If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Modern silver goes black, old silver stays white
Hi Guys,
I thought I float this for your thoughts. My friend has a 10th Century Viking ring... the real deal, not a replica. After 10 centuries it's just starting to take on yellow hue. I see modern silver rings that simply go black within a relatively short time. The explanation that was given to me was that the silver blackening is due to modern suphides pretty much everywhere. Your thoughts? Regards Charles |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Modern silver goes black, old silver stays white
On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 19:56:39 -0800, in rec.crafts.jewelry Chilla
wrote: My friend has a 10th Century Viking ring... the real deal, not a replica. After 10 centuries it's just starting to take on yellow hue. I see modern silver rings that simply go black within a relatively short time. The explanation that was given to me was that the silver blackening is due to modern suphides pretty much everywhere. Your thoughts? There are two issues here. One is the metal itself. Modern silver is generally sterling silver, which contains 7.5% copper. Old silver may have less copper, or even traces of gold, since the two metals are often found together, or one impure with the other, etc., and ancient refining methods were often somewhat less than perfect. As well, if the ring was buried for a time, there may well have been a good deal of leaching of the copper, if any, that might have been near the surface, out of the metal, leaving the surface area purer silver than the main body of the metal. And ancient metalworking methods, principally heating and working without the benefit of good firescale preventing fluxes, would also tend to lead to a final object who's surface was copper depleted. Since the copper in sterling tarnishes more rapidly than the silver (though both form black sulphides), items with that sort of close-to-fine silver surface, would tarnish more slowly. Traces of gold in the alloy, if any, would make it tarnish even more slowly. Modern silver items, by contrast, have not generally been surface depleted of their copper. Some working methods might even leave significant levels of copper oxide at or near the surface,(called fire stain) which will make these items tarnish even more rapidly than an item who's surface is clean sterling silver. As well, modern sterling silver jewelry is often made by casting, which can produce metal with a degree of porosity. These tiny pores in the metal surface increase the degree to which the silver can react with atmospheric sulphides, so they can tarnish somewhat faster. Ancient jewelry was often hammer forged, and even if cast, was often polished by means of burnishing, or rubbing the surface to a shine with a hard steel or stone tool. That compresses the surface, removing any porosity at the surface in a way that modern buffing processes do not do (though tumbling with steel shot does do this, one of it's benefits, if it's not then subsequently machine buffed.). So the differences in the rate at which some ancient jewelry will tarnish can be attributed to differences in overall alloy, differences in the working methods that change the alloy at the surface only, and differences in working methods tha change the density/reactivity of the surface. The second issue is what you allude to, modern environmental issues. Sulphide tarnish is caused by reaction with sulphur compounds in the air. There are two primary sources of this that come to mind. One, of course, is volcanic activity, and there's no reason why that componant of atmospheric sulphides would be different now than in 10 century europe, or elsewhere. However, the second major source of sulphur compounds in the air are fossil fuels, especially coal. Since the industrial revolution, the contribution to atmospheric sulphur levels has been on a steady increase. This is the same basic source as much of the greenhouse gas worries behind global warming, and in fact, some of those sulphur compounds are themselves, powerful greenhouse gasses. These are the same compounds responsible for "acid rain", as well. And continuing air pollution from industrial processes, automobile exhaust, and the rest, continue to raise atmospheric levels of sulphur compounds. The result is that all silver items are likely to tarnish more quickly today than they might have done in earlier times. Whether your Viking ring is tarnishing more slowly than modern silver is doing now, would then relate to the first topic, the metallurgy of the ring. Peter Rowe |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Modern silver goes black, old silver stays white
Peter W. Rowe wrote:
