Evaluation of dry ice blasting as a sustainable technique for graffiti removal on steel and aluminium substrates coated with acrylic-urethane and acrylic-styrene clear coats

Aina Vega Bosch; Laura Osete Cortina; Virginia Santamarina Campos

doi:10.14568/cp39993

Authors

Aina Vega Bosch Department of Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage, Polytechnic University of Valencia, 46022 Valencia, Spain https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6977-2373
Laura Osete Cortina Instituto Universitario de Restauración del Patrimonio, Polytechnic University of Valencia, 46022 Valencia, Spain https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0709-5885
Virginia Santamarina Campos Department of Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage, Polytechnic University of Valencia, 46022 Valencia, Spain https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6151-8271

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14568/cp39993

Keywords:

Graffiti removal, Dry ice blasting, Non-porous surfaces, Solid CO2, FTIR, FESEM

Abstract

Dry ice blasting is presented as a sustainable alternative to removing unwanted coatin without damaging underlying materials. This study analyses its effectiveness in the removal of aerosols from non-porous surfaces, evaluating the physical, chemical, and micromorphological responses derived from the cryogenic phenomena. Alkyd, polyurethane, acrylic and bitumen aerosols were applied on steel and aluminium substrates coated with acrylic-urethane and acrylic-styrene clear coats. Changes in mechanical properties, such as adhesion and hardness, as well as optical properties like colour and gloss, were evaluated. Additionally, the treated surfaces were analysed using Field Emission Scanning Electron (FESEM) and Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR). The results demonstrated that the method preserves the integrity of the coatings; however, traces of aerosol (< 0.5 %) were detected, which affected the surface wettability and gloss in some cases. These findings confirm its potential as a safe alternative for use on non-porous surfaces.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Gomes, V.; Dionísio, A.; Pozo-Antonio, J. S., ‘Conservation strategies against graffiti vandalism on cultural heritage stones: protective coatings and cleaning methods’, Progress Organic Coatings 113 (2017) 90-109, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2017.08.010.

2. Bargi, M.; Morigi, M. P.; Fontana, R; Pampaloni, E.; Striova, J.; Salvadori, B., ‘Efficiency evaluation of chemical and physical methods for the removal of spray paints from marble substrates’, IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 949 (2020) 012027, https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/949/1/012027.

3. Ribeiro, T.; Dionísio, A.; Aires-Barros, L., ‘Aerosol-paint graffiti: the effects on calcareous stone’, Restoration of Buildings and Monuments 15(1) (2009) 51-66.

4. Sanmartín, P.; Cappitelli, F.; Mitchell, R., ‘Current methods of graffiti removal: a review’, Construction and Building Materials 71 (2014) 363-374, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.08.093.

5. Germinario, G.; Werf, I. D. van der; Sabbatini, L., ‘Chemical characterisation of spray paints by a multi-analytical (Py/GC–MS, FTIR, μ-Raman) approach’, Microchemical Journal 124 (2016) 929-939, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2015.04.016.

6. Cocco, O.; Carboni, M.; Carcangiu, G.; Murru, A., ‘Crime art on the stone: graffiti vandalism on cultural heritage and the anti-graffiti role in its surfaces protection’, Periodico di Mineralogia 84(3A) (2015) 435-452, https://doi.org/10.2451/2015PM0023.

7. Goidanich, S.; Toniolo, L.; Jafarzadeh, S.; Wallinder, I. O., ‘Effects of wax-based anti- graffiti on copper patina composition and dissolution during four years of outdoor urban exposure’, Journal of Cultural Heritage 11(3) (2010) 288-296, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2010.02.001.

8. Ciliberto, E.; Battaglia, D. M.; Capello, C.; Gatto, M.; Delfa, S. La, Masieri, M.; Quarta, G., ‘Graphic vandalism: study of the interaction of spray varnishes with stone materials and test of some antigraffiti treatments’, Procedia Chemistry 8 (2013) 165-174, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proche.2013.03.022.

9. Vega-Bosch, A.; Santamarina-Campos, V.; Colomina-Subiela, A.; Carabal-Montagud, M.-A., ‘Cryogenics as an advanced method of cleaning cultural heritage: challenges and solutions’, Sustainability 14(3) (2022) 1052, https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031052.

10. Spur, G.; Uhlmann, E.; Elbing, F., ‘Dry-ice blasting for cleaning: process, optimization and application’, Wear 233-235 (1999) 402-411, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1648(99)00204-5.

