, Volume 11, Issue 3, pp 729–749 | Cite as

Mineralogical, Petrographic, and Physical Investigations on Fossiliferous Middle Jurassic Sandstones from Central Sardinia (Italy) to Define Their Alteration and Experimental Consolidation

  • Carla Buosi
  • Stefano ColumbuEmail author
  • Guido Ennas
  • Paola Pittau
  • Giovanni G. Scanu
Original Article


In the present work, the mineralogical-petrographic and physical features of Middle Jurassic sandstones with macrofossil plant remains belonging to the Domenico Lovisato collection, housed at the Geological and Palaeontological Museum of the Cagliari University (Sardinia, Italy), have been studied to define the alteration processes and the consolidating treatment. These sandstones, coming from the Genna Selole formation (central Sardinia), show evident problems of physical decay, due to petrophysical and compositional characteristics such as high porosity, low cementing degree, and presence of clay minerals (e.g., phyllosilicates). This latter leads to subsequent cyclic mechanisms of hydration/dehydration, which affect these sedimentary rocks. For this purpose, five main different sandstone specimens with evident crystalline matrix decohesion have been selected and analyzed. To define their mineralogical-petrographic (composition, microstructure) and physical characteristics (real and bulk densities, helium porosity, water absorption, mechanical strength, etc.), the optical microscope (OM) in polarized light, X-ray powder diffraction analysis (XRPD), helium and water pycnometer, and point load test were used. Testing the most suitable and compatible products for consolidation and time-saving of the palaeobotanical remains, several experimental treatment tests have been performed using four chemical products (i.e., alkoxysilane ethyl silicates and Na/K-silicate).


Sandstone Palaeobotany Decay Porosity Mechanical strength 



The authors also thank the company Buccellato Freius S.r.l. (Italy) for having kindly provided the consolidant products used for this study.

Funding information

CB and GGS were financially supported by the Sardinia Regional Government (P.O.R. Sardegna F.S.E. Operational Programme of the Autonomous Region of Sardinia, European Social Fund 2007–2013—Axis IV Human Resources, Objective l.3, Line of Activity l.3.1 “Avviso di chiamata per il finanziamento di Assegni di Ricerca”).

Supplementary material

12371_2018_326_MOESM1_ESM.docx (125 kb)
Table SM1 . Results of water absorption kinetic determined by total immersion of specimen for the five analyzed sandstones (A, B, C, D, E) before and after the treatments with four chemicals, where reported the values of dry weight of specimens (g), progressive wet weights (g) and the relative progressive imbibition coefficients (ICPW) on the time (8 days) determined every 24 h. Data of sample D, due to its very low cementing degree, not has completed the absorption test. Abbreviations: n.d. = not determined. (DOCX 125 kb)
12371_2018_326_MOESM2_ESM.docx (116 kb)
Table SM2a . Physical mechanical data by Poin Load Test of five untreated sandstone samples (A, B, C, D, E). Symbols: W = width of specimen, where W1 and W2 are the main sizes used when the specimen not has a regular cubic shape; 2 L = length of specimen; D1 = initial distance between the two conical punches; D2 = operative distance between the two conical punches used as parameter to calculate the punching index; P = rupture load of specimen; De = “equivalent diameter of the carrot” (according to ISRM 1985, see methods); F = correction factor of punching index; Is = resistance to puncturing; Is(50) = resistance to puncturing normalized to a carrot with diameter of 50 mm. (DOCX 115 kb)
12371_2018_326_MOESM3_ESM.docx (115 kb)
Table SM2b . Physical mechanical data by Poin Load Test of five sandstone samples (A, B, C, D, E) treated with Indur IN chemical. Symbols as Table SM2a. (DOCX 115 kb)
12371_2018_326_MOESM4_ESM.docx (117 kb)
Table SM2c . Physical mechanical data by Poin Load Test of five sandstone samples (A, B, C, D, E) treated with Indur PI chemical. Symbols as Table SM2a. (DOCX 116 kb)
12371_2018_326_MOESM5_ESM.docx (112 kb)
Table SM2d . Physical mechanical data by Poin Load Test of five sandstone samples (A, B, C, D, E) treated with Indur FB chemical. Symbols as Table SM2a. (DOCX 112 kb)
12371_2018_326_MOESM6_ESM.docx (114 kb)
Table SM2e . Physical mechanical data by Poin Load Test of five sandstone samples (A, B, C, D, E) treated with Consolidant CM. Symbols as Table SM2a. (DOCX 114 kb)


