Survey of Mine Clearance Technology

7/30/2019 Survey of Mine Clearance Technology

1/33

Survey of Mine Clearance Technology

By J . A. Craib

[The United Nations University and

The United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs]

The study was conducted by J.A. Craib, BARIC (Consultants) Ltd.of the United Kingdom for the United Nations University

and the United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs.

September 1994

Contents

Part I: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTIONAIMTHE REQUIREMENTTHE MILITARY POSITIONPOSSIBLE DETECTION TECHNOLOGIESPOSSIBLE CLEARANCE TECHNOLOGIESROBOTICS TECHNOLOGYTHE WAY FORWARD

Part II: INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUNDSCOPE OF THE STUDYABBREVIATIONSDEFINITIONSAIM OF THE REPORT

ACTION PLAN

THE MINES SITUATION

HISTORYANTI TANK MINESANTI PERSONNEL MINESSUBMUNITIONSTHE MUNITIONS SITUATION

LOCATIONHAZARDUNEXPLODED EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCEMUNITIONS ITIONS HELD IN STORAGENEW EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS

ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENTHIGHLY DESIRABLEDESIRABLE

MINE DETECTIONCURRENT MINE DETECTION TECHNOLOGIESMine DetectorsBomb Locators
http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#1http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#1http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#1http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#3http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#4http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#4http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#5http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#5http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#6http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#7http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#8http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#9http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#10http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#11http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#11http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#12http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#13http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#13http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#14http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#15http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#16http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#17http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#18http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#19http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#19http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#20http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#20http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#21http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#22http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#23http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#24http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#24http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#25http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#26http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#27http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#28http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#28http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#29http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#29http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#30http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#31http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#32http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#33http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#34http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#1http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#1http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#3http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#4http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#5http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#6http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#7http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#8http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#9http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#10http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#11http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#12http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#13http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#14http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#15http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#16http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#17http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#18http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#19http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#20http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#21http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#22http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#23http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#24http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#25http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#26http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#27http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#28http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#29http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#30http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#31http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#32http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#33http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#34


2/33

Various Applications of These PrinciplesMOST PROMISING DETECTION TECHNOLOGIESInfra Red (IR) or Thermal Imaging (TI)MicrowaveVisible Spectrum PhotographyGround Penetrating Radar

Photon BackscatterBiosensors

Nuclear PhysicsMINE CLEARANCE

HAND CLEARANCECURRENT MECHANICAL CLEARANCE EQUIPMENTPloughsFlailsRollersSeek and Destroy TechniquesExplosive TechniquesLasers and 'Spoofs'Sifting

POSSIBLE ADVANCES FOR MINE CLEARANCEVIBRATING ROLLERSHIGH POWER MICROWAVESMUNITIONS CLEARANCE

ROBOTICS

POSSIBLE FUTURE USES OF ROBOTICSTHE VIEW OF THE MILITARY

THE HUMAN INTERFACE

THE WAY FORWARD

Annex A: Abbreviations

Annex B: Publications Reviewed

Annex C: Companies and Agencies Contacted

Annex D: Countries with a Known Mines Problem

Top

Part I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

1. The worldwide problem created by land-mines put into the ground during a conflict and just left there oncethe conflict had ended is well known. A US State Department survey has identified about 66 countries with aknown problem. The work being undertaken by various organizations to remove these mines is gaining greater

public recognition and there are signs that donors are willing to invest in this work as a precursor to the moretraditional humanitarian work. There is, however, some concern at the slow speed with which this work can be

done and with the variable degree of certainty that an area has no more mines once the work has beencompleted.
http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#35http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#36http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#37http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#37http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#38http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#38http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#39http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#40http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#41http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#41http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#42http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#42http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#43http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#44http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#45http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#46http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#46http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#47http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#48http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#49http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#49http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#50http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#51http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#51http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#52http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#53http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#54http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#55http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#56http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#57http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#58http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#59http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#60http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#61http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#62http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#63http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#64http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#65http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#66http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#35http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#36http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#37http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#38http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#39http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#40http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#41http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#42http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#43http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#44http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#45http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#46http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#47http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#48http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#49http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#50http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#51http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#52http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#53http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#54http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#55http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#56http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#57http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#58http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#59http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#60http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#61http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#62http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#63http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#64http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#65http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#66http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#top


3/33

2. Although they are criticized for using mines, it is the military which has done most to find ways of removingthem. Unfortunately there is a difference in requirement between the military and the humanitariancommunities. The former are, usually, only interested in clearing a path (breaching) through a minefield whichis in their way. other mines are of little consequence. The humanitarian community is very much concernedabout all the mines in an area. Military equipment is designed for the military requirement, leaving thehumanitarian community to make whatever use it can of equipment which may not meet their precise need.

Largely because of this, much civilian mine clearance is done by hand, using a hand probe to look for mines.This is very slow and dangerous. 3. Both communities recognize that the equipment available today has notkept pace with advances in technology. To remedy this, the military is investing hundreds of millions of dollarsin research and development. To date, the humanitarian community is investing none. The UN, representingthe latter group, recognizes that more needs to be done and has commissioned this study into the potential ofnew technologies to improve mine detection and mine clearance equipment.

Top

AIM

4. The aim of this report is two-fold:

a. To outline the relevant technologies with potential to improve mine detection and mine clearanceequipment and to suggest which show the most promise.

b. To suggest how new equipments can best be produced using these selected technologies.

Top

THE REQUIREMENT

5. Before looking at new technologies and how they can used in new equipments, it is important to decide what

equipments are required. This is a subject which merits broader discussion than the aim of this study willallow. The following is a list devised by the author based on discussions during recent fora. Whatever the meritof his choice, it forms the basis of later analysis of technologies. Any disagreements are likely to be ones of

priority. There are other equipments, such as personal protection, which, though essential are not included inthis list.

Their technologies do not form part of this study because suitable equipment already exists, developed forother purposes but of immediate use in mine clearance.

a. a. Essential. The ability to detect non-metallic and metallic mines with a single equipment. Amechanical equipment capable of clearing buried and surface laid mines to an agreed level ofefficiency.

b. b. Highly Desirable. A remote system for detecting the position and perimeter of minefields. The

ability to operate the essential equipments remotely. A stand-off system for destroying mines in-situ.c. c. Desirable. The robotic mapping of minefields and mines. The robotic destruction of mines.

6. These requirements, if met, will probably need sophisticated equipments. They will require a high level ofmaintenance skill and their support costs will be high. one of the underlying principles of the humanitariancommunity is to develop equipment with which local people in distressed countries, once trained, can carry onworking after expatriates depart. However, some of these countries will be unable to provide the necessarymaintenance skills and may be unable to provide sufficient security to protect them from theft or abuse.

Consideration must be given at the appropriate time to the capabilities of the end-user.

Top

THE MILITARY POSITION
http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#top


4/33

7. As already stated, the military are investing vast sums of money in research and development and this studywould be flawed if their work were not discussed. Those which have so far invested most of the money are, inthe main, those which are also drastically reducing their forces and their military expenditure. Research anddevelopment budgets have been hard hit and many projects have been cancelled and many more are under realrisk of cancellation. It is inevitable that work taking place to meet new, and existing, breaching requirementswill suffer also.

8. Normally, the military are very reluctant to discuss their work, partly for perceived security reasons, but alsobecause of the risk to their intellectual property rights. However, the author had substantial discussions with anumber of research agencies and was heartened by their open attitude.

9. In the US, for example, Congress has voted funds for humanitarian mine clearance, and preliminarydiscussions suggest that they would be happy to work within an international grouping, sharing some researchinformation.

