Modeling of Tomb Decay at St. Louis Cemetery No. 1: the Role of Material Properties and the Environment Judith Alleyne Peters University of Pennsylvania
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Theses (Historic Preservation) Graduate Program in Historic Preservation 2002 Modeling of Tomb Decay at St. Louis Cemetery No. 1: The Role of Material Properties and the Environment Judith Alleyne Peters University of Pennsylvania Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses Part of the Historic Preservation and Conservation Commons Peters, Judith Alleyne, "Modeling of Tomb Decay at St. Louis Cemetery No. 1: The Role of Material Properties and the Environment" (2002). Theses (Historic Preservation). 471. http://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses/471 Copyright note: Penn School Of Design permits distribution and display of this student work by University of Pennsylvania Libraries. Suggested Citation: Peters, Judith Alleyne. (2002). Modeling of Tomb Decay at St. Louis Cemetery No. 1: The Role of Material Properties and the Environment. (Masters Thesis). University Of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. http://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses/471 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Modeling of Tomb Decay at St. Louis Cemetery No. 1: The Role of Material Properties and the Environment Disciplines Historic Preservation and Conservation Comments Copyright note: Penn School Of Design permits distribution and display of this student work by University of Pennsylvania Libraries. Suggested Citation: Peters, Judith Alleyne. (2002). Modeling of Tomb Decay at St. Louis Cemetery No. 1: The Role of Material Properties and the Environment. (Masters Thesis). University Of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. This thesis or dissertation is available at ScholarlyCommons: http://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses/471 UNIVERSITY/ PENNSYLVANIA. UBRAR1E5 MODELING OF TOMB DECAY AT ST. LOUIS CEMETERY NO. 1: THE ROLE OF MATERIAL PROPERTIES AIND THE ENVIRONMENT Judith Alleyne Peters A THESIS Historic Preservation in Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania of Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCffiNCE 2002 Resyier FrankG^Matero John A. Fidler Building Conservation Associate Professor of Architecture Head of & Research English Heritage . Chair Franklj-^atero Associate Professor of Architecture Aers//v)A oS a^^<3 P Mg^ f\t^t / I / UNIVERSlPi' OF PENNSYLVANIA LIBRARIES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS When one decides to "retire early" at age fifty from a lucrative business career to seriously pursue a career in the preservation of significant cultural resources, it can only be done successfiilly with considerable support from family, friends and mentors. the constant I have been exceedingly fortunate to have a family that encourages acquisition of knowledge of the material and cultural world. My father. Dr. Timothy Peters, and my mother. Dr. Janice Peters, have taught me that there are friends, opportunities and interesting, challenging projects to be found in every part of life, and in every part of the globe. It is boring and unfijlfilling to walk only on the conventional paths. When I decided to enter a graduate program in conservation at the University of Pennsylvania, I never realized how totally involved I would become. I wish to acknowledge my brother, sister and friends that have helped me maintain my life and responsibilities in Princeton, NJ, while I worked and studied long hours in Philadelphia. My brother has been particularly helpfiil wdth all physical phases of this research, such as helping me carry and cut heavy bricks and samples of stucco. This research has been a joy and I have purposefiilly pushed into areas not absolutely required for the main theme, so that I could acquire hands-on experience with many sample handling, characterization and analytical techniques. I would like to express MODELING OF TOMB DECA YAT ST. LOUIS CEMETERY NO. 1 my gratitude to Lindsay Hannah and Dorothy Krotzer for their on-site help in gathering the numerous samples, and for their insight into deterioration at the site as they work on the Save America 's Treasures project to stabilize and restore tombs. I found the classes and labs taught by Frank Matero and Elena Charola particularly helpful in this research, and also wish to thank Rynta Fourie for her time and advice on microscopy. Jim Ferris, Bill Romonow and Andrew McGhie at the Laboratory for Research on Structural Matter were wonderfully giving of their time and expertise in SEM, XRD and TGA. Lastly, I wish to acknowledge and express my gratitude to Frank Matero. When I first posed the idea of coming back to school and entering a new field, he enthusiastically endorsed the plan. Since I entered the program, he has offered me numerous projects to expand my knowledge and experience