• 圣淘沙名胜世界(新加坡)

    Past human stone tool performance: experiments to test the influence of raw material variability and edge angle design on tool function

    Walter Gneisinger, Lisa Schunk, Ivan Calandra, Joao Marreiros, Anja Cramer

    Published: 2023-07-12 DOI: 10.17504/protocols.io.3byl4kr6ovo5/v1
    AI 解读
    浏览 1530

    Abstract

    The goal of this sequential experiment was to test tool performance of Late Middle Palaeolithic Keilmesser by examining two relevant characteristics concerning their edge design: the raw material and the edge angle.

    To do so, a controlled, mechanical setup was used. The samples and the contact material were standardised to limit the number of confounding factors. As tasks, unidirectional cutting and carving movements were performed. The edge angle values for the experimental standard samples were chosen to reflect the calculated edge angles from the analysed Keilmesser .

    Steps

    Documentation of the archaeological tools

    1.

    The research question behind this here presented experiment is based on archaeological artefacts, so-called Keilmesser from the Late Middle Palaeoltihic. The artefacts are from the sites of Balver Höhle, the Upper site of Buhlen (both Germany) and Grotte de Ramioul (Belgium). For more information about the sites see the following (exemplary) references:

    Citation
    K. Günther 1964 Die altsteinzeitlichen Funde der Balver Höhle, Münster

    Citation
    O. Jöris 2001 Der spätmittelpaläolithische Fundplatz Buhlen (Grabungen 1966-69): Stratigraphie, Steinartefakte und Fauna des oberen Fundplatzes Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie 73, Bonn

    Citation
    M. Ulrix-Closset 1979 Le paleolithique moyen dans le bassin mosan en Belgique, Liege

    1.1.

    3D scanning

    In total 175N Keilmesser were analysed and scanned with an AICON smartScan-HE R8 from the manufacturer Hexagon (software version OptoCat 2018R1). The S-150 FOV (field of view) used has a point-to-point distance of 33 µm.

    Equipment

    ValueLabel
    smartScan-HE R8NAME
    3D structured light scannerTYPE
    AICONBRAND
    -SKU
    S-150 FOV, resolution of 33 µmSPECIFICATIONS

    Software

    ValueLabel
    OptoCatNAME
    Hexagon Manufacturing Intelligence SoftwareDEVELOPER
    2018R1VERSION

    The scanning settings are identical to the following protocol, and details can be found there:

    Enhancing lithic analysis: Introducing 3D-EdgeAngle as a semi-automated 3D digital method to systematically quantify stone tool edge angle and design

    The editing steps to create a closed 3D model are also the same as in the protocol mentioned above and were executed with GOM inspect, a free software for 3D measurement data.

    Software

    ValueLabel
    GOM InspectNAME
    Hotfix 2, Rev. 111729, build 2018-08-22OS_NAME
    GOMDEVELOPER
    http://www.gom.com/de-de/produkte/gom-inspect-suiteLINK
    2018VERSION
    1.2.

    Edge angle calculation

    The edge angle measurements on the 3D models of the Keilmesser were taken with 3D-EdgeAngle . For details about the method see (publication of the forthcoming paper):

    Enhancing lithic analysis: Introducing 3D-EdgeAngle as a semi-automated 3D digital method to systematically quantify stone tool edge angle and design

    For calculating the edge angles, the following parameters were applied:

    • "2-lines" measuring procedure
    • the length of the line was defined with 2 mm
    • 10 mm as distance to the intersection
    • only sections two to eight were used

    Mean values were calculated in R, a free software and programming language for statistical computing and graphics.

    Software

    ValueLabel
    R Studio DesktopNAME
    The R Studio, Inc.DEVELOPER
    http://www.rstudio.com/products/RStudio/LINK
    1.1.463VERSION

    See "analysis_EA_Keilmesser" within the following repository on GitHub:

    http://github.com/lschunk/PastHuman_StoneToolPerformance.git

    Or in open access on Zenodo:

    http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7564605

    Sample preparation

    2.

    Standardised tools

    24 experimental standard samples were produced for the experiment:

    6 x 35°

    6 x 35°

    6 x 45°

    6 x 45°

    2.1.

    Raw material

    Baltic flint:

    Southern Sweden (secondary deposit):

    55.945852 N, 12.767851 E

    Silicified schist:

    Balver Höhle

    51.339167 N, 7.871944 E

    Buhlen

    51.191022 N, 9.086585 E

    Note
    In this experimental context, silicified schist is termed lydite . The experimental samples are labeled LYDIT x-x (lydite in German = Lydit). Experimental flint samples are labeled FLT x-x. The first number identifies the nodule and the second number identifies the blade cut from the nodule.