Top

POSSIBLE DETECTION TECHNOLOGIES

10. Current mine detection technology has probably reached its effective limit. The ever increasing use ofminimum metal mines has stretched to the limit the ability of the detectors to find very small amounts of metal.It is technically possible to manufacture mines with no metal at all making the present equipment obsolete. It isa new technology which will hold the answer to the detection of these mines. It is generally accepted by theresearch community that no single technology will meet all the detection requirements. Two, or more,technologies may be needed to give the required capability.

11. There is no clear consensus amongst the scientific community about which technologies show the mostpromise. However, two of the most promising sensor technologies are infra red (IR) and ground penetratingradar (GPR). Both have attracted substantial funding and research effort and both have been shown to work,albeit with some limitations. There are other technologies, such as micro-waves and some applications ofnuclear physics, which may eventually prove to be successful but they are not as advanced in the developmentcycle and carry a higher risk of failure.

12. Technologies, such IR and GPR, share at least two features in common - both have limitations, and bothneed substantial data processing. There may, therefore, be scope for combining them. It is not entirely clearwhether the limitations occur under the same circumstances but the aim must be to find technologies whichare, at least to some degree, complementary, i.e., one is effective when the other is not. There is some doubtwhether a common data processing system is realistic but the indications are encouraging. If this aspirationwere successful it would allow the development of a multi-sensor detector which both the military andcommercial sectors believe to be the way forward.

13. To progress this, a consensus should be sought on the most promising combination of technologies for

mine detection (GPR and IR is one such possible combination). Resources should then be applied to develop amulti-sensor detector served by a common data processor.

14. The remote detection of minefields is possibly realistic by the turn of the century under military researchand may be of direct benefit for humanitarian use without further development. However, the cost of such asystem is likely to be prohibitive and may well remain beyond the procurement capacity of the humanitariancommunity. The same situation applies to any equipment developed for the remote mapping of minefields.However, the potential benefit of these equipments will be considerable if they can be made available outsidethe military domain.

Top

POSSIBLE CLEARANCE TECHNOLOGIES
http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#top


5/33

15. There is no realistic alternative available in the foreseeable future to the present clearance techniques. Asolution to the need for a reliable method of mechanical clearance is bedeviled by the clearance efficiencyexpected by the humanitarian community. The requirement that equipment is highly efficient is obvious; everymine missed is a potential tragedy for someone. Nevertheless, present realities indicate that mechanicalclearance is unlikely ever to be as efficient as hand clearance but it is very much quicker. The UN has stated arequired efficiency of 99.8% which, whilst feasible for hand clearance, is unrealistic for current mechanical

systems. Military research is targeted at their breaching needs and is based on acceptance that a high efficiencymay not be achievable given the operational scenario in which the equipment will be used. It is possible that afuture military equipment will easily satisfy the need of the humanitarian community but, if not, it is unlikelythat military funds will be available to make the necessary improvements. Applying a version of Parieto's Law:a 20% improvement in the level of efficiency may take 80% of the total cost.

16. Since there is no clear answer at the moment, progress being made through military research should bemonitored. Some attention should be paid to the possible use of high power microwaves. At the same time, thehumanitarian community should decide the operational requirement of the mechanical equipment it considersacceptable and discuss it with industry to see what can be realistically achieved.

Top

ROBOTICS TECHNOLOGY

17. Remote control of most equipments is quite feasible. However, as an example, the benefit of mounting amine detector on a remotely controlled vehicle is very doubtful. Careful consideration must be given to decidewhether the anticipated reduction in risk to the operator justifies the added cost and possible reduction inefficiency.

18. Genuine robotics is very much more difficult, and will be very expensive. It is very doubtful in theforeseeable future whether the humanitarian community will have access to such equipment. Even more sothan for remote control, a careful cost/benefit analysis must be made before the necessary capital investment ismade. Some research is taking place, most of it in its infancy. Like airborne detection, robotic equipment may

be beyond the procurement capacity of the humanitarian community.

19. A cost/benefit analysis should be made to determine to what extent remote control and the futureapplication of robotics will benefit mine clearance. Following this analysis, remote control is readily availableand the progress in military robotics research should be monitored.

Top

THE WAY FORWARD

20. The overwhelming impression the author has gained throughout this study is the need to develop a

partnership with the military and, in particular, with their research bodies. Bearing in mind the vast sums ofmoney being spent by the military in general, and the US in particular, it would be nonsense to ignore such a

possibility. Ideally, a forum should be set up comprising the US, the UN and other interested countries toprogress the development of humanitarian mine clearance equipment.

21. Although countries like the US may be willing to participate in such a forum, fiscal stringency placesconstraints on their ability to provide new funding. Additional funding will be required because many of thefuture equipments will be expensive to develop and, probably, even more expensive to manufacture in thequantities which will be required. There is limited value in developing equipment then to find no money existsto buy them. There may be governments, limited in the amount of practical assistance they can provide indistressed countries, which may be willing to assist a humanitarian mine clearance equipment procurement

programme.

Top


6/33

Part 11 INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

1. It is widely acknowledged within the humanitarian mine clearance community and, indeed, within the

military community, that equipment available for locating and subsequently removing land-mines is outdated.In many cases, the technologies employed by equipment now in use, even by technically advanced armies,have changed little since World War II. By way of just one example, the British Army is still officiallyequipped with a hand held mine detector which first came into service in 1954. The humanitarian mineclearance community depends, to a very large extent, on equipment developed for military use which it thenuses for its own purposes. However, despite this sometime common usage, there are two distinctly different

philosophies which may make finding a solution for humanitarian needs more difficult.

2. The military imperative is to ensure that mines laid by the enemy (or themselves) do not hinder theiroperations. They have little need to concern themselves otherwise. Sometimes a victorious army will clear allthese mines but a defeated army rarely will. Most of their equipment is designed to meet their narrow aim of

breaching. What happens to the other mines which do not impede their operations is of little interest to them.Many would wish this otherwise but the truth is demonstrated by the number of mines laid in the ground

around the world still waiting for clearance. By contrast, the humanitarian community is very much concernedabout those mines ignored by the military. However, whilst the military has the resources to developequipment for their purposes, the humanitarian community has not sought to use any funds to developequipment for its own particular uses.

3. Part of the discussion in this report will consider how a relationship with the military can be developed toimprove this situation. This will be based on three key factors. Firstly, military budgets are in steep decline inmuch of the developed world leaving insufficient funds to meet military requirements. Secondly, theoverwhelming majority of mines related research takes place under the auspices of the military, using theirfunds. Thirdly, the vast majority of mine clearance is left to the humanitarian community or to commercialorganizations.

Top

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

4. There is a great deal of work going on throughout the world in subjects relevant to this project.Unfortunately, due to various time and resource constraints it was possible to survey only a portion of the work

being carried out worldwide. Still, the entities consulted provide an appropriate basis for a solid overview ofthe question.

5. The vast majority of this work takes place within the military arena and some of the work is classified, withhuge sums of money being invested. It would not be surprising for the agencies involved to be protective oftheir work. In the event, most military agencies were remarkably open about many of their projects although

they limited themselves to general statements of intent in some cases.

6. In the civil arena there was the understandable problem of protecting intellectual property rights andcommercial interests and industry was clearly protective of the potential rewards of their work.

7. The author was given access to much privileged information, some commercial-in-confidence and someclassified. This was permitted on the understanding that the sensitive material would not be reproduced in away which breached the caveats. Also, it was agreed that the documents in question would not be quoted asfootnotes or in a bibliography. Therefore, there are many statements made in this report which are notsupported by a quoted document. Whilst this may be considered unsatisfactory, the benefit of obtaining theinformation, even with this limitation, outweighed the disadvantage.

