Augmented Reality in Explosive Ordnance Disposal and Risk Education

The emergence of augmented reality (AR) technology has provided educators with an exciting new tool for teaching across various disciplines. One area where this tool could be especially helpful is in learning about landmines and unexploded ordnance (UXO). This article explores the positive changes and potential negative issues posed by using AR in explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) and explosive ordnance risk education (EORE). It concludes that, despite issues relating to EOD technicians’ reluctance to use AR, dizziness experienced while wearing headsets, and limited access to smartphones in EO affected countries, AR technology will ultimately contribute positively to EOD and EORE. 

What is Augmented Reality? 

Before diving into AR, it is important to define the parameters. Mandy Mayfield, in her 2021 paper on how this technology could transform military training, provides a useful distinction between virtual reality (VR) technology, which “immerses users in a computer-generated environment,” and AR technology, which “transposes data or other digitally created images on top of a real-world field of view. Mixed reality also merges real and virtual worlds to produce new environments where physical and digital entities co-exist.”[1]  

There are also different kinds of VR and AR systems. Some involve elaborate headsets, while others can be downloaded directly onto tablets and smartphones.[2] The EOD field utilizes both technologies. This article primarily discusses AR technology, with brief mentions of VR systems, but it is important not to confuse the two. 

Augmented Reality in Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technician Training 

Since 2019, Allen Tan and the Golden West Design Lab in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, have used AR technology to train EOD technicians in the field. It began by working with the US Department of State’s Office of Weapon Removal and Abatement (PM/WRA) to create the Advanced Ordnance Training Materials (AOTM) program, which used 3D-printed sample pieces of ordnance to train EOD technicians. Building on the success of that program, they developed the Augmented Reality Ordnance Learning System (AROLS).[3]

AROLS initially focused on more universal concepts, showing how fuzes work or the spalding effect that comes from a squash head, so that students of all backgrounds could more easily understand these concepts. They also developed an app that students could download directly to their smartphone and a library so that students could place the items in a room. However, it became more complicated, as “users need a marker card to put on the table. This marker allows the app to recognize the surface orientation and relative scaling. This is how the software understands where to place the virtual object and what the size needs to be. While other technologies (surface mapping) exist in higher-end devices (e.g., the Microsoft HoloLens), the reliability of these technologies on smartphones remains unacceptable at this time.”[4] 

An image from an augmented reality app in use, 2024.

Courtesy of Charlie Valentine. 

A newer startup, EODynamics AB, has found a way to overcome the marker card issue and successfully integrate the technology into smartphones. Students using the app can place a landmine or item of UXO from the online library in any room, anywhere in the world, as soon as they download the app.

The developer of the EODynamics AB app, Charlie Valentine, became involved in mine action for largely the same reasons as Tan did: 

Our decision to use AR in EOD training stemmed from a need for safer, more scalable, and cost-effective training solutions. Traditional EOD training is resource-intensive, involving significant logistical requirements, safety risks when it comes to creation of FFE (Free From Explosive Hazards), and costs associated with realistic scenarios in deployed environments outside of a traditional school house. By integrating AR, we saw an opportunity to provide technicians with an immersive experience that simulates high-risk scenarios without physical hazards.[5]

Whether an EOD technician uses EODynamics or AROLS, there are definite advantages. When applied to other fields, AR shows promising results; for instance, an analysis of over 250 studies looking at AR in education found that “AR programs produce learning outcomes that are, on average, three-fifths of a standard deviation larger than alternative comparisons.”[6] This is evident in other studies. A study of medical students found that, when combined with dummies, AR effectively helped the students learn how to find veins and arteries for needle insertion.[7] A study of AR in fitness, where university students used an AR app on their phones with an AR trainer assisting them, showed that participants preferred AR over video- or image-based learning and that AR made the majority of participants want to exercise more.[8] If EOD technicians are receptive to this technology, they may experience similar positive results. 

