Helen Armstrong, Collections Registrar & Aja Cooper, Conservation Intern, Durham University • Does the use of barcodes have long term conservation implications for collections? • How long can we expect barcodes to last? • What happens to barcodes in disaster situations?

1. Barcodes
A conservation perspective
Helen Armstrong & Aja Cooper

2. Culture Durham

3. Culture Durham Collections
• 58,676 objects ranging in date from
prehistoric artefacts to contemporary arts.
• The collections cover:
– Egypt
– Asia including China, India and Islamic world
– local archaeology
– Architectural collections from UNESCO World
Heritage Site
– Biological specimens
– Western art

4. Archaeology Collections

5. New collections

6. Ready to go?

7. Ready to go?

8. Will barcodes damage my
collections?

9. Will barcodes stay stuck on?

10. What happens to barcodes in a
disaster?

11. Project Outline
• Testing
• Oddy Testing on Barcode Overall, Adhesive, Label,
and Ink
• Solvent Testing on Barcodes
• Adhesion Tests on Oriental Museum Primary Storage
Materials (Correx, Tyvek, Acid Free Card, Card)
• Disaster Planning Tests (Fire and Water)
• Preparation for Integrated Pest Management

12. Oddy Testing Solvent
Testing
Adhesion
Testing
Disaster
Planning
Testing
I.P.M. Testing
Are barcodes
conservation
grade?
What solvents in
museums should
barcodes be kept
away from to retain
legibility?
Is the adhesive of
the barcode reliable
overall? What
stresses / forces
undermine
reliability?
Can barcodes be
expected to survive
a disaster and
remedial recovery
within 48 hours?
What pests are
most likely to target
barcodes as a food
source?
Would one aspect
of a barcode
degrade / off gas /
more than another?
Would solvents that
alter barcodes affect
what collections
they are associated
with?
Is there a storage
material barcodes
adhere to best?
How will barcodes
withstand severe
disasters especially
(fire and/or flood;
partial or complete
damage?)
If yes, can the
target food source
be identified
through
experiment?
If change is
observed during
test, what material
type should be
avoided?
What are the
solubility
parameters of the
ink on the barcode?
(TEAS testing)
Testing routine
adhesion failure -
Would an additional
barrier be required?
Will the survivability
of the barcode
depend on the
material it is
adhered to?
Concerns for pest
monitoring over
time?
/ /
If so, what
additional adhesive
barrier should be
used?
Would barcode
condition
compromise
emergency salvage
responses?
Is a pest prevention
strategy necessary?

13. Results
Oddy Testing
on Barcode
Label and
Ink
Control Sample
on Right*
Solvent
Testing

14. Adhesion
Testing
Correx and Tyvek
most compatible
substrate; strongest
adhesive bond.
All base materials
used acceptable to
host barcodes.
Routine adhesion
failure if barcode is
intentionally
removed and
reapplied ~ five
times minimum.
More tests
required to
provide a reliable
timeline for
adhesion.
Disaster
Planning
Testing
WATER DAMAGE (48
HRS)
-No change following
immersion for 48 hrs, even
after intentional disruption.
FIRE DAMAGE (<15
MINUTES)
-Controlled burning from all
four corners unless fire
compromised label
L – R : Correx, Acid Free Card, Card, Tyvek

15. Oddy Testing
RESULTS
Solvent
Testing
RESULTS
Adhesion
Testing
RESULTS
Disaster
Planning
Testing
RESULTS
I.P.M. Testing
RESULTS
(Not included)
Conservation grade In order:
1. Toluene
2.Turpentine
3.Ethanol
4.Acetone
In a best practice
scenario (minimal
handling,
environmentally
controlled setting) –
yes, barcode is reliable.
Barcode survivability
dependent on severe
disaster type.
Damage over time to
card based storage
materials overall.
Target pests according
to what storage material
barcodes are adhered
to.
Minimal change
recorded – suitable for
long term usability.
No specifications yet
for barcodes
associated with the
Oriental Museum
collection.
Plasticized materials
most compatible with
barcode adhesive –
Correx, Tyvek
Fire – museums can
expect majority damage
to barcode.
Water – museums can
expect minimal damage
to barcode.
Not applicable – tests
should have been done
for mould or bacteria
rather than pests.
No specific object /
material concern for
proximity to barcodes.
Aromatic hydrocarbon
exposure or emissions
should be avoided.
Routine adhesion
failure not expected. -
Barcodes on acid free
card may require
additional barrier.
Barcodes on card may
be recoverable in fires
whereas heat liquefies
plasticized materials
first in a chain reaction,
damaging storage
material and label.
No concern
documented.
Museum or library
archivist tape / label /
sealant?
No change if left
undisturbed,
tape/label/barrier
applied, or freeze dried.
Uncertainty regarding
mould / bacteria
development after 48
hrs.
Inconclusive on
barcode testing alone.

16. • Barcodes and labels are conservation grade.
– Safe for proximity to and variety of objects / collections within the
Oriental Museum.
• Reliable and suitable for long-term usability.
– Best practice – minimal handling of object or barcode transfer; avoid
extreme environmental (RH + temp) fluctuations to safeguard barcode
adhesion.
• Barcode most compatible on plasticized storage materials.
– A secondary barrier needed on card based materials?
• Between disaster and remedial recovery, barcodes should be able to
endure floods / water damage.
– Fire damage dependent on factors like : storage material, placement of
barcode, conditions and extent of fire.
• Pest monitoring tests did not provide fruitful results.
– Testing should have focused on mould and bacteria damage.
• Would have reinforced water damage tests.

17. Please Help Us….
• Maybe we have been worrying about nothing
• Our testing has been limited
• We hope that you may have existing knowledge about
and experience of using barcodes you are willing to
share
• What other questions do you have about barcodes?
We would be very grateful for your thoughts
Thank You