8. The author is not a scientist but has a mine clearance background. The extracts from literature quoted in thisreport and the analysis of them are based on a mine clearance perspective whilst trying to do justice to thetechnical details given. Any imperfections viewed from a scientific perspective are unintentional.
http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#top


7/33

Top

ABBREVIATIONS

9. A large number of abbreviations and acronyms will be used throughout this report. The first time each is

used, it will be explained in full but thereafter only the shorter form will be given. To assist the reader inunderstanding them, all the abbreviations and acronyms used in this report are listed in Annex A.

Top

DEFINITIONS

l0. Mine Clearance or Demining. 'Demining' is a relatively new word which has entered the vocabulary and istaken to mean the complete removal of mines in an area for humanitarian purposes. Sometimes the phrase'mine eradication' is used for the same purpose. The author favours the use of 'mine clearance' which, whenused in the military or humanitarian arenas, means the complete removal of mines within a specified area.

Considering the plethora of specialized words, phrases, acronyms and abbreviations already in existence, theauthor will only use the term mine clearance except when another author is being directly quoted.

ll. Explosive ordnance Disposal (EOD). This is sometimes still known as bomb disposal, but the currentNATO term of EOD is partially defined as:

The detection, identification, field evaluation, rendering-safe, recovery and final disposal of unexplodedexplosive ordnance.

Clearly, land-mines are one example of unexploded explosive ordnance (UXO) and mine clearance is oneaspect of EOD. However, for simplicity throughout this report, the terms EOD and UXO will be used to referto matters other than land-mines.

12. Clearance Efficiency. This is defined as the percentage of the total number of mines laid which have beenremoved from the ground and destroyed. This is an important concept, fundamental to later discussions. It is anecessary measure of the quality of clearance but, arguably, can be relatively meaningless. The definitionassumes that the number of mines in any area is known, which is rarely the case. How is the efficiency of anoperation actually proved? What is the attitude of donors when a missed mine is found later or, sadly, someoneis killed or injured by such a mine? There is no easy answer until better equipment is available which willimprove detection and clearance rates. In the Falkland Islands, after the war with Argentina, the BritishGovernment demanded an efficiency of 99.995% (it was permissible to miss one mine in 20,000). This was notachievable then, and still is not, and the minefields are still there. This has been acceptable in the FalklandIslands because the minefields are at least surrounded by fences which are regularly maintained. In many othercountries with a severe mine problem, any fences erected will be stolen as a scarce and valuable commodityleaving the population and livestock at continuing risk. Despite all these difficulties, clearance efficiency

remains a necessary measure of the quality of work done but caution should be exercised in its use.

Top

AIM OF THE REPORT

13. The aim of this report is to present an analysis of the technologies currently being exploited for minedetection and mine clearance purposes; those technologies not being exploited and which may have potential;and to recommend possible strategies to improve the equipment situation for clearing mines in a humanitariancontext.

Top
http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#top


8/33

ACTI0N PLAN

14. The plan devised to meet the requirements of this study was designed to fulfil, as best as possible, thefollowing objectives:

a. Literature Search. This was the stated contract requirement. Those open publications thought likely to be

helpful and which were scanned in some detail are listed at Annex C. Extensive use was made of the libraryfacilities at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) in London. To read all the publications as far back ascopies were held would have swamped the resources of the researcher for little information return. It wasdecided therefore to limit the review to the publications published since January 1 990. In the event, very fewactually provided any articles of substantial value.

b. Contact with Industry. once the lack of information to be gained from the literature search was realized, itwas decided to contact those companies and agencies which were known to the researcher. It was hoped in thisway to gain a perspective of what industry was doing and what it hoped to achieve. of the 60 organizationscontacted 26 responded and about 20 were helpful.

c. Contact with Government Research Agencies. The information is essentially limited to the USA and the UK.

However, at the same time, it was possible to attend symposia held respectively by the InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the Swedish National Defence Research Establishment (FOA) and GPR'94 (a symposium on ground penetrating radar). These provided access to officials from other researchestablishments attending these symposia. It is recognized that there are other government research agencieswhich are doing valuable work and it is hoped that the future life of this project will allow these to beapproached. The response from those contacted was very helpful, in the main, and provided the major input tothis report.

Top

THE MINES SITUATION

15. This report will not discuss in detail the mine types which create difficulties in many countries throughoutthe world. There are a number of publications which already do this very adequately. However, finding waysof reducing these mine related difficulties without understanding at least something of them may lead tomisunderstanding. A brief analysis is given below and this is considered sufficient for the purpose of thisreport. A list of countries believed to have a mines problem is given in Annex D.

Top

HISTORY16. World War I, with the introduction of mechanized armour and the expansion of trench warfare,also saw the introduction and development of improvised antitank (AT) mines. In the years following WorldWar I, mechanized armour evolved into the dominant force on the battlefield, and tactics of mobility, speed

and fire-power have become the predominant concerns of battlefield commanders. AT mines have, as aconsequence, become an increasingly important weapon. AT mines kill tanks, delay enemy forces, deny areaof access and, channel the enemy into routes which provide advantages to friendly forces. Antipersonnel (AP)mines have been developed as complementary weapons to AT mines to inhibit the clearing of AT mines,harass and destroy infantry units, and to deny area access to ground troops. During the 1970s, new types of APmine were developed which more effectively offset enemy manpower advantages and to deny logistic accessroutes to the enemy. Prior to this, mines were manually emplaced and armed. However, scatterable mines can

be deployed from aircraft and dropped behind enemy lines into rear echelons. This also was one of the firstuses of self-sterilization devices, which limited the threat posed to people who would enter the area aftermilitary operations were concluded. The 1980s saw the introduction of a new breed of mines, which could bedeployed from artillery, aircraft and ground vehicles, as well as manually. These mines employ influencesensors for tank detection and incorporate electronic timers to initiate self destruction at predesignated times.These mines have created a new dimension in mine warfare. Not only can they be used in the traditional way,

by outnumbered forces, but they can also be used to rapidly create a temporary minefield in remote areas. Inthe 1970s and 1980s low metallic content mines made of plastics and ceramic components, which had seenlimited use since the l940s, began to proliferate. These mines are inexpensive to make and difficult to detect.


9/33

Top

ANTITANK MINES

17. These mines are designed to incapacitate tanks and other vehicles either by destroying the track or wheels

(immobilising the vehicle) or by penetrating the hull, causing the death of the occupants. Early versions reliedupon blast effects to incapacitate the vehicle. Blast mines, which are the most commonly found AT mines, tendto be heavy (weighing up to 14 kg) because they use a large amount of explosive to obtain the pressuresneeded for desired effects. These mines are mechanically fuzed to trigger upon contact with the vehicle. otherAT mines rely on the projection of a metal slug or jet to penetrate the vehicle hull. While some of these mineshave mechanized fuzes (tilt rods), they generally have magnetic sensors and electronic components. AT mines,

primarily incapacitate their targets by attack from below (the tank must pass over the mine to initiate it).Alternate modes of attack are side attack and top attack. Side attack mines rely upon the firing of a projectileinto the side of a tank as it passes a sensor. Side attack mines generally have a 50-l00 metre range. They will

probably not present a significant demining problem because there is less risk of abandonment due to their costand short life as they are battery powered. Top attack mines rely upon sophisticated technology and are still indevelopment. They will not be deployed for a number of years and their expense makes their widespread anduncontrolled use very unlikely. It is unlikely that these mines will be a problem within the context of demining.Manually emplaced AT mines may be secondarily-fuzed (or booby trapped) to prevent removal. Those minesfuzed with these anti-handling devices (AHD) will detonate if disturbed, making mine clearance much moredifficult to accomplish. Advanced scatterable mines may include integral electronic AHDs.