    2.2.

    Blanks

    Raw material nodules/ blocks (step #2.1) were first cut into rectangular cuboids (blanks) of the following dimensions:

    10mm

    25mm

    60mm

    Equipment

    ValueLabel
    Goliath 450NAME
    Lapidary rock sawTYPE
    Steinschleifmaschinen & Lapidary tools Ltd.BRAND
    -SKU
    -SPECIFICATIONS

    a) cut 10mm slices

    Cutting slice (here: flint).
    Cutting slice (here: flint).
    Cutting slice, with safety cover lifted for photo (here: flint).
    Cutting slice, with safety cover lifted for photo (here: flint).
    Cut to provide level surface, photo with safety cover lifted (here: flint).
    Cut to provide level surface, photo with safety cover lifted (here: flint).
    Slice, side view (here: flint).
    Slice, side view (here: flint).
    Slice, top view (here: flint).
    Slice, top view (here: flint).

    b) cut slices into blanks

    Blank, top view (here: flint).
    Blank, top view (here: flint).
    Blank, lateral view (here: flint).
    Blank, lateral view (here: flint).
    2.3.

    Hardness measurement

    The hardness of the blanks (step #2.2) was measured with a Leeb rebound hardness tester.

    Equipment

    ValueLabel
    Equotip 550NAME
    Portable hardness testerTYPE
    ProceqBRAND
    -SKU
    Leeb C probeSPECIFICATIONS

    The blanks were placed on a stable base of sufficient mass (here a polished granite slab of about 20kg). Since the samples did not fulfill the requirements for minimum sample size and weight, coupling paste was used between the sample and the base. Each blank was measured ten times to insure and test intra-blank variability.

    Setup for measuring Leeb rebound hardness with the devices/components labeled.
    Setup for measuring Leeb rebound hardness with the devices/components labeled.
    Measuring Leeb rebound hardness.
    Measuring Leeb rebound hardness.
    2.4.

    Edge angle

    One end of the blanks (step #2.2) was cut to produce samples with a 35° / 45° , with the following dimensions:

    10mm

    25mm

    30mm

    Equipment

    ValueLabel
    310 CPNAME
    Diamond band sawTYPE
    ExactBRAND
    -SKU
    Cutting the edge angle.
    Cutting the edge angle.
    Positioning blank, close-up (here: flint).
    Positioning blank, close-up (here: flint).
    Cutting the edge angle, close-up (here: flint).
    Cutting the edge angle, close-up (here: flint).

    <img src="http://static.wappv.com/literature_test/protocol_io_true/protocols.io.3byl4kr6ovo5/duehbgyf7" alt="Experimental standard sample without chamfered edge, view of side A (corresponding to the "dorsal" side of bifacial lithic artefact; here: flint)." loading="lazy" title="Experimental standard sample without chamfered edge, view of side A (corresponding to the "dorsal" side of bifacial lithic artefact; here: flint)."/>

    <img src="http://static.wappv.com/literature_test/protocol_io_true/protocols.io.3byl4kr6ovo5/duejbgyf7" alt="Experimental standard sample without chamfered edge, view of side D (corresponding to the "lateral" side of bifacial lithic artefact; here: flint)." loading="lazy" title="Experimental standard sample without chamfered edge, view of side D (corresponding to the "lateral" side of bifacial lithic artefact; here: flint)."/>

    2.5.

    Chamfered edge

    To avoid catastrophic breakage of the edge during experiments, the leading edge of the experimental standard samples (step #2.4) was chamfered to a 45° (see #2.6 for photos).

    Equipment

    ValueLabel
    310 CPNAME
    Diamond band sawTYPE
    ExactBRAND
    -SKU
    Cutting chamfered edge (here: flint).
    Cutting chamfered edge (here: flint).

    The cut with the band saw left a small burr between the two adjacent surfaces at the edge of the chamfered surface and the lateral side D. This burr was manually removed with a diamond drill bit in a mini drill.

    2.6.

    Coordinate system

    Three ceramic beads were adhered onto each side of the cutting edge to provide a coordinate system on each side.

