Gregerová
M., Department of Mineralogy, Petrology and Geochemistry, Faculty of Science,
Masaryk University, Kotlářská 2, 611 37 Brno, Czech Republic, e-mail: mirka@sci.muni.cz
Pospíšil
P., Department of Geotechnics, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Brno University of
Technology, Veveří 95, 662 37 Brno, Czech Republic, e-mail: pospisil.p@fce.vutbr.cz
Abstract:
The presented
paper summarizes results of historical plasters and mortars research of the
The
relative dating of particular building stages of said churches is based on
micropetrographic identification of the sandy fraction of mortars (in each
stage, a different sand was used) and on the degree of re-crystallization
(ageing) of the original micritic carbonate. The assessment of plasters and
mortars relates to the localization (inner, outer plaster) and the height level
of the sampling site above ground and position of the mortar in the wall
(plaster, bedding mortar). The azimuthal orientation of the sampled wall has
been also documented.
Micropetrographic
analysis of sandy fraction of mortars and plasters, together with the
assessment of the degree of matrix re-crystallization, can in almost 95% cases
confirm or exclude the assumed age of the particular construction phases.
Keywords: plasters, mortars, durability,
degradation, re-crystallization
Many
factors affect ageing of plasters and mortars. Besides the age of the structure
they are composition of mortars and plasters, stage of matrix hardening,
position in the structure, type of building material, climatic conditions,
capillary elevation of ground water, level above ground, azimuthal orientation,
insulation of structure, quality of maintenance, reconstructions, utilization
of object etc.
Decreasing
of quality of outer parts of structure is first result of ageing. Plaster
alters its texture, color, hardness and cohesion with wall construction
material are decreasing and during the latest period parts of plaster peel off
and fall down. Plaster does not supply protection and aesthetic function.
Employees
of Museum in
Medieval
core of Saint Wenceslas church forms polygonally closed presbytery, outer walls
and square shaped
Samples of
mortar of Saint Catherine church in Kelč were taken from outer side of
presbytery basement. It was built according to archive data in 80’ of 16th
century.
Mortars and
plasters represent collection of samples of
Strength,
hardness and plaster or mortar diffusion depend on type and properties of
applied sources, component mixture ratio and hardening conditions. Some
historical plasters are better in properties after several centuries than
building stone in structure. Example of high quality mortar is firm, consistent
lime mortar (3 m2 of pre-Romanesque age), which was discovered in
Mikulčice (
Formation
of firm lime mortar or plaster depends on drying of lime suspension, which is in
close relation to shrinkage of mortar. Calcium silicates are formed by
dissolution of quartz in alkali environment. Last process is carbonation.
The third
above-mentioned process – carbonation – is the most significant for mortar
strength. Lime matrix in mixture with water (together with soluble calcium
alkali silicates) fill pores among particles of filling material (sandy
grains). Reaction with atmospheric carbon dioxide forms calcium carbonate,
which is identical with micrite by the texture. Rate of carbonation is the
highest in relative humidity from 50% to 60%. Process does not occur in dry
conditions and in higher relative humidity is almost stopped for difficult
penetration of CO2 through the pore system filled by water (Hošek,
Muk 1990). Original high alkalinity of lime mortar (pH 12,5 to 13,5) is
gradually decreased to approximately pH 8. It may be said that strength of lime
mortar depends on partial pressure of CO2 (its usual content in
atmosphere is 0,03%) on amount, kind and stage of lime slaking (quick lime
accelerates process of solidification but it blocks penetration of CO2
into mortar) on porosity of mortar (determined by hydraulic coefficient, ratio
of matrix and filling material, size of sandy particles and particle size
distribution curve) by moisture and temperature of surrounding environment.
Šujanová
(1981) determined rate of carbonation of standard lime mortar in usual
atmospheric conditions as follows: 59% of calcium hydroxide changed to calcium
carbonate during 2 days, after 5 weeks it was 75% and after 2 years 86%. We
have to find explanation stage of slaking of lime matrix (all studied mortar
samples contain relicts of quick lime).
It was
verified by study of more than 300 samples of historical plasters and mortars
in many medieval structures. It is possible to determine within the frame of a
structure relative age of mortars and plasters.
