Additional file 1 of Exploring the inner hygro-mechanical behaviour of historical panel paintings: a novel approach using digital twins
Creators: name: Lorenzo, Riparbelli
name: Paola, Mazzanti
name: Thomas, Helfer
name: Chiara, Manfriani
name: Luca, Uzielli
name: Ciro, Castelli
name: Andrea, Santacesaria
name: Luciano, Ricciardi
name: Sandra, Rossi
name: Joseph, Gril
name: Marco, Fioravanti
Publisher: name: figshare
Year: 2024
Subjects: subject: Biophysics
subject: Medicine
subject: Ecology
subject: FOS: Biological sciences
subject: Sociology
subject: FOS: Sociology
subject: Biological Sciences not elsewhere classified
subject: Science Policy

description: Additional file 1: Figure S1. Test 1 -Results in terms of Moisture content, stresses and strains in the plane of the panel perpendicular to the grain in the cross section for the panel with and without the crossbeams, and the difference in stress and strains between the two states. As the gradient of moisture content in the thickness of the panel is the driver of the phenomenon it is repeated two times in the first row to assure to the reader a vertical respondence on both columns and the fact that the distribution of moisture is exactly the same at each timestep for both cases with and without crossbeams. Figure S2. Test 2 -Results in terms of Moisture content, stresses and strains in the plane of the panel perpendicular to the grain in the cross section for the panel with and without the crossbeams, and the difference in stress and strains between the two states. As the gradient of moisture content in the thickness of the panel is the driver of the phenomenon it is repeated two times in the first row to assure to the reader a vertical respondence on both columns and the fact that the distribution of moisture is exactly the same at each timestep for both cases with and without crossbeams. Figure S3. Test 3 -Results in terms of Moisture content, stresses and strains in the plane of the panel perpendicular to the grain in the cross section for the panel with and without the crossbeams, and the difference in stress and strains between the two states. As the gradient of moisture content in the thickness of the panel is the driver of the phenomenon it is repeated two times in the first row to assure to the reader a vertical respondence on both columns and the fact that the distribution of moisture is exactly the same at each timestep for both cases with and without crossbeams. Figure S4. Test 4 -Results in terms of Moisture content, stresses and strains in the plane of the panel perpendicular to the grain in the cross section for the panel with and without the crossbeams, and the difference in stress and strains between the two states. As the gradient of moisture content in the thickness of the panel is the driver of the phenomenon it is repeated two times in the first row to assure to the reader a vertical respondence on both columns and the fact that the distribution of moisture is exactly the same at each timestep for both cases with and without crossbeams. Figure S5. Test 5 -Results in terms of Moisture content, stresses and strains in the plane of the panel perpendicular to the grain in the cross section for the panel with and without the crossbeams, and the difference in stress and strains between the two states. As the gradient of moisture content in the thickness of the panel is the driver of the phenomenon it is repeated two times in the first row to assure to the reader a vertical respondence on both columns and the fact that the distribution of moisture is exactly the same at each timestep for both cases with and without crossbeams. Figure S6. Test 6 -Results in terms of Moisture content, stresses and strains in the plane of the panel perpendicular to the grain in the cross section for the panel with and without the crossbeams, and the difference in stress and strains between the two states. As the gradient of moisture content in the thickness of the panel is the driver of the phenomenon it is repeated two times in the first row to assure to the reader a vertical respondence on both columns and the fact that the distribution of moisture is exactly the same at each timestep for both cases with and without crossbeams. Figure S7. Test 7 -Results in terms of Moisture content, stresses and strains in the plane of the panel perpendicular to the grain in the cross section for the panel with and without the crossbeams, and the difference in stress and strains between the two states. As the gradient of moisture content in the thickness of the panel is the driver of the phenomenon it is repeated two times in the first row to assure to the reader a vertical respondence on both columns and the fact that the distribution of moisture is exactly the same at each timestep for both cases with and without crossbeams. Figure S8. Test 8 -Results in terms of Moisture content, stresses and strains in the plane of the panel perpendicular to the grain in the cross section for the panel with and without the crossbeams, and the difference in stress and strains between the two states. As the gradient of moisture content in the thickness of the panel is the driver of the phenomenon it is repeated two times in the first row to assure to the reader a vertical respondence on both columns and the fact that the distribution of moisture is exactly the same at each timestep for both cases with and without crossbeams. Figure S9. Test 9 -Results in terms of Moisture content, stresses and strains in the plane of the panel perpendicular to the grain in the cross section for the panel with and without the crossbeams, and the difference in stress and strains between the two states. As the gradient of moisture content in the thickness of the panel is the driver of the phenomenon it is repeated two times in the first row to assure to the reader a vertical respondence on both columns and the fact that the distribution of moisture is exactly the same at each timestep for both cases with and without crossbeams. Figure S10. Test 10 -Results in terms of Moisture content, stresses and strains in the plane of the panel perpendicular to the grain in the cross section for the panel with and without the crossbeams, and the difference in stress and strains between the two states. As the gradient of moisture content in the thickness of the panel is the driver of the phenomenon it is repeated two times in the first row to assure to the reader a vertical respondence on both columns and the fact that the distribution of moisture is exactly the same at each timestep for both cases with and without crossbeams. Figure S11. Test 11 -Results in terms of Moisture content, stresses and strains in the plane of the panel perpendicular to the grain in the cross section for the panel with and without the crossbeams, and the difference in stress and strains between the two states. As the gradient of moisture content in the thickness of the panel is the driver of the phenomenon it is repeated two times in the first row to assure to the reader a vertical respondence on both columns and the fact that the distribution of moisture is exactly the same at each timestep for both cases with and without crossbeams. Figure S12. Test 12 -Results in terms of Moisture content, stresses and strains in the plane of the panel perpendicular to the grain in the cross section for the panel with and without the crossbeams, and the difference in stress and strains between the two states. As the gradient of moisture content in the thickness of the panel is the driver of the phenomenon it is repeated two times in the first row to assure to the reader a vertical respondence on both columns and the fact that the distribution of moisture is exactly the same at each timestep for both cases with and without crossbeams.