ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURAL

HERITAGE

REPORT Nº 1

CLASS CODE: CIV-320

TOPIC:
Restoration of historic
buildings: conservation principles and structural
assessment. (Pere Roca,2011)

TEACHER: Dr. Rafael Aguilar

MEMBERS: Miguel Gutiérrez Torres 20145895

Ivanna Franccesca Sanchez Carrasco 20145806

Edgar Alexander Vilcamich Muñoz 20160065

Denis Omar Huaman Yactayo 20163084

Antonio Brandon Mizuno Trujillo 20130231

1
 INDEX

1. Introduction: heritage values 3

2. Structure and authenticity 3

3. Aims of structural restoration 5

4. Study of historic structures: phases and activities 5

5. Structural modelling and analysis 5

6. Objectives of the reliability verification 6

7. Possible approaches to structural assessment 6

8. Facing Uncertainties 7

9. Conclusions 7

2
1. Introduction: heritage values

Before starting any process of conservation or restoration of a patrimonial property, it is

necessary to identify the cultural and patrimonial values of our search in order to know how
to approach and respect them. Therefore, any action related to heritage conservation must
be aimed at preserving its authenticity, taking cultural values ​into account. This research is
based on the Nara Document, which talks about cultural diversity and heritage diversity, as
well as values ​and authenticity. This heritage Authenticity is an evaluation based on the Nara
Document on Authenticity, whose purpose is to confirm the value of a cultural asset.
Knowledge and understanding of original characteristics is a key requirement for the
appropriate assessment of all elements of authenticity. Judgments of authenticity are linked
to a variety of tangible or intangible components of any cultural heritage, including shape
and design, materials, use, traditions, techniques, the environment and the spiritual meaning
for people, among other factors.

The Nara Document recognizes that judgments about the authenticity and the values
​attributed to cultural heritage may differ from one culture to another, and even within a single
culture. In other words, each culture has different points of view for its criteria of what
authenticity and conservation of heritage means. Each culture can value a heritage in
different ways, such as China, in which it gives more importance to the type and notion of
construction by craftsmanship than to the preservation of the material; that is, it is more
important that the style or form of construction is maintained than the material used. On the
other hand, there are examples such as the aqueduct of Segovia, in which its value is in the
raw material, because its grandeur and state reflects its history. That is, in this case, more
importance is given to the raw material, which may be due to the difficulty of having built
such structures in previous periods.

2. Structure and authenticity

As part of the cultural heritage, historic structures must be studied and restored in
accordance with general principles of conservation. Preserving the authenticity of the
structure implies respect not only for its material and shape but also for its mechanical
properties and resisting features.

The International Scientific Committee for Analysis and Restoration of Structures of

Architectural Heritage of ICOMOS has recently developed a set of Recommendations for the
Analysis and Restoration of Historic Structure, which have been inspired by the Venice
Charter (1964). These Recommendations are intended to be useful to all those involved in
conservation and restoration problems, but cannot in any way replace specific knowledge
acquired from cultural and scientific texts. In particular, the recommendations state that the
value of a historic building lies not only in the appearance of its individual elements, but
rather think of it as a set and that each element contributes to another element. Therefore,
examples where only the façade of the buildings is maintained instead of making a global
restoration plan, does not meet the conservation criteria

3
Another particular that must be respected are the changes, part of the history, such as
deformations, damage to the structure, etc. as far as they do not jeopardise its adequate
performance. A clear example is the deformation of Hagia Sophia’s dome through time,
which does not have the same original curve due to different landslides, modifications, and
age. Another example is the piers of Kuçuk Aya Sofya Mosque in Istanbul, which present
deformations that are now part of their history. Then, it can be affirmed that the structural
damages of these two examples convey knowledge regarding the functioning of these
structures in the face of the phenomenon of time. As a conclusion, restoration operations
should also respect the architectural features capable of transmitting information on such
intangible cultural values.

A final example of information transmission through heritage elements found in its

construction processes and technologies, which leave holes or joints, layers of mortar,
broken stones as a result. From these samples or architectural expressions, the use of
scaffolding or formwork can be evidenced for its elaboration, which is a clear example of
intangible cultural values. A first example is that of the image (1) that shows an encounter,
which can mean many things such as a construction process in stages or panels, or an
extension. The other image (2) shows holes used to support the original scaffoldings during
construction in Santa Maria del Mar church in Barcelona, ​where it shows the mode of
construction that in many cases we wonder how they built in the past. From this, it can be
seen that our construction technologies are an evolution of the methods used in the past.
Therefore, you should try to maintain this heritage so that future generations can learn about
the past​.

Imagen 1 Imagen 2

4
3. Aims of structural restoration

When it comes out to preserve a structure’s authenticity, the general assumption is to go for
interventions that produce minimal alterations on the heritage. However, regarding an
engineer point of view the restoration of a heritage structure must involve two other
important aims: Ensure the safety of people using or visiting the structure by limiting the risks
and achieve desired protective levels. On the other hand, engineers must avoid
strengthening the heritage structure by incorporating additional elements. In this way,
interventionists elude the loss of cultural value due to alteration of original material and
structural features. Following this idea, any action on a heritage structure such as
maintenance, repairs or strengthening must have a strong methodology to produce minimal
alterations. Indeed, the common process to figure out the optimal solution is by envisaging
multiple alternative resolutions and then choosing the one causing the lesser alteration.

