3.9 Article

Chemical and Laser Cleaning of Corrosion Encrustations on Historical Stained Glass: A Comparative Study

期刊

HERITAGE
卷 6, 期 2, 页码 1942-1957

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/heritage6020104

关键词

stained glass; laser cleaning; chemical cleaning; encrustations; conservation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this research was to compare the effectiveness of chemical cleaning and laser cleaning in removing surface congruent dissolution products from a stained-glass sample. Both methods were able to eliminate the outer dark layer associated with carbon compounds and the external part of the white layer formed by salt crystallization. The advantages and disadvantages of each method were also discussed.
The aim of this research work was to conduct a comparative study on the effectiveness of the application of chemical cleaning versus laser cleaning in the removal of surface congruent dissolution products from a potash-lime-silica historical stained-glass sample. EDTA was selected as the chemical cleaning agent. Laser cleaning was performed using a 238 fs pulse UV (343 nm) laser. The comparative cleaning studies were carried out on a stained-glass piece supplied by the Maison Lorin Glass Restoration Workshop from Chartres, France. Given the complex nature, irregular thickness and heterogeneity of the encrustations found on the glass, the two cleaning approaches were carefully performed step by step, while monitoring the process using an optical microscope. Raman spectroscopy and field emission scanning electron microscopy were used to characterize the changes induced on the sample surface during the cleaning process. The results demonstrate that the two cleaning approaches were able to eliminate the outer surface dark layer associated with carbon compounds, as well as the external part of the white layer generated by the crystallization of salts, formed with the dissolved elements after a reaction with the air. A comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of each method is also presented.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据