ブックタイトル「煉瓦造建造物の保存と修復」英語版

概要

「煉瓦造建造物の保存と修復」英語版

14. According to an interview of an employee at Kurashiki Ivy Square,ivy is intentionally grown on the brick walls and regularly trimmedas they grow, two to three times a year. In the past ten years, therehas been no building damage observed due to ivy growth.15. When plants are affected by the brown patch disease, small brownspots appear on the leaf and stem. When this spreads to the entireplant, the plant itself will die. This is mostly seen in the monthsfrom mid June to end of September.16. The idea of the sealing treatment was derived from the techniqueof pouring materials such as asphalt into a horizontal joint forwater protection, which has been employed since the Meiji era.This method was modernized and applied in this restoration.17.石神敏（2015）「旧手宮鉄道施設機関車庫の保存修理」『文化財建造物の保存修理を考える第2回シンポジウム「文化財建造物修理の新たなる展開近代化遺産の保存修理」の記録』公益財団法人文化財建造物保存技術協会, pp.93-115.18.公益財団法人文化財建造物保存技術協会（2010）『重要文化財旧手宮鉄道施設（機関車庫三号ほか）保存修理工事報告書』小樽市,pp.138-139.19. It was understood that if groundwater ingress were to becompletely prevented, it would have effects on the ground andtherefore, the pit floor was not treated with a water sealant to leaveway for drainage of water that entered the building from below.20. There have been more than fifty reports published focusing onrestoration projects of brick masonry structures, in which we canfind writings on brick repair methods. However, in many of thesereports, the condition of damage is described only as“severelydamaged,”with most lacking information on how judgments weremade for brick repairs such as replacement. Therefore, among thesereports, exemplary cases where detailed information on standardsapplied for each of the repair methods was clearly given werechosen.21.韮山町教育委員会（1989）『史跡韮山反射炉保存修理事業報告書』韮山町, pp.30-32.22.株式会社計測リサーチコンサルタント（2017）『平成28年度韮山反射炉維持管理事業韮山反射炉調査業務（温湿度計測・電子カルテ作成）』pp.9-12。23. Standards for degree of damage were based on documents fromWorld Heritage Section of Izunokuni City.24.株式会社鹿島出版会（2013）『重要文化財東京駅丸の内駅舎保存・復原工事報告書』東日本旅客鉄道株式会社, p.63、p.176、pp.323-324.25.株式会社鹿島出版会（2013）『重要文化財東京駅丸の内駅舎保存・復原工事報告書』東日本旅客鉄道株式会社, pp.254-255.26.株式会社鹿島出版会（2013）『重要文化財東京駅丸の内駅舎保存・復原工事報告書』東日本旅客鉄道株式会社, pp.325-332.27. Information was provided by Katsunori Maebori who was thearchitectural conservator/project manager for this restoration.Also, the following literature was referred to公益財団法人文化財建造物保存技術協会（2010）『重要文化財旧手宮鉄道施設（機関車庫三号ほか）保存修理工事報告書』小樽市, pp.125-140.28. On the side (the largest surface) of each of the made-to-orderbricks, traces of mechanical cutting made during the manufacturingprocess generally remain. Therefore, in areas such as archspringers where a part of the brick side can be seen, salvaged oldbricks are used, with consideration to factors other than color andform. There are also areas where specially-made replacement brickwas patinated with soot discharged from steam locomotives thatwas left in the building.29.財団法人文化財建造物保存技術協会（1991）『重要文化財山形県旧県庁舎及び県会議事堂保存修理工事報告書1旧県会議事堂編』山形県（生活福祉部生活文化課）, pp.104-109.30.横井邦明（当時、新居浜市別子銅山文化遺産課課長）、「発表資料：旧山根精錬所煙突の保存活用-市民協働の実践の場-」、2012.10.7。31. Created based on新居浜市別子銅山文化遺産課提供資料：「旧山根精錬所煙突調査事業委託報告書」.32. Voluntary participating members of the Architectural Institute ofJapan were Taisuke Yamazaki, Naoji Hasegawa, Yasunori Tsumura,Yuichi Shiki, and Madoka Kayaki. The reinforcement plan wasproposed by Tsumura and Shiki.33. Details of what led to the preservation of this wall are based on aninterview of Professor Masaki Fujikawa of University of Tsukuba,Faculty of Engineering, Information and Systems (held on March10, 2017) who took part in post-disaster surveys in this area.34.藤川昌樹著、野村俊一、是澤紀子編、「〈視点〉被害と復興の構図-災害時の歴史的建造物をめぐって」、『建築遺産保存と再生の思考災害・空間・歴史』、東北大学出版会、pp.171-176。35. Information on this restoration is based on a interview ofMr. Yu Endo of The Japanese Association for Conservation ofArchitectural Monuments, who gave a presentation at the“Seminaron Preservation and Adaptive-Use of Brick Masonry Structures”held at Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural Propertieson July 14, 2016 as well as that of Mr. Yoshio Takahashi whowas responsible for the restoration project, held on December 16,2016.36. In repositioning the walls, the amount of pointing material wascontrolled so that it would settle in appropriate positions relyingon the weight of the walls themselves as they were set down.37. Repairs of the brick walls were made by such methods asreplacement of damaged elements placing priority on appearance,as was desired by the property owner. Therefore, bricks in whichholes were made for raising the wall were repaired likewise.38. Details of this restoration were heard from Masaya Seki, ChiefDesigner of Shimizu Corporation’s Collective Housing and ReligiousStructure Designing Divison, who was involved in the relocationproject of Seishido, through an interview held on January 27,2017.39. Each of the bricks in the wall that was to be cut for installingstructural reinforcement was numbered for reconstruction in thesame position. Their surfaces were made into tiles for reapplication.40.財団法人文化財建造物保存技術協会（1991）『重要文化財山形県旧県庁舎及び県会議事堂保存修理工事報告書1旧県会議事堂編』山形県（生活福祉部生活文化課）, pp.21-23.41.財団法人文化財建造物保存技術協会（1991）『重要文化財山形県旧県庁舎及び県会議事堂保存修理工事報告書1旧県会議事堂編』山形県（生活福祉部生活文化課）, pp.259-261.42. Details of this restoration were based on an interview of TsutomuKimura Professor Emeritus at Nagaoka Institute of Design, whowas the project manager of the restoration of Former YamagataPrefecture Assembly Hall, on January 24, 2017 at the site of theassembly hall and on May 17, 2017 at Tokyo National ResearchInstitute for Cultural Properties.43.木村勉（2017）「バットレスで支え、内部空間を復原山形県旧県会議事堂（文翔館）」『住宅建築2月号』建築資料研究社, pp.24-25.44.公益財団法人文化財建造物保存技術協会（2010）『重要文化財旧手宮鉄道施設（機関車庫三号ほか）保存修理工事報告書』小樽市,pp.1-2.45. This is based on an interview of Mr. Katsunori Maebori. Also, thefollowing documents were referred to公益財団法人文化財建造物保存技術協会(2010).『重要文化財旧手宮鉄道施設(機関車庫三号ほか).保存修理工事報告書』小樽市, pp.183-184.46. Placement of reinforcement members was decided on by choosinglocations in which these additions would be hidden from viewas much as possible. Also, the structural frame created byreinforcement beams was designed with consideration of the fanshapedfloor plan.47. Regarding paint finish on structural reinforcement members, lowglosspaint was chosen to match the texture of paint on steamlocomotives, so as to diminish the presence of these additionalreinforcement elements.48. Details on the restoration case at Seisen University were heardfrom Mr. Masahito Kibayashi木林長仁at The Building Center ofJapan on January 20, 2017.117