3.9 Article

Detection and Identification of Possible Gel Residues on the Surface of Paintings after Cleaning Treatments

期刊

HERITAGE
卷 4, 期 1, 页码 304-315

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/heritage4010019

关键词

polyvinyl alcohol; borax; hydrogels; paint cleaning; dammar varnish; Py-GC/MS

资金

  1. Compagnia di San Paolo
  2. Fondazione CRT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An analytical method based on ATR-FTIR and Py-GC/MS was developed to identify PVA-borax gel residues. The results showed that clearing the surfaces with organic solvents is necessary to ensure a good removal of gel residues. Py-GC/MS analyses in SIM mode are more sensitive and selective for detecting gel residues.
Important features required for gels used for the cleaning of paintings are viscoelastic properties ensuring good adaptability to the morphology of the surfaces and complete gel removal after application. Poly (vinyl alcohol) (PVA)-borax gels containing different liquid phases are often used as cleaning materials, but still little is known about their ability to leave no residues. This study reports the development of an analytical method based on attenuated total reflectance-Fourier transform infrared (ATR-FTIR) spectroscopy and pyrolysis-gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (Py-GC/MS) for the identification of PVA-borax gel residues on mock-ups and on works of art after cleaning treatments. The effect of additives in the formulation (i.e., poly (ethylene oxide)) and of clearing treatments with organic solvents after the gel removal was assessed both with respect to the effectiveness of the cleaning and the presence of residues on the painted surfaces. The results obtained show that clearing the surfaces with cotton swabs and organic solvents after the application of the gel is necessary to ensure a good removal of gel residues. Moreover, Py-GC/MS analyses in single-ion-monitoring (SIM) mode are more sensitive and selective, allowing the detection of gel residues even on surfaces where no residue is detected by ATR-FTIR.

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