There are two issues here. One is the metal itself. Modern silver is generally sterling silver, which contains 7.5% copper. Old silver may have less copper, or even traces of gold, since the two metals are often found together, or one impure with the other, etc., and ancient refining methods were often somewhat less than perfect. As well, if the ring was buried for a time, there may well have been a good deal of leaching of the copper, if any, that might have been near the surface, out of the metal, leaving the surface area purer silver than the main body of the metal. And ancient metalworking methods, principally heating and working without the benefit of good firescale preventing fluxes, would also tend to lead to a final object who's surface was copper depleted. Since the copper in sterling tarnishes more rapidly than the silver (though both form black sulphides), items with that sort of close-to-fine silver surface, would tarnish more slowly. Traces of gold in the alloy, if any, would make it tarnish even more slowly. Even with pure silver the metal "yucks" up pretty quickly. I just don't understand how this ring, which would have been cast, due to its design, in only just yellowing now. It's been in the atmosphere for some time now. One of the interesting things about the old casting methods, and when I mean old I'm referring to viking dark age casting methods. The silver poured into the moulds would have come out fire scale free, or so the modern experimental archaeologists have show with their work. The interesting thing is that usually small amounts of metal were melted, in charcoal (so a reducing atmosphere), and the lost wax moulds used were made from clay mixed with horse dung. I'm wondering if the use of base materials, as opposed to refined investment plasters, would make a big difference? I haven't been forwarded any answers yet from the archaeologists. Regards Charles |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Modern silver goes black, old silver stays white
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 13:37:07 -0800, in rec.crafts.jewelry Chilla
wrote: Even with pure silver the metal "yucks" up pretty quickly. Depends, perhaps, on location. I've some fine silver things I made almost 20 years ago, which are even now, mostly untarnished. Just a bit of discoloration here and there. It might also have to do with whether the item if truely clean. Very slight surface films of wax, oil, or whatever, might protect the surface. If it's cast, and porous, then such materials might even sort of impregnate the surface, making them even less likely to be cleaned off... But that's just a guess. One thing you might try, if you've a university or other facility that might have access to x-ray fluorescence technology, is to see if someone can give you an analysis of the alloy. XRF is able to determine what the composition of an alloy is, at least at the surface, with great accuracy, and is totally non-destructive. That might tell you if there are other metals or elements in the alloy that might have some protective effect. I just don't understand how this ring, which would have been cast, due to its design, in only just yellowing now. It's been in the atmosphere for some time now. Obviously, there is some difference between this ring, and currently made objects. We can guess till the cows come home what that might be, but without more data on the metalurgy of the thing, it's just guessing. There are any number of possibilities, some of which I've mentioned. One of the interesting things about the old casting methods, and when I mean old I'm referring to viking dark age casting methods. Often, work from this era and local, were poured into open stone (often soapstone) molds. Such molds are generally poured without a lot of preheating. The same is true of sand casting methods. Because the metal chills quickly on contact, and because stone molds are not porous, there is no prolonged availability of oxygen at the cooling surface to allow oxidation. Modern lost wax casting uses investment plasters that are porous, to allow air to escape during casting, which allows great detail easily. But it also holds a certain amount of air at the cooling metal surface. Plus, the gypsum based investment plasters have some sulphur content, and if overheated, can contribute to formation of sulphides, as well as oxides. The silver poured into the moulds would have come out fire scale free, or so the modern experimental archaeologists have show with their work. The interesting thing is that usually small amounts of metal were melted, in charcoal (so a reducing atmosphere), and the lost wax moulds used were made from clay mixed with horse dung. This is similar to methods used even today in East African traditional casting, where beeswax models are "invested" in a mix of clay, dung, and grasses or straw. The organic material in the mold creates a strongly reducing atmosphere during casting and solidification of the metal that also produces a clean casting free of oxidation. In modern western methods, when this is desired, there are also investments plasters available that also incorporate graphite in the mix to also produce a reducing atmosphere in the mold. The downside to it is that with a reducing atmosphere in the mold, complete burnout of the wax model is more difficult, which can create resudues with some modern casting waxes, as well as giving poorer gas permiability to the investment, so sometimes poorer fills. But there's no denying that those traditional materials, even if less suited to modern production methods, do indeed produce beautiful and detailed castings if done right. However, are you sure that viking metalwork used lost wax methods? I'd only heard of the use of stone molds or simple sand casting methods before. I'm not an expert in this however, and could easily have missed that. Still, I'd not thought that lost wax methods were used that far north at that time. I'm wondering if the use of base materials, as opposed to refined investment plasters, would make a big difference? I haven't been forwarded any answers yet from the archaeologists. modern investment plasters do indeed give different results. Still, the principal differences are in surface oxidation. After the piece is finished, a modern cast piece should also have a clean fire scale free