This is another session that I tweeted (@taradkennedy), so not a long post, but enough to give you the gist at least.
Ms. Goler was using micro-Raman spectroscopy for dating of Egyptian manuscript material.This is super cool because normally we’d have to take a sample of a manuscript and do carbon dating in order to determine a date of an unknown. With this method, we don’t!
So, how does it work? Essentially measurements are taken of the carbon black ink on a particular manuscript using micro-Raman spectroscopy. Using the difference in the dominant peak heights in the spectrograph with ink samples where the date is known, ratios are plotted and graphed to show dates:
So, the more plots you have, the more dates you have; and the more dates you have, the easier it is to determine the date range of an unknown manuscript.
To test that this would work, Ms. Goler analyzed a manuscript where she didn’t know the date range, but the librarian/ curator did. Using this method, she was able to date the manuscript within a 70 year range!
It was nondestructive in that the energy level of the laser used didn’t “burn up” the ink sample. One of the issues that a conservator from the University of Michigan else mentioned during the Q&A portion was that in order to get the peak response that Ms. Goler got, she would destroy the sample. Since my experience with Raman spectroscopy is zero, I can’t really speculate why Ms. Goler was successful and this other woman from U of M was not.
I did think this is a really promising technique, provided I understood the content correctly. If people have edits or corrections, be sure to comment below!
Tag: AIC’s 44th Annual Meeting
44th Annual Meeting, May 16, Research and Technical Studies, Visible-Induced Luminescence Imaging: Past, Current and Future Applications in Conservation Research, Dawn Kriss and Anna Serotta
I was excited to see the most recent update on VIL imaging as it is an accessible imaging technique that can be used to localize pigments with specific characteristics. It is useful for anyone interested in painted surfaces, and can be used in conjunction with other multispectral imaging, or as a standalone technique.
The basic idea is that you need a light source to produce visible light, a camera with its infrared filter removed, and a bandpass filter to limit the type of light that gets to the camera sensor, along with some standards to help process the images. The pigment particles on the object are excited in the visible range, and emit infrared radiation which is detected by the modified camera. This technique can be used to detect trace remains of pigments that are all but undetectable to the naked eye. The technique was developed by scientists from the British Museum and the Courtauld Institute (see Verri et al., 2009) [1].
In the case studies shown in Dawn and Anna’s presentation the focus was on Egyptian blue, which produces luminescence in the infrared (~910nm) when exposed to visible light. Optimizing the capture and processing protocols will mean better results and hopefully, a means of standardizing and sharing information between conservators working in different labs. While VIL is gaining popularity as more museums add it to their workflow (for example. as part of the APPEAR project spearheaded by the Getty), the technique is still being developed, with much more progress on the horizon. Dawn and Anna reported on results of a survey of VIL users to show where progress has been made and where we can still expect some improvements in the technique.
Capture: varying light sources
There are many options for lights used for excitation, so choosing a light source that is targeted to your research question is critical. As an example, the authors described work by my classmate Brian Castriota showing that red LEDs with an output centered at 630 nm caused greater luminescence of Egyptian blue compared to white LEDs. More research on the luminescence characteristics of other pigments will help users optimize their light sources to target specific pigments.
Processing: calibration, standards, and protocols
While many conservators using VIL use the CHARISMA protocols (developed by the British Museum), others are using Photoshop to process the images. Egyptian blue VIL images are usually shown in monochrome, but as the technique is expanded different overlays or crossfades will help communicate the results by registering the images with other photographs, as Dawn and Anna did for the images shown in their presentation. This is one of the greatest advantages of VIL: it’s very easy to understand the images that are generated and easy to communicate the results to the public. However, capturing good metadata and using appropriate standards are critical for the intercomparability of these data in the future. It will be crucial to develop a luminescence scale or target in order to compare images from institutions who may not be using the exact same capture or processing parameters.
What do we have to look forward to?
While its initial development as a tool for identifying Egyptian blue has led to its popularity among archaeological conservators, it seems like the technique is ripe for more widespread adoption for research into modern pigments, some of which also have unique luminescence properties.
Conservators can use a variety of wavelengths using targeted or tunable light sources (e.g. the CrimeScope, adapted from the forensics field) to survey visible-induced luminescent pigments (other examples of which include dragon’s blood, Indian yellow, Han blue, cadmium red and yellow). Dawn and Anna showed an example of imaging surveying cadmium pigments used in Stuart Davis’s Mellow Pad carried out by their Brooklyn colleague Jessica Ford. For more on the work from the team at the Brooklyn Museum, see their recent blog post here.
