Artisanal Lime Coatings and Their Influence on Moisture Transport During Drying

  • T. Diaz GonçalvesEmail author
  • V. Brito


Lime coatings such as whitewashes were originally used in historical buildings all across Europe and the rest of the globe, on lime plasters or directly on stone elements. Today, these coatings are increasingly used in conservation not only due to their unique aesthetic features but also for functional reasons. One of their main functional advantages is the ability to not hamper the drying of the substrate, which is very important because dampness is recurrent in historical buildings. The work presented here is aimed at improving the understanding of how and why lime coatings affect (or not) the drying of the porous building materials that usually constitute those substrates. We analysed experimentally the influence of one selected lime coating on the drying of five substrate materials with architectural relevance: one lime mortar and four stones, the well-known Ançã limestone, Maastricht limestone and Bentheimer sandstone, as well as a common Portuguese low porosity limestone. All the materials were characterized in relation to their capillary porosity and pore size distribution. Afterwards, the drying kinetics of the substrate materials, when coated or uncoated, was evaluated and compared. It was concluded that the lime coating not only does not hinder drying, but can even accelerate it. Indeed, at high moisture contents, the drying rate increases up to as much as 50%. This is likely to happen because the coating generates a larger effective surface of evaporation. In the article, we discuss the possible causes and implications of this phenomenon.


Lime coatings Porous materials Drying Moisture transport Historical buildings 



This work was supported by national funds through the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT), under the research project DRYMASS (ref. PTDC/ECM/100553/2008). We are thankful to Veerle Cnudde and Timo G. Nijland for providing the Bentheimer sandstone. We would like to acknowledge also the support of Luís Nunes and José Costa in several aspects of the experimental work.


  1. Arandigoyen, M., Pérez Bernal, J. L., Bello López, M. A., & Alvarez, J. I. (2005). Lime-pastes with different kneading water: Pore structure and capillary porosity. Applied Surface Science, 252, 1449–1459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ASTM International. (2004). Test method for determination of pore volume and pore volume distribution of soil and rock by mercury intrusion porosimetry. ASTM Standard D 4404-84.Google Scholar
  3. Brito, V., Gonçalves, T. D., & Faria, P. (2011). Coatings applied on damp building substrates: Performance and influence on moisture transport. Journal of Coatings Technology and Research, 8(4), 513–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dautriat, J., Gland, N., Guelard, J., Dimanov, A., & Raphanel, J. L. (2009). Axial and radial permeability evolutions of compressed sandstones: End effects and shear-band induced permeability anisotropy. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 166(5–7), 1037–1061.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. De Clercq, H., De Zanche, S., & Biscontin, G. (2007). TEOS and time: the influence of application schedules on the effectiveness of ethyl silicate based consolidants. Restoration of Buildings and Monuments an International Journal (Bauinstandsetzen und Baudenkmalpflege eine internationale Zeitschrift), 13(5), 305–318.Google Scholar
  6. Diaz Gonçalves, T., Brito, V., & Pel, L. (2012). Water vapour emission from rigid mesoporous materials during the constant drying rate period. Drying Technology: An International Journal, 30(5), 462–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diaz Gonçalves, T., Brito, V., Vidigal, F., Matias, L., & Faria, P. (2014). Evaporation from porous building materials and its cooling potential. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 27(8), 04014222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hammecker, C. (1993). Importance des transferts d’eau dans la dégradation des pierres en oeuvre (Importance of water transfers in the degradation of stones in the site), Thèse de doctorat (Ph.D. thesis). Strasbourg, France: University Louis Pasteur.Google Scholar
  9. Holmes, S., & Wingate, M. (1997). Building with lime: A practical introduction. London: Intermediate Technology Publications. ISBN 1853393843.Google Scholar
  10. Jeannette, D. (1997). Structures de porosité, mécanismes de transfert des solutions et principales altérations des roches des monuments. In R. A. Lefèvre (Ed.), La pietra dei monumenti in ambiente fisico e culturale (pp. 49–77). Ravello: European University Centre for Cultural Heritage.Google Scholar
  11. Petković, J., Huinink, H. P., Pel, L., Kopinga, K., & van Hees, R. P. J. (2007). Salt transport in plaster/substrate layers. Materials and Structures, 40(5), 475–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. RILEM TC 25-PEM. (1980). Recommended tests to measure the deterioration of stone and to assess the effectiveness of treatment methods, Test No. II.1 “Saturation coefficient”, Test No. II.5 “Evaporation curve”, Materials and Structures, 13, 204–207.Google Scholar
  13. Rousset-Tournier, B. (2001). Transferts par capillarité et évaporation dans des roches. Rôle des structures de porosité (Capillary transport and evaporation in rocks. The role of pore structures), Thèse de doctorat (Ph.D. thesis), University Louis Pasteur, Strasbourg, France.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Laboratory for Civil Engineering (LNEC)LisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations