Page 53 - Copper and Bronze in Art: Corrosion, Colorants, Getty Museum Conservation, By David Scott
P. 53

Leidheiser  (1979) summarizes chemical and physical data, covering a wide range of copper
          alloys together with  corrosion rates, for seventy National Bureau of Standards  test sites across
          the United States. The data are for variables of drainage, resistivity, pH,  percent air-pore space,
          moisture  equivalent, volume shrinkage,  apparent  specific gravity,  and  water  composition in
          terms of total  acidity, sodium, calcium, potassium, magnesium, carbonate,  bicarbonate,  chlo­
          ride, and sulfate. A less extensive British study was also carried out using test conditions simi­
          lar  to  those  of the  NBS program, with  results  that were broadly comparable. The  NBS study
          showed losses in wall thickness of copper pipe to be from  0.06 to 5.2  X  10 ~  mm per year; the
                                                                       2
          British study showed from 0.06 to 6.9  X  10 ~  2  mm  per year. Copper and copper alloys were not
          found  to undergo appreciable pitting,  except in moist acid-clay soils and wet acid peat, where
          localized attack occurred sporadically.
              These conclusions are very useful for the general modeling of the corrosion rates of buried
          copper, but for archaeological material buried for thousands  of years, the general rate derived
                                                                            i
          from  these short-term studies  may  be  inadequate.  They illustrate the  difficulty n modeling
          extremely  long-term events  by short-term experiment,  even  on  a  single-phase  substrate. In
          archaeological contexts, unalloyed copper usually corrodes much more slowly than tin bronze,
          arsenical copper, or brass alloys. An  example is provided by some very early copper scraps and
          ornaments from  an important Greek Neolithic ditched enclosure. The pieces were examined at




           TABLE  l . l  ANALYSIS OF CORROSION  IN  SOILS




          ACENCY  a      SOIL TYPE     YEARS          CORROSION     MAXIMUM PITTING
                                                      (μιη/year)    (mm/year  x 10 )
                                                                              4
          BNFMRA         5 least corrosive   10       0.5-2.5       uniform:  no pits
          BNFMRA         4 least corrosive   5        5.0-25        0.040
          NBS            9 least corrosive   14       4.0-25        0.043
          NBS            2 next most
                         corrosive     14             25-130        0.033
          BNFMRA         acid clay/acid peat   10     53-66         0.046
          BNFMRA         2nd  series  cinders   5     66            0.32
                               :
                                b
          NBS            3 most corrosive:
                         rifle  peat/
                         tidal marsh   14             160-355       0.115

         A  BNFMR A  =  British Non-Fe >rrous Metals Research Ass  •ciation (now  defunct);  NB 3 =  National Bureau of  Standards.
         ^2nd  series =  second atten  ipt to derive accurate resul ts for this set of data.





                         C H A P T E R  O N E
                         36
   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58