Conservators can use a variety of wavelengths using targeted or tunable light sources (e.g. the CrimeScope, adapted from the forensics field) to survey visible-induced luminescent pigments (other examples of which include dragon’s blood, Indian yellow, Han blue, cadmium red and yellow). Dawn and Anna showed an example of imaging surveying cadmium pigments used in Stuart Davis’s Mellow Pad carried out by their Brooklyn colleague Jessica Ford. For more on the work from the team at the Brooklyn Museum, see their recent blog post here.
References.
[1] Verri, Giovanni, et al. “Assyrian Colours: Pigments on a Neo-Assyrian Relief of a Parade Horse.” The British Museum Technical Research Bulletin 3 (2009): 57–62.
44th Annual Meeting – Sustainability, May 16, "Sustainable Energy Reductions without Relaxed Environmental Criteria for a Hypothetical Museum in Montreal" by William Lull
Annoyingly, my computer thought it would be a great time to crap out, but luckily I come equipped with multiple electronic devices. So, as to not let my computer get the best of me, I snapped pictures of a number of his slides, so I would catch the gist of his talk. It also helps that Bill came to Yale to give a much more extensive version of this talk to collections and facilities staff.
Good news? The talk in its entirety is available as a paper on Bill’s web site: http://publications.garrisonlull.com
Bill set up a hypothetical building scenario (10,000 sf) using Montreal as its home. Montreal uses hydro power (so cool and GREEN) for its utilities so carbon footprint isn’t a concern here, so he doesn’t talk about emission reduction in this scenario.
Institutions want to save money, so naturally, their first thought is to cut back on HVAC settings. Same with energy savings: if we change our parameters, we’ll save money AND energy! But at what risk to our collections?
The scenarios that were hypothesized were the following:
- Change lighting energy use – reduce by 1 w/sf
- Change the T/RH to the relaxed AAMD (Association of Art Museum Directors) standards
- Change the energy loads and other proposed criteria without changing the environment set points
The scenarios were tried in a collections storage space and a gallery space in the proposed building.
Now, granted, the AAMD “standards” were proposed so that we’d be more lenient in our loaning practices, and not about energy savings or anything like that. Plus, I am not sure what “science” was used to determine these guidelines, since as far as I know, no conservators or conservation scientists were part of the conversation. But that’s a bone I can pick on a different blog post. 🙂 Anyway, Bill was just using it as an example of relaxed conditions.
One important element to examine are the alternative loads and how they might affect these numbers. Reducing these loads on a system will save energy and money:
- Internal Loads
- e.g. humans, lights, computers
- turn off lights, change lamps, turn off computers not in use
- Envelope Loads
- e.g. radiant heat from the sun, glass, insulation, vapor barrier (or lack thereof)
- seal up cracks, add insulation, vapor barrier
- Outside Air Loads
- how much outside air is being let in?
- check and see how much outside air is being let in
- you need some due to ASHRAE and OSHA standards
My favorite – and simplest – solution is to change the amount of air being pushed through your HVAC system. If you don’t have constant volume supply/ return fans, slow the fans down! You’ll maintain the environment you want, and save money and energy! Just make sure air is still being distributed evenly so your conditions stay constant. And BTW, supply and return fans are NOT the same as VAV fans. Those are smaller fans that are used the condition one room at a time based on how you set the thermostat in a single room.
Other recommendations have been to shut down equipment during unoccupied times and then turn the equipment back on. Bill doesn’t recommend this for a variety of reasons:
- Wear and tear on equipment (e.g. motor belts)
- The conditions are less than ideal, especially in the summer (I’ve experienced this issue)
Bottom line? There are other ways to be smart with energy savings and STILL maintain the environmental conditions you want in your collections and exhibit spaces. So, don’t assume you need to relax your environmental standards to be a greener museum. Examine your overall building and systems with your facilities folks and see what you can find that might save you money in the long run without compromising your collections.
Super smart and super practical. This HVAC nerd gives this talk two thumbs up!
