Name, Last Name: Yousef M. Ibreighith

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work.

Name, Last name: Yousef M. Ibreighith

Signature:

Date:

Abstract

SaintNicholasCathedral is an immense and valuable historical building in North Cyprus. It has been built in thefourteenth century with limestone;this stone monument is sufferingfrom different weathering forms.

The main aim of this study is to identify weathering forms and rates affecting the historical buildings in the coastal city of Famagusta, and to provide better understanding of weathering factors and causes.Forthis purpose, many investigations, evaluations and laboratory tests were carried out.

Weathering state for the Cathedral in means of weathering forms and causes was evaluated. As a result, Alveolar weathering was the most common form caused by salt weathering. A stone- by- stone investigation of discoloration stages and weathering grades by the means of monument mapping was carried out, and results showed that an average of (57.43%) of the Cathedral’s stones have lost their original color, and (64.09%) of stones were weathered (lost some/ most of its original volume). In situ quantitative measurements of weathering ratesaverage value for the whole building were found to be (6.54mm 100a-1). Physical, chemical, mechanical and petrographical properties for the building limestone were tested and classified in means of engineering classifications. The results showed that two different limestone types were used in the building: argillaceous limestone and limestone with low unit weight,high solubility in water and weak acid solutions. In addition to limestone properties, sea breeze loaded with sea spray, sun path,temperature difference between day and nightin the presence of humidity as well ashigh concentration of (PM10) due to Sahara dusts during months of February and March were found to be the main factors of weathering.

For any future restoration project, the study presented detailed definitions, terms, methods and recommendations to be considered at that time.

Finally, following its main aims, the thesis is structured as follow. Chapter one is the introduction, chapters two is discussing weathering, chapter three is discussing the conservation of cultural heritage, chapter four is over viewing the case study (SaintNicholasCathedral), chapter five is over viewing the study methodology, and chapter sixshowing the Results and discussion, the last part of this study presenting recommendations and conclusions.

Nicosia, 2010

Yousef M. Ibreighith

.

Özet

Aziz Nicholas katedrali kuzey kıbrısta bulunan muazzam ve değerli tarihi bir yapıdır. 14. yüzyılda kireçtaşından yapılan yapı şu anda değişik hava aşınmalarından dolayı zarar görüyor.

Bu çalışmanın esas amacı, kıyı şehri olan Mağusa’da bulunan tarihi yapının değişik karaktere sahip olan aşınmaları belirlemek ve aşınmalara sebep olan faktörleri ve nedenleri ortaya çıkarmaktır. Bu nedenle, birçok araştrma, değerlendirme ve laboratuvar testi yapılmıştır.

Katedralin aşınma biçimleri ele alınarak değerlendirilmiştir. Sonuç olarak, Alveolar aşınması yani tuzdan dolayı aşınma en çok gorülmüş biçimdir

Solma ve aşınma etaplarında her taş için araştırmalar yapılıp, yapının taş haritası yapıldı. Sonuçlar gösteriyor ki, katedral taşlarının % 57.43’ü orjınal renklerini kaybetmiş, ve taşların % 64.09’ü da aşınmadan dolayı orijınal hacimlerini kaybetmişlerdir.

Binanın tamamını oluşturan taşların niceliksel ortalamalarının değerleri de (6.54mm 100a-1) olarak bulunmuştur.

Binanın kireç taşları, fiziksel, kimyasal, mekaniksel ve petrografik değerlerine bakılarak mühendislik kategorilerinde değerlendirimiştir.

Bu çalışmanın sonuçları, bina yapımında iki çeşit kiriçtaşının kullanıldığını gösteriyor. Bunlar argillaceous kireçtaşı ve düşük yoğunluğu olan, yüksek poren olan ve suda yüksek çözünürlüğü olan ve dayanıksız asid çözeltiler kullanılmıştır.

Kireç taşı özelliklerine ek olarak, denizden esen meltem, deniz spreyi, paz yolu gün ve gece havasıcaklığı farklarına bağlı olarak nem ve şubat ve mart aylarındaki Sahra tozunun yüksek orandaki PM10 konsantrasyonun başlıca aşınma sebeplerindedir.