    <img src="http://static.wappv.com/literature_test/protocol_io_true/protocols.io.3byl4kr6ovo5/dyfcbgyf7" alt="Final experimental standard sample with beads, view of side A (corresponding to the "dorsal" side of bifacial lithic artefact; here: flint)." loading="lazy" title="Final experimental standard sample with beads, view of side A (corresponding to the "dorsal" side of bifacial lithic artefact; here: flint)."/>

    <img src="http://static.wappv.com/literature_test/protocol_io_true/protocols.io.3byl4kr6ovo5/dye4bgyf7" alt="Final experimental standard sample with beads, view of side C (corresponding to the "ventral" side of bifacial lithic artefact; here: flint)." loading="lazy" title="Final experimental standard sample with beads, view of side C (corresponding to the "ventral" side of bifacial lithic artefact; here: flint)."/>

    For details, see:

    Citation
    Calandra I, Schunk L, Rodriguez A, Gneisinger W, Pedergnana A, Paixao E, Pereira T, Iovita R & Marreiros J. 2019 Back to the edge: relative coordinate system for use-wear analysis Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences http://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-019-00801-y

    2.7.

    Summary of the standard sample production

    Standard sample production. The rock nodules (left; here Baltic flint) are cut into blanks (middle; step #2.2) with a Lapidary rock saw. A diamond band saw was used to cut the blank to create a typical standard sample with a defined edge angle (step #2.4) and a 45° chamfered edge (right, step #2.5). Highlighted are the three beads used as coordinate system (step #2.6).
    Standard sample production. The rock nodules (left; here Baltic flint) are cut into blanks (middle; step #2.2) with a Lapidary rock saw. A diamond band saw was used to cut the blank to create a typical standard sample with a defined edge angle (step #2.4) and a 45° chamfered edge (right, step #2.5). Highlighted are the three beads used as coordinate system (step #2.6).
    2.8.

    Cleaning

    100mL

    1Mass / % volume

    Equipment

    ValueLabel
    Sonorex Digitec DT255HNAME
    Heated ultrasonic bathTYPE
    BandelinBRAND
    -SKU
    4.5 LSPECIFICATIONS

    40°C

    0h 5m 0s

    Contact material

    3.

    Standardised contact material

    Three synthetic bone plates with the following dimensions were used as contact material:

    250mm

    250mm

    6mm

    75%

    Artificial bone plate.
    Artificial bone plate.

    Mechanical device

    4.

    General settings

    Linear unidirectional movements (cutting & carving): 2000strokes split in 4cycles .

    The cycles are defined by the following number of strokes:

    1strokes to 50strokes

    51strokes to 250strokes

    251strokes to 1000strokes

    1001strokes to 2000strokes

    5.

    Experimental setup

    Equipment

    ValueLabel
    SMARTTESTERNAME
    Modular material testerTYPE
    Inotec APBRAND
    -SKU
    recorded values with the time stamps: - for each drive: position, speed, acceleration (+ deceleration) - penetration depth with distance sensor - apllied force with force sensor 1 (strain gauge sensor) - friction with force sensor 2 (strain gauge sensor)SPECIFICATIONS

    Linear movement from start point to end point:

    5kg (= ~ 50 N)

    170mm

    600mm/s

    4000mm/s2

    10Hz (for each channel)

    Experimental design.
    Experimental design.
    5.1.

    Setup sample holder

    The length of the spring of the sample holder was adjusted to compensate for the weight of the sample holder (without dead weights and sample).

    Adjust the position of the upper end of the spring on the rail, so that:

    1. the sample holder almost touches the frame, and
    2. at the same time, there should be no pull from the spring onto the sample holder.
    Zeroing sample holder.
    Zeroing sample holder.
    5.2.

    Setup sample

    The experimental standard sample (step #2) was clamped in the sample holder (SMARTTESTER) and manually oriented in all directions.

    a) cutting movement

     the active edge was parallel to the contact material and the blade is mounted perpendicular to it 
    

    (90° )

    Sample FLT8-2 set up above bone plate, ready for the cutting experiment.
    Sample FLT8-2 set up above bone plate, ready for the cutting experiment.

    b) carving movement

     the active edge was orientated in a flat angle towards the contact material (`20°` ) 
    
    Sample LYDIT5-13 set up above bone plate, ready for the carving experiment.
    Sample LYDIT5-13 set up above bone plate, ready for the carving experiment.
    5.3.

    Setup contact material

    The bone plates (step #3) were clamped in a custom-made sample holder and fixed with a screw in the middle of the bone plate (see photos in step #5.2).

    The plate was aligned with the X-axis.

    5.4.

