Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-68ccn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T22:01:16.670Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of the Effectiveness and the Potential Damage of Cleaning Methods for the Restoration of Stained Glass Windows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2011

Hannelore RÖMICH  and
Dieter R. Fuchs
Hannelore RÖMICH
Affiliation:
Fraunhofer-Institut für Silicatforschung, Neunerplatz 2. D-8700 Würzburg, F. R. G.
Dieter R. Fuchs
Affiliation:
Fraunhofer-Institut für Silicatforschung, Neunerplatz 2. D-8700 Würzburg, F. R. G.
Get access

Abstract

A comparative study on the effects of restorational cleaning methods for stained glass windows was carried out using corrosion sensitive model glasses. Typical deterioration phenomena like crusting, leaching and microcracking could be simulated using accelerated weathering in climatic test cabinets. The sensibilization of such samples caused by cleaning was assessed by infrared spectroscopy and light microscopy after re-weathering.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 267: Symposium J – Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology III , 1992 , 1039
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1992

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] Newton, R. G., The deterioration and conservation of painted glass - a criticalbibliography. (Oxford University Press 1982).Google Scholar
[2] Marschner, H., Arbeitsheft 32, Bayer. Landesamt fuir Denkmalpflege, 44–55 (1985)Google Scholar
[3] Bauer, W. P., Verres Refract. 30, 62 (1976) W. P. Bauer, CVMA News Letter 37138, 21 (1984)Google Scholar
[4] Moncrieff, A., Conservation in Archaeology and the Applied Arts, IIC Congress, Stockholm, 99 104 (1975)Google Scholar
[5] Marschner, H., CVMA News Letter 39140, 24 (1986).Google Scholar
[6] Fitz, S. et al., Forschungsbericht UFOPLAN-Nr. 106 08 002, 1984, edited byUmweltbundesamt, Bismarckplatz I. D-l1000 Berlin 33Google Scholar
[7] Bettembourg, J. M., Compte Rendu du 8e Colloque du CVMA, York (U. K.) 1 972J. M. Bettembourg et F. Perrot, Verres Rifract. 30, 92–95 (1976)Google Scholar
[8] Fuchs, D. R., Patzelt, H., Schmidt, H., Kontakt & Studium, Bd. 282, 174–192, ExpertVerlag, 1989 Google Scholar
[9] Fuchs, D. R., Romich, H., Tur, P., LeiBner, J., Forschungsbericht UFOPLAN-Nr. 108 07 005/03, 1991, edited by Umweltbundesamt, Bismarckplatz I, D-1000 Berlin 33Google Scholar
[10] Fuchs, D. R.. Remich, H., Schmidt, H., Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. Vol. 185, 239–251 (1991)Google Scholar
[11] Remich, H., Fuchs, D. R., Zwischenbericht im Rahmen des Verbundprojektes des Bundesministeriums fur Forschung und Technologie BAU C 5026 C/4 (1992)Google Scholar