This analysis employs nanoindentation to assess mechanical strength in caliche, indicating implications for archaeological work.
During the processes of excavation, restoration, and conservation of archaeological sites, it is common practice to perform physical and chemical characterization of the site materials. This is carried out to determine the best methods and materials for conserving and preserving the site. For this reason, techniques such as infrared spectroscopy and elemental analysis by X-ray fluorescence (XRF) are primarily used for chemical characterization, while mechanical tests such as the uniaxial compression test and hardness tests are used for physical and mechanical characterization. However, a common limitation is obtaining samples for destructive physical tests, such as compression tests, due to their invaluable cultural value. To address this problem, this work proposes the mechanical characterization of the material through nanoindentation. This technique requires a smaller sample size and can be performed in a timely manner by observing the resistance of each mineralogical phase present in the material. Thus, a preliminary predictive model of mechanical resistance is proposed based on the composition observed in the samples from the archaeological site of Cerro de los Remedios, located in the municipality of Comonfort, Guanajuato, Mexico. The samples were characterized using infrared spectroscopy, XRF, XRD, and SEM-EDS. The results indicate that the stone (caliche) is formed from 95.6–93% micrite calcite; 2.51–0.42% aluminosilicate; 3.14–1.89% high-calcium aluminosilicate; and 3.43–2.39 quartz or amorphous SiO2. The proposed correlation models were adjusted to a linear function, a second-order polynomial, and a logarithmic function. In the M2–linear model, the non-linear effects generated by variables such as texture, porosity, phase adhesion, cement type, and cracks or discontinuities were not considered. In this model the best prediction of the experimental data was obtained within a variation of ±15%.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Salazar‐Hernández et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: