A little notice about RetroBright !

[Merlin]

I knew I would get unpopular by stating this. I started this thread to inform people about the work the National Museum of Denmark is going through to find a preservative for plastic, and found it interesting that they actually tested RetroBright, which I also have used.

As one of the team that created Retr0bright, I would be only too happy to discuss it in a troll-free environment with the guys in Denmark. I'm pretty sure that Terry and Lorne feel the same way too.

It's not about trolling or making unpopular statements; it's making these statements in an unqualified way that does more damage, as it comes across as trolling.

I put the Wiki up in the first place to try and stimulate some scientific interest and maybe take things forward. Unfortunately, I suffered a lot of trolling and cries of 'Heresy!' - it's a wonder I wasn't burned at the stake for witchcraft...

 

[Carrington]

I agree with previous posters who noted that Ms. Shashoua states she's not recommending Retr0bright as a "preservative". Perhaps something is lost in the translation, but I'd think this is different from evaluating it as a "restorative" procedure.

I, for one, still welcome our new non-yellowed plastic overlords.

 

[Ole Juul]

It's not about trolling or making unpopular statements; it's making these statements in an unqualified way that does more damage, as it comes across as trolling.

I missed the trolling so I guess some post(s) must have been deleted.

As one of the team that created Retr0bright, I would be only too happy to discuss it in a troll-free environment with the guys in Denmark. I'm pretty sure that Terry and Lorne feel the same way too.

I am puzzled as to why you don't then engage them in a conversation on the subject. It might be beneficial to all parties and certainly more productive than mentioning it here. Since you are likely the professionals which are referenced in the article, I suspect your e-mail would be most welcome.

In any case, the article in question from the preservation laboratory at the National Museum is for conservators, not collectors. In many cases the museum is involved with things which are many thousands of years old and the requirements, indeed interests, are different from those of a retro gamer or nostalgic vintage collector. Much of their collection is of Viking artefacts and their stone age (and even earlier) collection is treated with considerably more care than the average vintage computer hobbyist wishes to consider.

You can find more related blog entries here.
http://aktuelbevaring.natmus.dk/kategori/plast
Not really great, but works:
http://translate.google.ca/#da|en|

Here is a quick translation of the article. Please excuse the roughness, but I just wanted to get this done as quickly as possible.

If you are interested in old computers, you probably also know that monitors, keyboards and other parts yellow over time. These parts are made of ABS plastic, where ABS stands for "acrylonitrile butadiene styrene." In addition, there are fire retardants added to plastics. These are, among other things the added chemicals which make plastic eventually turn yellow, but other factors such as oxidation are also involved.

It's not everyone who collects old computers that like this discoloration. In 2008, a number of professionals in various fields set out to find a solution to this problem. There was a desire for a treatment which could remove yellowing, but which was also not deleterious to the plastic material. The result was Retro Bright (read more about RetrObright's story here).

Retro Bright is not a commercial product, but a home made gel. The gel is composed of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2 / hydrogen peroxide), xanthan gum (thickening agent), glycerine, and detergents. Hydrogen peroxide is commonly known from hair bleaching products. Detergent is added to the mixture because the substance tetra acetyl ethylene diamine (TAED) serves as a catalyst in the chemical process that takes place when the gel is applied to the yellowed plastic. Retro Bright is not a product recommended by conservators since there are currently no studies available which detail the long term effects.

It should be emphasized that Retro Bright is not something you should begin to experiment with at home in the kitchen without first having taken several precautions. Hydrogen peroxide is corrosive and can cause blindness if you get the solution in your eyes.

This week Yvonne Shashoua and myself have been testing the effects of RetrObright, and whether one can use it to rinse other types of plastic. The selected plastic materials are the ones we've used throughout the POPART (link) project, including polymethylmetakrylat (PMMA), polyvinylchloride (PVC), polyethylene, polystyrene, and cellulose acetate. Because Retro Bright is a mixed product, we decided also to test the pure solutions of hydrogen peroxide and detergents separately.

Our experiments showed that it definitely is not recommendable to use Retro Bright or hydrogen peroxide on the plastics we examined. As can be seen in photographs taken through the microscope, there was an etching of the surface, which was also visible with the naked eye. After the treatment of polymethylmetakrylat (PMMA) with hydrogen peroxide one could see a distinct cracking in the area where the solution had been applied. Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) on the other hand has faded, and the photograph shows how the soapy gel has etched a bubble-like pattern in the material's surface.

