两种化学法显现铝质发动机号码的比较  

Comparison of Two Chemical Methods for Revealing Aluminum Engine Numbers

作　　者：马元元 张晓顺[1] MA Yuanyuan;ZHANG Xiaoshun(Key Laboratory of Impression Evidence Examination and Identification Technology,Ministry of Public Security,People’s Republic of China,Shenyang 110035,China;Criminal Police Corps of Chongqing Public Security Bureau,Chongqing 400707,China)

机构地区：[1]痕迹检验鉴定技术公安部重点实验室,辽宁沈阳110035 [2]重庆市公安局刑侦总队,重庆400707

出　　处：《山东化工》2025年第6期151-153,共3页Shandong Chemical Industry

基　　金：痕迹检验鉴定技术公安部重点实验室资助课题(2018HJKF14)。

摘　　要：选取以盐酸为主的2种常用的腐蚀法和电解法显现试剂配方,模拟发动机号码篡改手法,利用钢号模具在发动机缸体表面打制实验号码,用角磨机打磨掉原始号码后,用配制的试剂进行显现实验并比较显现效果,发现两种方法都能显出被篡改的发动机号码,但在反应机理、显现速度和效果方面存在明显差异,电解法显现速度更快、更环保,腐蚀法显现速度慢,但效果更稳定。Two commonly used corrosion method and electrolysis method reagent formulations mainly based on hydrochloric acid were selected.The engine number tampering method was simulated.The steel number mold was used to punch experimental numbers on the surface of the engine cylinder block.After grinding off the original number with an angle grinder,the prepared reagents were used for manifestation experiments and the manifestation effects were compared.It was found that both methods can show the tampered engine number,but there are obvious differences in reaction mechanism,manifestation speed and effect.The electrolysis method has a faster manifestation speed and is more environmentally friendly.The corrosion method has a slower manifestation speed but a more stable effect.

关 键 词：腐蚀法 电解法 显现 铝质 发动机号码 

分 类 号：D918.91[政治法律—法学]