44th Annual Meeting, General Session (GO – Emergency Response), May 16, “The Emergency Response Team at the Centre de conservation du Québec” by Eloïse Paquette
The Centre de conservation du Québec (CCQ), in Québec city, is a unique institution. Founded by the Ministère de la Culture et des Communications in 1979, its mandate is to protect and preserve Quebec’s cultural heritage and to make sure that this valuable heritage is recognized as such, and made as widely available as possible. The CCQ, which provides a variety of services (ranging from restoration to raising awareness about conservation issues and to emergency response), employs thirty conservators. One of these professionals, Éloïse Paquette, Paintings Conservator at the Centre, was at the joint 44th annual meeting and 42nd annual conference on May 16 to let us in on the secrets of the CCQ’s well-rounded Emergency Response Team. I had been looking forward to this talk: as a Quebecoise, and an aspiring conservator, this was a valuable occasion to get to know the workings of the CCQ, as well as how prepared they are to face disasters that threaten cultural heritage in the Belle Province. What I found out is that the members of the Emergency Response Team of the CCQ are, as Paquette pointed out, as ready as they can be.
The ice storm of January 1998, which paralyzed the Montreal region, acted as a catalyst for the coming into being of an official Emergency Response Team at the CCQ. The crise du verglas, as it is known in Quebec, caused massive power outage. At the Lachine Museum, 10 km from downtown Montreal, leaks appeared from previously frozen pipes when the power came back on, and the storage area was flooded with hot, dirty water, critically damaging the Museum’s collections. The CCQ was called for help, and three conservators were on site two days later. 254 of the affected objects demanded immediate care: the exhibition space of the museum was turned into examination rooms, many textiles were dried or frozen on site, and others were washed then and there. 87% of the textiles were saved, and half of them can be displayed today. Some of the textiles, paintings, works on paper, ethnological objects and furniture were restored in the following years.
This disaster prompted the Lachine Museum to revise its storage space (they installed a gas heating system and revised the classification of the objects) and the CCQ to put into place a more detailed and comprehensive emergency plan. Paquette explained to the audience what this plan is, and, most importantly, how good organization and communication make it an effective one. The CCQ’s Emergency Plan, which is revised and put up to date during regular meetings, relies on cooperation between team members as well as with other institutions and museum employees. The CCQ has agreements with the Musées de la civilisation and the Musée National des Beaux-Arts in Quebec City, as well as with Centre des services du Québec – Parcs Canada.
The first aspect of the Emergency Plan which Paquette unveiled was the Telephone Pyramid, a diagram in which a network of names and phone numbers are linked one to the other, in such a way that when a member of the team receives a call telling them about an emergency, they know exactly which other members to call. Hence, everyone is quickly in the know and ready to act. Like every other document related to the Emergency Plan, this Pyramid is available in a binder at CCQ, and every team member has a copy at home. The Pyramid was also printed in credit card format, so that it is carried around at all times (as Paquette pointed out, she had her copy in her wallet during the talk). This goes to prove what is seemingly obvious, but can never be stressed enough: communication is key for efficient emergency response.
The members of the emergency team also own a pocket-size summary of the plan. In the Emergency Plan, nothing is left to chance: the sequence of events is detailed, designated facilities are pointed out, the responsibilities of each team member is exposed, contact information for CCQ’s partners in case of disaster is listed, floor plans of institutions and museums are provided, etc. The document is made complete by a few annexes, the first of which being “Salvage Material Lists.” The materials of the Emergency Response Team, which are regularly inspected, are housed together in a secure area at the Centre, in well identified boxes. On each box is taped a list of the material it contains. The materials are visible, easily accessible, and very well organized. At the end of the talk, an attendee asked Paquette, who had provided us with an example of the list of materials contained in two of the boxes (box #1: aluminum paper, waxed paper, Ziploc bags, plastic fasteners, garbage bags, polythene, and box #4: security helmets, first aid kit, security glasses, dust masks, disposable gloves, dishwashing gloves, latex gloves), what they used aluminum paper for. Paquette stated that most of the materials have no specific, set use. Instead, they are to be brought on site just in case they are needed. This whole organization of the material makes for a quick and efficient disaster response.
The emergency plan has been put to the test a few times since its inception. Paquette told the audience about two disasters that – as someone who grew up in Quebec City – I remember vividly: the burning of the Quebec’s Armoury (2008), and the fire at the Musée de la civilisation de Québec (2014).
The Voltigeurs de Québec Armoury, a Gothic Revival drill hall, was built in the later part of the 19th century. As Paquette pointed out, on top of its historical significance, the manège militaire (as it is known in Quebec) also had architectural value: it was the largest wooden structure in America without columns. Iqn the night of April 4th, 2008, as the whole of Quebec City was still preparing for the celebration of the city’s 400th birthday, the Armoury, which was to have been one of the venues of the festivities, burned to the ground. As Paquette pointed out, the building was completely lost, except for the façade and the Voltigeurs de Quebec’s Museum, located to the left of the building. Several conservators were called on site on April 5th and tried to carry out the drying of archives and paper on site, until the federal government took over the conservation of the artifacts. 90% of the collection, which was mostly archives, was saved, and the museum was relocated.