11. Liu, Y.-H.; Maruyama, H.; Matsusaka, S., ‘Effect of particle impact on surface cleaning using dry ice jet’, Aerosol Science and Technology 45(12) (2011) 1519-1527, https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2011.603769.

12. Molen, R. van der; Joosten, I.; Beentjes, T.; Megens, L., ‘Dry ice blasting for the conservation cleaning of metals’, in Metal 2010: proceedings of the interim meeting of the ICOM-CC metal working group, eds. C. Chemello, C. Watters & P. Hull, Clemson University, Clemson (2011) 135-143.

13. Vega-Bosch, A.; Santamarina-Campos, V.; Bosch-Roig, P.; López-Carrillo, J. A.; Dolz-Ruiz, V.; Sánchez-Pons, M., ‘Assessing the feasibility of removing graffiti from railway vehicles using ultra-freezing air projection’, Applied Sciences 14(10) (2024) 4165, https://doi.org/10.3390/app14104165.

14. Dzido, A.; Krawczyk, P., ‘Abrasive technologies with dry ice as a blasting medium’, Energies 16(3) (2023) 1014, https://doi.org/10.3390/en16031014.

15. Máša, V.; Horňák, D.; Petrilák, D., ‘Industrial use of dry ice blasting in surface cleaning’, Journal of Cleaner Production 329 (2021) 129630, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129630.

16. Mašková, L.; Smolík, J.; Vávrová, P.; Neoralová, J.; Součková, M.; Novotná, D.; Jandová, V.; Ondráček, J.; Ondráčková, L.; Křížová , T.; Kocová, K.; Stanovský, P., ‘Carbon dioxide snow cleaning of paper’, Heritage Science 9 (2021) 145, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40494-021-00622-0.

17. Millman, L. R.; Giancaspro, J. W., ‘Environmental evaluation of abrasive blasting with sand, water, and dry ice’, International Journal of Architecture, Engineering and Construction 1(3) (2012) 174-182.

18. Vega-Bosch, A.; Santamarina-Campos, V.; Osete-Cortina, L.; Sánchez-Pons, M.; Bosch-Roig, P., ‘Efficient and sustainable cleaning: a comparative analysis of cryogenic technology’, Applied Sciences 14(15) (2024) 6591, https://doi.org/10.3390/app14156591.

19. Polar Tech, in PT-PROsi. Datasheet (2019).

20. ‘Nitro 2G Negro’, ficha técnica, in Montana Colors S.L., https://www.montanacolors.com/downloads/TDS_MTN_Nitro%202G_ES.pdf (accessed 2024-02-23).

21. ‘Montana Tarblack 600ml’, in Montana-Cans, www.montana-cans.com/en/spray-cans/montana-spray-paint/black-50ml-600ml-graffiti-paint/montana-tarblack-600ml (accessed 2024-02-16).

22. ‘Water Based - technical data sheet’, in Montana Colors S.L., https://www.montanacolors.com/downloads/TDS_MTN_WaterBased_400_EN.pdf (accessed 2024-02-23).

23. ‘Montana Tarblack: fichas de datos de seguridad’, in Montana-Cans (2022), www.montana-cans.com (accessed 2024-02-23).

24. ‘Hardcore - technical data sheet’, in Montana Colors S.L. (2022), https://www.montanacolors.com/downloads/TDS_MTN_Hardcore_EN.pdf (accessed 2024-02-23).

25. ‘MTN 94 - technical data sheet’, in Montana Colors SL. (2023), https://www.montanacolors.com/downloads/TDS_MTN_94_EN_23.pdf (accessed 2024-02-23).

26. ‘UNE-EN 15886. Conservation of cultural property. Test methods. Colour measurement of surfaces’, in AENOR (2011).

27. ‘UNE-EN ISO 2813. Paints and varnishes. Determination of gloss value at 20o, 60o and 85o (ISO 2813:2014)’, in AENOR (2015), www.aenor.es (accessed 2024-02-23).

28. ‘UNE-EN 15802. Conservation of cultural property. Test methods. Determination of static contact angle’, in AENOR.

29. ‘UNE-ENISO 868. Plastics and ebonite. Determination of indentation hardness by means of a durometer (Shore hardness) (ISO 868:2003)’, in AENOR.

30. ‘UNE-EN ISO 2409. Paints and varnishes. Cross-cut test (ISO 2409:2020)’, in AENOR.