Heritage Concrete in Buildings - Research Proposal Example

Heritage Concrete in Buildings Course Tutor Date Introduction Concrete buildings present a large section of the invaluable national heritage in the United Kingdom. The social science studies have taken a huge turn on the materiality factor that is behind the existence of these monuments of national importance. According to Petursdottir (2012), the study of material culture comes during a time when these buildings require advancement in sustainability and preservation with a purpose of extending their existence. Various researchers have set out to study the restoration processes through which reconstruction, protection and carbonation among others are carried out. The objectives of this study are therefore well laid and thought of based on various previous researches in this line. As such the topical nature of this proposal is biased towards the establishment of the core actions towards ensuring that the heritage concrete buildings are in a plum condition. Research Objectives Based on the introductory remarks above, the specific objectives of this study are as follows: To investigate the physical and chemical parameters that accelerate the effects of weathering on heritage concrete buildings To identify the effects of weathering on the structural strength and physical outlook of heritage concrete buildings. To establish the most effective tools for quantifying damages on heritage concrete buildings. To establish appropriate measures that are undertaken to prevent further physical damages by physical processes such as dead loads and earthquakes. Significance of Research The conservation process that is attached to heritage concrete has elicited multilevel researches with researchers such as Gaudette and Slaton (2007) coming up with an argument that periodical inspection is necessary to ensure proper maintenance measures. This comes at a time when seismic activities have heightened around the world as reported by Rainieri et al. (2013). Rainieri et al. acknowledges the fact that human activities have also increased the desire for extreme preservation, maintenance and management of heritage concrete buildings. Non-destructive measures of inspection have been researched on by Moropoulou et al. (2013) in their article, “Non-destructive techniques as a tool for the protection of built cultural heritage.” They have in particular enlisted technological measures that should be kept in place together with the most recent technological techniques. These include infrared thermography, ultrasonic testing, ground penetrating radar, fibre optic microscopy and image analysis among others. The coverage on these technologies is covered to provide a straight forward system of calibration for the sake of developing a rational manner of making choices. This topic is worth further pursuance since it is evident that the contentiousness that arises when trying to actualise wear and damages is not well understood. Further to this Sorace and Terenzi (2013) in their research titled “Structural assessment of a modern heritage building”, the progress in terms of maintenance and repair has assumed a big stride over time. In their research they noted reinforcement columns, concrete gallery slabs and glazed facades running from gallery to roof. The question elicited by these reinforcements as ways of maintenance and repair is particularly on the load carrying capability of these members owing to Rainieri et al. (2013)’s arguments on increased seismic activities. On the other side, maintaining the authentic nature of the existing frames is checked by carrying out linear and nonlinear analyses of sample members to give a clear picture of the seismic and static safety conditions. The durability issue is also revisited by Gil-Martin et al. (2013) with an interest on the future of heritage structures. The aim is to ensure that whatever is designed at present is not going to pose as a budget hog towards the concerned authorities. Regarding maintenance, they point out that although there were minimum trades that existed during the construction of heritage buildings, importance should be given on utilizing the upcoming technologies on maintenance and repair. The concluding remarks made on this issue is that the mentality of those entrusted for this activity should embrace new modes of repair and maintenance of heritage concrete buildings (Gil-Martin, Gonzalez-Lopez, Grindlay, Segura-Naya, Aschheim, & Hernandez-Montes, 2012). The restoration procedure is also worth noting for the sake of this research since strategy is paramount. It should however be noted that there is a wide gap between restoration and repair in that the two affect the authenticity of a heritage building negatively and positively. According to English Heritage (2013), the restoration process of heritage concrete buildings is aimed at ensuring sustainable conservation of the original fabric and maintaining the building’s appearance. Restoration of the heritage buildings especially on the remedial work is considered by the researchers a costly affair that requires knowledge of the materials to be restored. The point is that effective treatment should be prescribed for the deterioration incurred over time by considering the underlying mechanisms. Feilden (2007) further states that the restoration process should be classified in accordance to their causative mechanisms citing examples such as decay, rusting, and human factors among others. According to Gaudette and Slaton (2007) protection systems are also important as part of the reconstruction technique. Apart from joint sealants and protective coatings they suggest that monitoring inspection systems should be put in place in order to keep heritage concrete in periodical check. Although originality is not guaranteed in a maintenance job, durable elastomeric sealants have been suggested thereby replacing the