Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Applied Sciencesarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Non-Invasive Evaluation of Polymeric Protective Coatings for Metal Surfaces of Cultural Heritage Objects: Comparison of Optical and Electromagnetic Methods

Authors: Diego Quintero Balbas; Alice Dal Fovo; Daniela Porcu; Antonina Chaban; Simone Porcinai; Raffaella Fontana; Jana Striova;

Non-Invasive Evaluation of Polymeric Protective Coatings for Metal Surfaces of Cultural Heritage Objects: Comparison of Optical and Electromagnetic Methods

Abstract

The application of protective coatings is an effective preventive strategy to avoid metal corrosion. Constant monitoring of the coating’s quality is fundamental for the successful preservation of the metallic objects by reducing their interaction with corroding agents. Their evaluation over time helps to identify failure at early stages and promote their removal and substitution. Several methods have been employed for coating evaluation (i.e., chemical analysis, thickness and homogeneity investigation). In this paper, we compare three methods—Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT), Confocal Raman Microspectroscopy (CRM), and Eddy Currents (ECs)—to evaluate thickness values and coating integrity. The results from the two optical techniques (CRM and OCT) agree, being able to detect the inhomogeneity of the layer on a micron scale but requiring correction to account for the refraction phenomenon. The Eddy Current is a fast and efficient method for thickness estimation, providing data with millimetric lateral resolution.

Country
Italy
Related Organizations
Keywords

protective coatings, cultural heritage, OCT, Confocal Raman, Eddy Current, metallic surfaces, Fluid Flow and Transfer Processes, OCT, Process Chemistry and Technology, Confocal Raman, General Engineering, protective coatings, General Materials Science, Eddy Current, cultural heritage, metallic surfaces, Instrumentation, Computer Science Applications

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    2
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
  • citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    2
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    Powered byBIP!BIP!
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
2
Top 10%
Average
Average
Related to Research communities
moresidebar

Do the share buttons not appear? Please make sure, any blocking addon is disabled, and then reload the page.