Re: Silk Storage in Buffered Boxes

[Constance <cnstnce@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Nov 23, 2005, at 12:50 PM, Irene Karsten wrote:
> My question concerns the effects of alkaline buffers that are
> incorporated in most archival boxes.

I would appreciate hearing any of the responses to this question - as 
we are also confronting this issue for a large silk collection.

My impression is that, in some limited situations, buffered boxes are 
acceptable for silk if the contents are well packed with unbuffered 
materials - though not ideal.  We use unbuffered tissue in contact with 
the textile and washed soft structure 1443R Tyvek as a secondary 
enclosure.  The fiberboard doesn't seem to exhibit the chalkiness of 
the buffered tissue, and physical transference of the unbound carbonate 
appears to be of less concern.  Though it does not seem advisable to 
make a large investment in, nor become significantly dependent upon, 
this storage solution for silk collections.

It is the convenience of the ready-to-hand buffered boxes in a variety 
of sizes and shapes that has made them so attractive.

In terms of disaster preparedness, I would expect there to be a 
vulnerability to the silk textiles if the boxes are accidently wetted.  
Although the solubility of calcium carbonate is limited, it would tend 
to increase the alkalinity of the wetted materials.  This could be 
reversed by rinsing - but some (probably unobservable) chemical 
degradation might occur, depending on conditions and time wet.  The 
increased pH of such an event would definitely promote bleeding and 
color loss - particularly from the silk embroidery - which would be 
generally irreversible.

Corrugated polypropylene, such as Coroplast, seems to be the preferred 
material for storage of protein fibers and protein objects - and this 
is the recommendation we are making.

Is this thinking correct?

Can anyone point me to advice on box making techniques, designs, 
fasteners for Coroplast?  (I reordered the CCI technical bulletin on 
working with fluted plastic sheet.)

Thanks,

David Walker
Talisman Restoration, Inc.
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


On Nov 23, 2005, at 12:50 PM, Irene Karsten wrote:

> At the University of Alberta, we are currently planning a new
> storage facility for a collection of over 600 East Asian textiles.  
> This collection includes a large number of smaller flat textiles
> primarily made of silk embroidered with silk and metal threads: rank
> badges, sleeve bands, textile fragments, etc.  We are considering
> housing these artifacts in acid-free cardboard boxes in order to
> facilitate moving the objects to the new storage room (in another
> building) and to facilitate frequent moving from storage to a
> research/study area since the collection will be heavily used for
> research and teaching.  Ready-made archival boxes could provide good
> protection for these artifacts at a reasonable cost.
>
> My question concerns the effects of alkaline buffers that are
> incorporated in most archival boxes.  Non-buffered acid-free
> materials (tissues, boards) are usually recommended for textiles--
> for protein fibres especially--to prevent potentional degradation to
> fibres and dyes.  Although it is true that immersion in alkaline
> solutions, particularly strong bases, degrades silk and wool, I have
> been unable to find any research on the effects of adjacency to
> alkaline buffered materials.  Has anyone experienced problems with
> alkaline buffered materials in practice?  Should buffered archival
> boxes be avoided for silk materials even if lined with unbuffered
> materials?  
>
> Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail