Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T15:27:03.724Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Applied Mechanics of Materials in Conservation Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2011

Marion F. Mecklenburg*
Affiliation:
Conservation Analytical Laboratory, Smithsonian Institution Washington, D.C. 20560
Get access

Abstract

Much of the damage found in cultural and artistic objects is not chemical in nature but results from mechanical responses to stimuli such as changes in temperature, relative humidity, impact, and vibration. Analytical tools of engineering mechanics are available that allow us both to diagnose existing problems as well as to predict the effects of future potential hazardous conditions for many objects. A systematic approach of applying engineering principles to cultural objects requires two fundamental steps: 1, determining the mechanical properties of the constitutive material found in objects, and 2, developing analytical procedures that determine the overall effect of the individual material responses to various stimuli on the object as a whole. The individual material properties are typically defined as the yield and ultimate strengths, the elastic modulus, and the strains to yield and failure.

For the vast proportion of cultural objects, the materials are organic, and their mechanical properties are dramatically altered by environmental factors such as changes in temperature and relative humidity.

One of the most successful analytical techniques is Finite Element Analysis (FEA) using the digital computer. This method will allow one to numerically model an object, to mathematically induce environmental changes as well as determine the mechanical effects of these changes on the object modeled.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Stevens, W.C., “Rates of Change in the Dimensions and Moisture Contents of Wooden Panels Resulting from Changes in Ambient Air Conditions”, Studies in Conservation, VI (1961), pp 2125.Google Scholar
2. Buck, R., “Some Applications of Mechanics to the Treatment of Panel Paintings”, Recent Advances in Conservation, IIC (1963) pp 156162.Google Scholar
3. Mecklenburg, M.F., “Some Aspects of the Mechanical Properties of Fabric Supported Paintings”, report submitted to the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, 1982.Google Scholar
4. Thompson, G., The Museum Environment, Butterworths, London, 1978, pp 7982.Google Scholar
5. Hackney, S., “The Dimensional Stability of Paintings in Transit”, ICOM Committee for Conservation, Preprints, Vol. II, (Sydney), International Council of Museums, Paris, 1987, pp 597600.Google Scholar
6. Stolow, N., Controlled Environment for Works of. Art in Transit, Butterworths, London, 1966.Google Scholar
7. Toishi, K., “Relative Humidity in a Closed Package”, Recent Advances in Conservation, Rome Conference IIC, 1961, Butterworths, London, 1963, pp 1315.Google Scholar
8. Toishi, K., “Humidity Control in a Closed Package”, Studies in Conservation, IV (1959), pp 8187.Google Scholar
9. Stolow, N., “Standards for the Care of Works of Art in Transit”, In Museum Climatology, ed. Thomson, G., IIC London Conference 1967, pp 271284.Google Scholar
10. Toishi, K., “Jet Transport of Art Objects”, In Museum Climatology, ed. Thomson, G., IIC London Conference, 1967, pp 4144.Google Scholar
11. Thomson, G., “Relative Humidity - Variation with Temperature in a Case Containing Wood”, Studies in Conservation, IX (1964), pp 153169.Google Scholar
12. Broek, D., Elementary Enqineering Fracture Mechanics, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Third Edition, 1982, pp 4859.Google Scholar
13. Barsom, J.M. and Rolfe, S.T., Fracture & Fatigue Control in Structures, Applications of Fracture Mechanics, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Second Edition, 1987, pp 429437.Google Scholar
14. Paz, M., Structural Dynamics. Theory and Computation, Van Nostrand Reinhold, NY, 1980, pp 3440.Google Scholar
15. Clough, R.W. and Penzien, J., Dynamics of Structures, McGraw Hill, NY, 1975, pp 4162.Google Scholar
16. Staniforth, S., “The Testing of Packing Cases for the Transport of Paintings". Preprint, Art in Steering Committee Meeting, The Getty Conservation Institute, Marina del Rey, CA, 1986, Appendix E.Google Scholar
17. Sitwell, C.L., “Vibration Test Results on an Air Ride Suspension Vehicle and Design Considerations for a Racking System”, ICOM Committee for Conservation, Preprints, Vol II, (Sydney), International Council of Museums, Paris, 1987, pp 601606.Google Scholar
18. Green, T., and Hackney, S., “The Evaluation of a Packing Case for a Painting”, ICOM Committee for Conservation, Preprints, (Copenhagen), International Council of Museums, Paris, 1984, pp 84.12.1–84.12.6.Google Scholar
19. Ostrem, F.E. and Liboviez, B., “A Survey of Environmental Conditions Incident to the Transportation of Materials”, Final Report, PB 204 442, prepared for the Department of Transportation, Office of Hazardous Materials, Wash. DC, 1971.Google Scholar
20. “An Assesment of the Common Carrier Shipping Environment”, General Technical Report FPL 22, Forest Products Laboratory, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Madison, WI, 1979.Google Scholar
21. Green, T., “Shock and Vibration - Test Results for Framed Paintings on Canvas Supports”, ICOM Committee for Conservation, Preprints, Vol II, (Sydney), International Council of Museums, Paris, 1987, pp 585596.Google Scholar
22. Staniforth, S., “The Testing of Packing Cases for the Transport of Paintings”, ICOM Committee for Conservation, Preprints, (Copenhagen), International Council of Museums, Paris, 1984, pp 84.12.7–84.12.16.Google Scholar
23. Cook, R.D., Concepts and Applications of Finite Element Analysis, John Wiley, NY, 1974.Google Scholar
24. Przemieniecki, J.S., Theory of Matrix Structural Analysis, McGraw-Hill, NY, 1968.Google Scholar
25. Colville, J., Kilpatrick, W., and Mecklenburg, M.F., “A Finite Element Analysis of Multi-layered Orthotropic Membranes with Applications to Oil Paintings on Fabrics”, Science and TechnoloQv in the Service of Conservation, IIC, London (1982) pp 146150.Google Scholar
26. Elm, A., “Some Mechanical Properties of Paint Films”, Official Dicest, 25 (1953), pp 750774.Google Scholar
27. Shikher, M.G., “Deformation Properties of Linseed Oil Films”, Journal of Applied Chemistry, Moscow and Leningrad, USSR Academy of Science Publishing House, 12 (1932), pp 18841891, trans. R.E. Smith and W. Boroski.Google Scholar
28. Damfilov, A.V., and Ivancheva, Ye.G., “Mechanical Properties of Pigmented Oil Films”, Journal of Applied Chemistry, Moscow and Leningrad, USSR Academy of Science Publishing House, 20 (1947), pp 676683, trans. R.E. Smith and W. Boroski.Google Scholar
29. Mecklenburg, M.F., Some Aspects of the Mechanical Behavior of Fabric Supported Paintings”, report submitted to the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, (1982) pp 811.Google Scholar
30. Hedley, G., “Relative Humidity and the Stress/Strain Response of Canvas Paintings: Uniaxial Measurements of Naturally Aged Samples”, Studies in Conservation, Vol 33, (3) (1988), pp 133148.Google Scholar
31. Mecklenburg, M. F., “The Effects of Atmospheric Moisture on the Mechanical Properties of Collagen Under Equilibrium Conditions”, Preprints of Papers presented at the 16th Annual Meeting, (New Orleans), The American Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works, Washington, DC, (1988), pp 231244.Google Scholar
32. Private Communication with S. Michalski, CCI.Google Scholar
33. Wood Handbook: Wood as an EngineerinQ Material. Agriculture Handbook No. 72, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forrest Products Laboratory (1974).Google Scholar
34. Kasewell, E.R., Wellington Sears. Handbook of Industrial Textiles, Wellington Sears Company, Inc., NY, (1963) 1.Google Scholar