1.1 本规程可用于测量、评分和改善探测器的整体性能，该探测器可对拭子上的爆炸物痕迹发出警报。这些爆炸痕迹探测器（ETD）可以基于但不限于化学检测技术，如离子迁移谱（IMS）和质谱（MS）。 1.2 本规程考虑了仪器（采样后）痕量检测性能，涉及在标准背景挑战材料存在的情况下，八种类型炸药配方中的特定化学分析物。本规程适用于试验方法 E2677 为了评估检测极限，测量灵敏度和重复性的组合指标，要求ETD具有数值响应。 1.3 本规程通过将采样率、询问拭子面积和典型八小时轮班期间的估计维护需求考虑在内，考虑了ETD的有效检测吞吐量。 1.4 这种做法不需要，但特别重视对目标化合物和爆炸制剂的具体识别。 1.5 还可以测试多模式仪器（可在检测微量炸药、感兴趣药物、化学战剂和其他目标化合物之间切换的仪器）的功能。测试中的多模式仪器应设置为优化检测微量炸药的操作条件的模式。该实践要求使用一组ETD操作设置，根据中描述的因素计算系统测试分数 1.2 , 1.3 和 1.4 . 最低可接受分数来自实践中确立的标准 E2520 – 07中给出了此类测试的示例 附录X1 （示例2）。 1.6 预期用户- ETD开发商和制造商、测试实验室和负责有效遏制恐怖主义的国际机构。 1.7 最好使用实际炸药作为测试样品，但标准炸药配方并不广泛可用，也没有在拭子上定量和真实地沉积这些炸药的方法。本规程考虑了可从商业供应商处获得的16种化合物。这并不意味着只有这十六个对跟踪检测很重要。大多数ETD能够检测许多其他化合物，但这些化合物要么在化学上与所考虑的化合物相似（因此是多余的），要么出于稳定性和安全性的原因，无法从商业供应商处获得。在典型的实验室实践中，所考虑的16种化合物在使用量下是安全的。 1.8 本规程无意取代机构为测试特定应用的ETD性能而采用的任何现行标准程序。这些程序可能更严格，使用不同的化合物或实际的炸药配方，采用不同或更现实的背景挑战，并考虑环境采样程序和其他操作变量。 1.9 本规程推荐了一种制备测试拭子的方法，即移液法，因为该方法简单、可重复、定量、记录在案，适用于大多数当前检测技术。其他方法，如喷墨打印和干转移，可能会产生更真实的分析物分布和粒径，但这些方法并不广泛可用，也不太熟悉。如果程序经过验证并正确记录，则可以使用这些程序。 1.10 对于任何沉积方法，由于拭子制备过程中的挥发性和损失，一些化合物很难定量呈现到ETD入口。确定了与此实践相关的问题以及建议的说明。 1.11 单位- 以国际单位制表示的数值应视为标准值。本标准不包括其他计量单位。 1.12 本标准并非旨在解决与其使用相关的所有安全问题（如有）。 本标准的用户有责任在使用前制定适当的安全、健康和环境实践，并确定监管限制的适用性。 1.13 本国际标准是根据世界贸易组织技术性贸易壁垒（TBT）委员会发布的《关于制定国际标准、指南和建议的原则的决定》中确立的国际公认标准化原则制定的。 ====意义和用途====== 5.1 该实践可用于实现以下几个目的:为可靠确定ETD跟踪检测性能的术语、指标和程序建立全球参考框架；作为供应商证明设备在规定的性能分数下正常运行的证明；用于用户在购买后对探测器性能进行定期验证； 作为一种普遍可接受的模板，国际机构可对其进行调整，以规定性能要求、分析物和剂量水平、背景挑战和操作。 5.2 预计当前的ETD系统将在所考虑的各种爆炸类型和化合物中表现出广泛的性能。与以前的版本一样，本规程确定了探测器在检测微量爆炸物时被视为有效所需的最低性能。当爆炸物探测器达到至少80分的测试分数时，它被认为具有“最低可接受性能”。

1.1 This practice may be used for measuring, scoring, and improving the overall performance of detectors that alarm on traces of explosives on swabs. These explosive trace detectors (ETDs) may be based on, but are not limited to, chemical detection technologies such as ion mobility spectrometry (IMS) and mass spectrometry (MS). 1.2 This practice considers instrumental (post-sampling) trace detection performance, involving specific chemical analytes across eight types of explosive formulations in the presence of a standard background challenge material. This practice adapts Test Method E2677 for the evaluation of limit of detection, a combined metric of measurement sensitivity and repeatability, which requires ETDs to have numerical responses. 1.3 This practice considers the effective detection throughput of an ETD by factoring in the sampling rate, interrogated swab area, and estimated maintenance requirements during a typical eight hour shift. 1.4 This practice does not require, but places extra value on, the specific identification of targeted compounds and explosive formulations. 1.5 The functionality of multi-mode instruments (those that may be switched between detection of trace explosives, drugs of interest, chemical warfare agents, and other target compounds) may also be tested. A multi-mode instrument under test shall be set to the mode that optimizes operational conditions for the detection of trace explosives. This practice requires the use of a single set of ETD operational settings for calculating a system test score based on the factors described in 1.2 , 1.3 , and 1.4 . A minimum acceptable score is derived from criteria established in Practice E2520 – 07, and an example of such a test is presented in Appendix X1 (Example 2). 1.6 Intended Users— ETD developers and manufacturers, testing laboratories, and international agencies responsible for enabling effective deterrents to terrorism. 1.7 Actual explosives as test samples would be preferable, but standard explosive formulations are not widely available, nor are methods for depositing these quantitatively and realistically on swabs. This practice considers sixteen compounds that are available from commercial suppliers. This does not imply that only these sixteen are important to trace detection. Most ETDs are able to detect many other compounds, but these are either chemically similar (hence redundant) to the ones considered, or are unavailable from commercial suppliers for reasons of stability and safety. Under typical laboratory practices, the sixteen compounds considered are safe to handle in the quantities used. 1.8 This practice is not intended to replace any current standard procedure employed by agencies to test performance of ETDs for specific applications. Those procedures may be more rigorous, use different compounds or actual explosive formulations, employ different or more realistic background challenges, and consider environmental sampling procedures and other operational variables. 1.9 This practice recommends one method for preparation of test swabs, pipetting, because this method is simple, reproducible, quantitative, documented, and applicable to most current detection technologies. Other methods, such as inkjet printing and dry transfer, may generate more realistic analyte distributions and particle sizes, but these methods are not widely available and less familiar. They may be used if the procedures are validated and documented properly. 1.10 With any deposition method, some compounds are difficult to present to the ETD inlet quantitatively due to volatility and loss during the swab preparation process. Problematic issues pertinent to this practice are identified along with recommended instructions. 1.11 Units— The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard. 1.12 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. 1.13 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee. ====== Significance And Use ====== 5.1 This practice may be used to accomplish several ends: to establish a worldwide frame of reference for terminology, metrics, and procedures for reliably determining trace detection performance of ETDs; as a demonstration by the vendor that the equipment is operating properly to a specified performance score; for a periodic verification by the user of detector performance after purchase; and as a generally-acceptable template adaptable by international agencies to specify performance requirements, analytes and dosing levels, background challenges, and operations. 5.2 It is expected that current ETD systems will exhibit wide ranges of performance across the diverse explosive types and compounds considered. As in previous versions, this practice establishes the minimum performance that is required for a detector to be considered effective in the detection of trace explosives. An explosives detector is considered to have “minimum acceptable performance” when it has attained a test score of at least 80.