oil-resin based sealants which have been used for ages. Cathode protection has also been encouraged as a means for corrosion mitigation in heritage concrete buildings. Gaudette and Slaton (2007); Bertolini et al. (2011) are keen to state that that the effects of corrosion are more profound than any other degradation mechanism based on the fact that this weakens a structure of the building immensely. This progressive damage is also blamed for the exterior effects against the building’s aesthetic nature through effects such as cracks, exposure of rebar and rusty spots all over. Gaudette and Slaton (2007) set on a mission to demystify the possibility of having sacrificial anodes embedded on steel as a means of preventing corrosion. Further investigation should be carried out to ascertain the cost implications of this procedure towards the maintenance of heritage concrete buildings. Carbonation has been hailed by Bertolini et al. (2011) who state that the technique is suitable for protection purposes. Carbonation is meant to increase the alkalinity of concrete so as to offer a cathode impression within the reinforcement environment. The query raised by these researchers is the mode of carbonation that should be applied since there is a large drift in the nature of distress and other contributory factors. Cunningham (2013) insists that the level of deterioration be ascertained through procedural chromatography before the carbonation process is initiated for record or evidence purposes. This is because there are too many physical processes that are likely to be looked down upon when undertaking such a vital protection procedure. Research Methodology The research methodology that shall be used shall be designed in a manner that shall engage both primary and secondary sources on a comparative basis to effectively conclude on the objectives enlisted above. The investigative technique that shall be applied for field research shall encompass both destructive and non-destructive technologies for material testing within the laboratories. Samples taken from sites shall be taken to laboratories for testing and analysis in order to establish the mechanical properties of concrete and the effects of external forces as suggested by the objectives. Partially destructive methodologies i.e., Windsor gun penetration and extraction tests shall also be carried out to provide physical data based on the samples corrected. Examples of non-destructive tools that shall be employed for the sake of successful research include endoscopy, thermography, magnometry, ground penetrating radar, electrical potential measurement, sclerometric tests and sonic rebound analysis. Secondary data from research journals and books shall also be used for the purpose of reference and results counterchecking. These shall also aid in shaping the objectives with respect to previous researches and pending leads that are worth exploration. Apart from these, verbal interviews shall be conducted to confirm on some of the underlying facts. Research Schedule This research shall be undertaken within a period of 36 months and shall take the form portrayed by figure 1 below generated in Microsoft Project. Figure 1: Project Schedule. Research Challenges Like any other research, this research does not lack its share of challenges too. To begin with, finding participants for this research may pose as a social or ethical difficulty since most of the monumental areas are busy throughout the year. This may also aggravate the problem to finding the willing institutions to participate since this topic of study is controversial. The ability to detect most of these flaws is requires a technical approach and getting a proper guidance may pose as a challenge too. Lastly, this research may also be marred by minor challenges such as large percentage of travel and dependency on weather. References Bertolini, L., Carsana, M., Gastaldi, M., Lollini, F., & Redaelli, E. (2011). Corrosion assessment and restoration strategies of reinforced concrete buildings of the cultural heritage. Materials and Corrosion , 146-154. Cunningham, A. (2013). Modern Movement Heritage. London: Taylor & Francis. English Heritage. (2013). Practical Building Conservation: Concrete. London: Ashgate Publishing Company. Feilden, B. (2007). Conservation of Historic Buildings. Oxford: Routledge. Gaudette, P. E., & Slaton, D. (2007). Preservation of historic concrete. New York: Government Printing Office. Gil-Martin, L. M., Gonzalez-Lopez, M. J., Grindlay, A. L., Segura-Naya, A., Aschheim, M. A., & Hernandez-Montes, E. (2012). Toward the production of future heritage structures: Considering durability in building performance and sustainability – A philosophical and historical overview. International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment 1 , 269–273. Guida, A., Pagliuca, A., & Minerva, A. T. (2012). A “Non-Invasive” Technique for Qualifying the Reinforced Concrete Structure. International Journal of Geophysics , 1-9. Moropoulou, A., Labropoulos, K. C., Delegou, E. T., Karoglou, M., & Bakolas, A. (2013). Non- destructive techniques as a tool for the protection of built cultural heritage. Construction and Building Materials 48 , 1222 -1239. Petursdottir, P. (2012). Concrete Matters: Ruins of modernity and the things called heritage. Journal of Social Archaeology 13(1) , 31–53. Rainieri, C., Fabbrocino, G., & Verderame, G. M. (2013). Non-destructive characterization and dynamic identification of a modern heritage building for serviceability seismic analyses. NDT&E International 60 , 17-31. Sorace, S. (2013). Structural assessment of a modern heritage building. Engineering Structures 49 , 743 - 755. West, D., & Ellsmore, D. (2011). Challenges in the Conservation, Repair and Re-use of Historic Reinforced Concrete Buildings. Annual Conference: Association for Preservation Technology 2011 (pp. 1-21). Victoria: The Fairmont Empress. Read More