4.6 Article

Differential Stone Decay of the Spanish Tower Facade in Bizerte, Tunisia

期刊

出版社

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001774

关键词

Petrophysics characterization; Stone decay; Nondestructive techniques; Salt crystallization; Durability; Architectural heritage

资金

  1. Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM) [AECID AP/042080/11]
  2. Faculty of Sciences of Bizerte, Tunisia [AECID AP/042080/11]
  3. Rafael Fort
  4. GEOMATERIALES Program [S2009/MAT-1629]
  5. Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)
  6. Adaptability and Employment Program of the European Social Fund (ESF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Spanish Fortress of Bizerte in Tunisia shows differential erosion patterns on the rock ashlars used in the construction of its main facade (sixteenth century) exposed to marine aerosol action and several restoration works. In order to determine the origin of this erosion and the degree of stone decay, a combination of microdestructive and nondestructive techniques have been used on-site and in the laboratory. Moisture measurements, ultrasonic velocity propagation, and water absorption by a Karsten pipe test, together with polarized light and fluorescence optical microscopy, mercury intrusion porosimetry, and ion chromatography analyses, were carried out to perform petrophysical characterization of stone samples and determination of soluble salts. Results show that the differential stone weathering is caused by small variations in the petrographic characteristics of the construction's geomaterials, such as the type and degree of cementation, porous network configuration, and presence or absence of soluble salts. These variations are also detected by the portable nondestructive techniques, showing their analytical sensitivity to small petrophysical changes even in the same type of rock and their performance in predicting future degradations not currently visible on the surface of the rocks. (C) 2016 American Society of Civil Engineers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据