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.

Beam characterization of a microfading tester: evaluation of several methods / P. Swit, M. Gargano, J. del Hoyo-Melendez. - In: HERITAGE SCIENCE. - ISSN 2050-7445. - 9:1(2021 Jul), pp. 78.1-78.14. [10.1186/s40494-021-00556-7]

Beam characterization of a microfading tester: evaluation of several methods

M. Gargano
Methodology
;
2021

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.
beam profile; illumination intensity; sharp-edge method; microfading; spot shape
Settore FIS/07 - Fisica Applicata(Beni Culturali, Ambientali, Biol.e Medicin)
lug-2021
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
s40494-021-00556-7.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 1.97 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.97 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/951220
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 2
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact