Art+Museum

=__**Preserving the Arts**__= Coverstone | Ferry | Gastineau | Martinelli = =

= = = = = **Plan of Attack** =

We want to study the humidity in the art museum to test and see if the conditions are appropriate for the works of art.

This would include determining the proper rate of air circulation, wet bulb temperature, and various lighting levels within the galleries.

For instance, we hypothesize that after a large group visits a portion of the museum, the humidity and temperature will increase and possibly surpass the levels appropriate for the art.

**Update**:
We want to study the humidity in the art museum (West Gallery, David T. Owsley Ethnographic Gallery, and the Brown Study Room) to test and see if the conditions are appropriate for the works of art. We will compare these results to the fluctuations of the outdoor conditions to understand how the building systems are working.

This would include determining the proper relative humidity, dry bulb temperature, and wet bulb temperature within the galleries and outside.

For instance, we hypothesize that after a large group visits a portion of the museum, the humidity and temperature will increase and possibly surpass the levels appropriate for the art.

= **Thesis** =

The fluctuation of relative humidity within the Art Museum exceeds the acceptable range for preservation of the artwork.

**Update:**
Specifically looking at the West Gallery, David T. Owsley Ethnographic Gallery, and the Brown Study Room in the art museum, the fluctuation of relative humidity, dry bulb temperature, and wet bulb temperature will exceed the acceptable range for preservation of the artwork.

= **Methodology** =

Approach:
Our approach for the case study is to research the acceptable limits of relative humidity and temperature range in the art museum. Our group would like to use a well informed and researched opinion of art preservation to garner an understanding of the optimal conditions for the art. We plan on collecting data over a period of time to understand the fluctuations of these conditions based on occupancy.

Instrumentation:
We would like to use the hobo to measure and document the dry and wet bulb temperatures in the galleries over a period of time. Using this tool we will be able to determine if the humidity is appropriate for the varieties of artwork. We would also plan on visiting the museum during different situations to use the sling psychrometer to check the differences in dry and wet bulb temperature.

**Update:**
We would like to use the hobo to measure and document the dry bulb temperatures in the West Gallery, David T. Owsley Ethnographic Gallery, and the Brown Study Room in the art museum over a period of ten days. We would also like to have some documentation of the outdoor spaces. Using this tool (the hobo) we will be able to determine if the humidity is appropriate for the varieties of artwork. We would also plan on visiting the museum during different situations to use the digital psychrometer to document dry and wet bulb temperature.

Surveys:
We don’t necessarily need to implement a survey to get the results, because the information should be found in the data. This data would not include anything subjective.

Schedule:
September 26- September 30 and October 3- October 7 Data Collection October 10-15 Data Compilation October 17-21 Additional Collection if needed October 24-28 Conclusions Made from the Data

**Update:**
October 11-21 Data Collection October 22-28 Conclusions Made from the Data

Permission to use the space/building:
We are still waiting for a response about permission to use the building.

Partial Draft:
**Introduction:**

Due to the different mediums of art, there are many environmental conditions that need to be considered for the sake of preservation. These conditions include lighting, air quality, airflow, temperature, and humidity. Humidity is one of the most difficult factors to control in an art exhibit space, due to the proximity of each gallery. The varying mediums of artwork within a space also make it difficult for the humidity to be adjusted to the maximum standards of preservation for a specific medium. Specifically looking at the West Gallery, David T. Owsley Ethnographic Gallery, the Brown Study, and exterior conditions in and around the art museum, the fluctuation of relative humidity, dry bulb temperature, and wet bulb temperature are expected to exceed the acceptable range for preservation of the artwork displayed. This is an issue that needs to be resolved in order to preserve the artwork for future generations.

Abstract:
We want to study the humidity in the art museum (West Gallery, David T. Owsley Ethnographic Gallery, and the Brown Study Room) to test and see if the conditions are appropriate for the works of art. We will compare these results to the fluctuations of the outdoor conditions to understand how the building systems are working. This would include determining the proper relative humidity, dry bulb temperature, and wet bulb temperature within the galleries and outside.

For instance, we hypothesize that after a large group visits a portion of the museum, the humidity and temperature will increase and possibly surpass the levels appropriate for the art. Specifically looking at the West Gallery, David T. Owsley Ethnographic Gallery, and the Brown Study Room in the art museum, the fluctuation of relative humidity, dry bulb temperature, and wet bulb temperature will exceed the acceptable range for preservation of the artwork.

Our approach for the case study is to research the acceptable limits of relative humidity and temperature range in the art museum. Our group would like to use a well informed and researched opinion of art preservation to garner an understanding of the optimal conditions for the art. We plan on collecting data over a period of time to understand the fluctuations of these conditions based on occupancy. With this data we will either validate the effectiveness of the existing systems, or we will be able to recommend ways to improve the system.