But how receptive will EOD technicians be? According to First Lieutenant David Slatkovsky of the Slovakian Army, and Officer Primarily Responsible for the EOD Training and Combat Support Kit (ETACS) project at the NATO EOD Centre of Excellence, some EOD technicians do not believe that AR can compare to traditional, tactile methods of learning. Lt. Slatkovsky went on to say, “however, for those willing to take up this challenge of adjusting and learning [a] new approach, this technology can bring much better results than conventional methods. Please bear in mind that the difference between the two categories is not the age, rather the mindset of operators.”[9] 

The availability of new AR tools for EOD technicians is beneficial, but if they choose not to use them, it could hinder growth in the field. It should be noted that Lt. Slatkovsky’s experiences might not be universally true. Nonetheless, it is a concern that should be taken seriously. 

While the EOD technicians Lt. Slatkovsky mentioned showed distrust toward the new technology because they preferred traditional methods, my interview subjects all insisted it is just a tool for training, not a replacement for traditional methods. Furthermore, Charlie Valentine stated, “AR training can’t fully replicate the physical stress and sensory experience of handling live explosives. Therefore, it should complement, rather than replace, hands-on training by focusing on allow[ing] trainees and students to have more iterations of procedural training.”[10] EODynamics AB’s lead developer, Nick Valenti, put it succinctly: “AR on its own can no more be a comprehensive replacement for any training plan than a new wrench can be a replacement for an entire toolbox.”[11]

In addition to issues related to EOD technicians’ receptiveness, Lt. Slatovsky also worried about the headsets themselves: “Depending on the type of the extended reality[12] being used, the biggest downsides of this technology [are] the time needed for adapting to wearing a headset and engaging in [a] totally different environment.”[13] Damian Piórko, senior lecturer at the Military University of the Land Forces in Wrocłąw, Poland, echoed this concern, adding, “users of this tech may feel dizzy and their eyesight may get fatigued quickly.”[14] 

A trainer from EOD Academy in Munich, Germany, using an augmented reality kit.

Courtesy of Charlie Valentine.

Interestingly, a 2015 case study highlighted US Marines using AR headsets during a practice mission. Although there were only five marines on the mission—meaning the sample size was too small to draw significant conclusions—it did corroborate some of the aforementioned concerns.[15] For instance, the Marines reported increased levels of simulator sickness.[16] They also experienced issues using real-world tools such as a map and protractor while wearing the headset. The original authors of the case study cited this as a reason to improve headset technology.[17] More recent research has found similar results. In 2024, the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), when evaluating The ThirdEye X2 MR Smart Glasses, Microsoft HoloLens 2, and Magic Leap 2 for training first responders, found issues with users experiencing dizziness and eyestrain.

The authors of the DHS study attributed the problem to “vergence accommodation conflict” and explained: “A person’s eyes normally converge (cross slightly) as the distance from an object to their eyes decreases or diverge (uncross) as that distance increases. Simultaneously, the eyes also focus or ‘accommodate’ according to the eye-to-object distance. In the real world, both vergence and accommodation occur at the same point, but in the virtual world, the vergence and accommodation points are often out of sync. While an object may appear to be five feet away, the screen the user’s eyes must focus on is only one to two inches away. This disconnect is known as the ‘vergence accommodation conflict’ and can cause headache, dizziness, nausea, and eye strain.’”[18] 

Headsets continue to be a common method for AR training. While the US Marine study involved a very small sample size, the DHS study did not specify its sample size. More research with a larger sample size is necessary to determine whether dizziness is a major factor or if it could potentially be mitigated by periodic breaks. It should be noted that this is not an issue for people using the smartphone apps.  

Augmented Reality in Explosive Ordnance Risk Education 

In 2020, Marlo Brooke, CEO of AVATAR Partners, a software company that provides AR solutions, stated, “this all needs to be sustainable and cost-effective. And by that, I mean it has to have scalability… It needs to scale-up, support multi-platforms [and] be cost effective from the start.”[19]  

With AR advancements in EOD training, we are arguably now at that point. As Damian Piórko stated in an interview, “to begin with, any phone app is crucial as it can reach thousands of users immediately… Applications can show in detail videos and pictures of the ERW [explosive remnants of war], UXO, or IED [improvised explosive devices]. This gives imagination of the object’s appearance and simultaneously provides safety precautions. Notably, the young generation, which is the most affected by the mines, due to their curiosity, could be saved by such apps.”[20] 

Charlie Valentine elaborated on his experience in Iraq and Ukraine, emphasizing that the company’s newly developed Explosive Hazard Augmented Reality Trainer (EHART)[21] system was designed to aid EORE. “By using AR, we can provide realistic yet safe training scenarios to teach civilians, NGO [nongovernmental organization] staff, and even schoolchildren how to identify and avoid explosive hazards while gathering quantitative metrics on participants’ responses,” he explained.[22] 

EODynamics software being used in Ukraine by a Ukrainian EOD trainee.

