Selecting building stones for different uses: Which of the following statements together best describe appropriate stone selection for carving, arches, and high-pressure applications?

Introduction / Context:
Stone selection depends on application: ornamentation, arch construction, and load-bearing conditions require different combinations of weight, strength, and workability. This conceptual question checks your ability to match stone properties to use-cases.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Carving requires ease of tooling.
• Arches benefit from reduced self-weight in some designs.
• High pressure or heavy loads demand strong, hard stones.

Concept / Approach:
Soft, fine-grained stones (e.g., some limestones, soft sandstones) carve readily for intricate details. Lightweight stones (e.g., some tuffs or lighter density stones) reduce dead load, which can be beneficial in arches where self-weight influences thrust. Hard stones (e.g., granites, dense basalts) resist crushing and are appropriate for high-pressure zones like columns and foundations.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Historic architecture illustrates soft limestones for ornamentation, lighter stones in some arch rings, and strong igneous rocks for columns and bearing elements. Modern codes also emphasize compressive strength for load-bearing masonry units.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Each individual statement is correct on its own, but the best comprehensive choice is the combination acknowledging all three principles; hence “All of the above.”

Common Pitfalls:

• Assuming “light stones” are always inferior; in arches, dead load matters, but stone must still meet strength requirements.
• Equating “hard” solely with wear resistance; here compressive strength is central.

Final Answer:
All of the above