Gelecekteki olası restorasyon projelerine yardımcı olacak bu çalışmada detaylı tanımlamalar, terimler, metodlar ve oneriler sunulmuştur.

Sonuç olarak, esas amaçlarının temel alaran bu çalışma asağıdaki gibi sekillendirilmiştir. 1. bölüm giriş, 2. bölüm aşınmayı ele almak, 3. Bölum kültürel mirası muhafaza etmek, 4. Bölüm vakaya genel bakışı ve 5. bölum de sonuçları ve tartışmaları, son bölümde öneri ve sonuçlar ele alıyor.

Lefkoşa, 2010

Yousef M. Ibreighith

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my advisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nuran Kara Pilehvarian for her patience, motivation, enthusiasm, immense knowledge and the continuous support for the progress of this thesis, she was the direct reason behind every progress achieved during this study. Also I would like to acknowledge Assoc. Prof. Dr. Umut Turker for his continuous support of my Master’s study, and his guidance during writing this thesis, with out his care and encouragement it would be impossible for me to finish my work.

In addition, I would like to thank Prof. Dr. Harun Batirbaygil, Asst. Prof. Dr. Pınar Akpınar, Dr. Havva Arslangazi and Ayşe Sayınel for their help and valuable advises for the best of me and my thesis.

I owe special thanks to KUDEB manager Arch. Şimşek Deniz and the advisors Prof. Dr. Ahmet Ersen, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Güleç, Mr. Nimet Alken, and for M. Okay Şahin, Mustafa Baykir, Savaş Özdemir, Fatih Özbaş, Hazal Özlem Ersan, Mustafa Eruş, Burcu Basaram, Gokçen Çelik, Burçin Beştur, Çiğdem Köroğlu, Gazanfer Akıncı, Irem Narderli, Ergün Çagıran and all employees of KUDEB in Istanbul for their help and hospitality.

A special thanks to Tüfekçi Group’s owner Mr. Hussein Tüfekçi for all the great experience I gained while working in his company, and also for keeping the doors open for me all the time during this study, also I want to thank Eng. Samir Abujabal for his assistance in laboratory tests executed in the company’s laboratory.

I am indebted to all my friends and colleagues for their support, advises and care they showed all the time, especially Dr. Hussam Alrjoub, Eng. Bahaa Alsalibi, Mr. Adnan Almatari, Eng. Muath Abualqumssan, Arch. Bilal Abuayyash andEng. Obaydah Altalbishi.

Finally, I would like to thank all my dear family members, my Father Mohammed, My mother Amel, my sisters Bissan, Dalal & Mariam, and my little brother Ibrahim, since without their help, prays and wishes it was impossible that one day I could be writing a master’s thesis. I would like also to thank my family in Cyprus, my mother Gönül Kayımzade, my brother Ali Kayımzade and my sister Tuğba, whom make me feel myself at home all the time.

DEDICATION

I dedicate this work to my father, mother, sisters, brother, uncles, aunts, grandmothers and all the people of Palestineand the TurkishRepublic of Northern Cyprus,

for the souls of my grandfathers -Yousef and Ahmed-; may their souls rest in peace,

for the martyr Abu Ali Mustafa and all the martyrs of Palestine; may their souls rest in peace,

for the prisoner Ahmed Saadat and all the prisoners of freedom in the racial occupation’s jails,