surface, and if done right, free of fire stain as well. So at most, all I can envision as a difference might be a difference in the amount of copper available at the surface due to surface depeletion during working, as noted in my last post. Beyond that, differences in the alloy itself would be where I'd look. Perhaps some accidental trace element acting as a sacrificial material much as in galvanized iron, or as something contributing tarnish resistance in the same way some of the modern fire stain free alloys work (lead, tin, zinc, perhaps? Messes up the workability, but might affect tarnishing too). It doesn't take much of these elements to have an effect. Or, as I suggested, a small amount of gold in the alloy could do that too. But don't discount as well the possibility of a simple coating of some sort being involved. Whether intentionally applied at some point, or simply there through the processes and history involved, such a surface film might have a strong effect. Tenth century jewelers weren't using modern detergents and ultrasonics to clean their jewelry. And things like lubricating waxes or the like used in polishing or burnishing could have gotten quite imbedded in any surface porosity. There are many modern silver polishing agents that leave some sort of protective film, and you can't tell just by looking, and these are merely surface films easily cleaned off. The sort of thing I've got in mind might be a tad more durable... But that's just a guess. Cheers Peter Rowe |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Modern silver goes black, old silver stays white
Peter W. Rowe wrote:
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 13:37:07 -0800, in rec.crafts.jewelry Chilla wrote: Even with pure silver the metal "yucks" up pretty quickly. Depends, perhaps, on location. I've some fine silver things I made almost 20 years ago, which are even now, mostly untarnished. Just a bit of discoloration here and there. It might also have to do with whether the item if truely clean. Very slight surface films of wax, oil, or whatever, might protect the surface. If it's cast, and porous, then such materials might even sort of impregnate the surface, making them even less likely to be cleaned off... But that's just a guess. One thing you might try, if you've a university or other facility that might have access to x-ray fluorescence technology, is to see if someone can give you an analysis of the alloy. XRF is able to determine what the composition of an alloy is, at least at the surface, with great accuracy, and is totally non-destructive. That might tell you if there are other metals or elements in the alloy that might have some protective effect. You know that's an extremely good idea, I will pass that on to my friend. The silver poured into the moulds would have come out fire scale free, or so the modern experimental archaeologists have show with their work. The interesting thing is that usually small amounts of metal were melted, in charcoal (so a reducing atmosphere), and the lost wax moulds used were made from clay mixed with horse dung. This is similar to methods used even today in East African traditional casting, where beeswax models are "invested" in a mix of clay, dung, and grasses or straw. The organic material in the mold creates a strongly reducing atmosphere during casting and solidification of the metal that also produces a clean casting free of oxidation. In modern western methods, when this is desired, there are also investments plasters available that also incorporate graphite in the mix to also produce a reducing atmosphere in the mold. The downside to it is that with a reducing atmosphere in the mold, complete burnout of the wax model is more difficult, which can create resudues with some modern casting waxes, as well as giving poorer gas permiability to the investment, so sometimes poorer fills. But there's no denying that those traditional materials, even if less suited to modern production methods, do indeed produce beautiful and detailed castings if done right. I think I'll be looking at graphite based investment plasters, the wax I currently use is a high detail gravity wax, so it liquefies very. As with anything the down side is that wax models are very brittle, so you can't drop them (repairs to this wax are never very good). However, are you sure that viking metalwork used lost wax methods? I'd only heard of the use of stone molds or simple sand casting methods before. I'm not an expert in this however, and could easily have missed that. Still, I'd not thought that lost wax methods were used that far north at that time. Absolutely, there are finds of moulds that have been broken open, some of the jewelry pieces have a linen material imprint in the back. We learn a lot from actual finds as well as the broken moulds. Viking Artefacts is a great reference for pieces from this period. Could you contact me via email, I think that you would be an asset to a few groups I belong to, I can discuss it there. Regards Charles |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How to get a white Silver finish? | Paul WIlson | Jewelry | 4 | December 10th 07 11:11 AM |
AD: Black Cat Beads - Pre Vacation SALE - Bali Silver 35% OFF and More! | Nicole @ Black Cat Beads | Beads | 0 | July 22nd 05 01:39 AM |
Silver Black and Durability | Ed | Jewelry | 1 | May 4th 04 08:06 AM |
sterling silver vs. 14k white gold | porkchops | Jewelry | 6 | April 14th 04 02:41 AM |
casting-black silver | Marion Margoshes | Jewelry | 9 | December 18th 03 02:36 AM |