Six years later, in 2014, an electrical fire broke out on the second floor of the Musée de la civilisation de Québec. Two exhibition rooms were flooded. In the first exhibition, one that contained about 300 First Nations artifacts, the objects were quickly protected and sustained minimal damage. The second exhibition was composed of Pierre Gauvreau’s paintings, which were rapidly covered with polythene to prevent ashes from settling on the surface, since there was no more storage space available. Except for the floors of the rooms, which had to be replaced, everything remained in good condition.
After the fire at the Museum, the CCQ’s Emergency Response Team went over their performance and commented on everything that went right, and everything that went wrong. Paquette concluded her talk by sharing some of the conclusions they drew from this exercise: everyone should have a cellphone and be in constant communication during transportation and intervention; a police escort should be demanded by the team in order to avoid traffic; frontal lamps are a must; the basic needs of the team need to be taken care of; it is necessary to monitor what other people are doing on the site (for example, cleaning company employees will sometimes use products that are dangerous for the collections); and the team (and their material) should be identified. Paquette showed the blue vest that the members of the Emergency Response Team wear when they work on the site of a disaster, which makes them recognizable but also distinguishes them from firefighters and other professionals.
What really makes the Emergency Response Team at the Centre de Conservation du Québec shine is the emphasis that is put throughout their emergency plan on good communication and obsessive organization. With the material always ready to be packed in a car and brought on site, and everyone easily reachable on their phones, it seems like this team could serve as an example for other institutions that have not yet fully embarked on the emergency preparedness train. In this regard, I would like to suggest that it might be worth considering for the CCQ to make the entirety of their emergency plan publicly available. All of their hard work and planning could greatly benefit conservation professionals all over the world.
44th Annual Meeting – Research and Technical Studies, May 17, "Investigation of Fogging Glass Display Cases at the Royal Ontario Museum" by Helen Coxon et al
This was one of the sessions I tweeted (@taradkennedy), so this won’t be a long post, but I will give you a summary with lots of slide images!
So the problem: these brand-new exhibit cases were mysteriously fogging up for no apparent reason. And even better: once they were cleaned, the fog would roll right in; coming right back like a bad check. Some awesome examples of what was popping up on the inside AND the outside of the glass:
So what was this mysterious fog? Turns out it is a mix of things (it always is): definitely free sodium from the glass along with lactic acid, plasticizers, aromatic hydrocarbons… the digital shots of the GC/MS results are mostly illegible unless you have the peak locations memorized, but I did get a shot of where all of this stuff came from:
So, everything from the air around the cases to the materials that they were cleaned with to the goo that they lubricated big, heavy machines with that moved the glass pieces around like this:
So, now what? Luckily Stephen Koob, King of the Glass Conservators, had a nonionic formula that worked!
Here’s the recipe. I hope you can read it.
Hilariously, the glass manufacturer felt bad and came up with this six-stage cleaning kit for the museum to use. The museum was like… um, thanks, but no thanks. Yeah, not even the fussiest of conservators wants to do that much cleaning.
This talk was one of my favorite talks of the conference: folks presenting a practical problem in an accessible way that was thoroughly researched with a practical (nonionic) solution… SOLUTION, get it???
OK, I’ll stop now.
44th Annual Conference – Pre-Conference Workshop, May 14, "Choosing and Implementing a Fire Suppression System for a Collecting Institution" by Nick Artim et al
OK, I’ll be honest. The reasons why I went to this pre-conference workshop were:
- I had a business meeting in the afternoon and thought I’d better go to another session so I don’t look like a lazy git
- Nick Artim, Fire Protection Guru, was on the panel
Man, this would be a useful group to chat with back when we were trying to figure out which fire suppression system to go with for our rare book library years ago. For those of you not well-versed in fire suppression systems, this is a fairly comprehensive look at the different fire suppression systems available for cultural institutions. It also examines different investigations and processes looking into fire suppression systems for different cultural institutions.
Sprinklers at the Archives of Manitoba – Ala Rekrut
About the building itself: the Winnipeg Civic Auditorium was built in 1932; redeveloped in 1973 into Archives Building; new storage vault was created from the old concert hall that was part of the auditorium.
In 1994, the water micromist sprinkler systems were recommended, but they were too new and untested to be implemented at that point. So, they chose a wet pipe system and a dry pipe for cold storage in 1998. However, there was limited sprinkler coverage in the public areas and they wanted to re-investigate the possibilities of installing a fire suppression system.