Top

ANTI PERSONNEL MINES

18. These mines are designed to kill or incapacitate people. There are generally two types of AP mine: thoserelying strictly on blast effects, and those throwing out lethal fragments. The blast type AP mine relies uponthe individual soldier stepping on it to trigger detonation. Blast effects can vary, from incapacitation and

trauma, to loss of life, depending on the size of the charge and the circumstances of initiation. Fragmenting APmines throw out a spray of lethal fragments, steel balls or pellets. Many of these mines have bounding features,

providing increased range and lethality. The mines are triggered by various means, ranging from direct contactto pulling or severing a trip line to command detonation.

Top

SUBMUNITIONS

19. Submunitions are a contentious subject because many consider them to be mines, and in some respects theyact in exactly the same way. There is little merit in discussing in this report the relative differences between

them. It is a reasonable compromise to accept that both mines and submunitions come from similar groups ofmunition, and that, in some cases their roles are similar. In other cases their roles are quite dissimilar. Thefollowing extract summarises some key points about submunitions.

Submunitions are not a particularly new phenomenon but their profile has been raised over recent yearsbecause of the perceived similarity to mines. After the Gulf War, although the major problems which facedthose clearing UXO was mines, nevertheless, submunitions caused many problems. Those which did notdetonate as expected - normally on impact with their target - stuck in the ground and it was not unusual forthem to detonate if they were mishandled. In a real sense, they were acting like mines, even if that was nottheir original intention.

The interest of the ICRC, so far as mines are concerned, is well known. The lack of a clear difference betweenthem and submunitions has caused alarm that a possible inhumane weapon may miss attempts at prohibition.However, it is here that the two diverge [in similarity]. Mines are cheap, can be laid by hand, they are easy tomanufacture and were given, in their millions, as part of military aid packages.


10/33

Submunitions are different. They are very expensive to manufacture and require sophisticated engineeringfacilities. Most often they must be delivered by aircraft. They were very rarely given in aid packages becausethey were designed for use by their parent nation in potential wars of the utmost importance, such as thatwhich might have taken place between NATO and the former Warsaw Pact. Their design and effects werelikely to be classified. It is unlikely therefore that submunitions will be available to the nations which are, inthe main, using land-mines to inhumane effect. There may be two exceptions; Afghanistan and Angola which

saw direct action by forces from the Soviet Union and South Africa respectively.

Top

THE MUNITIONS SITUATION

20. Almost by definition, when mines have been laid, some form of armed fighting has taken place. Inevitablysuch fighting will have left quantities of UXO. This UXO can present a severe problem. Munitions (which alsoinclude mines) are usually stockpiled in depots, often in appalling dangerous conditions, awaiting the timewhen they will be put to their designed use. Both these situations are discussed further below. Theconsideration of UXO, other than mines, is not a principal aim of this report; however, it is not practicable to

consider one without the other for three major reasons:

a. a. In the search for mines, it is sometimes essential to clear items of UXO which are either in the wayor would continue to be an immediate hazard to local people.

b. b. There are frequent deaths and injuries resulting from UXO, particularly grenades, which areattractive to children.

c. c. Whether or not they are required to clear UXO, EOD personnel will, as a matter of course, eitherdestroy those which pose an immediate risk to life or at least make them as safe as possible.

Top

LOCATION

21. Except in specialised circumstances, there is no tactical advantage in having UXO on the ground. That isthe role of mines which are also cheaper. UXO is therefore normally found in areas where combat took placeor where troops were positioned. If these locations can be identified, then a systematic search of the area willclear many of the items.

Top

HAZARD

22. The degree of hazard from UXO varies but in general terms they pose a smaller risk than mines. Manyitems will be relatively safe if left alone. Unfortunately, people in poorer countries often try to salvage themetal to sell and have been know to cut items open to get the explosives out. Bombs have been used as seatsand shells as door-stops or weights to hold tarpaulins in place. other UXO is in a highly dangerous state;grenades with no safety pins or very corroded ones, 'weeping' explosives (the exudation is often a pure form ofnitroglycerine) and detonators (they contain exceptionally sensitive explosives). Missiles are often still onlaunchers and, although they may no longer be capable of functioning, they still present a range of hazards.When a bomb or shell hits the ground it should usually explode (there are some exceptions). When this fails tohappen, it is usually not possible to determine why. In some cases, a sharp knock will he sufficient to causedetonation.

Top

UNEXPLODED EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE
http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#top


11/33

23. Normally UXO refers to munitions which have been put to their designed use but failed to functionproperly. The term can also be used to describe munitions which have been taken onto the battlefield and notused but just left there. often it is not possible to distinguish one type from the other and it is normal practice totreat all munitions as UXO - as potentially very dangerous. The clearance of land in Kuwait resulted in manydeaths from incidents related to UXO. Although detailed figures have not been seen by the author, it is

possible that more deaths and injuries were due to UXO than mines. one of the most dangerous UXO found

there is generally agreed to be submunitions dropped by aircraft. Many of these submunitions are designed toact as scatterable mines but many others were designed to detonate on impact but failed to do so. It is anaccepted World War II figure that 10% of all munitions placed, fired or dropped failed to function as expected.Despite more advanced engineering, this figure is unlikely to have reduced substantially. There is a school ofthought that the more advanced a technology, the greater the number of UXO which will result. Even whensubmunitions have not been used, other UXO create a severe hazard. Hand grenades in particular, are attractiveto children who see them as playthings, often with tragic results. It is not uncommon for hand grenades to befound without their safety pins and only need slight movement to explode.

Top

MUNITIONS HELD IN STORAGE

24. Stored munitions are only raised in this report because they present another potential hazard and are whereunused mines will normally be kept. In some cases the location of these stores is known but this is not alwaysthe case because those exercising control over them are protective of their military resource. There are

probably scores, and possibly many more of these stores throughout countries which have a mines problem andmany of them are likely to be unsafe by normal standards. It is probably the case that sufficient munitions existin these stores, including mines, to provide substantial support to further conflicts.

Top

NEW EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS

25. Industry has stated clearly that before gaps in technology are identified, the humanitarian communityshould know what it wants that technology to do. In other words, the humanitarian community must firstdecide what equipment capabilities it needs. This is a subject which will undoubtedly merit considerabledebate before a consensus is reached - NATO equipment fora can take many years to reach agreement on asingle equipment- and clearly the author does not have that luxury. To provide some structure to this report,and to act as a basis for later debate, the author has devised a list of equipment capabilities which he believesreflects the needs of humanitarian users. Recent fora, , provided the author with some basis on which to devisethe list which is otherwise his own view. Whatever the merit of his choice, it forms the basis of later analysisof technologies.

26. There are other equipments, such as personal protection, which, though essential are not included in this

list. Their technologies do not form part of this study because suitable equipment already exists, developed forother purposes but of immediate use in mine clearance.

27. The task has been made simpler because, despite their different approaches to the problems of mines, manyof the military requirements are directly mirrored by those in the civilian domain. However, writing a fullEquipment Requirement document is a time consuming task needing a full understanding of what the userwants, the conditions in which the equipment will be used, who will use it, who will maintain it, how many areneeded, how much it will cost, and so on. In almost all cases, a full justification must be given to persuade thefund holder (or donor) to spend the funds involved. None of this is provided here. The list below is broken intothree sections; Essential, Highly Desirable, Desirable. This is a cascading selection process, particularlynecessary when funds are short, which will always be the case. Normally, the items shown as Desirable rarelyreceive financial support but are still shown because their perceived importance might change as circumstanceschange.