  1. Amoroso G (2002) Trattato di scienza della conservazione dei monumenti. Alinea editrice, FlorenceGoogle Scholar
  2. Antonelli F, Columbu S, De Vos Raaijmakers M, Andreoli M (2014a) An archaeometric contribution to the study of ancient millstones from the Mulargia area (Sardinia, Italy) through new analytical data on volcanic raw material and archaeological items from Hellenistic and Roman North Africa. J Archaeol Sci 50:243–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Antonelli F, Columbu S, Lezzerini M, Miriello D (2014b) Petrographic characterization and provenance determination of the white marbles used in the Roman sculptures of Forum Sempronii (Fossombrone, Marche, Italy). Appl Phys A 115:1033–1040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnold A, Zehnder K (1991) Monitoring wall paintings affected by soluble salts. In: Proceedings of a symposium organized by the Courtauld Institute of Art and the Getty Conservation Institute, London, UKGoogle Scholar
  5. Berthonneau J, Grauby O, Bromblet P, Vallet JM, Dessandier D, Baronnet A (2012) Role of swelling clay minerals in the spalling decay mechanism of the “Pierre du Midi” limestone (south-east of France). Proceedings of 12th Inter-national Congress on the Deterioration and Conservation of Stone, Columbia University, New York, 2012, pp. 1–11Google Scholar
  6. Bertorino G, Franceschelli M, Marchi M, Luglié C, Columbu S (2002) Petrographic characterisation of polished stone axes from Neolithic Sardinia, archaeological implications. Per Miner 71:87–100Google Scholar
  7. Brown G (1961) The X-ray identification and crystal structures of clay minerals. Mineralogical Society (Clay Minerals Group), London, p 544Google Scholar
  8. Butlin RN, Yates TJS, Martin W (1995) Comparison of traditional and modern treatments for conserving stone. In: Methods of evaluating products for the conservation of porous building materials in monuments: international colloquium. Rome, Italy, pp 111–119Google Scholar
  9. Camaiti M, Cerri F, Rescic S, Sacchi B, Tiano P (2002) Ethyl silicate as reinforcing agent for stone materials: laboratory and in situ tests. In: International Congress on the silicates in the conservative treatments, Torino, Italy, pp 137–145Google Scholar
  10. Camaiti M, Dei L, Errico V (2006) Consolidation treatment of tuff: in situ polymerization or traditional methods? In: Proceedings of V Int. Conference on Structural Analysis of Historical constructions, New Delhi, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  11. Camaiti M, Benvenuti E, Paciulli L (2011) Formulati a base di poliammidi parzialmente fluorurate e fluoroelastomeri per la protezione e il consolidamento di manufatti lapidei. Arkos – Scienza e Restauro 28:29–33 ISSN 1974-7950Google Scholar
  12. Cao Y, Salvini A, Camaiti M (2017) Oligoamide grafted with perfluoropolyether blocks: a potential protective coating for stone materials. Prog Org Coat 111:164–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cnudde V, Dierick M, Vlassenbroeck J, Masschaele B, Lehmann E, Jacobs P, Van Hoorebeke L (2007) Determination of the impregnation depth of siloxanes and ethylsilicates in porous material by neutron radiography. J Cult Herit 8:331–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Coins ES (1995) Alkoxysilane stone consolidants: the effect of the stone substrate on the polymerization process. Doctoral thesis, University College London, University of London, UKGoogle Scholar
  15. Colas E, Mertz JD, Thomachot-Schneider C, Barbin V, Rassineux F (2011) Influence of the clay coating properties on the dilation behavior of sandstones. Appl Clay Sci 52(1–2):245–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Columbu S (2017) Provenance and alteration of pyroclastic rocks from the Romanesque Churches of Logudoro (north Sardinia, Italy) using a petrographic and geochemical statistical approach. Appl Phys A Mater Sci Process, 123 (3), 165:1–28.
  17. Columbu S (2018) Petrographic and geochemical investigations on the volcanic rocks used in the Punic-Roman archaeological site of Nora (Sardinia, Italy). Earth Environ Sci 77(16):577Google Scholar