One of the biggest hurdles in this project was that the building is managed by another entity, so the Archives can’t really make any changes. Here’s the timeline:
- Pre-2007: Building Conditions Assessment – recommendations included replacing HVAC systems, and installation of new sprinkler systems – so that they come close to building code (always a good thing)
- 2007: Vault renovation for HVAC, but no sprinklers, sadly
- 2010: Risk Management independent inspection: you should have 100% automatic sprinkler coverage, dudes. Bureaucracy stalls these things, you know
- 2013: Fire system alarm upgrade – still no sprinklers…
- 2015: Started project over again because the earlier estimates were way over budget – new team – what about sprinklers NOW? Finally YES we can investigate; water mist still not allowed, but they would investigate;who else has done this? Winnipeg Art Gallery had! What’s needed for water mist systems?
- Filtered city water; high pressure mist; 1 meter clearance needed; low ceilings are out
- Pump equipment sits on concrete slab 18” thick
A water-based conventional fire suppression system would be fine as well, but they will most likely go with a nitrogen gas (Inergen) system. It is still a work in progress…
You might be wondered how all of these recommendations could be ignored. Well, the answer is bureaucracy! The layers upon layers of government is why the building owners can ignore these recommendations. For example, recommendations from the province do not have to be heeded by the city government, for example. Also the building is grandfathered in due to its age.
Sprinklers at the Peel Library at University of Alberta – Carolyn Morgan
This project was to be an expansion of fire suppression systems in the Library at the University of Alberta. There were some systems in the basement of Library buildings: Halon in the public area and front office, but not storage; there was also a decommission wet pipe system in the same areas as the Halon. There was also an Inergen system in the audiovisual vault. Storage “fire suppression” protection in main collections storage consisted of a fire hose. They do have heat and smoke detectors.
The expansion project was to start May 2015, so staff had four months to sort the entire expansion project including choosing an appropriate fire suppression system. Nothing like a little bit of pressure to make one be decisive!
So, the goal with this project: protect and preserve our collections.
What are our choices?
- Gas systems: Inergen, Sapphire, FM-200
- Water systems: Sprinkler systems, wet pipe, dry pipe, water mist – pre-action or no pre-action?
- Hybrid: Victaulic Vortex
The chose the Victaulic Vortex system.
How did we come to our decision?
- Eliminated gas systems because of lack of space for tanks; expensive; lack of airtight integrity
- Eliminated water mist because of its unproven effectiveness where dense combustibles are present and the library lacked 1 meter ceiling clearance
- One of their biggest challenges was the limited head room: could not run sprinkler system – but maybe they could? No wet or dry pipe systems –
- selected Victaulic Vortex and double interlock pre-action sprinkler heads
Vicaulic Vortex – what’s that?
- Nitrogen and water
- Removes O2 and water and N2 65Km/ hour ; 10 microns drops of water
- Very little wetting; doesn’t require airtight rooms; few heads; quick system recharge
- High initial capital costs; need backup tanks; not widely used; may require a variance for acceptance by authority having jurisdiction
Double interlock pre-action heads – what’s that?
- Basically like dry pipe but water is held by electronically-operated valve
- You need: a detector system that must ID fire and open valve and the individual sprinkler heads are then activated
- Complex system and require attachment to fire detection system
Sprinklers in Historic Houses – Canadian Conservation Institute – John Ward
This was a summary of considerations and case studies involving historic buildings and fire suppression systems, including what you can do when you have no fire suppression system.
Eldon House, Ontario
- Typical house museum; very vulnerable; few have fire suppression system installed; usually fire detection system and that’s it
- Historic buildings can have passive measures, or can have passive measures added without drastically changing the building itself. Some recommendations:
- Compartmentalize buildings (fire-rated firewalls)
- Consider reinstalling doors in the house and close them in off-hours
- Check for vertical and lateral voids and fire-seal as required
They did review available fire suppression systems (eight of them) for the Eldon House and came to the following conclusions:
- Eliminate clean systems (not a tight enough seal in building)
- Water mist seems the safest but complicated to install; really best for rooms with special needs
- Options within that list; feasible to consider for this historic house:
- Pre-action dry pipe
- Water mist (Marriott Hi-Fog)
- Initially made for the cruise ship industry
- Hybrid nitrogen and water mist (Victaulic Vortex)
- For electronics/ computer rooms
- New: only around 10 years
- Doesn’t have to be ceiling mounted, moves around the room like a fog;
- Wet pipe still viable; simplest
Sinclair Inn; earliest wood frame building in Canada, Nova Scotia
- Victaulic Vortex doesn’t need to be used in a heated building!