Top


12/33

ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENT

28. Detecting Non-metallic and Metallic Mines. This is generally viewed as the greatest capability gap atpresent. It is already possible to detect metal mines but there is little point in developing a second system todetect minimum metal mines only. The need is to develop a single system to detect both. Whether it should behand held or vehicle mounted is a matter for later debate and is of little importance at this stage. Either concept

would allow very much quicker hand clearance.

29. Mechanical Clearance with a High Efficiency. With countless hectares of land requiring clearancearound the world, unless a mechanical system is devised - with an acceptably high clearance efficiency - somewill probably never be cleared. The equipment must be capable of clearing buried and surface laid AP and ATmines in a wide range of terrain and environmental conditions. It must keep environmental damage to aminimum.

Top

HIGHLY DESIRABLE

30. Remote Detection of Minefield Perimeters. one the major problems facing those clearing mines isknowing where they are. This equipment would provide that information by indicating the probable perimeterof a group of mines. It is unlikely to be capable of detecting an individual mine (current research does notrequire it). That is better, and more reliably, done by a close-in system. It could be argued that remote detectionof minefields is an essential equipment but, for reasons explained elsewhere in this report, it is unlikely ever to

be an equipment owned by the humanitarian community.

31. Remote Control. Mine clearance is a dangerous activity and removing human beings from the danger areahas to be a worthwhile aim. However, remote control is usually worthwhile only if the remote equipment can

perform to at least the standard required when operated by a human. Current mine detectors, if mounted on aremote vehicle, would probably perform less well without the experience of an operator holding it. Anyway, at

present, without the ability to detect minimum metal mines, it would be a waste of money. Similarly, existingmechanical equipments, most of which can be remotely controlled, do not have a sufficiently high clearanceefficiency to warrant it. Both of the essential requirements above should consider the possibility of remotecontrol.

32. Stand-off Destruction of Mines. Using just one scenario, if the perimeter of a minefield is known, thenthis equipment could be deployed to destroy each mine without a human having to go into the mined area. Itwill have to be capable of destroying each individual mine whether buried or on the surface.

Top

DESIRABLE

33. Robotic Minefield Mapping. This would allow all minefields to be mapped giving local people theinformation which would allow them to avoid mined areas. This is particularly important in countries where itis impossible to erect any form of fence (usually because they will be stolen). This requirement may well bemet as a 'spin-off' benefit from the remote detection of minefields mentioned above.

34. The Robotic Destruction of Mines. This could be considered the 'Holy Grail' of mine clearance where arobot locates and destroys all the mines in a minefield without serious risk to itself. The US is considering sucha concept but it is thought to be rather fantastic given the current state of technology. Nevertheless, it isincluded here as a reminder of what both the military and humanitarian communities would like one day.

Top

MINE DETECTION


13/33

35. Mine detection is an activity which depends almost exclusively on a single basic technology. Mines havetraditionally been cased in metal or, at least, had substantial metal content. By far the easiest way to detectthem when hidden from view was by using 'metal detectors' which reacted in the presence of metal. This basictechnology has become more sophisticated but has not changed fundamentally. Manufacturers have improvedthe sensitivity to react to smaller pieces of metal. However, whilst bringing an apparent benefit, there is acorresponding disadvantage. Many areas in which mines have been laid have been heavily contaminated by

metal fragments such as shrapnel and metal rubbish of many types. The more sensitive the detector, the morefragments that are detected. Each response which proves not to be a mine when uncovered is known as a falsealarm. Unfortunately the operator cannot always distinguish with certainty between a live mine and a falsealarm. Until responses can be positively identified, each must be treated as if it were a live mine which slowsdown the rate at which mines are cleared.

36. Most of the current mine detector manufacturers claim that some of their equipments will detect minimummetal mines. Technically this may be true but there is considerable skepticism amongst most users. What can

be achieved in the laboratory or in carefully selected ground may bear no relation to the situation faced in aminefield. Some minefields are laid in soil with a high ferrous content and whilst this can be filtered out, thereis a very real risk that a minimum metal mine will be missed.

37. Whatever the difficulties, there is no doubt that an effective detector is an important equipment- some sayit is the most important. It is the best way to achieve a high clearance efficiency without having to resort tohand probing only. Arguably, the present technology has reached its realistic limit and any substantialimprovement in detection capability must come through a new technology. The range of possible newtechnologies is reviewed later.

Top

CURRENT MINE DETECTION TECHNOLOGlES

38. Current detection equipment falls into two broad categories - mine detection and bomb detection. Both useapplied magnetic principles but otherwise are quite different in their capabilities and uses. The following is a

brief summary.

Top

Mine Detectors

39. General. Metal detectors emit a weak electromagnetic field which is disturbed proportionally to theamount of metal within its scope. Basically, metal detectors consist of one or more coils which oscillate at acertain frequency. Changes to the oscillation give information on the metal objects detected. Sensitivity is afunction of the operating frequency and the size of the search head. There are two principles of operation - theeddy current method and pulsed technology.

40. Eddy Current Principle. A weak magnetic field is produced, which will be disturbed proportionally to theamount of metal within the field. These disturbances are electronically evaluated and the result is made visible

by an indication meter and/or an audible tone.

41. Pulse Principle. Electromagnetic pulses are emitted and a receiving coil measures how quickly the short-lived magnetic field decays. Metal within the pulse field slows down the rate of decay. Again, differences inthe rate of decay are evaluated and indicated to the operator visually and/or audibly.

Top

Bomb Locators

42. Magnetic Anomaly Principle. Almost all bomb locators are high sensitivity magnetic anomaly detectors(sometimes known as difference magnetometers) making use of the natural magnetic field of the earth. The


14/33

function principle is a passive one, i.e., they do not radiate any energy unlike the mine detectors describedabove. Any changes in the natural magnetic field of the earth are detected by an imbalance between the twocoils within the magnetometer and are indicated to the operator. Essentially, magnetometers are used fordetecting ferromagnetic materials and are of limited value for detecting mines although they are extensivelyused for locating buried bombs. Some manufacturers claim to be able to detect targets at depths of up to 10metres below the surface.

Top

Various Applications of These Principles

43. In an attempt to maximise the benefits of these principles, manufacturers have devised a wide range ofequipments. In addition to the hand held systems, there are vehicle mounted or towed devices, large loopdetectors and detector arrays. Most of these have underwater variants and, in some cases, airborne versions.Vehicle mounted systems tend to be unwieldy and limited to road use. The old Soviet system known as Dim isa typical example and carries mine sensing heads on a wheeled array pushed in front of a light vehicle whichhas to stop every time something is detected. The South African Mine Detection Vehicle (MDV) is fitted with

pulse induction mine detection pans on either side. It is claimed to be capable of detecting normal AT mines asdeep as 500 mm over a three metre wide strip at speeds of up to 40 kph. The ground pressure of the MDV isnormally too low to detonate most AT mines and the cab is protected should a mine detonate. As soon as amine is detected, visual and audible signals alert the driver who then marks the location so the mine can bedealt with by personnel following behind.

44. Much optimism was given to computer-aided systems where a computer program is used to analyse signalsin very much more detail than is possible with the traditional hand held mine detectors. To date, these have notdemonstrated the promise expected, partly because they are limited by the use of existing detectors and partly

because the computer software leaves too much analysis to the operator, albeit presented in a different form.

