Comparison between nanosecond and femtosecond laser pulses for the removal of spray paint from granite surfaces

dc.contributor.authorBrand, Julia
dc.contributor.authorWain, A.
dc.contributor.authorRode, Andrei
dc.contributor.authorMadden, Steve
dc.contributor.authorKing, Penny
dc.contributor.authorRapp, Ludovic
dc.date.accessioned2026-02-20T04:12:12Z
dc.date.available2026-02-20T04:12:12Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.date.updated2023-10-01T07:16:11Z
dc.description.abstractWe investigated the removal of spray paint from heritage granite surfaces using a nanosecond pulse laser and compared the results, in terms of the effectiveness of treatment and preservation of the stone surface from potential damage, with results obtained using a femtosecond pulse laser. We show that, with the nanosecond laser, the ablation threshold of the stone was measured at 0.5 J·cm-2, but it was only possible to remove certain types of spray paints, such as blue and green paints, at a higher fluence of 0.9 J·cm-2. To remove other types of paints, such as red and yellow, it was necessary to increase even further the laser fluence to 1.5 J·cm-2, well above the ablation threshold of the stone. In this case, damage was induced in the minerals, such as melting of biotite, and a general roughening of the other minerals’ surfaces was observed. Despite nanosecond pulse lasers being more widespread for cleaning purposes, we demonstrate that femtosecond pulse lasers allowed better effectiveness in removing various colours of paint, without leaving residues, while keeping the laser energy below the damage threshold of the underlying stone, allowing complete preservation of the substrate, and avoiding the melting of the most sensitive mineral grains (particularly biotite). We determined the ablation efficiency of spray paint using the femtosecond pulse laser and found a maximum ablation regime centered around 6.2 J·cm-2, at 8.36 mm3·(min·W)-1. This study highlights the benefits of using a laser with femtosecond pulses instead of longer pulse durations (nanosecond range) for the preservation and maintenance of heritage stone.
dc.description.sponsorshipThe research was supported by the Australian Government through the Australian Research Council's Linkage Project funding scheme (Project LP180100276) and funding provided by Transport for New South Wales. King was partially supported by DP200100406.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen_AU
dc.identifier.issn1296-2074
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1885/733805704
dc.language.isoen_AUen_AU
dc.publisherElsevier Masson
dc.rights© 2023 Consiglio Nazionaledelle Ricerche (CNR)
dc.sourceJournal of Cultural Heritage
dc.titleComparison between nanosecond and femtosecond laser pulses for the removal of spray paint from granite surfaces
dc.typeJournal article
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage338
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage329
local.contributor.affiliationBrand, Julia, College of Science, ANU
local.contributor.affiliationWain, A., University of Canberra
local.contributor.affiliationRode, Andrei, College of Science, ANU
local.contributor.affiliationMadden, Steve, College of Science, ANU
local.contributor.affiliationKing, Penny, College of Science, ANU
local.contributor.affiliationRapp, Ludovic, College of Science, ANU
local.contributor.authoruidBrand, Julia, u1099237
local.contributor.authoruidRode, Andrei, u8913168
local.contributor.authoruidMadden, Steve, u4151700
local.contributor.authoruidKing, Penny, u3482508
local.contributor.authoruidRapp, Ludovic, u5119755
local.description.embargo2099-12-31
local.description.notesImported from ARIES
local.identifier.absfor510202 - Lasers and quantum electronics
local.identifier.ariespublicationa383154xPUB42145
local.identifier.citationvolume62
local.identifier.doi10.1016/j.culher.2023.06.005
local.identifier.scopusID2-s2.0-85162918839
local.type.statusPublished Version
publicationvolume.volumeNumber62

Downloads

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Comparison between nanosecond and Femtosecond laser pulses for the removal.pdf
Size:
2.92 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format