Courtesy of Stuart “Rick” Rickard.

Now that phone apps like EHART exist, Piórko’s idea can be realized. According to Nicholas Valenti, the Lead Developer at EODynamics AB, “AR provides unique opportunities in EORE training. Phones and AR headsets are relatively available and easy to transport, and digital assets can be updated or curated with minimal fuss. There’s also a level of scale and scope that AR headsets provide that can’t be simulated with images or screens.”[23] 

EODynamics isn’t the only organization exploring AR’s applicability to EORE. The Danish Refugee Council (DRC) are also creating digital EORE tools (that went hand-in-hand with a coloring book) for primary and secondary school students in Eastern Ukraine in 2021. Specifically, they have developed an AR game called “Dangerous Quest” that children could play. The game was bilingual (Ukrainian and Russian), had no traumatic images,[24] and was trialed with a group of eleven students. The project was validated and endorsed by the Ministry of Education and Science in Ukraine.[25] 

The DRC concluded that “digital initiatives work best when complementing the traditional, two-way communication channels,”[26] and, “although AR has a relatively high cost at the project’s start, it does not require expensive equipment to run. AR can function on any devices already equipped with a digital camera. AR maintenance costs after deployment is lower.”[27]

EORE programs, such as the one implemented by the DRC, require access to smartphones. Before the Russian invasion, Ukraine had a population of 43.8 million people and 49.3 million cell phones.[28] This suggests that, in a room full of people, there would be enough devices for everyone to use the app. In Afghanistan, however, which had a population of 40.1 million people and 22.7 million cell phones in 2021,[29] it would be far less likely that enough compatible devices would be available in a similar context. It should also be noted that the Central Intelligence Agency, sourced for these metrics, only measures the number of cell phones, not the percentage of the population that uses a smart phone.[30] Despite these limitations, EORE should strive to be locally and culturally relevant. While this EORE program cannot be implemented everywhere, it is beneficial in the locations where it can work. 

Conclusion 

The impact of AR is evolving in its use in EOD and EORE. Organizations like Golden West Design Lab and EODynamics AB are blazing a trail that many more will undoubtedly follow. The long-term hope is that this technology will make training EOD technicians safer and less expensive, even if it does not completely replace tactile training. Similarly, the opportunities to use AR for risk education materials are abundant. If AR programs such as the DRC Ukraine initiative can be made available globally, it will also provide a huge benefit to EORE professionals. With enough time and investment, obstacles such as reticence among EOD technicians to use AR, dizziness when wearing the headsets, and ease of access to smartphones can all be overcome. Ultimately, the goal is always to keep people safe from landmines and UXO. If this technology helps with reaching that goal, then its continued expansion could prove to be invaluable.  

---

Matt Fuller, PhD, earned his doctorate from the University of Otago in New Zealand. He also earned his International Mine Action Standards (IMAS) Level Three Certification from MAT Kosovo in 2022. He is currently a Researcher for EODynamics AB and an independent EOD Contractor in the UK. Before that, he was an Instructor of Philosophy at St. Philip's College in San Antonio, Texas.

---

Interviews 

Piórko, Damian. Senior lecturer at Military University of the Land Forces in Wrocłąw, Poland. Interviewed by author. Email interview. 15 November 2024. 

Slatkovsky, David. 1^st Lieutenant in the Slovakian Army, OPR of the ETACS project at the NATO EOD Centre of Excellence. Interviewed by author. Email interview. 13 November 2024. 

Valenti, Nicholas. Lead Developer at EODynamics AB. Interviewed by author. Email interview. 11 November 2024. 

Valentine, Charlie. Founder of EODynamics AB. Interviewed by author. Email interview. 31 October 2024.  