45. Whatever the method to which these principles are applied, they are all dependent upon the laws ofmagnetism. To function properly, the target must contain at least some metal (in the case of magnetometers,

ferrous metal). The smaller the amount of metal, the poorer the response. If the sensitivity is increased enoughto detect small metal objects, the greater the number of items that might be located. Almost all ground iscontaminated with small metallic fragments, even more so in an area on which mines have been laid and

battles fought. These fragments will lead to a high level of false alarms with a rapid decrease in the rate ofmine clearance. Mine detector manufacturers do not publicly agree, but most users of their equipment believethat magnetic principles are close to their useful limit. Privately many manufacturers recognized this and arelooking at ways of providing a quantum improvement in performance. Some are cooperating with experts inother sensing technologies. Some manufacturers remain committed to magnetism and are seeking to achievethe required improvement within the existing technology.

Top

MOST PROMISING DETECTION TECHNOLOGlES

46. There are many sensing technologies, some of which are already used in equipment. Whether thesetechnologies can be applied to mine detection is another matter. After the Falkland Islands war, faced with the

problem of minimum metal mines, the UK government set about finding a technology capable of detectingthem in the conditions prevailing on the islands. They set up Project IRONWORK in which a wide range ofresearch agencies were given money to work on their particular technology to assess whether it could beapplied to detecting mines. At a due time, each agency was required to present its findings to a scientific panel.out of this was chosen one technology which was then the focus of all subsequent research. The technology inquestion will be discussed later but, suffice to say at this point, the technology was shown to work but costcaused the UK to cease further work. As is widely known, most of the mines in the Falkland Islands are stillthere. As stated elsewhere, it is generally accepted that no single sensor technology will provide a complete

answer. For this reason, the US is working on a programme entitled Close-In Man-Portable Mine Detector(CIMMD) which may incorporate advanced IR, microwave sensors and ground penetrating radar.


15/33

47. The technologies which will be briefly discussed are: Infra red (thermal imaging)

MicrowaveGround Penetrating RadarVisible Spectrum PhotographyPhoton Backscatter

BiosensorsNuclear Physics

Top

Infra Red (IR) or Thermal Imaging (Tl)

48. Infra red mine detection relies on environmental heating effects, such as sun, wind, rain, snow, soil type,water tables, and the internal temperature of the mine to enhance the thermal contrast of the target from its

background. This being the case, then this contrast should be detectable. However, it is less straightforwardthan would be wished.

49. The following is a summary of one report which considered TI using emitted radiation. Surface Mines.During daytime, heat enters the mines. Explosives do not conduct heat well (it performs rather like paraffinwax). Consequently heat energy supplied largely remains in the top surface. The mine will radiate more duringthe daytime and less at night compared to normal undisturbed soil. It is possible that a mine in an arid area willradiate like undisturbed soil. Dark mines will absorb more heat (therefore radiate more) than lighter colouredones. At night the visible colour of mines will have no effect on the thermal emission. As in the case of groundlevel vegetation, the mine surface temperature will tend to fall below air temperature. The thermal emission ofa mine will be close to that of vegetation - both will be nearly at air temperature. Mine detection against avegetation background will probably not be possible with current sensors.

Buried Mines. If a buried mine is placed below the soil surface about 10 cm, with all other things equal, themine will have no significant influence on the heat energy source at the surface. The mine will be undetectable.only the disturbed soil above the mine may be detected.

50. This may seem discouraging but another report written in 1979 painted a bleaker picture:

It was apparent that at the present state of the science, thermal imagers as minefield detectors would beineffective.

However, this same report immediately goes on to say, with some foresight:

It is likely that signal processing technology coupled with a thermal imager in this role could reverse thesituation.

51. A recent report, published in 1993, is much more optimistic.

It is now technically both feasible and affordable for the space capable powers to keep any or every part of thesurface of the earth under observation virtually 24 hours a day.

At the expense of some detail, however, the surface can be imaged day or night and even under some degree ofweather obscuration, in the IR part of the spectrum. All objects at temperatures above absolute zero emit infra-red radiation with characteristics that depend both on their temperature and their material properties. Sensorscan now detect even very slight differences in surface emissions, and these can produce excellent images dayor night ...

52. This same report suggests using visible spectrum, IR and radar as three complementary techniques.
http://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#tophttp://www.unu.edu/unupress/ops1.html#top


16/33

... taken together, these three techniques allow some kind of view of the earth from space at any time and underalmost any conditions. Admittedly, they offer different degrees of resolutions that result both from the basic

physics of the technique and from the limitations of current engineering capabilities.

... any area characterized by all three types of image provides a great deal more information than is availableon a conventional photograph, however detailed. As a result it is becoming nearly impossible to hide surface

changes with camouflage or decoys, because not only do they have to 'look' right, they have to match inthermal and radar characteristics as well...

Using these three technologies will produce vast amounts of data- this can be done by computer and canquickly give a "before and after" comparison to detect any changes. The important point to emphasize is thatall of the component technologies are available today. Furthermore, regardless of military initiatives, there will

be strong incentives for civilian agencies to put them together ... to monitor environmental change, changes inagriculture and to use in a host of other ways.

53. There is much research currently taking place looking at the application of TI to mine detection andminefield detection. The main use seems to be airborne detection of minefields but at least one use is aimed ata hand held TI mine detector. In the US, research is under way on their Airborne Standoff Minefield Detection

System (ASTIMIDS) with two companies under contract to demonstrate their concepts. one concept involvesinfra red line scan (IRLS) using second generation TI and a solid state laser. The other concept also usessecond generation TI but dispenses with the laser. Data is likely to be transferred from the airborne sensor tothe ground station at a rate of 10.7 Mb per second which will have to be handled by massively parallelcomputers. Trials are understood to begin in 1996 with an equipment coming into service early next century.Assuming the project is successful it will be very expensive. No open literature has been seen relating tosimilar work in the other countries known to be working on this requirement.

54. Development is under way to demonstrate a new generation night vision goggle for use by EOD teamsduring operations involving booby trap clearance. This development is not aimed specifically at locating mines

but, if otherwise successful, may have some utility for this purpose.

Top

Microwave

55. A recent report claiming a use for microwaves in detecting mines was made by scientists at the EuropeanUnion's Ispra research laboratories. They claim to have a theoretical answer to the difficulty of detecting anddefuzing plastic mines. Their concept is two-fold; firstly to precisely locate the mines using airborne radar at aheight of 3,000 m, secondly, to defuze them by directing intense microwaves from a land based vehicle. Themicrowaves would break down the explosives up to a metre underground without causing a detonation. "Likethe microwave cooker in a domestic kitchen, the process works by transmitting energy into the chosen object."The stated cost would be "tens rather than hundreds of millions of pounds (Sterling) and the results could

produce huge benefits for the redevelopment of former conflict zones."

56. Some of the countries looking to develop a capability for airborne, stand-off remote detection of minefieldsare believed to be considering the use of microwaves but no open literature has been seen.

57. A microwave hand held mine detector is currently under trial at the Belvoir Research, Development andEngineering Center (BRDEC). The aim is to develop a small, lightweight man-portable pulsed microwavemine location system which provides a visual image. It is intended for use by EOD personnel "to identify man-made mine like objects." It is not clear how easily this would locate commercially manufactured minimummetal mines. However, it is stated that two prototypes have been successfully tested at the BRDEC mine lanes.Further computer improvements have been made with more testing in progress.