4. Study of historic structures: phases and activities

In order to increase the quality of the study, it is necessary to do a deep history research,
inspection of the structure conditions and a structural analysis approach. In the area of prior
studies executed in the heritage building, interventionists might desire to employ those
previous examinations to achieve a greater characterization from the cultural heritage. For
instance, the further operation might require the collaboration of historians, archaeologists,
architects, among other experts. Later on, this multidisciplinary research should be
integrated during 3 different stages that relates to the inspection and structural analysis
approach: the diagnosis, which aims to identify the causes of the damage and then
characterize the state of conservation of the structure; the safety evaluation, which is
oriented to determine desire levels of structural reliability; and a possible intervention (that
must be purely based on the conclusions derived from 2 previous stages) aims to restore,
repair, maintenance or perform strengthening operations.

5. Structural modelling and analysis

The importance of structural analysis, focused on heritage buildings, focuses on the

validation-prediction processes and repair alternatives based on the results of mathematical
models that try to reflect the behavior of materials and structure.

First, structural analysis models are based on implicit assumptions of specific values ​of the
materials or the behavior of the structure; because the technological capacity of a computer
does not allow a precise development of the real analysis of the building This leads to
processes of validation of the model before being applied, where different experiments are
carried out that compare the prediction of the analytical program and a real structural under
the same conditions. This process is achieved due to instruments with the ability to measure
real parameters of the building with the help of previously studied and regulated tests, such
as the Flat Jack Test. In addition, a historical approach is used regarding this process; that
is, in order to understand the structural behaviors, the prediction of the model should not
move away from the reality of the ancient structure under a certain historical event, such as

5
earthquakes. Finally, after the validation and correct prediction processes, the structural
analysis and the development of the mathematical model focuses on the study of different
alternatives for structural repair and reinforcement. In order to predict what will happen to the
structure before repair or reinforcement actions, a detailed analysis is allowed to accurately
represent the actual behavior in order to choose the best repair solution.

6. Objectives of the reliability verification

Considerations of interventions:

1. The conservation of the structure as a heritage asset, in a respectful and consistent

with its authenticity and cultural value. (Respect original materials to not alter
essence of culture)
2. Ascertaining a sufficient level of structural reliability to ensure an adequate level of
security to people. (Making sure the structure is sound and will not fail when
subjected to loads)
3. When there is an immovable cultural artistic content, ensure that the structure
contributes appropriately to preserve this content in good condition. (Making sure the
art content does not falter by reinforcing nearby elements)

The goal is to find a balance between these 3 objectives, taking into consideration local
cultural values. Need to make sure the highest priority is given to what the local culture
believes is most important before evaluating conservation objectives. It is necessary to avoid
overly cautious or conservative approaches, so any loss of culture value is limited. It is ideal
to avoid changing the composition of the original material in order to maintain the
authenticity of the structure. Try to find ways to reduce the load subjected to the structure if
necessary (limit capacity of visitors). Some damage to the structure can be tolerated if it can
be repaired afterwards, making sure it doesn’t completely fail beforehand.

Cost – Benefit analysis

Benefit means the reduction of structural damage or destruction, while cost is the alteration
of the original structure. Buildings are designed to cost the least money while meeting the
capacity criteria, here it is necessary to consider the least amount of alteration to the
building. Protection of heritage value has higher priority over design standards and codes.
The engineer can ensure the structure is acceptable with lower levels of reliability by limiting
its loading conditions.

7. Possible approaches to structural assessment

Engineers and architects should not be legally obliged to base their decisions solely on the
results of their calculations. Heritage value priority over design standard and codes.

Different approaches to verification:

1. Historical: Full time experiments developed at full geometric and time scales.
(Structure response over history)

6
 2. Comparative: Analyzing the response of similar nearby structures
3. Experimental: Testing the structure in-situ to find its ability to withstand real action
4. Analytical: Analyzing the structure as a model to find its structural capacity

Better when more evidence and approaches are taken into consideration. Results must be
compatible with the historical response of the structure.

8. Facing Uncertainties
There are significant uncertainties due to unavoidable constraints in data collection and the
methods of analysis applied. These uncertainties are very important because they always
affect the validity of the conclusions.On the one hand, we can find the uncertainties due to
unavoidable constraints in data in many factors such as the heterogeneity of the materials,
the complexity of the construction details, the real level of material deterioration, etcetera.
On the other hand, we can find limitations of the methods for structural analysis because of
the simplifications and assumptions. Structural Model is an example of both of these
constraints. It is based on a certain amount of data, it is validated by comparing its
predictions with empirical evidence provided by historical research, inspection and
monitoring. This model is important to simulate the behaviour of the structure under
conditions for which its response is known.

Furthermore, there are other useful experiments such as dynamic tests or in-situ stress
measurements. These experiments are also used by comparison with experimental results.
If it is a satisfactory comparison then it can lead to consider the model validated to some
extent. However, validation is always partial because the model may not be adequate for
certain purposes. In some sense, the use of the model for predictive purposes always to
transcend the limits of the validation. Finally, the ICOMOS/ISCARSAH recommends to
develop an explanatory report, in connection with any historical study , with a critical analysis
and a detailed discussion of the results. So, it is important to have a better report in order to
prioritize potential uncertainties and can have reliability of the data and assumptions
considered.

9. Conclusions
Heritage structures commemorate humanity history in themselves and must therefore be
preserved and recognized as a cultural heritage place by the local and global community.
Indeed, any action on patrimonial structures must be based on a deep knowledge of the
characteristics of the structure and its possible problems. This knowledge can be obtained
by combining both qualitative and quantitative activities or approaches, including historical
research, inspection, monitoring and structural analysis. Thus, the comprehension of those
features needs to be integrated in all the stages of the study as the diagnosis, the verification
of the reliability of the structure and the design of the intervention. In the reliability check
area, this uncertainty can be partially offset by considering historical and comparative
approaches in combination with structural analysis. Monitoring also offers interesting
possibilities for evaluating the structural response before, during and after a possible
intervention.