Another hint mentioned: Keep at 15% O2 levels in high density storage to reduce fire risk – this is being used at the British Library’s high density storage building.
Canadian Centre for Architecture – Israel Dube-Marquis
- Replacing an automatic fire protection system
- Evaluation Before Choosing
- Define needs
- Context
- Construction type
- Area covered
- Space available
- Electrical emergency power
- Detection systems
- Security monitoring
- NFPA
- NFPA 750 for water mist
- System evaluation criterias
- Evaluation Before Choosing
[Unfortunately, I had a difficult time understanding this presenter, so I didn’t take many notes – if anyone has anything to add to this presentation, please add the information in the comments!]
Heritage Protection Group – Nick Artim
His talk basically covers elements one should consider when deciding upon a fire suppression system for your cultural institution and which choices are available to you at this time.
But first: a funny quote: “Disaster: an emergency we screw up.”
- Best fire suppression system?
- What do you want to have left after the fire?
- What’s the building like?
- What’s it made of?
- What are the collections?
- What is the recovery capability?
- How are the collections arranged?
- The people who occupy and visit the building? How many?
- Rural or urban?
- Fire safety elements
- Fire prevention
- Life safety
- Fire resistance
- Fire detections
- Fire suppression
- Recovery
- NFPA
- Codes 909; 914 – historic structures and cultural properties
- Not prescriptive; all of us stakeholders are to become part of the process to become part of the solution
- Smoldering phase can last for several hours
- British Library – did the low O2 system because of its size; there is no good choice for fire suppression system
- The better the Fire Department knows your building, the better off you are
- Automatic Fire Systems
- Standard pressure sprinkler
- Gets everything wet so it doesn’t burn
- Prevents fire from growing
- Failure tends to happen: in piping material and fitting
- A LOT of water
- Wet load: HEAVY for paper
- Water mist
- Developed from the maritime industry
- Water droplet and cause it to explode
- Microdroplet with more surface area which becomes the coolant – engineering finesse required for it to work well
- Air suspension – more flexibility
- Mist can be drawn into the combustion process – more like a gas than rain
- More precise fittings; very durable
- Works pretty well – Monticello has it
- Excellent in remote area where it’s hard to get water source
- Wet pipe, dry pipe, pre-action, deluge
- Water is always in a pipe; dry pipe is for areas where freezing is a possibility
- Gas Systems (“clean system”)
- Control fire without water damage
- Not exactly damage-free – discharge speed, e.g. – be careful where you put the nozzle for discharge
- Details on where those discharge nozzles go
- Compartment application systems – air tight or gas will not stay in concentration
- CO2, Nitrogen, aerosol – Potassium-based solid – post-damage potential? What does all that potassium do to the art? Halocarbons (FM-200; Novec)
- Hybrid (Nitrogen and Water)… and we ran out of time.
- Standard pressure sprinkler
44th Annual Meeting – Book & Paper Session, May 17, "Soft Matter: Gel development for conservation treatment," Mylène Leroux
Following Hughes and Sullivan’s talk, Mylène Laroux, Master 2 Student at Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, reiterated the composition and advantages of gellan gum other rigid gel systems, highlighting the fact that they are simpler and safer for both the object and the conservator. She then compared these physical gel systems to the newly-developed Nanorestore® gel.
Nanorestore® gel was developed by the Nanoforart project, whose main objective, according to their website, is “the development and experimentation of new nano-materials and responsive systems for the conservation and preservation of movable and immovable artworks.” Nanorestore® is a chemical gel with high internal cohesion. It is available in pre-made sheets which are ready to use for aqueous treatment or they can be soaked in organic polar solvents for 12 hours and then used as a solvent gel. As with other gel systems, the Nanorestore® (soaked in ethanol) allowed Leroux to perform local adhesive stain removal without the formation of tidelines. Initial studies indicate that Nanorestore® has higher liquid retention rate than the polysaccaride gels. It’s also a sustainable option, since the gel can be placed back into solvent and reused multiple times.
At this time, Nanorestore® is not widely available and only comes in a few small sizes, so practical application in paper conservation labs is currently limited. However, it’s exciting to see new products being developed and tested, since we conservators are always looking to expand our toolboxes.