(images)
PMMA treated with hydrogen peroxide (25 x magnification)
PVC treated with Retro Bright (25 x magnification)

Although Retro Bright and hydrogen peroxide did not leave visible traces on all the materials we tested, we could nevertheless in all cases note a change in contact angle. This is an additional indication that the material surface tension has been changed as a result of treatment.

 

[Ole Juul]

Since there may be others with an interest in conservation, I'll just share some links.

Conservation Physics has a number of relevant papers on just that subject. Here is an article on How To Keep For A While What You Want To Keep Forever. It is a 9MB pdf.

The reference to POPART in my translation in the previous post should have a link. It is a project for The Preservation of Plastic Artefacts in Museum Collections. I'm not sure how far along they are at this point, but here is a quote:

Objectives

One of the objectives is to establish the risk associated with cleaning and to disseminate the result in fact sheets on ‘How to clean’. It will provide answers to some questions such as:

* How can museum professionals clean solvent- and water-sensitive surfaces without dissolving or changing the surface appearance of the artwork?

* Can water-based cleaning agents be employed effectively?

* Are mechanical cleaning techniques including brush, cloth and vacuum cleaners suitable for plastics?

* How will cleaning affect the longevity of plastics?

The effect of a protective thin coating and consolidation will be evaluated. We will then select a set of typical museum objects that will be used as case studies to illustrate important results of the project: the main typologies of plastic objects and their degradation and conservation issues.

For each item: description of physical conditions, model of condition survey and terminology, results of the polymer analysis as well as deterioration products.

I should also have given the English version of the Museum site. They are much concerned about modern synthetic materials as well as ancient artefacts.

@Merlin: I just realized how difficult it is to find the contact information for researchers at the Museum. Especially if the language is a barrier. Besides, they have a huge staff! Here is the page for Kathrine Segel who wrote the blog entry on RetroBright. It has an e-mail contact on it. Department page and, laboratory page.

 

[Ole Juul]

Well, I don't know how many of you read Danish or how well Google translate mangles the article, but this is what it says:

On ABS plastic, the Retr0Bright process is not recommended because they so far don't know about the long term effects.

On other types of plastic, like PVC, PMMA, polyetylene, polystyrene and cellulose acetate, they observed visual changes on the surface and thus can't recommend the process at all.

Basically, they're saying that a process developed to treat symptom A is not a good idea to use to treat symptom B. Like taking cough medicine against gastric ulcer.

I think you misunderstand what they were doing and why.

The changing of surface characteristics on all the materials they tested is important. If it changes the surface, it's a no-go. The vocabulary they used for this is easily missed. They simply used the term "contact angle" which is a method of using surface tension to gauge a condition. Here is an explanation on their site, and the pictures are fairly self explanatory. They see a degradation of the surface and thus consider it an unsuitable treatment in a situation where you want to preserve an object, which to a conservator would include the surface of that object. All tested materials were altered. This is not a surprise, but a fact which was worth establishing.

What I really objected about the Danish museum is when they try to apply the same process to other kinds of related materials.

I think you missed the fact that the POPART project is the overall endeavour here. I talked about that above, and gave a link, but the museums involved with this plastics conservation research are:
* CNRS
* Victoria & Albert Museum
* Natmus
* IFAC - CNR
* ICN
* PISAS
* ARC-Nucléart
* SolMateS
* Morana RTD d.o.o.
* UCL
* Getty Conservation Institute

All plastics are being investigated and it is no small project. Retro Bright and old computers is a minuscule part of this endeavour. This is not easy to glean from the short blog entry, but it would be assumed by the writer that the reader was a conservator who knows about current affairs in the field. Hopefully my translation above will be a little more understandable than the Google Transtalkerator.

 

[Vifa]

Hi Ole Juul,

Some very useful information, I have to read the 'How To Keep For A While What You Want To Keep Forever' pdf. Seems interesting.

To those who wants to contact the POPART team at the museum, try contact Yvonne Shashoua instead - I wasn't able to get in contact with Kathrine Segel because she was working on another project for a couple of months. Yvonne Shashoua is working on the POPART project too. For contact information, you can PM me.

 

[Alchemo]

Hi,

I'm new in here, Actually I do not collect vintage computer but I collect models and toys, and I found this thread when I was researching for solution to de-yellow some of my figures (made with ABS with some metal screws and springs coil etc.)

I'm still waiting for my Xanthan gum to arrive and am yet to find 12% or more H2O2. So I try out with something I already have, which is 3% H2O2 and some Oxy laundry booster. Meanwhile, I found this sneakers cleaning spray which react with light (product from Japan) in the store so I give it a try with some parts. following are the initial result:



Left-right: 3% H2O2 with Oxi booster, cure under 20A energy saving bulb for 1 hr.
Right-right: Sneakers cleaning spray-brush with tooth brush- rinse - expose 20A energy saving bulb for 2 hrs.

(an identical piece was left untreated in each pair to compare the result and the parts painted red were two-toned to begin with)

The ingredient of this product are: 0.7% sodium alkylsulfonate, agent preventing re-contamination, stabilizing agent and chelating agent (that was what written on the bottle) I think it use some sort of acidic action but as it is meant to be used in sneakers and handle with bare-hand, I suppose it would not be much stronger then H2O2.

Though not as significant as the first one, it is nevertheless an interesting find. I might try both method out again with sunlight this weekend.

Regards,

 

[smp]

Hi,

I think something went wrong with your attachment. Please give it another try - I am interested in seeing your results.

Thanks!
smp

 

[Alchemo]

I had uploaded the photo again.
I hope it will work better with sunlight, will try this weekend.

As the figure I wanted to work on has some painted parts and also some metal parts, it would be a bit tricky to apply.

 

[Chuck(G)]

Which ones in the photo are the untreated pieces? Maybe it's my monitor or your camera, but they all look pretty much the same.

 

[Alchemo]

The right one in both pairs are treated.

The bigger photo may better show the difference. (click)

I think the difference is not obvious because:

1. the original colour is a warm white.
2. I only treated both for a short time and only exposed to fluorescent bulb instead of sunlight.
3. I only used 3% H2O2.
4. It's a phone camera photo (but it is taken under cool white fluorescent bulb)

What is interesting is that the sneaker spray was applied, rinced and then exposed to light, but it still seems to whiten the plastic. I an really curious about the action of this stuff and its effect on the plastic.

 

[Shadow Lord]

There are tests being done on the Yo Joe! toy forums with this solution and it appears that the guy is applying for a patent for it. This method also has no pedigree for how long the results last for.

When he starts selling it, I'm going to get hold of some.

Merlin,

He has a new video that tells how to make the solution:

Any comments from anyone on this solution? Anyone used it?

 

[Chuck(G)]

Well, that pretty much settles it--both are bleaches of a sort. This previous one, chlorine, retr0brite, oxygen. I imagine that other bleaches might be used--say, sodium hypochlorite, sulfur dioxide, etc.

The downside is that I suspect that both damage the parts somewhat--the chlorine more than the oxygen.

 

[Shadow Lord]

Chuck,

I don't mind the bleaching and maybe a small/microscopic damage to the plastic. However, what concerns me is he need for re-application as Tezza has been experiencing. I am wondering if this formula would last longer?

 

[Chuck(G)]

I don't know, but I suspect that both will fade.

 

[ASSEMblergames]

As with all oxidation in plastics it greatly increases the risk of breakage and fracture.

The machine might be nice and white again, but the surface will be weaker and a good knock will crack it.

 

[Chuck(G)]

Really. There are archivist's water-based paints that can make things look good without destroying the plastic. In fact, many plastic cases were paint-over-plastic, so no issues with affecting the substrate.

In the long run, most plastics become brittle with time. As far as I know, there is no permanent fix for that. It's a headache for museum preservation people.

Quality of plastics seems to be all over the place. A Mac monitor that I owned would spontaneously shed bits of itself without even being so much as powered on. Curiously, the cases made of high-density structural foam seem to be doing fine after 35-40 years. Strange stuff--looks like root beer foam; you can staple notes to it, but it's very durable stuff.

 

[ASSEMblergames]

Really. There are archivist's water-based paints that can make things look good without destroying the plastic. In fact, many plastic cases were paint-over-plastic, so no issues with affecting the substrate.

In the long run, most plastics become brittle with time. As far as I know, there is no permanent fix for that. It's a headache for museum preservation people.

Quality of plastics seems to be all over the place. A Mac monitor that I owned would spontaneously shed bits of itself without even being so much as powered on. Curiously, the cases made of high-density structural foam seem to be doing fine after 35-40 years. Strange stuff--looks like root beer foam; you can staple notes to it, but it's very durable stuff.

In 10-15 years we can just print new cases. Once 3d printing is actually good.