Comparative study of rust removal efficiency and corrosiveness of commonly-used reagents for iron artifacts
DOI:
CSTR:
Author:
Affiliation:

(1. National Museum of China, Beijing 100079, China;2. Key Scientific Research Base of Conservation on Metal Collection (National Museum of China), State Administration for Cultural Heritage, Beijing 100079, China;3. University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China)

Clc Number:

Fund Project:

  • Article
  • |
  • Figures
  • |
  • Metrics
  • |
  • Reference
  • |
  • Related
  • |
  • Cited by
  • |
  • Materials
  • |
  • Comments
    Abstract:

    In order to compare the rust removal effects of commonly-used reagents for iron artifacts and to provide suggestions for the selection of reagents during iron artifact conservation, we carried out experimental studies using phosphoric acid, citric acid, tartaric acid and Na2EDTA. Various kinds of samples such as rust powder, rust fragments, cast iron sheets and rusted cast iron sheets were used to quantitatively study the rust removal efficiency of the reagents and their corrosiveness to the iron substrate. The results show that 1) each of the reagents causes strong corrosion on the iron substrate, and that the corrosion rate is much higher than the rust removal rate but can be reduced by the addition of inhibitors; 2) among these reagents, phosphoric acid has the strongest ability to remove rust and it works well on both powder and fragment samples, but excessive amounts of phosphoric acid are needed to ensure the continuous rust removal, since a small amount of phosphoric acid has a passivation effect; 3) citric acid, tartaric acid and Na2EDTA can dissolve the rust powder to some extent, but their efficiencies for rust removal from rusted fragments are very low. Consequently, phosphoric acid with a corrosion inhibitor is a suitable rust removal reagent in the conservation of iron artifacts.

    Reference
    Related
    Cited by
Get Citation
Related Videos

Share
Article Metrics
  • Abstract:
  • PDF:
  • HTML:
  • Cited by:
History
  • Received:September 18,2018
  • Revised:October 15,2019
  • Adopted:
  • Online: July 15,2020
  • Published:
Article QR Code