Endnotes

[1] Mayfield, Mandy, “Virtual, Augmented Reality Tech Transforming Training,” National Defense 105, no. 807 (2021): 32, https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/27023285.pdf.  

[2] Antonioli, Misty, Corinne Blake, and Kelly Sparks, “Augmented Reality Applications in Education.” The Journal of Technology Studies 40, No. 2, (2014): Pages 96,  http://www.jstor.org/stable/43604312.   

[3] Allen Dodgson, Tan, “Augmented and Virtual Reality for HMA EOD Training,” The Journal of Conventional Weapons Destruction 23, no. 2 (2023): 1, https://issuu.com/cisr-journal/docs/23.3-all/s/10140051.

[4] Allen Dodgson, “Augmented and Virtual Reality for HMA EOD Training,” 1.

[5] Email Interview with Charlie Valentine, 31 October 2024.  

[6] Howard, Matt C., and Maggie M. Davis. “A Meta-analysis of Augmented Reality Programs for Education and Training,” Virtual Reality 27, (2023): 2871, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-023-00844-6.

[7] Mendes, Helena Catarina Margarido, et al. “PINATA: ˜ Pinpoint insertion of intravenous needles via augmented reality training assistance,” Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics 82, (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compmedimag.2020.101731.

[8] Burns, Jamie, et al. “Comparative Study of AR Versus Image and Video for Exercise Learning,” Arxiv, (2022): Pages 1–6, https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.02161.

[9] Email Interview with David Slatkovsky, 13 November 2024. 

[10] Email Interview with Charlie Valentine, 31 October 2024.

[11] Email Interview with Nicholas Valenti, 11 November 2024.  

[12] “Extended Reality” is an umbrella term to describe virtual, augmented, and mixed reality (mixed reality is not discussed in this paper).

[13] Email Interview with David Slatkovsky, 13 November 2024.

[14] Email Interview with Damian Piórko, 15 November 2024.

[15] Champney, Roberto, et al. “Augmented Reality Training of Military Tasks: Reactions from Subject Matter Experts,” International Conference on Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality, (2015): Pages 252–262. https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/canvas/master/ms-142150-20160602160611/common/corefiles/Champeny_2015_military_AR.pdf 

[16] Roberto Champney, “Augmented Reality Training in Military Tasks: Reactions from Subject Matter Experts,” 258.

[17] Roberto Champney, “Augmented Reality Training in Military Tasks: Reactions from Subject Matter Experts,” 256.

[18] Miller, Steve, and Eric Morefield. “Augmented Reality (AR) Training Systems for First Responders,” Department of Homeland Security (2024): 3, https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2024-02/24_02_16_st_artrainingsystemsmsr_0.pdf.

[19] Mayfield, Mandy. “Virtual, Augmented Reality Tech Transforming Training,” National Defense 105, no. 807 (2021): 32, https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/27023285.pdf.  

[20] Email Interview with Damian Piórko, 15 November 2024.

[21] EHART stands for Explosive Hazard Augmented Reality Trainer and is a full headset similar to the AROLS system mentioned previously in the article.

[22] Email Interview with Charlie Valentine, 31 October 2024.

[23] Email Interview with Nicholas Valenti, 11 November 2024. 

[24] Vovk, Nick, and Audrey Torrecilla. “Topic: Mobile EORE Augmented Reality Application,” Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining, (2022): Pages 1–9, https://www.gichd.org/fileadmin/uploads/gichd/migration/fileadmin/GICHD-resources/info-documents/EORE_Advisory_Group/Mobile_EORE_Augmented_Reality_Application_April_2023.pdf.

[25] Nick Vovk, Audrey Torrecilla, “Topic: Mobile EORE Augmented Reality Application,” 6.

[26] ibid

[27] ibid

[28] Central Intelligence Agency, “Country Comparisons: Telephones - mobile cellular,” CIA World Factbook, 2022, https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/telephones-mobile-cellular/country-comparison/.

[29] Central Intelligence Agency, “Country Comparisons: Telephones – mobile cellular.”

[30] Smartphone penetration here refers to the percentage of a country’s population that owns or uses a smartphone. This metric provides an insight into how widespread smartphone adoption is across the country and is typically expressed as a percentage.