CONTENTS

DECLARATION i

ABSTRACT / ii
ÖZET / iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT / v
DEDICATION / vii
CONTENTS / viii
LIST OF TABLES / xiii
LIST OF FIGURES / xv
CHAPTER I / 1
1. INTRODUCTION / 1
1.1 PROPERTIES OF HISTORICAL BUILDINGS / 3
1.2 CONSERVATION PHILOSOPHY / 6
1.3 THE AIMAND OBJECTIVES OF STUDY / 8
CHAPTER II / 9
2. WEATHERING / 9
2.1. WEATHERING OF NATURAL BUILDING STONE / 9
2.1.1. STONE WEATHERING / 9
2.1.2. LIMESTONE WEATHERING / 11
2.2. MECHANISM OF WEATHERING IN BUILDING STONES / 13
2.2.1 CHEMICAL WEATHERING / 13
2.2.2 MECHANICAL (PHYSICAL) WEATHERING: / 14
2.3. CAUSES OF WEATHERING / 16
2.3.1. AIR POLLUTION / 16
2.3.2. BIOLOGIC WEATHERING / 18
2.3.3. SALT WEATHERING / 20
2.3.4. THE ROLE OF WIND-DRIVEN RAIN / 22
2.4. ENGINEERING CLASSIFICATION OF WEATHERING / 24
2.5 CLASSIFICATION SCHEME OF WEATHERING FORMS / 26
2.6 WEATHERING RATE / 33
CHAPTER III / 36
3. CONSERVATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE / 36
3.1 DOCUMENTATION AND EVALUATION OF STONE DAMAGE ON MONUMENTS / 38
3.1.1 DOCUMENTATION WITHIN THE SCOPE OF ANAMNESIS / 39
3.1.2 DOCUMENTATION WITHIN THE SCOPE OF DIAGNOSIS / 40
3.1.3 DOCUMENTATION WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THERAPY / 41
3.2 PRINCIPLES OF PRESERVATION / 42
3.2.1 CONSERVATION: / 43
3.2.2 RESTORATION: / 44
3.2.3 RENOVATION: / 44
3.2.4 MAINTENANCE: / 45
3.2.5 REPAIR AND STABILIZATION: / 45
3.2.6 REHABILITATION AND MONETIZATION: / 48
3.2.7 RECONSTRUCTION: / 49
3.2.8 THE OPTION OF REVERSIBILITY / 49
3.3. PREVENTIVE CONSERVATION / 51

3.4 INTERVENTIVE CONSERVATION

/ 52
3.4.1 CLEANING / 52
3.4.2 DESALINATION / 56
3.4.3 CONSOLIDATION / 57
3.4.4 SURFACE COATINGS / 60
3.4.4.1WATER REPELLENTS / 61
3.4.4.2 BARRIERS AGAINST AIR POLLUTION / 62
3.4.4.3 REACTION INHIBITORS / 62
3.4.4.4 CRYSTAL GROWTH INHIBITORS / 63
3.4.4.5 BIOCIDES / 63
CHAPTER IV. / 65
4. THE CASE STUDY (SAINT NICOLAS CATHEDRAL) / 65
4.1 FAMAGUSTA /GAZIMAĞUSA / 65
4.2 SAINT NICOLAS CATHEDRAL / LALA MUSTAFA PAŞA MOSQUE / 67
4.2.1 CONTEMPORARY DESCRIPTION OF THE CATHEDRAL / 70
4.2.2 WEATHERINGSTATE OF THE CATHEDRAL / 74
4.3. CASE ENVIRONMENT / 83
4.3.1 AIR TEMPERATURES / 85
4.3.2 RELATIVE HUMIDITY OF THE AIR / 86
4.3.3SUNSHINE / 86
4.3.4 WINDS / 88
4.3.5 AIR QUALITY / 89
4.3.5.1 PARTICULATE MATTER (PM10) / 89
4.3.5.2 SULPHUR DIOXIDE (SO2) / 90
4.3.5.3 NITROGEN DIOXIDE (NO2) / 92
4.3.5.4 OZONE (O3) / 93
CHAPTER V / 95
5. METHODOLOGY / 95
CHAPTER VI / 108
6. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION / 108
CONCLUSIONS / 133
RECOMMENDATIONS / 137
REFERENCES / 140

List of tables:

