Ethics and materials: Some Spanish Cases

The problem is general: modern architects and engineers are trying to understand historic structures using the wrong theoretical frame, the classic (elastic) thery of structures developed in the 19th Century for iron and stell, and in the 20th century for reinforced concrete, disguised with "modern" computer packages, mainly FEM, but also others. Masonry is an essentially different material, and the structural equations must be adapted accordingly. It is not a matter of "taste" or "opinion", and the consequences are before us. Since, say 1920s, historic monuments have suffered the aggression of generations of archietcts and engineers, trying to transform masonry in reinfored concrete or steel. The damage to the monuments and the expense has been, and is, enormous. However, as we have an adequate theory (modern limit analysis of masonry structures, Heyman 1966) which encompasses the "old theory" used successfully by the 18th and 19th Century practical engineers (from Perronet to Sejourné), it is a matter of "Ethics" not to use the wrong approach. It is also "contra natura" to modify the material masonry with indiscriminate injections, stitchings, etc. It is insane to consider, suddenly, that buildings which are Centuries or milennia old, are suddenly in danger of collapse. Maintenance is necessary but not the actual destruction of the constructive essence of the monument. A cocktail of "ignorance, fear and greed" is acting under the best of intentions.

Ethics and materials. Some Spanish Case Studies

In Navea, north of Spain, a medieval arch bridge shows a visible distortion (fig.1a). A stone falls down from the web of a gothic vault in a big parish church in Burgos (fig. 1b), and a voussoir falls down from the rib of another gothic vault in Oviedo (fig. 1c). An oval dome collapses in Zaragoza, though another four identical domes remain safe (fig. 1d). Sometimes the building has to support new, heavier loads. The ruin of the abandoned (since the 19th Century) monastery of Melón should be consolidated, some vaults are rebuilt and the visitors can walk over them. A Franciscan Convent is going to be turned into a Cultural Centre, the loads to be supported being multiplied by a factor of two. A little medieval bridge is asked to support the pass of heavy lorries. These are some of the cases I have studied in the last two decades, all of them referring to questions of structural safety. These are the kind of situations which often occurs in the field of Historic Structures. They require a study and an answer. This is no scholarly work (though in some cases new lines of future research will emerge). A judgement must be made by the expert and this judgement affects the safety and economy, in the last instance, of people. As there are rarely unique answers, the behaviour of the expert, then, can also be judged as "ethical", if he proposes an intervention that is necessary and adequate (or, recommends no intervention, judging the situation safe), or "non-ethical", if recommends an unnecessary or disproportionate intervention. In relation to the monument, also, the proposal can be judged ethically; any intervention damaging seriously the character of the monument may be labelled un-ethical.