Methodology:
We would like to use the “hobo” to measure and document the dry bulb temperatures in the West Gallery, David T. Owsley Ethnographic Gallery, and the Brown Study Room in the art museum over a period of ten days. We would also like to have some documentation of the outdoor spaces. Using this tool (the hobo) we will be able to determine if the humidity is appropriate for the varieties of artwork. We would also plan on visiting the museum during different situations to use the digital psychrometer to document dry and wet bulb temperature.

After collecting and analyzing the data from the various instruments, we would like to compare these values to the accepted ranges of relative humidity and dry/wet bulb temperature suitable for the different works of art. This comparison will help us understand how successful the existing mechanical systems in the Art Museum are at maintaining the environmental conditions that are necessary for art preservation.

**References:**

"Recommended Environmental Conditions for Museum Objects." //South East Conservation & Restoration//. South East Conservation & Restoration, 2011. Web. 26 Sept. 2011. .

Jones, Mark. //Museums and Climate Change//. Nov. 2008. Paper by the Director of V&A.

=Final Case Study:=

Introduction:
Due to the different mediums of art, there are many environmental conditions that need to be considered for the sake of preservation. These conditions include lighting, air quality, airflow, temperature, and humidity. Humidity is one of the most difficult factors to control in an art exhibit space, due to fluctuating occupancy levels, and the proximity of some exhibit spaces to the main entrance. The varying mediums of artwork within a space also make it difficult for the humidity to be adjusted to the standards of preservation for a specific medium. Specifically looking at the Traveling Exhibit Gallery, Upper East Gallery, David T. Owsley Ethnographic Gallery, and exterior conditions in and around the art museum, the fluctuation of relative humidity and dry-bulb temperature are expected to exceed the acceptable range for proper preservation of the artwork displayed. If so, this is an issue that needs to be resolved in order to preserve the artwork for future generations.

Abstract:
We studied humidity in the art museum (Traveling Gallery, David T. Owsley Ethnographic Gallery, Upper East Gallery) to learn whether the conditions are appropriate for the displayed works of art. We compared these results to the fluctuations of the outdoor conditions to understand how the building systems are work. This included determining the proper relative humidity and dry-bulb temperatures within the galleries, as well as outdoors.

We hypothesized that after a large group visited a portion of the museum, the humidity and temperature would increase and possibly surpass the levels appropriate for the art. Specifically looking at the three rooms in the museum, the fluctuation of relative humidity and dry-bulb temperature would exceed the acceptable range for preservation of the artwork.

Our approach for the case study was to research the acceptable limits of relative humidity and temperature range in the art museum. Our group employed well-informed, researched conclusions of art preservation to garner an understanding of the optimal conditions for the art. We collected our data over a period of time to understand the fluctuations of the aforementioned conditions based on occupancy level. With this data we evaluated the effectiveness of the existing HVAC systems, and made recommendations on how to improve them.

Methodology:
We used HOBOs to measure and document the humidity and dry-bulb temperatures in the Traveling Gallery, David T. Owsley Ethnographic Gallery, and the Upper East Gallery in the art museum over a period of ten days. During this same time, we documented outdoor humidity and dry-bulb temperature in order to compare indoor and outdoor conditions. Using the HOBOs, we were able to evaluate whether the humidity and dry-bulb temperatures were appropriate for the varieties of artwork in their respective galleries.

After collecting data from the HOBOs, we compared those values to the acceptable ranges of relative humidity and dry-bulb temperature. This determined if each gallery's conditions were suitable for its artistic content. This comparison helped us determine how successful the museum's existing mechanical systems were at maintaining the environmental conditions necessary for art preservation. HOBO Location Map - Indicated by red dots.

Process:
Our group acquired 5 HOBOs to monitor relative humidy and dry-bult temperature. One meter was placed in a shaded, outdoor location for reference. The remaining four HOBOS were located throughout the art museum.

The first meter, located in the traveling exhibition space, provided data for a room that is frequently changing its displays. We believed this would be an important area to focus on because of the variety of materials and artwork in that specific gallery.

The next meter was situated downstairs in the Owsley Gallery, near the museum entrance. We assumed the greatest variance of humidity and dry-bulb temperature would occur near the entry doors. To test this assumption, another meter was located in the Upper East gallery, directly above the Owsley Gallery. This allowed us to compare and contrast variations between a gallery located near the entrance, and one further away.

The last HOBO was located in the associate director’s office. This allowed for a data comparison between the galleries and a standard office environment.

All of the HOBO units were programmed to collect data every 10 minutes from October 17th to Octover 31st. This provided roughly 20,000 unique data points to analyze.

Graph 1 - Exterior
This meter was located outdoors on a covered porch under full shade.



Graph 2 - Art Museum Office
Located in the office of the director, a different wing of the art museum and further from the galleries.