Top

Visible Spectrum Photography


17/33

58. Most technically advanced military forces have sophisticated air reconnaissance facilities and the possibleuse of these assets has been investigated.

S9. In 1984, the US believed that there was significant value in the use of visible light (photography or TV)and thermal imaging sensors which were already fixed to tactical reconnaissance aircraft. In consequence, theyset up the Minefield Detection Using Reconnaissance Assets (MIDURA) programme to examine these

possibilities further. The result of the programme is not known but it no longer appears as a currentinvestigation and it is therefore assumed that it was not successful.

60. A year earlier, the UK, in response to the problem of the Falkland Islands minefields, set up a trial to testthe use of optical and IRLS cameras. The results, giving at best a 5% detection rate, showed that there were no

benefits to be gained.

61. Nevertheless, there may be occasions when current reconnaissance assets are capable of detecting minesand minefields; Kuwait was such an example. However, where mines have been in the ground for a long timeand covered with vegetation, there appears to be no benefit to using these assets.

Top

Ground Penetrating Radar

62. Like thermal imaging, this technology has been the centre of much research. Ground penetrating radar(GPR) system radiate a short impulse of electromagnetic energy into the ground and detect the backscatteredsignal from a buried target. The performance of the radar is chiefly governed by four factors: system dynamicrange; absolute bandwidth of the receive signal; range clutter; spatial clutter. There are a number of problemsassociated with GPR of which one of the greatest is the change in dielectric constant between the air and theground. In the early days of the Falkland Islands research, the surface reflections obscured mines flush with thesurface or just below it. More advanced data processing improved the situation but that work meant that thehead had to rest gently on the ground - not an ideal solution considering the low pressures required to detonateAP mines. other agencies claim to have overcome this problem, allowing the head to be lifted off the ground

but the results of their work has not been seen. A difficulty GPR shares with other technologies is that of datahandling. It would be normal to handle tens of millions of bits per second (mips) which, when analysis isrequired in real-time, is a very heavy requirement. A second problem is that of target recognition. GPR willgenerate reflections from all inconsistencies below the surface - voids, stones, water table, mines etc. and it isessential that the system can discriminate between mines and the source of other reflections. A solution tothese two shared problems may hold one of the keys to a successful future equipment.

63. Recent research continues to support the view that GPR may have an application for detecting mines. Workat Ohio State University has demonstrated the feasibility of the technique for this purpose. The FOA inSweden is also conducting similar research and claims to be able to demonstrate a working detector, usingimpulse radar, able to find non-metallic mines.

64. The UK government spent a great deal of money to support GPR research to find a solution the mines inthe Falkland Islands. Many other governments have spent, and still are spending, money on GPR but, so far asis known, the Falkland Islands research is the only one which has been directly centred on minefields laidduring a conflict. This research did produce a concept which was seen to work but it was very cumbersomeand expensive. However, this technology, and others critical to an effective system (such as data processing),have developed substantially since the UK project has cancelled in 1986. It is considered to be one of thetechnologies most likely (probably used in conjunction with another technology) to provide a solution thedetection requirement.

Top

Photon Backscatter

65. The photon backscatter approach uses a pencil thin beam of X-rays projected into the soil. These X-rayspenetrate the surface, are backscattered from objects below the surface, and are collected by panels of detectors


18/33

located on either side of the beam. The detected X-rays are used to form high resolution images of buriedobjects. The X-ray beam is scanned along the vehicle width (if mounted on a vehicle), and combined with theforward motion of the vehicle it provides full width detection in front of the vehicle. Laboratory results usingthis technique have demonstrated that high resolution images of buried mines are achievable for a number ofsoils and burial depths. An X-ray source suitable for integration on a field testbed system is currently beingfabricated.

66. Quite apart from whether a forward mounted detector is a wise concept, there is some scepticism within thescientific community about the use of X-ray technology and this was expressed at the FOA symposium.

Nevertheless, field trials may prove to be more promising than expected.

Top

Biosensors

67. In its simplest form, and most widely known, the use of dogs to 'sniff' explosives has been welldemonstrated. Their use to detect drugs is also well known. Some proponents of their use state that they can be

trained to detect almost anything. Dogs, like most living beings have their problems but those expert in theirhandling suggest that good training and sensible use will provide a reliable detection system. Dogs are beingused in Afghanistan and Mozambique apparently to good effect and their use is described below.

68. Pigs are thought to be better at 'sniffing' than dogs and might be better at finding mines. Their use forfinding truffles is well known. No open literature has been seen describing any tests or trials but the subject has

been discussed with some scientists. Their use would not be acceptable in some countries and there may thusbe little point in pursuing this avenue. 69. Ultra small amounts of trinitrotoluene (TNT) relaxes a tense muscle.Nitroglycerine is a well known component of drugs used to combat heart disease. This phenomenon couldpossibly be used in the detection of mines. The principle has been tested to work down to 1~14g TNT.

Very small amounts of the explosive evaporate into the air but even a few molecules can be sensed by themuscle, provided that they come close enough. Drug research has used pieces of muscle from the intestine ofcows for a long time. The experiment is simple. A muscle from the blood vessel in the intestine is cut into

pieces. one such piece is tied up between two hooks, one hook is attached to a force transducer in a containerwith constant temperature and physiological solution (to keep the muscle alive). The muscle is then tensedusing a drug (phenylephrine). When TNT is added, the muscle relaxes and this can be registered on the forcetransducer. The method is very sensitive and is similar to that expected from dogs, albeit without theunpredictability sometimes associated with the latter. More work is required to demonstrate that an equipmentcould be manufactured for easy use by an operator in a minefield.

70. Dogs are used quite extensively to detect mines. The Mine Detection Dog Centre, an Afghan NGO, usesthem to directly detect mines. At the end of 1 993, they had used 90 dogs to clear a total area of 5.67 squarekilometers, locating nearly 8,500 mines and a little over 1 3,000 items of UXO. The South African system, theMecum Explosives and Drug Detection System (MEDDS), has been used by the South African Defence Force

to clear roads in South Africa and is currently being used in Mozambique. This technique is substantiallydifferent from the Afghan use of dogs and is conducted in two phases. In Phase one, a mine protected vehiclefitted at the front with a vapour collection box is driven along the suspect road in stages of about one kilometreat speeds of up to 20 kph. At the end of each stage, a physical marker is put down or a GPS reading taken andthe chemical filters in the vapour box are renewed. The used filters, one from each side of the collection box,are logged in relation to the section of road over which they have passed and are stored in the vehicle for lateranalysis. The vehicle then goes to a 'clean' identification area set up nearby where the samples are set out onsmall stands to be sniffed by dogs specially trained to indicate within minutes which filters show signs ofexplosive contamination. In Phase Two, follow-up dog and disposal teams move in mine protected vehicles tothe relevant section of road. The dogs again use their sense of smell to localize further the mine. It is claimedthat over time, the smell of the explosive within a long-buried mine can permeate the ground or vegetation upto 10 m away from the mine itself. The dogs are trained to lie down at the edge of the area affected by thesmell, not at the source, to reduce their exposure to risk. A mechanical disposal vehicle then uses a remotely

controlled arm to locate and remove the mine.

Top


19/33

Nuclear Physics

71. Explosives contain relatively high concentrations of hydrogen and this can be detected. Equipmentsalready exist to look for hidden explosives and this concept could be applied to mine detection. A system usinga small neutron source has been fabricated and subjected to limited field tests. The results of these testsindicated a probability of detection of 0.95 to l.0 in very dry soils. The performance degrades significantly as

the soil moisture rises above 5% by weight. The technique may have application on dry soils but not wet.