    Program cutting and carving movement

    The program is identical for cutting and carving. For each sample, a new template was created (named with the sample ID and the stroke number).

    a) Move down in Z-direction to start position

    The z-value of the starting point was defined as follows: the sample holder on the z-drive was moved down slowly until the edge of the sample was in contact with the bone plate. 5 mm were added to the position of the z-drive in order to give the sample the possibility to penetrate into the bone plate without cutting through the 6mm-thick bone plate.

    b) Move forward in X-direction 170mm (linear movement)

    c) Move up in Z-direction approx. 20mm (above bone plate; no contact between contact material and sample)

    d) Move backwards in X-direction to starting point

    e) Loop 50 times over steps #5.4a-5.4d and export data to CSV

    f) Loop 200 times over steps #5.4a-5.4d and export data to CSV

    g) Loop 750 times over steps #5.4a-5.4d and export data to CSV

    h) Loop 1000 times over steps #5.4a-5.4d and export data to CSV

    The experiment was planned as a sequential experiment. The 2000 strokes were therefore split into four sequences (steps #5.4e-h). The experimental standard samples were documented after each sequence (step #6).

    For each sequence, five CSV files were exported, one for each recorded channel:

    • Penetration depth as measured by the distance sensor in the sample holder.
    • Force applied (Z-direction) as measured by the force sensor in the sample holder.
    • Friction as measured by the force sensor on the stage for the contact material.
    • Position of the X-drive (travel range).
    • Velocity of the X-drive.
    Program as seen in the GUI. Blue = sensors, red = actuators (drives) and green = control flow elements.
    Program as seen in the GUI. Blue = sensors, red = actuators (drives) and green = control flow elements.

    Program for sample FLT8-1 as example:

    FLT8-1_cutting_template.Smart

    5.5.

    Run program

    Each sample was used for a duration of ~ 7h 0m 0s (= running time SMARTTESTER)

    The following samples were used for the experiment:

    Cutting 35° edge angle:

    FLT8-4

    FLT8-5

    FLT8-6

    LYDIT5-5

    LYDIT5-6

    LYDIT5-7

    Cutting 45° edge angle:

    FLT8-1

    FLT8-2

    FLT8-3

    LYDIT5-2

    LYDIT5-3

    LYDIT5-4

    Carving 35° edge angle:

    FLT8-7

    FLT8-8

    FLT8-9

    LYDIT5-11

    LYDIT5-12

    LYDIT5-13

    Carving 45° edge angle:

    FLT8-10

    FLT8-11

    FLT8-12

    LYDIT5-8

    LYDIT5-9

    LYDIT5-10

    Documentation

    6.

    Sample documentation

    Before the experiment as well as after each cycle all 24 samples were documented in an identical way following these steps:

    • cleaning with tap water and commercial washing up liquid
    • weight measurement (threefold repetition)

    Equipment

    ValueLabel
    Kern PCB 3500.2NAME
    weighing scaleTYPE
    KernBRAND
    -SKU
    accuracy of 0.1gSPECIFICATIONS
    • 3D scanning of all samples (identical settings for all scans; step #1.1)
    • based on the 3D models, the volume of each sample could be calculated

    Equipment

    ValueLabel
    smartScan-HE R8NAME
    3D structured light scannerTYPE
    AICONBRAND
    -SKU
    S-150 FOV, resolution of 33 µmSPECIFICATIONS
    • 3D scanning of the contact material (only before and after 2000 strokes)

    Equipment

    ValueLabel
    smartScan-HE R8NAME
    3D structured light scannerTYPE
    AICONBRAND
    -SKU
    M-450 FOV, resolution of 108 µmSPECIFICATIONS
    • optical documentation of three of the four surfaces per sample (one lateral and the two main surfaces)

    Equipment

    ValueLabel
    Smartzoom 5NAME
    digital microscopeTYPE
    ZeissBRAND
    -SKU
    PlanApo D 1.6x/0.10 objective; EDF-stitched imagesSPECIFICATIONS
    • cleaning the area of interest with a cotton bud with
    • cleaning the area of interest with a cotton bud with
    • moulding of the two main sample surfaces with
     Moulding of one of the two surfaces (here: flint).
    Moulding of one of the two surfaces (here: flint).

    Data acquisition

    7.

    After conducting the experiment and the final documentation of all experimental standard samples, further data was acquired:

    • the edge angles of the samples
    • the depth and width of the cuts and scratches on the artificial bone plate
    7.1.

