4.5 Article

Control of indoor environments in heritage buildings: experimental measurements in an old Italian museum and proposal of a methodology

Journal

JOURNAL OF CULTURAL HERITAGE
Volume 6, Issue 2, Pages 147-155

Publisher

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.culher.2005.03.001

Keywords

cultural heritage; works of art conservation; Italian standard rules; reactive sensors; indoor air quality

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper describes some results from an experiment carried out regarding a procedure to be adopted for temperature and R.H. monitoring of indoor spaces designed for exhibiting events, such as museums and similar institutions. The monitored data employed in this study has been collected by the Department di Ricerche Energetiche ed Ambientali of the University degli Studi di Palermo in co-operation with the Regional Gallery Palazzo Abatellis of Palermo. The study analyses a simple method for characterising the environmental quality of museums so as to ensure the optimal conservation of works of art. This methodology is based on the procedure (where thermal and hygrometry parameters are concerned) proposed by an Italian standard rule. A new technique, firstly applied to the industrial environment, based on the passive reactive monitoring of proper coupons is also proposed for monitoring air quality in museums. The methodology adopted, has been applied to two survey campaigns which were carried out at a distance of 5 years. This shows the two aspects of thermal-hygrometry and levels of indoor air quality aimed at preserving works of art. The future developments of this work are oriented towards the definition of guidelines in support of those responsible for the conservation of works of art and improvements in the quality of environments for artwork conservation and for the comfort of visitors through the use of proper HVAC systems. (c) 2005 Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available