72. This and other possible uses of nuclear physics, as is the case with nuclear generated electricity in manycountries, may prove to be practical but unacceptable. The public perception of any aspect of nuclear science isnot positive and if the benefits associated with its use can be provided from another source then it may remainunacceptable for the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, it would be foolish to ignore this technology and, indeed,research is understood to be continuing.

Top

MINE CLEARANCE

73. The author defined mine clearance earlier in this report to mean the complete removal of mines within aspecified area. This is an ideal case but generally unrealistic. In practice, it is impossible to be certain that allmines have been removed. Many mines have been laid without any record showing where they were laid andhow many were used. Without this information there can be no certainty that all have been removed. There area number of factors which reduce the clearance efficiency from the ideal of 100% but they are not consideredin depth in this report. Suffice to say that, in most cases, hand clearance (using hand probing techniques, withor without mine detectors) gives a higher clearance efficiency than mechanical systems. These concepts arediscussed briefly below.

Top

HAND CLEARANCE

74. Most hand clearance employs two activities - hand probing and the use of mine detectors. Hand probingcan be undertaken, and often is, without the help of detectors. However, when detectors are used, hand probingtechniques will normally be used to uncover the mine, or to prove that no mine exists (in the case of a falsealarm). Hand clearance is a potentially dangerous activity with accidents being fairly common. For this reason,most mine clearance operators would prefer to use mechanical systems. The difficulties associated with suchsystems are discussed later.

75. Probing is undertaken by men either lying prone on their stomachs or in a squatting position. For safety,they will normally work in an echelon formation allowing a safety distance between them, so that if a minedetonates during probing, then the number of people injured will be reduced. The probe is a very simple piece

of equipment although some, developed for military use, are rather more sophisticated. Some are non-magnetic. The probe is one of the few items of equipment which can easily be made in the Third World. Somehave been manufactured by local tradesmen from lengths of reinforcing bar. Paradoxically, these locally

produced equipments are often better than the more sophisticated, and very much more expensive militaryversions. Probes will be considered no further in this report.

Top

CURRENT MECHANICAL CLEARANCE EQUIPMENT

76. There are a number of mechanical equipments already manufactured and the five main concepts (ploughs,

flails, rollers, 'seek and destroy' techniques and explosives) and two additional concepts (lasers and 'spoofs',and sifting) are discussed below. over the years many other concepts have been considered and are still beingconsidered. However, the concepts mentioned above and discussed below remain the main support to

breaching operations and from which one might hope to find future benefits for mine clearance.


20/33

Top

Ploughs

77. These have been in existence for decades and still provide one of the main methods of breaching in war

and were successfully used by the Coalition Forces in the recent Gulf War. There are many countriesmanufacturing these including Israel, the former Soviet Union, the UK and the US. They are, however,designed only to push mines to either side of the plough and those that do not detonate, remain, oftenundamaged and usually buried under disturbed soil. To subsequently clear these disturbed mines is often moredifficult. There are a variety of ploughs whose designs are dependent upon the specific task for which theywere intended and the conditions of the ground on which they might be used. Ploughs destroy the ground andvegetation, and will increase the problems of soil erosion. They require substantial automotive power to pushthem and this is traditionally provided by a battle tank which usually has to operate at full revs in bottom gear.The tank has considerable power, and it also provides protection from the enemy which laid the mines (whomay be defending the minefield) and also from the fragmentation from detonating mines. one magazine articleclaims that, when used in conjunction with a roller (such as the Soviet KMT-5), the plough is one of the fewsystems which can provide a virtual 100% clearance efficiency. This may be the case for a breached lane butthose mines moved to either side by the plough still remain. The tank propelled plough is consideredimpracticable for mine clearance and the descriptions given below are only intended for backgroundinformation.

78. Track-width Mine Plough. This pushes mines to either side of each track allowing the vehicle to breach aminefield safely. The Israeli version (Ramta) can be used at speeds of up to 6.5 kph in stony ground and hastwo plough assemblies each clearing a 1.5 metre width in front of each track to remove mines down to a depthof 300 mm A chain dragged between these initiates any mine located in the central unploughed area and fittedwith mast sensors.

79. Full-width Mine Plough. This is a very heavy equipment fitted to the front of a tank. It is V shaped anddigs down about 200 mm below the surface of the ground (it can go lower). It requires great automotive powerand destroys the ground over which it operates. The term 'fullwidth' indicates that the plough is a little wider

than the tank and has no gaps.

80. Scatterable Mine Clearance Device. This is also known as the Surface Mine Plough. It is a conceptequipment which was successfully used in the Gulf War. It is designed only for clearing scatterable mines(those delivered by aircraft, helicopter, missile and artillery) which usually lie on top of the ground. It is wellsuited for this role but is far less well suited for use against buried mines. It is not designed for use against ATmines. It can be mounted on the front of a small armoured vehicle or on a truck but in the latter case the driveris at considerable risk.

81. 'Rake' Plough. This is a US design very similar to the general concept of the full-width plough except it isa V shaped tined plough - rather like a rake - pushed by a tank. It was expected to be particularly good indesert conditions as the tines allow sand to pass through but are close enough together to catch mines andmove them to either side. It also needs considerable automotive power and destroys the ground.

82. Dozers. Civilian dozers are probably available in most countries and in theory they could have someapplication, particularly on dirt roads. They could possibly be used to improve the condition of these roads bygrading them. They can be very much less destructive of the ground than the track width, full-width and 'rake'

ploughs, but otherwise suffer from the same problems. Dozers are not designed to clear mines and thus have anumber of major disadvantages. They are not designed to withstand the explosive power of mines. Adetonating AT mine is likely to cause damage to the blade, perhaps causing fragments to fly off and hit thedriver. A US company produces mine ploughs for dozers and an Israeli company produces an add-on kit fordozers which provides an armoured cab offering some protection to the driver. It leaves the automotive andhydraulic components exposed. An armoured dozer has been used in specific EOD tasks but not against ATmines.

Top


21/33

Flails

83. A flail is a mechanically driven rotating drum, with chains attached, that beats the ground with great forceto detonate or physically break up land-mines. Flails were used for minefield breaching prior to the wide-spread acceptance of the track width mine plough.

84. Flails are intended to clear surface laid or shallow-buried mines from a narrow lane by repeated chainimpacts detonating, destroying or displacing mines in the cleared lanes. As with fuel air explosives andexplosive line charges, the displacement of mines caused by flail operations is a problem in Deminingoperations. Flails (like rollers and blast-over pressure systems) are also ineffective against long/multipleimpulse fuzed mines unless those mines are physically beaten apart by them. Further, flails typically requiremultiple passes over the same area in order to achieve an acceptable level of confidence. For these reasons,currently available flails are not really suited for area clearance. However, they can be a powerful tool for usein conjunction with other equipment and techniques.

85. Large countermine flails have been developed by the UK, South Africa, Germany and Israel. The GermanKailua is based on a turretless M48A2 tank and is operated by a crew of two. The Israeli Soil Mill system is

based on a armoured tractor pushing a power unit which operates a flail (or milling) arm. The latter claims to

have a better than 95% efficiency against AT mines but against AP mines it is less good. A small countermineflail for clearing AP mines is under development by the US Army.

Top

Rollers

86. These are pushed over an area by a protected vehicle and the inherent weight of the roller activates themine. The former Warsaw Pact forces, in particular, used them quite extensively but only for breachingoperations in war. They are designed to be fitted to tank

Survey of Mine Clearance Technology

Documents

Transcript of Survey of Mine Clearance Technology