Method is
based on following:
Identification
of mineral composition of sandy fraction.
State of
re-crystallization of carbonate matrix.
Height
level of mortar and plaster above ground together with azimuthal orientation.
Gregerová,
Vlček (1994) studied relative age determination on the base of identification of sandy fraction and its
relation to matrix.
Solidification
of lime mortar as it was mentioned above is initiated by changing of calcium
hydroxide to calcium carbonate affected by atmospheric CO2. Forming
CaCO3 is sub-microscopic in size of crystals and relates to micrite.
Micro-crystallized carbonate (sparite) is formed (at first in pores of mortar
and later in matrix) by partial dissolution and following re-crystallization.
Amount of sparite increases in time but increasing is not linear and depends on
many factors.
Mortar degradation
caused by atmospheric humidity, rainwater, snow thawing, capillary elevation of
groundwater in relation to position of studied mortar in the structure (height
level above ground, azimuthal orientation) causes quicker or slower dissolution
of micrite and crystallization and gradual crystallization - increasing of
calcite crystals – formation of sparite (Figure 1,2). It has been verified by
long-term study that these processes are quicker in mortars and plasters
prepared of slaking of incompletely burned lime (CaO). Crystallization pressure
of newly formed calcite crystals (according to physico-chemical conditions in
place of formation) leads to reduction of mortar and plaster strength and
follows up by their falling down from face of wall.
They are
identifiable according to presented methods mortars of two time periods in the
structure of
Table 1:
Classification of studied mortars of Translation of Virgin Mary church in
Brantice within individual construction phases.
Older construction phases |
|
Sample No.: |
localization |
1 |
k. 908, bedding mortar of aisle basement |
2 |
bedding mortar of face of Victory arch 1. construction
phase |
3 |
bedding mortar of outer face of basement of eastern
nave wall |
4 |
bedding mortar of inner face of basement of southern
nave wall (place A3, k. 956) |
5 |
bedding mortar of southern face presbytery basement
(place C2, k 902) |
6 |
place A3, k 906,
bedding mortar of inner face of southern nave wall |
Younger construction phases |
|
7 |
bedding mortar of top of northern nave wall |
8 |
inner plaster of top of northern nave wall
(approximately 1593) |
9 |
younger inner plaster of northern nave wall |
Mortars of
older construction phase are macroscopically the same in colour, granularity
and sandy fraction composition. They belong to unsorted mortars by granularity
and composition. Fragments of pelosiderites and bricks are observable in all
samples. Typical is also high amount of clay minerals. All samples contain
admixture of organic matter similar by optical parameters to white of the egg.
Re-crystallization of micritic matrix is visible in thin sections. Size of
sparite calcite crystals is within the interval 0.1 to 0.05 mm.
Mortars of
younger construction phase differ in stage of re-crystallization of micrite to
sparite. The sample No. 9 is exceptional within younger construction phase. Two
layers of plaster form it. But the difference in matrix re-crystallization
between both layers is very small and it is not possible to accurately identify
if it is formed during one construction phase or if the outer layer is younger
reconstruction.
