ArticlePloS one2025
Study on repair materials and technologies for addressing crack-related damage in the Earthen City Wall of Kaifeng.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rain and snow seepage into the cracks of the soil wall is the leading cause of its surface weathering, and the key to crack repair lies in developing reasonable repair materials. Based on the carbonation principle and mineralization mechanism of quicklime, this study focuses on the cracks in the city wall of Kaifeng as the research subject. Urea urease solution, quicklime, sodium methylsilicate, styrene-acrylic emulsion, waterborne polyurethane, and soil were selected to prepare 27 groups of high-fluidity repair materials with varying proportions. The surface strength, water absorption, surface strength after water absorption, consistency and freeze-thaw cycle tests of crack repair samples were carried out to explore the repair effects of different proportions of repair materials on crack diseases. The results demonstrated that the urease urea solution, along with its mineralization reaction with quicklime and sodium methylsilicate, significantly accelerated the chemical interaction between quicklime and sodium methylsilicate, thereby enhancing the mechanical and waterproofing properties of the repair materials. The group composed of 7.5% quicklime and 7% sodium methylsilicate exhibited a total efficacy coefficient of 96.25, indicating superior mechanical strength and waterproofing performance. Among the tested waterproofing agents-sodium methylsilicate, styrene-acrylic emulsion, and waterborne polyurethane-the effectiveness was ranked as follows: waterborne polyurethane > sodium methylsilicate > styrene-acrylic emulsion. Notably, the group containing 5% sodium methylsilicate combined with 7.5% quicklime achieved the lowest water absorption rate of 3.9%. Thirty cycles of crack-filling experiments revealed that the crack resistance of the filling material surpassed that of the original sample, while maintaining excellent integrity with the earthen structure even after freeze-thaw cycles (Fig 1).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.