  18. Columbu S, Garau AM (2017) Mineralogical, petrographic and chemical analysis of geomaterials used in the mortars of Roman Nora theatre (south Sardinia, Italy). Ital J Geosci 136:238–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Columbu S, Verdiani G (2014) Digital survey and material analysis strategies for documenting, monitoring and study the Romanesque churches in Sardinia, Italy. Lect Notes Comput Sci 8740:446–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Columbu S, Gioncada A, Lezzerini M, Marchi M (2014a) Hydric dilatation of ignimbritic stones used in the church of Santa Maria di Otti (Oschiri, northern Sardinia, Italy). Ital J Geosci 133:149–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Columbu S, Antonelli F, Lezzerini M, Miriello D, Adembri B, Blanco A (2014b) Provenance of marbles used in the Heliocaminus baths of Hadrian's Villa (Tivoli, Italy). J Archaeol Sci 49:332–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Columbu S, Sitzia F, Verdiani G (2015a) Contribution of petrophysical analysis and 3D digital survey in the archaeometric investigations of the Emperor Hadrian’s Baths (Tivoli, Italy). Rend Fis Acc Lincei 26:455–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Columbu S, Cruciani G, Fancello D, Franceschelli M, Musumeci M (2015b) Petrophysical properties of a granite-protomylonite-ultramylonite sequence: insight from the Monte Grighini shear zone, central Sardinia, Italy. Eur J Mineral 27:471–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Columbu S, Lisci C, Sitzia F, Buccellato G (2017a) Physical-mechanical consolidation and protection of Miocenic limestone used on Mediterranean historical monuments: the case study of Pietra Cantone (southern Sardinia, Italy). Environ Earth Sci 76(4):148. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Columbu S, Sitzia F, Ennas G (2017b) The ancient pozzolanic mortars and concretes of Heliocaminus baths in Hadrian’s Villa (Tivoli, Italy). Archaeol Anthropol Sci 9:523–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Columbu S, Antonelli F, Sitzia F (2018a) Origin of Roman worked stones from St. Saturno Christian Basilica (south Sardinia, Italy). MAA Journal 18(5):17–36. Google Scholar
  27. Columbu S, Piras G, Sitzia F, Pagnotta S, Raneri S, Legnaioli S, Palleschi V, Lezzerini M, Giamello M (2018b) Petrographic and mineralogical characterization of volcanic rocks and surface-depositions on Romanesque monuments. MAA Journal 18(5):37–63. Google Scholar
  28. Columbu S, Palomba M, Sitzia F, Murgia M (2018c) Geochemical and mineral-petrographic studies of stones and mortars from the Romanesque Saccargia Basilica (Sardinia, Italy) to define their origin and alteration. Ital J Geosci 137:369–695. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Columbu S, Lisci C, Sitzia F, Lorenzetti G, Lezzerini M, Pagnotta S, Raneri S, Legnaioli S, Palleschi V, Gallello G, Adembri B (2018d) Mineralogical, petrographic and physical-mechanical study of Roman construction materials from the Maritime Theatre of Hadrian’s Villa (Rome, Italy). Measurement 127:264–276. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Columbu S, Garau AM, Lugliè C (2018e) Geochemical characterisation of pozzolanic obsidian glasses used in the ancient mortars of Nora Roman theatre (Sardinia, Italy): provenance of raw materials and historical–archaeological implications. Archaeol Anthropol Sci 1–30.
  31. Columbu S, Lisci C, Sitzia F, Lorenzetti G, Lezzerini M, Pagnotta S, Raneri S, Legnaioli S, Palleschi V, Gallello G, Adembri B (2018f) Mineralogical, petrographic and physical-mechanical study of Roman construction materials from the Maritime Theatre of Hadrian's Villa (Rome, Italy). Measurement 127:264–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Columbu S, Carboni S, Pagnotta S, Lezzerini M, Raneri S, Legnaioli S, Palleschi V, Usai A (2018g) Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy analysis of the limestone nuragic statues from Mont’e Prama site (Sardinia, Italy). Spectrochimica Acta - Part B Atomic Spectroscopy 149:62–70Google Scholar