base. I have particularly enjoyed working on the New Orleans St. Louis Cemetery No. 1 project and look forward to expanding my involvement in a continuing role next year. Introduction 4 Hi TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS " FIGURES vii TABLES x« LO INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 ST. LOUIS CEMETERY NO. 1 - HISTORICAL CONTEXT 5 2.1 New Orleans - A City Develops in Spite of the River 5 2.2 St. Louis Cemetery No. 1 - Development and Change 8 2.3 Tomb Types and Traditional Construction 11 2.4 The Evolution of Restoration Practices 19 3.0 TOMB DECAY MECHANISMS 26 3.1 Development of Hypotheses 26 3.2 Tomb Construction - Form and Function 27 3.3 Construction Materials 32 3.3.1 The Integrated Assembly System 32 3.3.2 Brick 33 3.3.3 Mortar, Stucco, Plaster and Render 39 3.3.4 Surface Finish 48 3.3.5 Additional Components 50 3.4 Environmental Conditions 51 3.4.1 The Environment of New Orleans and the Cemetery Site 51 3.4.2 Biological and Vegetative Growth 54 3.4.3 Other Environmental Issues 56 3.5 Moisture Driven Decay Mechanisms 59 3.5.1 Porosity and Moisture Movement 60 3.5.2 The Evaporative Drying Process 66 3.5.3 Chemical Actions 70 3.5.4 Physical Movement 72 4.0 CURRENT CONDITIONS 75 4.1 Analysis of Current Condition Survey Data 75 4.2 Field Survey Observations 76 5.0 MATERIAL ANALYSIS AND CHARACTERIZATION 91 5.1 Sampling Strategies 93 5.1.1 Brick 94 5.1.2 Stucco/ Surface Finish Assembly 95 5.1.3 Mortar 96 5.2 Laboratory Analysis ^^ 96 5.2.1 Visual Inspection and Physical Characterization 101 5.2.2 Moisture Absorption by Total Immersion 108 5.2.3 Additional Tests on Intact Bricks 1 10 5.2.4 Development of Test Plan for Further Analysis 5.2.5 Water Vapor Transmission HI 5.2.6 Capillary Absorption 119 5.2.7 Drying Curves and Drying Rates 123 5.2.8 Acid Soluble Analysis & Gravimetric Analysis 127 5.2.9 Calcimetry 138 5.2.10 Presence of Salts 139 5.2.11 Optical Microscopy 142 5.2.12 Polarized Light Microscopy 146 5.2.13 Advanced Instrumental Analysis 151 5.2.14 Scanning Electron Microscopy, EDS 151 5.2.15 X-Ray Diffraction Analysis 159 5.2.16 Thermal Gravimetry, Differential Thermal Analysis 165 5.2.17 Laboratory Analysis - Observations and Conclusions 171 6.0 TOMB DECAY MODELS & SCENARIOS 174 6.1 Tomb Decay Mechanisms Confirmed 174 6.1.1 Brick 176 6.1.2 Mortar 177 6.1.3 Stucco 179 6.2 Tomb Combinations Dlustrated 182 6.3 Tomb Decay Scenarios 188 6.3.1 The Well-Maintained Tomb 190 6.3.2 Neglected Surface Finishes 192 6.3.3 Deferred Repairs 194 6.3.4 The Unwelcome "Garden" 196 6.3.5 Incompatible Surface Finishes 198 6.3.6 Incompatible Patches & Repairs 200 6.3.7 The Cement Straight-Jacket 202 7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 204 7.1 Recommendations for Further Research 204 7.2 Recommendations for Aboveground Cemetery Guidelines 207 8.0 CONCLUSIONS 208 BIBLIOGRAPHY 210 New Orleans History and Cemeteries 210 Technical Bibliography 214 APPENDICES 227 Appendix A - GISMaps of Conditions 228 Appendix B - Sampling Record 236 Appendix C - Experimental Data 267 Appendix D - Summary Results 293 INDEX 303 FIGURES CHAPTER 2 2. 1 Map of the Louisiana Coast, 1719-20, M, de Serigny, The Historic New Orleans Collection, 22.1 6 2.2 Norman's Plan of New Orleans Environs, 1845, Special Collections, Tulane University 7 2.3 Closure tablet. Tomb #251, First visible date of 1826 10 2.4 Aboveground tombs 11 2.5 Early step tombs 13 2.6 Sketches of aboveground tombs by Benjamin Latrobe, from The Journals ofBenjamin Henry Latrobe 1 799-1820 14 2.7 St. Louis Cemetery No. 1 in 1834, Watercolor sketch by John H.B. Latrobe... 16 2.8 Perpetual Care tomb being rebuiU 22 2.9 Marble tablet repaired with an incompatible epoxy adhesive 23 2.10 Bergamini Tomb #12, one of the pilot restoration tombs 25 CHAPTERS 3.1 Cause-and-effect diagram for tomb decay 26 3.2 Vauh configurations for aboveground tombs 29 3.3 Brickwork showing evidence that tomb was added onto at some time 30 3.4 Muhiple layers of surface finish. 12.5 x magnification 30 3.5 Multiple layers of stucco. 12.5 x magnification 30 3.6 Flooding between the tombs 51 3.7 St. Louis Cemetery No. 1, March 2001 58 3.8 Sources of moisture 59 3.9 Attraction of water molecules to hydrophilic porous materials 61 3.10 4 levels of wetting for hydrophilic porous materials 64 3.11 Capillary Absorption Curve for 548-01 Brick with Stucco 65 3.12 4 levels of drying for hydrophilic porous materials 67 3.13 Drying rate curve shows critical moisture content point 68 3.14 The salt decay mechanism 70 3.15 Brick fractured by cement stucco 71 CHAPTER 4 4.1 Stucco condition mapping through GIS 75 4.2 Adhesion mechanisms include both physical and chemical forces 77 4.3 Example of cracked and peeling modem finish 78 4.4 Delamination and deformation of stucco 80 4.5 Telescoping brick wall 82 4.6 Open mortar joints and evidence of wetness 82 4.7 Tomb #518 Sodiedad Cervantes de B.M., cement cracking 82 4.8 Comparison of damage results.