Table No. / Table name / Page
Table 2.1 / Crystallization pressures of a few common salts ……………………... / 21
Table 2.2 / Engineering classification of weathering ……………………...……… / 25
Table 2.3 / Structure of the classification scheme of weathering forms ………….. / 26
Table 2.4a / Classification scheme of weathering forms (Group 1) ………………... / 27
Table 2.4b / Classification scheme of weathering forms (Group 2) ………………... / 28
Table 2.4c / Classification scheme of weathering forms (Group 3) ………………... / 30
Table 2.4d / Classification scheme of weathering forms (Group 4) ………………... / 32
Table 3.1 / Scales of stone deterioration ………………...………………...……… / 40
Table 4.1 / survey of historical earthquakes affected the region / 69
Table 4.2 / Meteorological Data of Famagusta (1975-2005) ……………………... / 85
Table 6.1 / Discoloration stages percentages ...………...………………...……….. / 113
Chart 6.1 / Comparisons of discoloration stages percentages ……………..……... / 113
Table 6.2 / Weathering grade percentages ...…………………...…………………. / 119
Chart 6.2 / Comparisons of weathering grade percentages …………..………...... / 119
Table 6.3 / Weathering rate averages in each sampling site around the cathedral / 121
Table 6.4 / Unit weight and specific gravity values of tested samples of No.1 type and there average………………...……………………………...……... / 123
Table 6.5 / Unit weight and specific gravity values of tested samples of No.2 type and there average………………...……………………………...……... / 123
Table 6.6 / Water absorption values for the tested samples (No.1 type samples)…. / 124
Table 6.7 / Water absorption values for the tested samples (No.2 type samples)…. / 124
Table 6.8 / Classification of density of limestone …………………………...……. / 125
Table 6.9 / Classification of density of limestone according to water absorption / 125
Table 6.10 / Compressive strength test results (samples type No.1) ...... ……….. / 126
Table 6.11 / Compressive strength test results (samples type No.2)...... ……...…….. / 126
Table 6.12 / Classification of compressive strength …………………...... / 127
Table 6.13 / Results of Water soluble salts and conductivity analysis ……………... / 128
Table 6.14 / Results of LOI and IR analysis …………………...... ………..……….. / 128
Table 6.15 / British Geological Scheme for the classification of limestone by purity / 129
Table 6.16 / Classification of limestone samples (No.1 and No.2) ………………… / 132