44th Annual Meeting – Collections Care, May 15, "Comprehensive Collection Risk Assessment at Museum Victoria" by Maryanne McCubbin and Robert Waller
This presentation focused on using the Cultural Property Risk Analysis Model (CPRAM) at the Museum Victoria in Melbourne, Australia. If you scroll to the bottom of this web page you can obtain a free e-copy of CPRAM from Protect Heritage.
Museum Victoria, founded in 1854, specializes in a large range of materials and disciplinary types; natural sciences, indigenous cultures, history and technology. Less than 1% of collection is on exhibit at any given time. The museum complex has a wide range of facilities and each contain very different operational management and environments, and therefore different challenges:
- Melbourne Museum – newest building – half of collections storage is in this space
- Royal Exhibitions building – World Heritage listed building; paleontology and geology collection are stored in basement of this facility. They are being moved out of space currently because of the risks associated with storing them here (part of the CPRAM process)
- Emigration museum – state registered building – just exhibits in this space
- Off site collections storage – 50% spatially of our collections
- Pumping stations – contains collection items
- Science works – 3rd of their exhibition facilities
Summary of Museum Victoria’s experience of working on the CPRAM:
There are a lot of different risks in Museum Victoria’s collections. Before doing the CPRAM, it is important to recognize boundaries between collections and divide collections into discrete units, with exhibits being its own discrete collections unit. In total, there were 38 collections assessment units, with the assessments about 2/3rds of the way completed; 1/4 was completed by September of 2014 (unsure about beginning date). The initiative utilize a lot of staff time, but the Museum considered it a “Redirection” of time spent by staff instead of an extraordinary demand. In other words, they made this work a priority.
Museum Victoria’s main interest in doing the CPRAM was to assess the loss in utility value of collections over time. Value of course is considered in the context of the Museum, including historical/technological; exhibition; scientific; and cultural values to the Museum.
The remaining information below is only somewhat valuable if you are not familiar with the CPRAM model. I recommend getting the CPRAM document from Protect Heritage to understand the context of some of the information below (I was typing information that was on the PowerPoint slides that Robert was showing, and I added some additional information):
Risk Model Enhancements Completed at Museum Victoria:
- Comprehensiveness
- Source of risk + type of risk = generic risk – then broken down into specific risk – creating a quantitative sense of risk
- Accountability
- Ratio of other elements – 0 – 1 scale
- Accountable for proving this is not the case?
- Instrumental power
- 200 page emergency plan = symbolic of the amount of risk, but who is going to read a 200 page emergency plan? Especially in an emergency.
- Show risks that are within the control of the facility manager
- Customized information
- Extensive external critical reviews
- Comprehensiveness
- Clarity
- Evidence
- Appropriate model
- Data sourcing
- Benchmarking
- Introduce to a range of benchmarks from other institutions
- Done own research
- External input is critical in adoption – to become self sufficient
- Ongoing reporting
- Implementing and gaining support at an institution-wide level including the Board – this is the hardest part
- Reporting at all levels – templates that Robert provided
- Aggregate and detailed data
- Integrated incident reports into museum facilities
- Redeveloped incident reporting
- Online collection incident reporting
- We don’t report all incidents – not realistic
- Consistency of logic to encourage consistency of result, e.g. number scale, etc.
- Evidence of data – put effort toward that instead of assuming the problem
- Redeveloped incident reporting
44th Annual Meeting – Sustainability, May 16, "Sustainable Preservation on a Small Island: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Passive and Mechanized Environments" by Jeremy Linden et al.
This talk’s subject matter was as advertised: a preservation environment project on a remote island off the coast of Maine: Monhegan, Maine.
Never heard of Monhegan? Join the club. The island is protected by legislation – it is considered a conservation zone, since the island is fragile and so are its resources. On this tiny island is the Monhegan Museum. They were looking to improve the environment in the museum while also being sustainable: the environment was the only issue that the museum had not addressed in the CAP Report that was completed for the museum a number of years ago. So the museum got a PAG grant, bought some PEM2 dataloggers to get environmental data, and then brought in the Image Permanence Institute (IPI) to help improve their environment.
By the way, if you ask Ron Harvey, the CAP grant is the gateway drug to grants! 🙂
The island sounds like a lovely place… in the summer. Its remote location creates challenges, especially in the winter. The water lines are above ground, so water freezes in the winter. No wonder the population on the island plummets in the winter: 800 in the summer to *50* in the winter. it doesn’t help that the only way on and off the island is by boat: the mail comes by boat, the artwork travels by boat… you get the idea.
