Beam characterization of a microfading tester: evaluation of several methods
Abstract Microfading testing allows to evaluate the sensitivity to light of a specific artwork. Characterization of the illumination spot is important to determine its shape, dimensions, light distribution, and intensity in order to limit and account for possible damage. In this research the advanta...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SpringerOpen
2021-07-01
|
| Series: | Heritage Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-021-00556-7 |
| _version_ | 1831549194084548608 |
|---|---|
| author | Paweł Świt Marco Gargano Julio M. del Hoyo-Meléndez |
| author_facet | Paweł Świt Marco Gargano Julio M. del Hoyo-Meléndez |
| author_sort | Paweł Świt |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Microfading testing allows to evaluate the sensitivity to light of a specific artwork. Characterization of the illumination spot is important to determine its shape, dimensions, light distribution, and intensity in order to limit and account for possible damage. In this research the advantages and disadvantages of several methods used to determine the beam shape and intensity profiles are described with the aim of providing various options to microfading researchers interested in characterizing their irradiation spots. Conventional and imaging methods were employed and are compared in terms of their accuracy, cost, reliability, and technical features. Conventional methods consisted of an aperture technique using aluminium foil and four different materials namely stainless steel, silicon, muscovite, and Teflon used as sharp edges. The imaging methods consisted of digital photography of illumination spot, direct beam measurement using a CMOS camera, and direct beam measurement using a laser beam profiler. The results show that both conventional and imaging methods provide beam width measurements, which are in satisfactory agreement within experimental error. The two best methods were direct measurement of the beam using a CMOS camera and sharp-edge procedure. MFT illumination beam with a CMOS camera followed by a determination of the beam diameter using a direct method, more specifically one involving a sharp-edge technique. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-17T02:32:48Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-6ed59e76dc244613890cbeece13ac946 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2050-7445 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-17T02:32:48Z |
| publishDate | 2021-07-01 |
| publisher | SpringerOpen |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Heritage Science |
| spelling | doaj.art-6ed59e76dc244613890cbeece13ac9462022-12-21T22:06:55ZengSpringerOpenHeritage Science2050-74452021-07-019111410.1186/s40494-021-00556-7Beam characterization of a microfading tester: evaluation of several methodsPaweł Świt0Marco Gargano1Julio M. del Hoyo-Meléndez2Institute of Chemistry, Faculty of Science and Technology, University of SilesiaDepartment of Physics, University of MilanLaboratory of Analysis and Non-Destructive Investigation of Heritage Objects, National Museum in KrakowAbstract Microfading testing allows to evaluate the sensitivity to light of a specific artwork. Characterization of the illumination spot is important to determine its shape, dimensions, light distribution, and intensity in order to limit and account for possible damage. In this research the advantages and disadvantages of several methods used to determine the beam shape and intensity profiles are described with the aim of providing various options to microfading researchers interested in characterizing their irradiation spots. Conventional and imaging methods were employed and are compared in terms of their accuracy, cost, reliability, and technical features. Conventional methods consisted of an aperture technique using aluminium foil and four different materials namely stainless steel, silicon, muscovite, and Teflon used as sharp edges. The imaging methods consisted of digital photography of illumination spot, direct beam measurement using a CMOS camera, and direct beam measurement using a laser beam profiler. The results show that both conventional and imaging methods provide beam width measurements, which are in satisfactory agreement within experimental error. The two best methods were direct measurement of the beam using a CMOS camera and sharp-edge procedure. MFT illumination beam with a CMOS camera followed by a determination of the beam diameter using a direct method, more specifically one involving a sharp-edge technique.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-021-00556-7Beam profileIllumination intensitySharp-edge methodMicrofadingSpot shape |
| spellingShingle | Paweł Świt Marco Gargano Julio M. del Hoyo-Meléndez Beam characterization of a microfading tester: evaluation of several methods Heritage Science Beam profile Illumination intensity Sharp-edge method Microfading Spot shape |
| title | Beam characterization of a microfading tester: evaluation of several methods |
| title_full | Beam characterization of a microfading tester: evaluation of several methods |
| title_fullStr | Beam characterization of a microfading tester: evaluation of several methods |
| title_full_unstemmed | Beam characterization of a microfading tester: evaluation of several methods |
| title_short | Beam characterization of a microfading tester: evaluation of several methods |
| title_sort | beam characterization of a microfading tester evaluation of several methods |
| topic | Beam profile Illumination intensity Sharp-edge method Microfading Spot shape |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-021-00556-7 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT pawełswit beamcharacterizationofamicrofadingtesterevaluationofseveralmethods AT marcogargano beamcharacterizationofamicrofadingtesterevaluationofseveralmethods AT juliomdelhoyomelendez beamcharacterizationofamicrofadingtesterevaluationofseveralmethods |