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No. / Figure name / Page
Figure 2.1 / Stone weathering model diagram: morphology and chronology ….….. / 10
Figure 3.1 / Approach to monument preservation………………………………….. / 38
Figure 4.1 / Famagusta district- North Cyprus …………………………………….. / 65
Figure 4.2 / Walled city of Famagusta ………………………………………..…… / 65
Figure 4.3 / A general view of St. Nicholas Cathedral ……………………..……... / 67
Figure 4.4 / West Facade of the Cathedral ……………………………...…………. / 70
Figure 4.5 / The construction plaque on the south wall ……………………………. / 72
Figure 4.6 / (Relief) Alveolar weathering (Ra) ……………………………………. / 74
Figure 4.7 / (Relief) Alveolar weathering (Ra) ……………………………………. / 74
Figure 4.8 / From western wall …………………………………………………….. / 76
Figure 4.9 / From western wall …………………………………………………...... / 76
Figure 4.10 / From northern wall …………………………………...……………….. / 76
Figure 4.11 / Biological colonization ……………………………………………….. / 77
Figure 4.12 / Biological colonization ……………………………………………….. / 77
Figure 4.13 / Biological colonization (Eastern wall) ………………………………... / 78
Figure 4.14 / Colonization by higher plants (southern wall) ………….…………...... / 78
Figure 4.15 / Colonization by higher plants (western wall) ……….…….………….. / 78
Figure 4.16 / Soiling to crust (western wall) ………………………………………... / 79
Figure 4.17 / Soiling to crust (eastern wall) …….…………………………………... / 79
Figure 4.18 / Soiling to crust (western wall) ……….……………………………….. / 79
Figure 4.19 / Coloration ……………...…….………………………………………... / 80
Figure 4.20 / Coloration ……………...…….………………………………………... / 80
Figure 4.21 / Coloration ……………...…….………………………………………... / 80
Figure 4.22 / Weathered wall section (southern side) ……………...……...………... / 81
Figure 4.23 / Weathered wall section (northern side) ……………...………………... / 81
Figure 4.24 / Break out ……………...………………...…………...………………... / 82
Figure 4.25 / Break out ……………...………………...…………...………………... / 82
Figure 4.26 / Destructive works …………...…………...………...…..……………... / 82
Figure 4.27 / Average Min and Max temperatures in Famagusta (2009) …………… / 86
figure 4.28 / Average sunhours in Famagusta (2009) ………………………………. / 87
Figure 4.29 / Simulating the sun path in relative to the cathedral ……...…………… / 87
Figure 4.30 / Sea breeze ……………………………….……………………………. / 88
Figure 4.31 / Sea breeze direction with regard to the cathedral ……………………. / 88
Figure 4.32 / PM10 concentrations(µg/m3) in Northern Cyprus (2002-2004) ……… / 89
Figure 4.33 / Satellite image shows Sahara dust covering large portion of Mediterranean sea …………………………………………………….. / 90
Figure 4.34 / Mean interpolated SO2 distribution over Cyprus during summer
(2002 and 2003) ………………………………………………………. / 91
Figure 4.35 / Mean interpolated SO2 distribution over Cyprus during winter
(2002 and 2003) ………………………………………………………. / 91
Figure 4.36 / Mean annual interpolated SO2 distribution over Cyprus
(Summer 2002 to summer 2003) ……………………………………… / 91
Figure 4.37 / Mean annual interpolated NO2 distribution in Famagusta (2002-2004) / 92
Figure 4.38 / Mean interpolated Ozone distribution in Cyrus during summer ……… / 93
Figure 5.1 / Sample No.1 (washed) …………………………………...…………… / 97
Figure 5.2 / Sample No.2 (washed) ……...………………………………………… / 97
Figure 5.3 / Shows the stone color difference …………………………………...… / 97
Figure 5.4 / Shows some moderately discolored …………………………………... / 99
Figure 5.5 / Shows some highly discolored stones ………………………………… / 99
Figure 5.6 / Shows some slightly discolored stones …………………………..…… / 99
Figure 5.7 / Shows some slightly weathered stones ……………………………..… / 100
Figure 5.8 / Shows moderately weathered stone ………………………………...… / 100
Figure 5.9 / Shows some highly weathered ……………...………………………… / 100
Figure 5.10 / Shows some extremely weathered stones ……………………...... …… / 100
Figure 5.11 / Shows the starting point (site no. 1) …...……………………………… / 101
Figure 5.12 / Shows the site no. 14 …………………………………..……………… / 101
Figure 5.13 / Weathering rate measuring instruments ……………………………… / 101
Figure 5.14 / Two examples of Stone surface weathering features from the Cathedral walls ……………………………………………...………… / 101
Figure 6.1 / Discoloration assessment of stone on Western façade ………………... / 109
Figure 6.2 / Discoloration assessment of stone on southern façade ……………….. / 110
Figure 6.3 / Discoloration assessment of stone on Northern façade ……………….. / 111
Figure 6.4 / Discoloration assessment of stone on eastern façade ………………..... / 112
Figure 6.5 / Weathering grade assessment of stone on the western façade ………... / 115
Figure 6.6 / Weathering grade assessment of stone on the southern façade ……….. / 116
Figure 6.7 / Weathering grade assessment of stone on the northern façade ……….. / 117
Figure 6.8 / Weathering grade assessment of stone on the eastern façade ………… / 118
Figure 6.9 / Sampling areas ………………...………………...………………...... / 121
Figure 6.10 / Compressive strength results for samples (No.1,a and No.1,b) ………. / 126
Figure 6.11 / Compressive strength results for samples (No.2,a and No.1,b) ………. / 127
Figure 6.12 / General view of sample No.1 using Stereo Microscope ………...……. / 130
Figure 6.13 / General view of sample No.2 using Stereo Microscope ……...………. / 121
Figure 6.14 / Sample No.1 cross sectional view under the polarized microscope...... / 131
Figure 6.15 / Sample No.2 cross sectional view under the polarizing microscope...... / 132

1