Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • 2021-09
  • 2021-10
  • 2021-11
  • 2021-12
  • 2022-01
  • 2022-02
  • 2022-03
  • 2022-04
  • 2022-05
  • 2022-06
  • 2022-07
  • 2022-08
  • 2022-09
  • 2022-10
  • 2022-11
  • 2022-12
  • 2023-01
  • 2023-02
  • 2023-03
  • 2023-04
  • 2023-05
  • 2023-06
  • 2023-07
  • 2023-08
  • 2023-09
  • 2023-10
  • 2023-11
  • 2023-12
  • 2024-01
  • 2024-02
  • 2024-03
  • 2024-04
  • 2024-05
  • Work has been performed the canopy has been removed and

    2018-10-22

    Work has been performed, the canopy has been removed, and the old skylight has been painted with a protective material. However, this work has not been conducted for cultural reasons nor for the desire to conserve and reveal the monument as it concentration equation should be. Actually, the urgency to eliminate the causes of serious risks casually overlapped the removal of the added sham.
    Introduction Franco Minissi (1919–1996) was born in Viterbo near Rome in 1941. Minissi graduated with an architecture degree during the Second World War. He started working in architectural conservation in the early 1950s with a collaboration with Istituto Centrale del Restauro (ICR). His idea of architecture combined ancient values and new spaces, such that during the post-war reconstructions, he defended the historical heritage against the damage of building speculation that followed. His idea of museum design process attempted to give a new meaning to cultural heritage and its preservation referred to concepts of interaction developed by architectural historian, Bruno Zevi, and by theorist of conservation and restoration, Renato Bonelli. During those years, the borderline between conservative solutions and modification of ancient buildings had become less sharp for the contributions of architects such as Franco Albini, Carlo Scarpa, Giovanni Michelucci, Mario Ridolfi, and Ignazio Gardella, or their younger counterparts, namely, Ludovico Quaroni, the BBPR group, or the least known Neapolitan architect, Ezio Bruno De Felice (1916–2000), who carried out works conceived in simultaneous mixture of new and old materials, as a new layer of the building process. A complete overview of his works can be drawn from this recent research, which considered the conceptual aspects on which Franco Minissi based his work and possibilities of those times (Vivio, 2008, 2010).
    Walls of Capo Soprano at Gela, Caltanissetta (Sicily) At Gela, the walls had been brought back to light between 1948 and 1954 by the Super in tendency of Antiquities of South-central Sicily. The walls were composed of a stone basement and above were double skins of raw clay bricks with stone-filled cores. The ICR had already made a few attempts to consolidate the terracruda walls, such as the injection of a specific cement called “fondo coriarca,” but these attempts were unsuccessful. Therefore, the higher portion of the walls was coated with an innovative system designed by Minissi. The system composed of tempered glass plates, which exercised static pressure similar to that of the earth that was almost buried by the century-old walls, and thus, prevented the disintegration of the walls. The setup comprised a glass box placed on the walls and was similar to a showcase built in situ to have the lowest visual possible impact on the monument (Figure 1).The unbreakable glass plates were connected with ties in stainless aluminium alloy and tightened with screw hubcaps with a plastic interface. The ends of the ties gave a new visual pattern visible behind the glass, which recalled ancient clay weaving (Figure 2). However, the diameter of the ties was reduced from 25 to 20mm, while the core samples had a 50mm diameter. These dimensions caused a slow and gradual curving of the ties that was rather moderate in the lower holes of the stone basement but quite marked in the crude-clay walls, whose unstable structure did not oppose any resistance to the deformation.The slight movements that took place later caused water infiltration in-between glass plates. Nonetheless, the situation was kept under control for a long time with a light covering on the restored walls. Such a covering was placed on lattice pillars, placed at a great distance from each other toward the hinterland, and anchored by steel tensors toward the seashore. However, node of Ranvier solution did not prevent greenhouse effect. High temperatures induced by the transparent surface and a complete lack of maintenance produced the perfect microclimate in the space between the wall and the glass surface. Consequently, plants, insects, and microorganisms proliferated.