Tim:

I read the EXCELLENT report and think that you REALLY have something going
there!

I, then, "cracked" open one of the sealed containers from the ranch
at the lab that held the ferrous objects from what we think MAY be
artifacts from the 16th Century *Content* of the Cavendish Expedition.
There is a sword blade that is approximately 18" long and appears to be
stable enough, NOW, for further conservation and shipment to Martin Read, a
good friend at The University of Plymouth in the UK, who could compare the
style and metallurgy to the materials from 16th Century Cattwatter Wreck
assemblage.  BUT, it MAY be from an 19th Century shipwreck. What would your
lab charge to "process" it in your "bomb" and check the metallurgy and is
it too large for the "bomb"?

In any case, keep up the EXCELLENT work!  We will look forward to seeing
you next January in Sunny (hopefully) Fort Worth.

Richard J. Lundin BA, MA, RPA, ISAP
Mineral Exploration Consultant. Professional Geologist (AIPG) & Permitting
Specialist
Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA) & Remote Sensing Specialist
(ISAP)(Airbourne & Archaeogeophysics)
Director, Wondjina Research
President & CEO, RICH ORE Mining, Inc.
President, Wombat Mining & Exploration Co.
Geologist & Agent, Oro Grande Mining Co.
Partner, WRI\CC JV
Partner, UCMERCED-TCEDA INNOVATIONLAB



On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Timothy Scarlett <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Hi Histarch,
>
> My students, colleagues, and I just completed a small round of experiments
> using supercritical carbon dioxide fluid treatments to extract water
> from—and impregnate polymer into—corroded iron artifacts from
> archaeological sites. This reversible technique for drying and sealing
> nodules or artifacts can become a bulk/batch treatment for corroded iron,
> stabilizing them for storage. The process can cut treatment time from
> months or weeks down to hours per group of samples (orders of magnitude
> faster), while extending time between treatments, and without compromising
> artifact integrity. This can be applied to artifacts which are entirely
> corroded and lack any iron core or those with substantial ferrous metal
> remaining, and following this treatment, more patient and detailed
> conservation plans can be executed when desired.
>
> This is particularly important for industrial and historical archaeology
> sites that produce overwhelming volumes of corroded ferrous metal. Also for
> brownfield and superfund sites, since the technique can be “tuned” to
> extract toxic compounds like arsnic, DDT, and such, without damaging
> artifacts from sites or any period that were exposed to contaminated
> groundwater or processes that contaminated them during their life-history.
>
> As with other studies using subcritical pressures, this may be tweaked to
> quickly and effectively extract chlorides. The studies of this are ongoing
> by a group of conservators and engineers, many of these studies appear it
> he bibliography.
>
> I welcome comments
> Cheers,
> Tim Scarlett
>
>
>
> http://www.mtu.edu/social-sciences/research/reports/Scarlett_Caneba_Final_Report.pdf
> <
> http://www.mtu.edu/social-sciences/research/reports/Scarlett_Caneba_Final_Report.pdf
> >