    Edge angle of the experimental standard samples

    The 3D models (samples + contact material) were imported as STL files into GOM Inspect and existing mesh holes were closed. 3D models were edited as described in the previously mentioned protocol:

    Enhancing lithic analysis: Introducing 3D-EdgeAngle as a semi-automated 3D digital method to systematically quantify stone tool edge angle and design

    Software

    ValueLabel
    GOM InspectNAME
    Hotfix 2, Rev. 111729, build 2018-08-22OS_NAME
    GOMDEVELOPER
    http://www.gom.com/de-de/produkte/gom-inspect-suiteLINK
    2019VERSION

    Based on the closed models, the volume could be calculated.

    Additionally, the edge angles of the samples after each cycle were calculated by means of GOM Inspect. To calculate the edge angle, 3D-EdgeAngle was applied again as for the archaeological artefacts (see step #1.2). Note that the parameters changed slightly ('3-points" instead of "2-lines" measuring procedure), since the "3-points" measuring procedure seems to be more suitable for simple morphologies as represented by the standard samples.

    The following parameters were applied:

    • "3-points" measuring procedure
    • length of the line was defined with 2 mm
    • as distance to the intersection the mean for distance three to six was calculated
    • only sections two to eight were used
    7.2.

    Penetration depth / dimensions of the grooves on the contact material

    In addition, the contact material was documented with a Sensofar S-wide (Sensofar Metrology, Spain), a 3D optical metrology system. This way, the cuts and the scratches on the bone plate could be quantified.

    Equipment

    ValueLabel
    S wideNAME
    3D optical metrology systemTYPE
    SensofarBRAND
    -SKU
    • each bone plate was documented in four quadrants due to the limited travel range of the stage
    Acquisition settings used with the Sensfar S-wide.
    Acquisition settings used with the Sensfar S-wide.

    The data was processed in ConfoMap (a derivative of MountainsMap Imaging Topography developed by Digital Surf, Besançon, France; version ST 8.1.9286).

    Software

    ValueLabel
    ConfoMap (MountainsMap Imaging Tophography)NAME
    Digital Surf, Besançon, FranceDEVELOPER
    http://www.digitalsurf.com/de/LINK
    ST 8.1.9286VERSION

    In total, two templates were used:

    a) "Patch surfaces of the bone plates acquired with the Sensofar S-wide"

    An initial template was needed to patch the single quadrants together, so that the grooves are complete again. This involves levelling and aligning. Afterwards, each groove can be exported individually.

    BP-I-TFE_S-wide_cutting_2000strokes_20210803_A-B.pdf

    b) "Processing on single grooves"

    This template extracts the topography layer of the grooves and calculates a mean profile of a series of 30 profiles. After levelling the mean profiles, the height and the width of each groove can be calculated.

    BP-I-TFE_S-wide_cutting_2000strokes_20210803_FLT8-1_45deg.pdf

    The ConfoMap templates for each surface in MNT and PDF formats are available in open access on Zenodo (http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7565158). This also includes all original and processed surfaces.

    Data analysis

    8.

    Data analysis

    The data acquired within the experiment was analysed in R.

    Software

    ValueLabel
    R Studio DesktopNAME
    The R Studio, Inc.DEVELOPER
    http://www.rstudio.com/products/RStudio/LINK
    1.1.463VERSION

    The different datasets were split in separate analyses:

    a) "analysis_HLC"

    This R script imports and plots the Leeb rebound hardness data acquired on the experimental standard samples (see step #2.3).

    b) "analysis_EA"

    This R script deals with the calculated edge angles from the experimental standard samples (see step #7.1).

    c) "analysis_ST.all_sensors"

    These R scripts contain the analysis of the data acquired with the five sensors connected to the SMARTTESTER (see step #5.4). However, plots concern only the data from the penetration depth.

    d) "analysis_S.wide"

    These R scripts deal with the penetration depth of the experimental standard samples into the contact material. The penetration depth is already part of "analysis_ST.all_sensors", but was additionally calculated with a Sensofar S-wide (see step #7.2).

    e) "analysis_VW"

    This R script contains the volume and the weight measurements for all experimental standard samples from before and after the experiment (see step #6).

    The entire repository with all R analyses can be found on GitHub:

    http://github.com/lschunk/PastHuman_StoneToolPerformance.git

    and on Zenodo:

    http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7564605

    8.1.

    Results

    Available in open access on Zenodo:

    http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7564605

    推荐阅读

    Nature Protocols
    Protocols IO
    Current Protocols
    扫码咨询