Overall, the building had some HVAC elements, but it wasn’t consistent, mostly due to the additions of buildings gifted to the museum, like the Assistant Lightkeeper’s house, which was gifted to the museum in 1998, and turned into a collections vault. The vault has HVAC and the office has heat, but the gallery spaces were unheated, mostly because they only have exhibitions during the warmer months.
First order of business: monitor the environment and get data. Some alarming conditions popped up:
- Rising damp was discovered in the building due to how water flowed, so luckily that was simple water mitigation: move the water away from building instead of letting it drain into the basement
- Working with climate control in a passive manner: using things like foam doors to reduce moisture migration, for example
- Extremes of environment in this space
So, what’s an island with significant collections to do?
Luckily, this is not IPI’s first rodeo in challenging environments. So what were some of the things they chose to do based on the limited services and accessibility?
- Period appropriate repairs to bring the keeper’s house closer to its original intended performance while remaining a passive building. Not every building needs an air handler, so let’s try to bring the building back to how it was supposed to behave in its original construction.
- What about energy reduction and efficiency?
- Testing strategies (seasonal set points, controlled shutdowns) to allow the mechanized vaults to operate passively for portions of the year while improving preservation
- Improving energy generation on the island and recovering waste heat as a new source of energy
- Good construction to original building helps a lot
- Passive operations during parts of the year
- Ranges and guidelines safe for collections
- One of the HUGE challenges was electricity. The wiring needed repairs, but the museum was able to work with the power company and help from them to recover wasted heat for collections during the winter
- Re-purposing appropriate structures to improve collections storage/ exhibit
- Ice House
- Extended the collection storage to include both the upper and lower floors to accommodate the need for appropriate storage for the expanding art collections
- Gallery
- CHECK THIS OUT: Solar thermal dehumidification to manage high summer RH! SO COOL (if you pardon the pun)
- Addition of vapor and thermal barrier in the exposed dirt crawlspace to reduce vapor transfer into the building
- Ice House
To keep in mind: strategies and solutions that are appropriate to place – specifics may not be broadly applicable but the process certainly is! I thought it was an excellent example of collaboration while being considerate of an historic building – lots of places aren’t. This project demonstrated excellent teamwork and the awesomely amazing things an interdisciplinary team can do!
Some questions that came up after the talk:
How did you deal with the rising damp? The answer was downspouts and a French drain; also a plus that water loves to run downhill away from building, so the fact that the museum was set up high was to their advantage
What IS Solar-thermal Dehumidification anyway?: essentially they are running the desiccant system with the SUN only during the summer! The desiccant system is a Munters unit by the way. The vapor barrier is plastic sheeting over the top of the dirt layer in the crawlspaces to prevent rising damp.
44th Annual Meeting – Luncheon Session, May 15, Emerging Conservation Professionals Network Luncheon
The emerging conservation professionals luncheon was one of the events I was really looking forward to at the annual meeting. As a recent graduate and having just entered the conservation field as a postgraduate fellow, the idea of having a chance to converse with established conservation professionals, and receive advice to help launch my own career was extremely appealing.
Prior to the event, participants filled in a short online form that established what we wanted to achieve from the session. We could sign up as a mentor or a mentee, and choose between a variety of interests including (but not limited to) networking, jobs and fellowships, resume writing, getting into conservation and so on. This information was then used to match us to the people we would be interacting with during the session.
At the luncheon, participants were grouped into tables with approximately 7 – 8 people. At my table were two established conservation professionals, three recent graduates with fellowships/jobs, and two others new to the field.
The program started with an overview of the ECPN, introducing their board members, goals, and previous and upcoming programming. This was useful to new participants, allowing them to know who to reach out to, as well as the resources available to them. This was followed by several testimonials from established professionals, including Sarah Melching, Director of conservation at the Denver Art Museum who gave an in depth account of her unconventional pathway into conservation. It was interesting and also served as a source of encouragement for pre-program attendees.
Once the organized talks were completed, the official networking session began. Each table had a list of questions to facilitate discussions, making it easier for those of us who are a little shyer to keep the conversation flowing. The diversity at the tables was interesting, allowing some who came as mentees to serve as mentors to those just entering the field. This was surprising, yet rewarding. Personally, I left the event knowing I made some new connections, connections that only got stronger throughout the course of the conference.
I hope that such opportunities continue to be offered at future AIC meetings. The support provided from established colleagues in the field is invaluable and I find myself wishing that more time had been devoted to the mentor-mentee exchange. I would also appreciate the prospect of meeting more mentors and talking to them on a one-on-one basis. Thank you ECPN and ECC for organizing the event!
To find out more about the ECPN network and their resources, visit their page here.