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

cultural properties. It will be necessary to make levelheadeddecisions by reviewing past restorations and choosingtechnical methods that can today be still applied. For thisto be realized, occasions when architectural conservatorscan gather, discuss, and give one another feedbacks on theirworks seem to be what is necessary. On-site workshopssuch as that led by Restoration Research Society for CulturalProperty Structures in recent years at Chateau Kamiya OldWinery Facility provided an opportunity for exchangingopinions.Those in charge of restoration need to be able toobjectively explain the procedures taken in deciding towhat extent preservation principles were followed and whatchanges were to be accepted. If a record could be kept ofhow each of the participants including the property owner,site manager, restoration designer, structural engineer, andspecialists reached a conclusion, it would be invaluable forreviewing past restorations in the coming future.Lastly, I would like to note that this year (2017) marksthe 40th anniversary of the first structural reinforcementadopted in the restoration of the Imperial GuardsHeadquarters. We will have to face maintenance andrepair of the reinforcement systems that had earlier beenapplied. Additionally, in new reinforcement to be installed,it is not only durability that needs to be verified, but alsoconsideration for maintenance after restoration has beencompleted. Aside from using materials of high durability,the ease of inspection by building managers as well aslow maintenance fees are issues that particularly requireattention in preservation.Footnotes1. The number of nationally designated or registered brick masonrycultural properties are as follows: Important Cultural Properties (157structures, out of 947 structures from the modern period [after thestart of the Meiji era in 1868] ) and Registered Cultural Property (329structures, out of 11,301 structures) (As of March 2017)2. In this paper, it has been concluded that an effective preventivemethod for efflorescence on reinforced concrete structures is toprevent water from passing through walls (Matsuo 2007).3. The author had the chance to be involved in this restorationproject as a member of the organization in charge of constructionsupervision and to view the processes for installing reinforcement.In order to attach metal plates onto brick walls, anchors needed tobe inserted into the deformed walls at regular intervals, which wouldthen be threaded into the holes in the plates to be fixed. Because theseams between plates were to be welded, edges of plates needed tobe flush with one other and thus, there was much difficulty in theaccurate positioning of these heavy metal plates. Restoration of theinterior finishes required adjustments which appeared after changeswere made to the wall thickness; the construction manager drewdetailed drawings on-site for accurate execution. Compared withreinforcement methods involving steel frame, which is connected tohistoric structures at points, reinforcement with metal plates attachedby larger surfaces tend to involve difficulties in construction.4. This was based on an interview of Mr. Nagahito Kobayashi ofThe Building Center of Japan [日本建築センター] by Mr. ShinyaIshida, Modern Cultural Heritage Section, Tokyo National ResearchInstitute for Cultural Properties held on January 20, 2017 regardingstructural reinforcement of Seisen University’s Former MarquisShimazu Residence.5. In order to solidify the reinforcing element with the structure, groutto be used for filling gaps between the brick structure and deformedreinforcement bars should be cement paste or inorganic materialsuch as mortar (in consideration of aging of organic adhesives).6. The longest depth of boring on the office wall was 14 meters.7.”Because brick is a porous material, it absorbs moisture in the groundand brings moisture into the wall…therefore, a moisture-proofbarrier should be placed in a horizontal joint at a height of 15 to 30centimeters from the ground. Material for the barrier can be such asnatural slate, sheet lead, asphalt or waterproof mortar.”(Yagi 1936)8. The three Former Kanazawa Armory Warehouses were nationallydesignated as Important Cultural Properties in 1990 after havingundergone restoration.References? Aikawa, Matsui (2015):相川悠、松井敏也、「煉瓦の吸水放湿特性にみる塩の影響及び保存修復材料の検討」『日本文化財科学会大会研究発表要旨集』pp.244-245.? Inoue, Iijima, Sasaki (1995):井上正樹、飯島眞人、佐々木晴夫、「中央合同庁舎第６号館赤れんが棟保存改修工事」『コンクリート工学』33(4), pp.35-43.? Imazeki (2017):今関俊、「シャトーカミヤの煉瓦躯体に施されていた修理」『文化財建造物研究―保存と修理』Vol.2, pp.33-45.? Ogawa (2010):小川一郎、「三菱一号館（我が国最初の近代オフィスビル）の復元～免震構造による煉瓦組積造建物の復元～」『コンクリート工学』48(10), TOPICS? Kawasaki (2017):川崎香織、「第４回現場ワークショップ（シャトーカミヤ旧醸造場施設）に参加して―学生から見た保存修理実践の場の議論―」『文化財建造物研究』Vol.2, pp.105-109.? Round-table talk (1989):巻頭座談会、「これからの建築文化の遺産をどう残していくか半澤重信、藤森照信、木村勉、横谷英之建築の技術」『施工』pp. 32-47.? Kimura (1997):木村勉、「山形県庁舎及び県会議事堂の修復における構造補強」『建築防災』pp. 29-33.? The Japanese Association for Conservation of ArchitecturalMonuments (JACAM) (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』公益財団法人文化財建造物保存技術協会? The Japanese Association for Conservation of ArchitecturalMonuments (JACAM) (2016)『シャトーカミヤ旧醸造場施設保存修理工事（災害復旧）報告書』公益財団法人文化財建造物保存技術協会? Kuchitsu (2005):朽津信明、「文化財材料としての煉瓦の劣化」『マテリアルライフ学会誌』pp.7-11.? Shimizu (1997):清水真一、「文化財建造物の構造補強の考え方」『建築防災』pp. 2-7.? Suzuki (2001):鈴木博之、『現代の建築保存論』王国社? Suzuki (2012):鈴木博之、「歴史的建造物の保存・再生について」『公共建築』pp. 64-67.? Takiyama, Nagae, Yoshida, et.al. (2007):多幾山法子、長江拓也、吉田亘利他、「歴史的煉瓦造の保存・再生に向けたステンレス鋼挿入耐震補強」『歴史都市防災論文集』Vol.1, pp.203-208.? Tanigawa. Hasegawa, Lee (1996):谷川恭雄、長谷川哲也、李聡子、「近代建築物の補強・補修方法に関する技術の現状」『コンクリート工学』34(10), pp.5-13.? Tominaga (2015):冨永善啓、「文化財建造物の構造補強の考え方:実務からの発想」『建築の研究』pp. 6-11.? Tominaga, Watanabe (2016):冨永善哲、渡邉智子、第４章第２節『構造補強シャトーカミヤ旧醸造場施設保存修理工事（災害復旧）報告書』公益財団法人文化財建造物保存技術協会31