ArticleScientific reports2025
Preventive conservation engineering practice based on deformation resistance capacity evaluation of heritage buildings.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
Abstract
Urban renewal initiatives have accelerated the frequency of deep excavation projects implemented in close proximity to heritage structures. In soft soil regions, the nonlinear deformation behavior of soil creates substantial risks for the structural safety and long-term preservation of heritage buildings. Focusing on material degradation and pronounced deformation sensitivity of heritage buildings, this paper systematically analyzes the structural response to adjacent excavation through integrated finite element modeling. For a foundation pit excavation near a protected masonry heritage structure, the composite support scheme integrating TRD cement-soil cutoff walls, H-section steel beams, concrete horizontal bracing, and alternate bay excavation techniques effectively limited structural settlement to 2.43-3.13 mm, well below the 3.5 mm damage control threshold. Close correlation between monitoring data and numerical predictions confirmed the reliability of the modeling approach. Furthermore, numerical analysis validates that the code-prescribed soil displacement thresholds serve as upper-bound advisory limits for mitigating heritage structure damage, with case study calibration indicating a 30% reduction is warranted when considering horizontal soil displacement impacts. The developed technical pathway integrating "heritage structure deformation resistance assessment - excavation scheme optimization - preventive conservation implementation" not only provides actionable guidance for heritage-adjacent excavations but also offers transferable value for similar engineering projects.
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.