Collections
of studied mortar samples show Tables 2, 3 and 4 of St. Wenceslas church in
Table 2:
Material composition of studied mortars and plasters of St. Wenceslas church in
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
12 |
13 |
matrix |
24[1] |
44 |
36 |
46 |
33 |
41 |
25 |
43 |
39 |
45 |
67 |
53 |
pores |
20 |
12 |
16 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
11 |
16 |
17 |
19 |
5,6 |
8,7 |
sand |
56,1 |
50,3 |
46,9 |
42,3 |
55,3 |
45,5 |
63,7 |
40,9 |
43,3 |
36,3 |
26,4 |
38,3 |
Material composition of sandy fraction |
||||||||||||
quartz |
25 |
14 |
17 |
17 |
5,9 |
7,2 |
9,7 |
8 |
14 |
13 |
12 |
2,9 |
ortho and metaquartzites |
9,9 |
14,9 |
23,7 |
14 |
9,2 |
18 |
40 |
22 |
17 |
12 |
6,7 |
9 |
other rock fragments |
20 |
11 |
2,7 |
8,3 |
12 |
4,2 |
6,4 |
9,7 |
8,2 |
8,5 |
6,8 |
8,9 |
feldspars |
0,6 |
3,4 |
3,1 |
2,5 |
1,7 |
3,4 |
4 |
1,2 |
3,4 |
1,9 |
1,9 |
1,4 |
accessories |
0,4 |
7 |
0,3 |
0,2 |
0,8 |
0,7 |
0,1 |
|
0,3 |
0,6 |
0,2 |
0,8 |
carbonates |
0,2 |
|
0,1 |
0,3 |
23 |
10 |
3,2 |
|
0,2 |
0,1 |
|
14 |
micas |
|
|
|
|
2,7 |
2 |
0,3 |
|
0,2 |
0,2 |
|
1,6 |
Table 3:
Mixture ratio of lime and sand in studied mortars of St. Wenceslas church in
|
Mixture ratio (lime : sand)[2] |
|||||||||||
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
12 |
13 |
lime |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1,1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1,04 |
1 |
1,2 |
2,5 |
1,3 |
sand |
2,3 |
1 |
1,3 |
1 |
1,6 |
1,2 |
2,6 |
1 |
1,2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
Table 4:
Classification of studied mortars of St. Wenceslas church in
The oldest construction phase |
||
Group |
Sample No.: |
Localization in the structure |
a |
1 |
sample of outer face of basement of southern
presbytery wall (k. 900) |
|
3 |
sample of
basement of buttress of northern nave
wall in place of Victory arch prolongation (k 906) |
|
4 |
sample of basement between first couple of nave buttress (k. 908) |
|
10 |
sample of inner
face of tower basement (k.917) |
b |
2 |
sample of outer face of Gothic sacristy basement ( k.
904) |
|
9 |
sample of inner face of northern basement of Victory
arch (k. 915) |
|
7 |
sample of inner
face of southern nave wall ( k. 912) |
|
8 |
sample of inner
face of southern Victory arch basement (k. 914) |
Younger construction phase |
||
|
5 |
sample of basement wall relict in northern aisle
(k.909) |
|
6 |
sample of basement wall relict in southern aisle (k.
910) |
|
13 |
sample of the end of nave basement |
The youngest construction phase |
||
|
12 |
sample of
mortar of outer face of Classicism sacristy (1803-1805) |
Groups a)
and b), which were recognized within oldest construction phase differ in
re-crystallization of micrite and thickness of sparite layers. The group b) has
higher amount of sparite and crystals are bigger.
Samples of
church in Kelč are unique. They are samples of bedding mortar taken of outer
face of presbytery basement, which was built according to archive data during
80’ of 16th century. The thickness of sparite layer composed of
fibrous calcite crystals is up to 5 mm (Figures 3 and 4). Based on archive data
of construction and microscopic study the rate of calcite re-crystallization is
0.5 to 1.25 mm per 100 years.
Figure
1: Počátek rekrystalizace mikritové matrix na sparit. St. Wenceslas church in
|
Figure
2: Re-crystallized matrix. Translation of Virgin Mary church in Brantice XPL.
Photo M. Gregerová. |
Figure
3: Re-crystallized matrix of calcareous mortar of 16th century.
Fibrous structure of calcite. Church in Kelč. Mag. 200x, PPL. Photo M.
Gregerová. |
Figure
4: The same sample as on Fig. 1, XPL. Photo M. Gregerová. |
Results of
study of collection of 300 samples of plasters and mortars verified that micropetrographic
analysis of sandy fraction of mortars and plasters, together with the
assessment of the stage of matrix re-crystallization, can in almost 95% cases
confirm or exclude the assumed age of the particular construction phases.
Mixture
ratio of lime and sand recommended by Šujanová (1981) for identification of
Romanesque, Gothic and Renaissance mortars and plasters was not verified.
The
research has been supported by
Gregerová M.,
Vlček R. (1994): Petrografická a geochemická charakteristika malt a omítek
kostela sv.
Hošek J.,
Muk J. (1990): Omítky historických staveb.- SPN, 143 str. Praha.
Šujanová O. (1981):
Povrchové úpravy pamiatkovych objektov.- Sborník ze semináře SÚPSOP.