Author Topic: "San Bruno" Spanish cannon cast in 1686  (Read 963 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cannonmn

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3345
"San Bruno" Spanish cannon cast in 1686
« on: September 04, 2008, 03:44:44 AM »
This cannon is displayed outside at the Washington Navy Yard, Washington DC.  It is obviously suffereing from extended exposure to acid rain corrosion.  Fortunately the markings were cast in "high relief" so there's enough left of them so can still read them, although I'm not so sure how much longer we'll able to do that.










 

Offline Double D

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12607
  • SAMCC cannon by Brooks-USA
    • South African Miniature Cannon Club
Re: "San Bruno" Spanish cannon cast in 1686
« Reply #1 on: September 04, 2008, 03:48:25 AM »
John,

you have shown and reported to us a number of these green guns.  What has to be done to clean, restrore and protect these guns?

Offline cannonmn

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3345
Re: "San Bruno" Spanish cannon cast in 1686
« Reply #2 on: September 04, 2008, 05:24:56 AM »
Quote
What has to be done to clean, restrore and protect these guns?

The very best thing is to move them under roof where they are not exposed to rain or direct sunlight.  The bronze guns at Watervliet Arsenal are now mostly inside, and show no evidence of ongoing corrosion.   The interim curator there, Bob Pfeil, told me they were moved inside in the 1950's.  No cleaning nor treatment of any kind was performed at the time.

For guns that must remain outside, what I think will work well and last perhaps 20 years is to do a superficial cleaning, maybe pressure washing with de-ionized water, to get the loose junk off them.  Then ensure they are completely dried out, inside and out, using alcohol and/or heat as required.  Then paint them with ordinary but durable opaque paint, both on the inside and outside.  The paint excludes the three things that can damage the bronze, namely moisture, oxygen, and light (seems to be a catylist for the other bad actors to react.)  The bore could be filled most of the way with some moisture-excluding foam, but that's probably overkill, and would be hard to remove when someone wants to research them thoroughly.  Any conservation measure must be reversible, that's the rule.

I should mention that the professional conservators seem to only recommend hot-applied microcrystalline wax (aka Renaissance Wax) as a coating.  The problem I have with that is that it only lasts about a year then the surface has to be re-cleaned and re-treated.  That's great business for those who are in the business of making their livings from such activity, but way too labor-intensive and expensive for most museums with a lot of cannons, they have to look at this from a "life-cycle cost" viewpoint.  When you do that, nothing will beat ordinary oil-based paint in the color of your choice, for low cost and durability.

The one bronze 4-pounder at the Naval Academy that's been painted since before I got there in 1968 shows no evidence of acid rain corrosion and still has all its marks, most of which are deep enough so you can read them through the paint.  Two French four-pounders at Fort McNair, dating from the 1750's, were painted at some point after I checked them in 1983, and show no evidence of corrosion now.

Photo:  Spanish bronze 4-pounder field gun "San Telesforo" at US Naval Academy, Annapolis MD


Offline cannonmn

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3345
Re: "San Bruno" Spanish cannon cast in 1686
« Reply #3 on: September 05, 2008, 04:01:28 AM »
One thing that has been suggested to me is that since the Navy refuses to take care of their bronze cannons, the various states and municipalities that can claim some previous association with the various objects would probably do a better job. 

A case in point is "San Bruno" pictured earlier in this post.  That gun was captured in California.  California has zero, or nearly zero acid rain of the type that is destroying this priceless relic.  I think if the right officials in California were to make a case to have this piece returned "home" and get their congressional representatives interested, it would happen.

I personally could care less where this relic is displayed as long as it is someplace where it is relatively secure and away from continued corrosion from the atmosphere, direct sunlight, and the acidic bird droppings it is collecting now.

Here's an example of one of the laws that may still be on the books allowing sales of obsolete ordnance:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode10/usc_sec_10_00004684----000-.html