Controlled comparative tensile tests of backed versus non‐backed edges’ adhesion: Inferences into stone tool functional properties

IF 1.5 3区 地球科学 0 ARCHAEOLOGY
Archaeometry Pub Date : 2024-08-16 DOI:10.1111/arcm.13025
Michael Wilson, Briggs Buchanan, Michael Fisch, Michelle R. Bebber, Metin I. Eren, Justin Pargeter
{"title":"Controlled comparative tensile tests of backed versus non‐backed edges’ adhesion: Inferences into stone tool functional properties","authors":"Michael Wilson, Briggs Buchanan, Michael Fisch, Michelle R. Bebber, Metin I. Eren, Justin Pargeter","doi":"10.1111/arcm.13025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Backing is a procedure for retouching a stone tool edge to an angle of or near 90°. Archaeologists have recorded backed lithic specimens in the Pleistocene and Holocene around the world. One prominent hypothesis for the occurrence of backing is that it increases a stone tool's adhesion relative to what it would have otherwise been with unmodified, sharp edges. We conducted a highly controlled semi‐static tensile test in which we assessed lithic specimens that possessed both a backed and a non‐backed edge, opposing each other. We hafted each specimen's backed and non‐backed edges to wood, and the bi‐hafted stone implement was then pulled apart using an Universal Instron Materials Tester, allowing for a direct ‘head‐to‐head’ comparison of the two edge types’ adhesive properties. Our tensile test results suggested no significant difference between backed and non‐backed edges in terms of adhesion, which does not support the hypothesis that backing increases a lithic specimen's adhesion.","PeriodicalId":8254,"journal":{"name":"Archaeometry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archaeometry","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/arcm.13025","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Backing is a procedure for retouching a stone tool edge to an angle of or near 90°. Archaeologists have recorded backed lithic specimens in the Pleistocene and Holocene around the world. One prominent hypothesis for the occurrence of backing is that it increases a stone tool's adhesion relative to what it would have otherwise been with unmodified, sharp edges. We conducted a highly controlled semi‐static tensile test in which we assessed lithic specimens that possessed both a backed and a non‐backed edge, opposing each other. We hafted each specimen's backed and non‐backed edges to wood, and the bi‐hafted stone implement was then pulled apart using an Universal Instron Materials Tester, allowing for a direct ‘head‐to‐head’ comparison of the two edge types’ adhesive properties. Our tensile test results suggested no significant difference between backed and non‐backed edges in terms of adhesion, which does not support the hypothesis that backing increases a lithic specimen's adhesion.
有衬底与无衬底边缘附着力的受控比较拉伸试验:石器功能特性的推论
倒角是一种将石器边缘修饰成 90° 或接近 90° 角的程序。考古学家在世界各地的更新世和全新世都发现了有背衬的石器标本。出现背斜的一个主要假设是,相对于未经修饰的锋利边缘,背斜增加了石器的附着力。我们进行了一项高度受控的半静态拉伸试验,评估了同时拥有背衬边和无背衬边且相互对立的石器标本。我们将每个试样的有背边缘和无背边缘固定在木头上,然后使用通用的 Instron 材料测试仪将双柄石器拉开,这样就可以直接 "正面 "比较两种边缘类型的粘合特性。拉伸测试结果表明,有背衬和无背衬的边缘在粘附性方面没有明显差异,这并不支持有背衬会增加石器样本粘附性的假设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Archaeometry
Archaeometry 地学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
105
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Archaeometry is an international research journal covering the application of the physical and biological sciences to archaeology, anthropology and art history. Topics covered include dating methods, artifact studies, mathematical methods, remote sensing techniques, conservation science, environmental reconstruction, biological anthropology and archaeological theory. Papers are expected to have a clear archaeological, anthropological or art historical context, be of the highest scientific standards, and to present data of international relevance. The journal is published on behalf of the Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, Oxford University, in association with Gesellschaft für Naturwissenschaftliche Archäologie, ARCHAEOMETRIE, the Society for Archaeological Sciences (SAS), and Associazione Italian di Archeometria.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信