  33. Costamagna LG, Barca S (2004) Stratigraphy, facies analysis, paleogeography and regional framework of the Jurassic succession of the «tacchi» area (Middle-Eastern Sardinia). Boll Soc Geol Ital 123:477–495Google Scholar
  34. Costamagna LG, Kustatscher E, Scanu GG, Del Rio M, Pittau P, van Konijnenburg-van Cittert JHA (2018) A palaeoenvironmental reconstruction of the Middle Jurassic of Sardinia (Italy) based on integrated palaeobotanical, palynological and lithofacies data assessment. Palaeobio Palaeoenv 98:111–138. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Davidson A, Brown GW (2012) ParaloidTM B-2: practical tips for the vertebrate fossil preparatory. Coll Forum 26:99–19Google Scholar
  36. De Clercq H, De Witte E (2001) Effectiveness of commercial silicon based water repellents at different application conditions. In: Proceedings of Hydrophobe III - 3rd International Conference on Surface Technology with Water Repellent Agents, Freiburg, Germany, pp 179–190Google Scholar
  37. Del Rio M (1976) Analisi palinologica del Giurese della Sardegna centrale. Boll Soc Geol Ital 95:619–631Google Scholar
  38. Del Rio M (1984) Palynology of Middle Jurassic black organic shales of “Tacco di Laconi”, Central Sardinia, Italy. Boll Soc Paleontol Ital 23:325–342Google Scholar
  39. Dieni I, Fisher JC, Massari F, Salard-Cheboldaeff M, Vozenin-Serra C (1983) La succession de Genna Selole (Baunei) dans le cadre de la paléogéographie mésojurassique de la Sardaigne orientale. Mem Sci Geol Padova 36:117–148Google Scholar
  40. Doehene E, Price CA (2010) Stone conservation—an overview of current research, 2nd edn. Getty Publications Book Distribution Center, Los Angeles ISBN 978-1-60606-046-9Google Scholar
  41. Down JL, MacDonald MA, Tetreault J, Williams RS (1996) Adhesive testing at the Canadian Conservation Institute: an evaluation of selected poly (vinyl acetate) and acrylic adhesives. Stud Conserv 41:19–44Google Scholar
  42. Elfving P, Jaglid U (1992) Silane bonding to various mineral surfaces. Report OOK 92:01, ISSN 0283–8575. Gotenborg, Sweden, Department of Inorganic Chemistry, Chalmers University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  43. Ennas G, Falqui A, Paschina G, Marongiu G (2005) Iron-cobalt alloy nanoparticles embedded in an alumina xerogel matrix. Chem Mater 17:6486–6491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Fitzner B, Snethlage R (1982) Einfluss der porenradienvertielung auf das verwitterungsverhalten ausgewahlter sandsteine. Bautenschutz und Bausanierung 5:97–103Google Scholar
  45. Franzini M, Leoni L, Lezzerini M, Cardelli R (2007) Relationships between mineralogical composition, water absorption and hydric dilatation in the “Macigno” sandstones from Lunigiana (Massa, Tuscany). Eur J Mineral 19:113–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Franzoni E, Pigino B, Pistolesi C (2013) Ethyl silicate for surface protection of concrete: performance in comparison with other inorganic surface treatments. Cem Concr Compos 44:69–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Goins ES, Wheeler GS, Wypphski MT (1996) Proceedings of the 8th international congress on deterioration and conservation of stone. vol. III, Berlin, Germany, pp 1255–1264Google Scholar
  48. Guerrero MA, Vazquez MA, Galan E, Zezza F (1990) The physical-mechanical properties and ultrasonic data as criteria for evaluation of calcareous stone decay. In: Proceedings of the 1th International Symposium, Grafo Edizioni, Bari, Italy, pp 309–312Google Scholar
  49. Hammecker C, Alemany RME, Jeannette D (1992) Geometry modifications of porous networks in carbonate rocks by ethyl silicate treatment. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress on Deterioration and Conservation of Stone, Lisbon, Portugal, pp 1053–62Google Scholar
  50. ISRM (1972) International Society for Rock Mechanics, Suggested method for determining the point load strength index. ISRM, Lisbon, Portugal, Committee on Field Tests. Document n.1, pp 8–12Google Scholar
