Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T13:45:29.362Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An in-depth look at how physical properties of cleaning materials affect the removal of soot from rough papers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 July 2021

Teresa Duncan ,
Edward Vicenzi  and
Shannon Brogdon-Grantham
Teresa Duncan
Affiliation:
Museum Conservation Institute, Smithsonian Institution, Suitland, Maryland, United States
Edward Vicenzi
Affiliation:
Smithsonian Institution, Museum Conservation Institute, Suitland, Maryland, United States
Shannon Brogdon-Grantham
Affiliation:
Museum Conservation Institute, Smithsonian Institution, United States

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Portable- and Laboratory-based Approaches to Analysis in Cultural Heritage
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 27 , Supplement S1 , August 2021 , pp. 2810 - 2812
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Microscopy Society of America

References

Bolstad-Johnson, D. The Hidden Hazards of Fire Soot. AIC News. 2010, pp 1–5.Google Scholar
Duncan, T. T.; Chan, E. P.; Beers, K. L. Maximizing Contact of Supersoft Bottlebrush Networks with Rough Surfaces to Promote Particulate Removal. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2019, 11 (48), 45310–45318. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.9b17602.Google ScholarPubMed
Duncan, T. T.; Chan, E. P.; Beers, K. L. Quantifying the Press and Peel Removal of Particulates Using Elastomers and Gels. J. Cult. Herit. In press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2020.11.004.Google Scholar
Pearlstein, E. J.; Cabelli, D.; King, A.; Indictor, N. Effects of Eraser Treatment on Paper. J. Am. Inst. Conserv. 1982, 22 (1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar