Advertisement

Carbonates and Evaporites

, Volume 30, Issue 3, pp 357–363 | Cite as

Ultrasonic investigations of marble columns of historical structures built in two different periods

  • Ali Erden Babacan
  • Kenan Gelisli
Original Article

Abstract

Ultrasonic methods are commonly used in structural investigation of historical buildings because they are easily applicable and produce rapid results. Information about strength of museums, mosques, and building structures can be obtained using ultrasonic waves. Turkey is located in a region where destructive earthquakes take place frequently. Buildings suffer significant damage from the earthquakes and deterioration over time. Therefore, the bearing systems of historical monuments should be investigated and protective measures, if necessary, should be taken. This study aims to analyze the marble columns of Hagia Sophia museum, built in the thirteenth and Gülbahar Hatun Mosque, built in the fifteenth century by using ultrasonic measurements and to compare with each other. These two buildings are among the most important historical structures in the Eastern Black Sea region of Turkey. Ultrasonic velocity distribution of marble columns was obtained from ultrasonic measurements with specific data acquisition. The velocity maps were analyzed and compared with both literature values and one another. The qualities of the main columns in the structures were determined through the use of some semi-quantitative calculations. The results show that the columns of Gülbahar Hatun Mosque were of low quality and that its columns had micro cracks. However, the columns of Hagia Sophia museum are in better condition.

Keywords

Ultrasonic method Historical buildings Marble Structure inspection 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are also grateful to the Museum Directorate of Trabzon for their precious help.

References

  1. Akevren S (2010) Non-destructive examination of stone masonry historic structures—quantitative IR thermography and ultrasonic testing. MSc Dissertation, The Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences of Middle East Technical University, Ankara, TurkeyGoogle Scholar
  2. Barroso E, Silva L, Polivanov H (2006) Weathering and deterioration evaluation of a Brazilian cultural heritage building. IAEGGoogle Scholar
  3. Cecire AS (2003) Nondestructive evaluation of historic structures. Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  4. Diana G, Fais S (2010) IR thermography and ultrasonic investigations in the cultural heritage field. In: 15th international conference on “cultural heritage and new technologies”, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  5. Golden Software Surfer (2002) User’s guide: contouring and 3D surface mapping for scientist and engineers. Colorado, USAGoogle Scholar
  6. Gosálbez J, Salazar A, Bosch I, Miralles R, Vergara L (2006) Application of ultrasonic nondestructive testing to the diagnosis of consolidation of a restored dome. Mater Eval 64(5):492–497Google Scholar
  7. Gupta V (2009) Non-destructive testing of some higher Himalayan Rocks in the Satluj Valley. Bull Eng Geol Environ 68:409–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lemoni E, Christaras B (1999) Classification of soils for urban planning, using in situ ultrasonic velocity techniques, geotechnical engineering for transportation infrastructure. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 393–399Google Scholar
  9. Martínez-Martíneza J, Benevento D, García-del-Curaa MA (2011) Spatial attenuation: the most sensitive ultrasonic parameter for detecting petrographic features and decay processes in carbonate rocks. Eng Geol 9:84–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Nuzzo L, Calia A, Liberatore D, Masini N, Rizzo E (2010) Integration of ground-penetrating radar, ultrasonic tests and infrared thermography for the analysis of a precious medieval rose window. Adv Geosci 24:69–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Popovics JS (2003) NDE Techniques for concrete and masonry structures. Prog Struct Eng Mater 5:49–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Siedel H, Siegesmund S (2011) Characterization of stone deterioration on buildings. In: Siegesmund S, Snethlage R (eds) Stone in architecture: properties, durability, 4th edn. Springer, New York, pp 347–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Siegesmund S, Dürrast H (2011) Physical and mechanical properties of rocks. In: Siegesmund S, Snethlage R (eds) Stone in architecture: properties, durability, 4th edn. Springer, New York, pp 97–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Stein ML (1999) Interpolation of spatial data: some theory for kriging. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Vasconcelos G, Lourenco PB, Alves CAS, Pamplona J (2008) Ultrasonic evaluation of the physical and mechanical properties of granites. Ultrasonics 48(5):453–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Yagiz S (2010) Geomechanical properties of construction stones quarried in South-western Turkey. Sci Res Essays 5(8):750–757Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Geophysics EngineeringKaradeniz Technical UniversityTrabzonTurkey

Personalised recommendations