  51. ISRM (1985) International Society For Rock Mechanics, Suggest method for determining the point load strength ISRM Commission for testing methods, working group on revision of the point load test methods. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 22:51–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Jiménez-González I, Rodríguez-Navarro C, Scherer GW (2008) Role of clay minerals in the physico-mechanical deterioration of sandstone. J Geophys Res Atmos 113(2):F02021Google Scholar
  53. Kim EK, Won J, Do J, Kim SD, Kang YS (2009) Effects of silica nanoparticle and GPTMS addition on TEOS-based stone consolidants. J Cult Herit 10:221–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Koob SP (1986) The use of Paraloid B-72 as an adhesive: its application for archaeological ceramics and other materials. Stud Conserv 31:7–14Google Scholar
  55. La Russa MF, Barone G, Belfiore CM, Mazzoleni P, Pezzino A (2011) Application of protective products to “Noto” calcarenite (south-eastern Sicily): a case study for the conservation of stone materials. Environ Earth Sci 62:1263–1272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Leoni L, Lezzerini M, Battaglia S, Cavalcante F (2010) Corrensite and chlorite-rich Chl-S mixed layers in sandstones from the “Macigno” Formation (northwestern Tuscany, Italy). Clay Miner 45:87–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Lezzerini M, Antonelli F, Columbu S, Gadducci R, Marradi A, Miriello D, Parodi L, Secchiari L, Lazzeri A (2016) The documentation and conservation of the cultural heritage: 3D laser scanning and GIS techniques for thematic mapping of the Sstonework of the Façade of St. Nicholas Church (Pisa, Italy). Int J Archit Herit Conserv Anal Restor 10:9–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lezzerini M, Pagnotta S, Columbu S, Gallello G (2018) Archaeometric study of mortars from the Pisa's Cathedral Square (Italy). Measurement 126:322–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Luo Y, Xiao L, Zhang X (2015) Characterization of TEOS/PDMS/HA nanocomposites for application as consolidant/hydrophobic products on sandstones. J Cult Herit 16:470–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Lutterotti L, Matthies S, Wenk HR (1999) MAUD: a friendly Java program for material analysis using diffraction. IUCr: Newslett CPD 21:14–15Google Scholar
  61. Mameli PL (2012) Problemi di consolidamento di matrici lapidee di differente microstruttura esposte a sollecitazioni ambientali e microclimatiche di varia origine. Dissertation thesis, Alma Mater Studiorum, Università di Bologna. Dottorato di ricerca in Ingegneria dei materiali.
  62. McGreevy JP, Smith BJ (1984) The possible role of clay minerals in salt weathering. Catena 11(2,3):169–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Miriello D, Antonelli F, Apollaro C, Bloise A, Bruno N, Catalano E, Columbu S, Crisci GM, De Luca R., Lezzerini M, Mancuso S, La Marca A (2015) A petro-chemical study of ancient mortars from the archaeological site of Kyme (Turkey). Per Mineral 84:497–517Google Scholar
  64. Moore DM, Reynolds RC Jr (1997) X-ray diffraction and the identification and analysis of clay minerals. University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  65. Price CA (1996) Stone conservation: an overview of current research. Getty conservation institute, Marina del ReyGoogle Scholar
  66. Ramacciotti M, Rubio S, Gallello G, Lezzerini M, Columbu S, Hernandez E, Morales-Rubio A, Pastor A, De La Guardia M (2018) Chronological classification of ancient mortars employing spectroscopy and spectrometry techniques: Sagunto (Valencia, Spain) case. J Spectrosc 2018:1–10. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Raneri S, Pagnotta S, Lezzerini M, Legnaioli S, Palleschi V, Columbu S, Neri NF, Mazzoleni P (2018) Examining the reactivity of volcanic ash in ancient mortars by using a micro-chemical approach. MAA Journal 18(5):37–63. Google Scholar
  68. Rodriguez Navarro C, Guidetti V, Chiavarini M, Sebastian Pardo E (1996) Studies on the protective-reaggregating fluorurethanes on lithotypes with different porosity and pore-size distribution. In: Proceedings of the 1995 LCP Cong. On Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage, Montreux, pp 711–721Google Scholar
