We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Nondestructive Forensic Comparison of Nylon Trace Evidence Using Room-Temperature Fluorescence Spectroscopy
Summary
Room-temperature fluorescence spectroscopy was tested as a non-destructive method for comparing nylon samples in forensic investigations, including nylon from 3D-printed objects. The technique could differentiate between nylon samples from different sources without damaging the evidence. This approach supports forensic analysis of plastic trace evidence in criminal investigations.
The increasing accessibility of 3D printers makes their use for criminal activity more likely. Current forensic analysis of trace evidence left by 3D-printed materials focuses on identifying the general type of plastic, which includes acrylonitrile butadiene styrene, polylactic acid, nylon, polycarbonate, polyethylene terephthalate, and chlorinated polyethylene. Herein, we present a nondestructive approach capable of differentiating among different types of nylons. The new approach is based on room-temperature fluorescence spectroscopy. Excitation-emission matrices, excitation and emission spectra, and synchronous fluorescence spectra are directly recorded from single microplastics with the aid of a fiber-optic probe coupled to a commercial spectrofluorometer. The comparison of spectral features demonstrates the capability to differentiate microparticles originating from Nylon 11, Nylon 12, Nylon 6/6, and Nylon 6/12. The observed differences are attributed to the presence of fluorescent impurities embedded in the polymer during its fabrication. The outstanding matching of excitation-emission matrices, excitation and emission spectra, and synchronous fluorescence spectra demonstrates the potential of this approach to link trace evidence to a specific source beyond its general plastic type.