Microorganisms cause massive damage to cultural assets worthy of protection every year. Currently used methods for the antimicrobial treatment of cultural assets are mostly limited in their efficiency or use toxic biocides. An investigation into new methods for creating antimicrobial surfaces and their applicability in cultural property protection. Advertorial Article Parallax Article Paintings, books, textiles, metal objects, wooden objects, pieces of furniture – almost all […]

Microorganisms cause massive damage to cultural assets worthy of protection every year. Currently used methods for the antimicrobial treatment of cultural assets are mostly limited in their efficiency or use toxic biocides. An investigation is being carried out into new methods for creating antimicrobial surfaces and their applicability in the protection of cultural property.

Paintings, books, textiles, metal objects, wooden objects, pieces of furniture – almost all types of our cultural heritage worthy of protection are affected by microbial infestation. Microorganisms such as bacteria, fungi and molds cause massive damage to art and cultural assets and even attack building facades or stone monuments. Air pollution and surface erosion further promote microbial contamination. However, microbial infestation of cultural assets not only affects the objects concerned, but also poses considerable health risks for visitors and employees of museums and depots as well as restorers.

Although numerous biocidal substances have long been known and used to protect cultural objects against microbial infestation, their effectiveness is often limited. In addition, there are now massive toxicological concerns about some of the biocides traditionally used, so their use should be avoided wherever possible.

Taking into account the specifics of individual cultural assets, the requirements for a biocidal protective coating can generally be summarized as follows:

Very similar requirements are now placed on antimicrobial protective coatings designed to protect the surfaces of medical devices (for example implants, prostheses and medical instruments) against microbial contamination. Like cultural assets, medical devices that are used every day in clinics or doctors’ surgeries are at risk of bacterial or fungal infestation. Such infections associated with implants can cause life-threatening complications. For this reason, extensive research has been carried out in recent years, including by the authors themselves, to develop antimicrobial surfaces for medical devices.

Due to the comparability of the requirement profiles for antimicrobial protective coatings for cultural assets and medical devices, it makes sense to take a closer look at new technologies for antimicrobial surfaces developed in medical technology and to examine their transferability to the protection of cultural assets. Therefore, selected new methods for the creation of antimicrobial surfaces for medical technology, in particular on the basis of nano- or microscale functional layers, and their applicability in cultural property protection are to be investigated.

The text is an excerpt from the article “Medical technology provides inspiration. New methods for producing antimicrobial surfaces” by Thorsten Laube, Claudia Rode and Matthias Schnabelrauch from RESTAURO 7/2016. You will find the full article in RESTAURO from October 10, 2016.

Work on the central station in the Dutch city of Arnhem has now been going on for 20 years. As a result, skaters have appropriated the space.

Work on the central station in the Dutch city of Arnhem has now been going on for 20 years. Despite ongoing construction work, the area has been appropriated by a user group that the planner considers unpredictable and often finds no space: skaters. A success for the responsible landscape architects from Bureau B+B. But where did it come from?

Images: ©Hufton+Crow

The design of Arnhem station is the result of more than two decades of collaboration between the architects UNStudio and the landscape architects from Bureau B+B. It presented the planners with various challenges. Topographically alone: the station is located on the slope of the Veluwe massif and the planners had to overcome a height difference of 20 meters. They achieved this by creating a subtle, constantly changing landscape. The folded, undulating natural stone surfaces largely trace the terrain below, linking visitor flows and ensuring a smooth transition between the different elevation levels.

Pictures: Frank Hanswijk

If you are not continuing your journey immediately, you can also make yourself comfortable on the wooden benches that emerge from the edges of the sloping natural stone surfaces in the quiet corners of the station grounds. You don’t have to buy anything, as there is no obligation to buy anything to sit down in the rooms outside the station. This is one of the reasons why the Arnhem station forecourt is so lively. And it is in turn an explanation for the fact that these local people tend to belong to those population groups that are otherwise often pushed out of public spaces – such as older people, young people, skaters or homeless people.

The Arnhem train station shows this: The less the purpose of a public space is defined, the more opportunities users have to implement their own ideas. This is of particular benefit to population groups that are often deliberately excluded when planning public spaces. The square design also benefited from the fact that it took around two decades to implement. This allowed the user groups, who tend to be marginalized, to appropriate the space in the long term.

Curious? You can find the full article on Arnhem station in the February 2019 issue of G+L.

Translated from the English by Sigrid Ehrmann