  69. Salazar-Hernández C, Puy Alquiza MJ, Salgado P, Cervantes J (2010) TEOS-colloidal silica-PDMS-OH hybrid formulation used for stone consolidation. J Appl Organomet Chem 24:481–488Google Scholar
  70. Sasse HR, Honsinger D, Schwamborn B (1993) PINS: a new technology in porous stone conservation. In: The conservation of stone and other materials, vol. 2, New York, US, pp 705–716Google Scholar
  71. Sattler L, Snethlage R (1988) Durability of stone consolidation treatments with silicic acid ester. In: The engineering geology of ancient works, monuments and historical sites, vol. 2, Rotterdam, pp 953–956Google Scholar
  72. Scanu GG, Kustatscher E, Pittau P (2012) The Jurassic plant fossils of the Lovisato Collection: preliminary notes. Boll Soc Paleontol Ital 51:71–84Google Scholar
  73. Scanu GG, Buosi C, Pittau P (2014) 5PC—the fossil plant record of Sardinia. Field guidebook of the 9th EPPC, Sardinia 1-4 sept. 2014. University of Cagliari, Dept. of Chemical and Geological Sciences 1–68Google Scholar
  74. Scanu GG, Kustatscher E, Pittau P (2015) The Jurassic flora of Sardinia—a new piece in the palaeobiogeographic puzzle of the middle Jurassic. Rev Palaeobot Palynol 218:80–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Scanu GG, Kustatscher E, Pittau P, van Konijnenburg-van Cittert JHA (2016) New insights into the Middle Jurassic floras of Sardinia (Italy)—the Miccolis Collection at the Museo di Scienze Naturali of Venice, Italy. Boll Soc Paleontol Ital 55(1):29–45Google Scholar
  76. Sebastián E, Cultrone G, Benavente D, Linares Fernandez L, Elert K, Rodriguez-Navarro C (2008) Swelling damage in clay-rich sandstones used in the church of San Mateo in Tarifa (Spain). J Cult Herit 9(1):66–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Siegesmund S, Weiss T, Vollbrecht A (2002) Natural stone, weathering phenomena, conservation strategies and case studies. Geological society special publications no. 205. The Geological Society, LondonGoogle Scholar
  78. Tabasso ML, Santamaria U (1985) Consolidant and protective effects of different products on Lecce limestone. In: Fifth International Congress on Deterioration and Conservation of Stone, Lausanne, pp 697–707Google Scholar
  79. Tsakalof A, Manoudis P, Karapanagiotis I, Chryssoulakis I, Panayiotou C (2007) Assessment of synthetic polymeric coatings for the protection and preservation of stone monuments. J Cult Herit 8:69–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Verdiani G, Columbu S (2010) E.Stone, an archive for the Sardinia monumental witnesses. Lect Notes Comput Sci 6436:356–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wangler T, Scherer GW (2008) Clay swelling mechanism in clay-bearing sandstones. Environ Geol 56(3–4):529–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Wheeler G (2005) Alkoxysilane and stone conservation. Getty publication, Los Angeles, pp 83–100Google Scholar
  83. Wheeler GS, Fleming SA, Ebersole S (1991) Evaluation of some current treatments for marble. In: Second International Symposium on the Conservation of Monuments in the Mediterranean Basin, Geneva, Ville de Geneve, Museum d'Histoire naturelle & Musee d'art et d'histoireGoogle Scholar
  84. Wheeler GS, Fleming SA, Ebersole S (1992) Comparative strengthening effect of several consolidants on Wallace sandstone and Indiana limestone. In: Seventh International Congress on Deterioration and Conservation of Stone, Lisbon, Portugal, pp 1033–1041Google Scholar
  85. Young RA (1995) The Rietveld method, IUCr monographs on crystallography 5. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  86. Zezza U, Veniale F, Zezza F, Moggi G (1990) Effects of water saturation on the pietra leccese mechanical weakening. In: Proceedings of the 1st international symposium the conservation of monuments in the Mediterranean Basin, Grafo Edizioni, Brescia, Italy, pp 263–269Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The European Association for Conservation of the Geological Heritage 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di Scienze Chimiche e GeologicheUniversità degli Studi di Cagliari, Cittadella Universitaria di MonserratoCagliariItaly

Personalised recommendations