conservation of warship vasa

Upload: katerina-dvorackova

Post on 04-Jun-2018

248 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/13/2019 Conservation of warship Vasa

    1/13

    Conservation of warship Vasa

    Kateina Dvokov

    18.11.2013

    the most powerful warship of its time; the

    grandiose symbol of a king and nation; a giganticdisaster;

    a daring experiment,

  • 8/13/2019 Conservation of warship Vasa

    2/13

  • 8/13/2019 Conservation of warship Vasa

    3/13

    CONTENTS

    History

    Vasa in numbers

    Conservation

    Evaluation

    Estimated costs

    Ship, nowadays

  • 8/13/2019 Conservation of warship Vasa

    4/13

    HISTORY

    Swedish warship built 1626-1628

    Sank in 1628, during maiden

    voyage lack of stability - ship with so

    many heavy-calibre cannon

    3050 people died

  • 8/13/2019 Conservation of warship Vasa

    5/13

    Salvaged in 1961, at depth 32 m

    no wooden ship as large andcomplex as Vasa had been raisedand conserved successfully

    30-year conservation process 1988 transfered to new museum

    Vasa

    The Vasa Museum opened in1990

  • 8/13/2019 Conservation of warship Vasa

    6/13

    VASA IN NUMBERS

    Length69 m

    Breadth - 11.7 m

    Height52.5 m

    Draught - 4.8 mDisplacement

    1210 tonnes

    Sail area

    1275 square meters

    Number of sails

    10 (of which six survive)

    Armament

    64 bronze cannon

    Crew

    Mariners145 men

    Soldiers300 men

    16 skeletons

  • 8/13/2019 Conservation of warship Vasa

    7/13

    Restoration

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmE3dhg

    elKU

  • 8/13/2019 Conservation of warship Vasa

    8/13

    CONSERVATION

    Wood suprisingly in good shape

    Bolts corrodediron compounds in wood

    drying out the wood, while stabilizing the size and shape of the object

    avoiding or minimizing shrinkage and collapse of the cell structure

    Brushing or spraying the consolidant on the surface

    at high humidity => microorganism growth=> fungicide

    800 tons of waterlogged wood

    surface area of 15,000 square meters

  • 8/13/2019 Conservation of warship Vasa

    9/13

    CONSERVATIONPolyethylene glycol Consolidantsubstitutes water,

    stregthen the structure

    synthetic polymer

    Problem with recycling PEG

    1979spraying discontinued => 9 years

    drying

    Humidity reduced from 95 % to 60 %

    EVALUATION

    shrinkage 6 to 8 %

    dark in color with a shiny, waxy finish

    due to the surface layer of PEG 4000

    The content of PEG as a function of depth indifferent ship components

  • 8/13/2019 Conservation of warship Vasa

    10/13

    A pine plank from the Vasa. From left to right: before, during and after extraction of iron .

    Far right: part of the plank after re-conservation by PEG-impregnation and freeze-drying (2

    magnification).

  • 8/13/2019 Conservation of warship Vasa

    11/13

    ESTIMATED COSTS

    1959 - mid-1973 - 35 million Swedish crowns (15% preservation costs)

    275 million dollars (= 41 432 600 Swedish crowns) 1980s tourists

    SHIP, NOWADAYS

    Attraction of Vasa museumyellowish white acidic outbreaks - the fluctuating of relative humidity,

    migration of sulfur compoundsiron and acids

    Degradation of PEG, extraction of iron, freeze - drying

    1720 C and 5155% RHconditions in the museum

  • 8/13/2019 Conservation of warship Vasa

    12/13

    AIRTICKET : 3 000 CZK +

    OPENING HOURS

    Every day 10.00-17.00

    Wednesdays 10.00-20.00

    ADMISSION

    Adults 130 SEK

    Students 100 SEK

    0-18 years free of charge

  • 8/13/2019 Conservation of warship Vasa

    13/13

    Sources

    http://www.vasamuseet.se/en/

    http://www.vasamuseet.se/sv/Skeppet/Skeppsbloggen/?tags=English

    The Vasa experience with polyethylene glycol: Aconservator's perspective

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1296207412000313

    HOCKER, E., ALMKVIST, G., SAHLSTEDT, M. TheVasa experience with polyethylene glycol: Aconservator's perspective.Journal of CulturalHeritage, 2012, vol. 13, no. 3, p. S172S182