Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5806/AST.2012.25.3.164

A study on the optimal conditions for latent fingerprint development using cyanoacrylate fuming method in vacuum chamber  

Yu, Je-Seol (Soonchunyang Univ. Graduate School of Forensic Science)
Jung, Jin-Sung (Soonchunyang Univ. Graduate School of Forensic Science)
Lim, Seung (Scientific Investigation Section, Gyungnam Provincial Police Agency)
Park, Sung-Woo (Department of Scientific Investigation, National Police Agency)
Publication Information
Analytical Science and Technology / v.25, no.3, 2012 , pp. 164-170 More about this Journal
Abstract
Cyanoacrylate fuming mehod is effective for latent fingerprints developing on non-porous surfaces. In this study, we investigated optimal conditions for latent fingerprint development using cyanoacrylate fuming method in vacuum chamber. The effects of temperature, relative humidity, fuming method and processing time were checked throughly. The amount of evaporated cyanoacrylate was increased at higher temperature, but cyanoacrylate polymerization on the fingerprint ridge was best at $30^{\circ}C$. With a relative humidity of 40% to 50% conditions, good quality of fingerprints were developed. If a relative humidity is lower than 30% or higher than 60%, polymerization rate of cyanoacrylate monomers on the fingerprint ridge was decreased. It was identified that application of $OMEGA-PRINT^{TM}$ dispersal pad or cotton ball with sodium hydroxide fuming method in vacuum chamber was more effective than natural fuming method. We found that cyanoacrylate processing time in vacuum chamber did not have more significant than relative humidity.
Keywords
cyanoacrylate; latent fingerprint; vacuum chamber; temperature; relative humidity;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 S. P. Wargacki, L. A. Lewis and M. D. Dadmun, J. Forensic Sci., 52(5), 1057-1062 (2007).   DOI   ScienceOn
2 L. A. Lewis, R. W. Smithwick, G. L. Devault, B. Bolinger and S. A. Lewis, J. Forensic Sci., 46(2), 241-246 (2001).
3 A. B. Yamashita, J. Forensic Ident., 44(2), 149-158 (1994).
4 J. E. Watkin, D. A. Wilkinson and A. B. Yamashita, 44(5), 545-556 (1994).
5 C. Lennard, 13th INTERPOL Forensic Science Symposium, Lyon, France, 86-93 (2001).
6 H. C. Lee and R. E. Gaensslen, 'Advances in Fingerprint Technology', 2nd Ed., CRC Press, Boca Ration, 2001.
7 J. Siegel, P. Saukko and G. Knupfer, 'Encyclopedia of Forensic Sciences', Academic press, Oxford, 2000.
8 M. J. Choi, Y. S. Sun, C. S. Kim, M. S. Choi, N. D. Sung and S. W. Park, Anal. Sci. Technol., 20(2), 147-154 (2007).
9 M. J. Choi, J. H. Ha and S. W. Park, Anal. Sci. Technol., 21(3), 212-221 (2008).
10 O. P. Jasuja, M. A. Toofany, G. Singh and G. S. Sodhi, Science and Justice, 49, 8-11 (2009).   DOI   ScienceOn
11 G. S. Sodhi and J. Kaur, Forensic science International, 120, 172-176 (2001).   DOI   ScienceOn
12 A. Czubak, Problems of Forensic Sci., vol. LII, 87-99 (2002).
13 A. Rawji and A. Beaudoin, J. Forensic Ident., 56(1), 33-54 (2005).
14 R. J. Jelly, E. L. T. Patton, C. Lennard, S. W. Lewis and K. F. Lim, Analytica Chimica Acta, 652, 128-142 (2009).   DOI   ScienceOn
15 A. Misner, D. Wilkinson and J. Watkin, J. Forensic Ident., 43(2), 154-165 (1993).
16 C. W. Bessman, E. Nelson, R. J. Lipert and S. Coldiron, J. Forensic Ident., 55(1), 10-27 (2005).
17 E. R. Menzel, J. A. Burt, T. W. Sinor, W. B. T. Ley and K. J. Jordan, J. Forensic Sci., 28(2), 307-317 (1983).
18 J. Almog and A. Gabay, J. Forensic Sci., 31(1), 250-253 (1986).
19 M. D. Dadmun, Final Project Report to the Department of Justice, 1-27 (2009).
20 P. Czekanski, M. Fasola and J. Allison, J. Forensic Sci., 51(6), 1323-1328 (2006).   DOI   ScienceOn