Graph 3 - Upper East Gallery
Placed in the east wing, second floor.

Graph 4 - Owsley Gallery
Meter located on first floor, roughly 50 feet from main entrance.



Graph 5 - Traveling Gallery
Placed on first floor, opposite from the Owsley Gallery.

Analysis:
Looking at the raw data, it is obvious that there is some sort of temperature and relative humidity fluctuation within the gallery spaces. The temperature in the gallery spaces jumped anywhere from 69 to 73 degrees Fahrenheit within a twenty-four hour period, and the relative humidity fluctuated between 41% and 55%.

The second floor, Upper East Gallery (Graph 3) is primarily home to works of oil on canvas. The graph shows an expected day/night humidity and temperature cycle, with less than a three degree fluctuation on most days. We know that the optimal temperature range for these paintings is between 64.4 and 71.6 degrees Fahrenheit with a relative humidity between 40% and 60%. While humidity, even on rainy days, is within acceptable levels, the temperature occasionally exceeds 71.6 degrees. This is a logical and predictable pattern, occurring at midday. Optimizing the HVAC system to account for peak hours could mitigate the problem. This might include time-programmable controls or smarter thermostat monitoring systems.

The Owsley Gallery (Graph 4) had a large amount of variation in both temperature and relative humidity; this was probably due to its close proximity to the front door. According to our source, //"Recommended Environmental Conditions for Museum Objects"//, wood (which is prevalent in the Owsley Gallery) should be kept around at 68 degrees Fahrenheit with an acceptable flux of 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit. The graph shows that the temperature jumps from 69 to 73 degrees Fahrenheit on a regular basis. Wood should be kept between 40% and 60% relative humidity, and the art museum manages to keep the relative humidity between 41% and 55%. Clay is also used heavily as a material within these exhibits. Clay should be kept between fifty and eighty-six degrees Fahrenheit, and the HVAC system in the art museum fits this criterion easily. Clay should be kept at a relative humidity of less than 40%, but the Owsley Gallery’s levels vary from 41% to 54%. Animal furs were also found throughout artworks within this gallery. Fur should be kept at 68 degrees Fahrenheit with an acceptable flux of 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit. The source also recommends that animal furs be kept in a room with an average relative humidity of 40% to 60%. The art museum manages this fairly easily.

The traveling gallery (Graph 5) had the least variation of temperature and relative humidity. During the interval that was measured, an installment of silver artwork was being displayed. According to the //"Recommended Environmental Conditions for Museum Objects"//, silver should be kept at 68 degrees Fahrenheit with an acceptable fluctuation of 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit. This was managed by the Art Museum’s HVAC system with little trouble; the temperature only fluctuated from 69 to 73 degrees Fahrenheit within the space. Silver also requires a relative humidity that is less than 35% to minimize tarnishing. The actual readings from the space show that the relative humidity was anywhere between 49% and 56%. A comparison of graphs five and one shows that the HVAC system was not able to maintain appropriate temperature and relative humidity conditions. This could be a programming issue (human error/ inadequate user feedback) or a thermostat issue (poor calibration/ insufficient monitoring capabilities).

Conclusions:
The standard conservator or administrator would ideally maintain a relative humidity of 50 +/- 8% for their museum (without exceeding a variation of 6% within a 24 hour period). The museum's temperature should be around 70 +/- 4° Fahrenheit (with a variation no greater than +/- 2° within a 24 hour period). The averaged data from the Ball State Art Museum's monitored galleries is 50% RH with a temperature of 71°F. Assuming these test zones accurately represent the entire museum, the Ball State Art Museum meets the aforementioned ranges. It is important to note that these "ranges" and "averages" are based on a variety of artwork within a given category. That is to say, certain types of oil-on-canvass require slightly higher humidity than other types of oil-on-canvass, and so on. We feel that these averages are reasonable, given the range of artwork within the museum and the cost impracticality of zoning an HVAC system for every individual piece of artwork.

To summarize, the big picture looks good. However, when analyzing each space, the desired relative humidity and temperature are occasionally exceeded. This continued fluctuation could be damaging to the installations over an extended period of time. Occasionally, and on a gallery-level basis, this data confirms our hypothesis: the fluctuation of relative humidity and temperature within the Art Museum exceeds the acceptable range for preservation of the artwork. However, overall and on average, the museum's temperature and humidity levels are considered safe and acceptable.

References:

 * Villarreal, Jose. “IMA Expands Acceptable Temperature and Humidity Guidelines.” Web. Sept. 2009. 
 * "Recommended Environmental Conditions for Museum Objects." South East Conservation & Restoration. South East Conservation & Restoration, 2011. Web. 26 Sept. 2011. < [] >.
 * Jones, Mark. "Museums and Climate Change." Nov. 2008.