## 3 Results and Discussion
### SEM-EDS Analysis  
SEM investigation permitted to characterize areas with different compositions as well as to explore surfaces, patinas and bright copper stains or minerals accumulation and especially to better identify corrosion products.  
In each area, numerous spectra are acquired as well as qualitative and semi-quantitative EDS analysis. The spectra obtained are a random measurement at one point (casually selected).  
Tables 2 and 3 report the SEM-EDS chemical composition related to iron samples and bronze samples, respectively, expressed as oxides in percentage.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Iron**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**SiO\({}_{2}\)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Al\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Fe\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**MgO**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**CaO**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Na\({}_{2}\)O**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**K\({}_{2}\)O**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**SO\({}_{2}\)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Cl**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**ZnO**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**CuO**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**P\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{5}\)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Tot**} \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{**Cond**} & 1.46 & 4.02 & 81.54 & 0.48 & 1.92 & 1.12 & 0.33 & 0.44 & 0.21 & 1.91 & 0.39 & 6.19 & 100 \\  & 0.64 & 2.52 & 82.71 & 0.48 & 1.65 & 0.97 & 0.22 & 0.25 & 0.23 & 2.07 & 0.42 & 7.84 & 100 \\  & 0.63 & 2.09 & 87.79 & 0.39 & 1.70 & 0.57 & 0.21 & 0.25 & n.d. & 1.57 & 0.30 & 4.52 & 100 \\  & 0.48 & 1.39 & 90.50 & 0.24 & 1.33 & 0.78 & 0.23 & 0.21 & n.d. & 1.12 & n.d. & 3.73 & 100 \\  & 0.46 & 0.63 & 93.49 & 0.24 & 0.92 & 0.39 & 0.12 & 0.17 & n.d. & 1.28 & n.d. & 2.31 & 100 \\  & 3.72 & 0.52 & 84.70 & 0.52 & 2.02 & 0.72 & 0.18 & 0.46 & n.d. & 1.77 & n.d. & 5.38 & 100 \\  & 1.79 & 1.70 & 87.54 & 0.30 & 1.07 & 0.77 & n.d. & 0.17 & 0.17 & 1.58 & 0.88 & 4.02 & 100 \\  & 0.99 & 1.63 & 90.94 & 0.25 & 0.67 & 0.61 & n.d. & 0.11 & n.d. & 1.09 & 0.78 & 2.93 & 100 \\  & 1.04 & 1.07 & 90.22 & 0.34 & 1.04 & 0.73 & n.d. & n.d. & 0.22 & 1.14 & 0.84 & 3.37 & 100 \\  & 0.60 & 7.22 & 89.27 & 0.53 & 0.77 & n.d. & n.d. & 0.13 & 0.13 & n.d. & 0.52 & 0.84 & 100 \\  & 0.20 & n.d. & 94.38 & n.d. & 0.29 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 4.61 & n.d. & n.d. & 0.51 & 100 \\  & 0.18 & n.d. & 98.45 & n.d. & 0.17 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 1.20 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 100 \\  & 0.31 & n.d. & 98.37 & n.d. & 0.25 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 1.07 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 100 \\  & 3.81 & 1.27 & 93.15 & n.d. & 0.63 & n.d. & 0.47 & n.d. & 0.67 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 100 \\  & 0.27 & n.d. & 98.02 & n.d. & 0.75 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 0.97 & 100 \\  & 0.22 & n.d. & 96.49 & n.d. & 1.97 & n.d. & 0.00 & 0.25 & 0.22 & n.d. & n.d. & 0.84 & 100 \\  & 0.34 & n.d. & 97.91 & 0.16 & 0.81 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 0.77 & 100 \\  & 2.09 & 1.99 & 87.49 & 0.33 & 2.87 & n.d. & 0.30 & 0.35 & 0.20 & 0.44 & 0.28 & 3.67 & 100 \\  & 70.40 & 1.19 & 20.47 & 0.20 & 7.50 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 0.24 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 100 \\  & 0.49 & 0.46 & 90.96 & n.d. & 6.87 & n.d. & n.d. & 0.20 & 0.56 & n.d. & n.d. & 0.46 & 100 \\  & 0.73 & 0.61 & 33.81 & 0.98 & 63.47 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 0.39 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 100 \\  & 0.46 & 0.41 & 85.93 & 0.19 & 10.97 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 1.59 & n.d. & n.d. & 0.45 & 100 \\  & 0.56 & n.d. & 41.31 & 0.22 & 57.91 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 100 \\  & 0.19 & n.d. & 96.33 & 0.00 & 0.67 & n.d. & n.d. & n.d. & 0.20 & 0.37 & n.d. & 2.24 & 100 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: SEM-EDS data analysis of all the iron samples analyzed and expressed as oxides in percentage. The second column explains the specific AREA detected in the samples. Samples 8, 10 and 32 were incorporated into the resin and sectioned. n.d. means not detected.