<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.3/JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xml:lang="ru">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-id journal-id-type="elibrary">33407</journal-id>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>Construction of Unique Buildings and Structures</journal-title>
        <trans-title-group xml:lang="ru">
          <trans-title>Строительство уникальных зданий и сооружений</trans-title>
        </trans-title-group>
      </journal-title-group>
      <issn pub-type="epub">2304-6295</issn>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">6</article-id>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4123/CUBS.123.7</article-id>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Criteria for assessing bioconcrete recovery after repeated crack opening</article-title>
        <trans-title-group xml:lang="ru">
          <trans-title>Criteria for assessing bioconcrete recovery after repeated crack opening</trans-title>
        </trans-title-group>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0002-3142-6018</contrib-id>
          <name>
            <surname>Kirsanova</surname>
            <given-names>Tatiana Aleksandrovna</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/>
          <email>kirsanova_ta@spbstu.ru</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0002-2596-0855</contrib-id>
          <name>
            <surname>Chistyakov</surname>
            <given-names>Vladimir Anatolyevich</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"/>
          <email>vladimirchi@yandex.ru</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0002-7521-5079</contrib-id>
          <contrib-id contrib-id-type="scopus">57197681036</contrib-id>
          <contrib-id contrib-id-type="researcherid">R-7951-2019</contrib-id>
          <name>
            <surname>Rahmani</surname>
            <given-names>Hamid</given-names>
          </name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"/>
          <email>hrahmani@znu.ac.ir</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0003-1913-4837</contrib-id>
          <name>
            <surname>Bahari</surname>
            <given-names>Abbas</given-names>
          </name>
          <email>bahari@znu.ac.ir</email>
        </contrib>
      </contrib-group>
      <aff id="aff1">Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University</aff>
      <aff id="aff2">Southern Federal University</aff>
      <aff id="aff3">University of Zanjan</aff>
      <pub-date publication-format="electronic" date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2026-04-01">
        <day>01</day>
        <month>04</month>
        <year>2026</year>
      </pub-date>
      <issue>3</issue>
      <issue-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">123</issue-id>
      <fpage>12307</fpage>
      <lpage>12307</lpage>
      <abstract xml:lang="en">
        <p>The object of research is the recovery of bacterial cementitious materials after repeated crack opening. This work aims to develop an assessment procedure that combines crack-width measurements, sequential forecast validation, and functional indicators. Method. Three published second-loading crack-width series were normalised by their initial openings and analysed using local exponential fitting and expanding-window validation. Five recovery indicators from a separate mortar study were compared at matched observation times. Results. Crack-width reduction at 21 days after second loading was 89.47, 83.33 and 82.22%. The fitted rate constants ranged from 0.08745 to 0.10595 d−1, with R² values of 0.9425–0.9765. Nine next-observation forecasts yielded normalised mean absolute and root mean square errors of 0.06934 and 0.07712, equivalent to 0.05116 and 0.05799 mm. In the separate functional block, surface closure and ultrasonic recovery at 28 days were 96.0636 and 67.7680%, respectively, with a difference of 28.2956 percentage points. The proposed procedure records a new baseline for each cracking cycle, estimates local kinetics, checks the next observation, and assigns functional tests according to the intended performance of concrete products.</p>
        <p>***ARTICLE IN PRESS***</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group xml:lang="en">
        <kwd>Construction materials</kwd>
        <kwd>Concrete products</kwd>
        <kwd>Self-healing concrete</kwd>
        <kwd>Repeated cracking</kwd>
        <kwd>Healing assessment</kwd>
        <kwd>Forecast validation</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
</article>
