PSI - Issue 55

Isabel Turbay et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 55 (2024) 168–176 Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000 – 000

175

8

having suffered unfortunate interventions. In this group are: La Catedral (CAG) and La Merced (MER) of La Antigua Guatemala; San Agustín (AGU), San Francisco (SFP) and San José (JOS) in Popayan, and San Pedro (SPC) in Cartagena. Other churches in alert such as San Roque in Cartagena (SRC) and La Ermita in Popayan (ERM) are mainly affected by fire resistance, physical and chemical characteristics, texture, foundation, structure, construction system and urban landscape. Meanwhile, La Catedral de Santa Catalina (CCC) and Santo Domingo (SDC) in Cartagena, and El Carmen in Popayan (CAR), are located with a relevant vulnerability in terms of urban pressure, due to the use of the surrounding land, inadequate occupation of public space, inadequate traffic and interventions, in addition to seismic vulnerability and a relative condition of vulnerability with respect to fire resistance. Buildings with high vulnerability degree grouped in orange (Fig. 3), are mainly related to intrinsic factors such as physical-chemical characteristics, texture, foundation, construction system, and those related to the level of use of the building or maintenance. Buildings with very high vulnerability degree (red) are mainly related to the physical and chemical characteristics of the materials, the foundation, the urban landscape, maintenance, roofs and structure. These graphic classifications help cultural heritage managers to make decisions on preventive conservation to understand the complexity of the vulnerability. 4. Conclusions The study using PCA allows us to identify the factors with the greatest statistical weight in the vulnerability assessment for each vulnerability model analysed and in the 21 churches studied. However, in this case these weights do not imply a significance for the simplification of the method, they allow us to understand the complexity of the vulnerability indices. The PCA has served as a clustering tool to identify similarities and differences in the factors that affect the overall vulnerability of each church, making it possible to predict typical future behaviours that allow cultural heritage managers establish preventive conservation measures applicable to several churches of the same type. Specifically, it has been shown that churches that have a high seismic vulnerability tend to also be those with a complex construction solution and difficult roofs in terms of rainwater evacuation, therefore, the monitoring and operation of this group of buildings could focus on mitigating risks by specifying alternatives that cover vulnerability in a unified way. For fire mitigation, this study has revealed a negative correlation between fire resistance and roof design. The churches that are less vulnerable to fire resistance tend to be those with a more complex roof design and more problems due to rain percolation, while churches with wooden ceilings on roofs are more vulnerable to fires. Urban plans and policies are essential to minimize global vulnerability in historic buildings and would have to be implemented at all degree of vulnerability (very low – very high) for preventive conservation purposes. This study highlights the need to carry out studies in a greater number of churches so that the data set contains more information on affected monuments with different locations, since in this case the loads of variables F1 and F2 explain around 53% of the total variability, related to 13 of 18 variables, and with more observations the set could be better understood. In addition, together with other statistical methods, the results could be complemented as in the case of cluster analysis or discriminant analysis. Acknowledgements This study was based on the ART-RISK methodology developed and funded thanks to ART-RISK project, a RETOS project of Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, Spain and European Regional Funds Development (ERFD), (code: BIA2015-64878-R (MINECO/FEDER, UE)) and FENIX (PID2019-107257RB-I00) financed by MCIN/AEI//10.13039/501100011033/FEDER “A way to build Europe” . This research employed DELPHI method to evaluate the vulnerability of Cultural heritage as part of the resilience of the communities in the context of the CONECT project (Collective Networks For Everyday Community Resilience And Ecological Transition, ENUTC Cofund 2021, PCI2022-133014) funded by AEI and UE with the Recovery, Transformation and Resilience Plan,