17.49°N 44.13°E · Earthen heritageCondition intelligence

The wall tells youbefore it falls.

A printed 100 mm tag, a phone photograph, and a width in millimetres you can defend in a committee room. Midmakh turns a crack into a rate — and a rate into a repair queue under a budget that will not cover everything.

Field capture of a cracked wall with the printed 100 mm scale tag in frame
Field capture · tag solved at 1.708 px/mm · measured 3.04 mmPlate 01
33
ancient villages under restoration across the Najran region
2 MPa
average compressive strength of the mud walls that remain
44 °C
threshold above which wet–dry cycling starts dissolving the clay
5 mm
crack width at which the platform flags intervention
01 — Method

A photograph proves a crack exists. It does not tell you what to do about it.

Most inspection tools stop at detection, and detection is the easy half — a dark line in a photograph is a dark line. What a conservation officer needs is a number they can defend, a direction of travel, and an order of works that survives a budget.

01

A tag in the frame

A printed 100 mm square is taped beside the damage. Its four corners are found in the photograph, so every pixel knows its physical size — with no assumption about how far away the camera was.

02

Geometry, not a guess

The crack is traced and its medial axis measured. Width comes from a distance transform against a known scale, not from a model that has seen other walls. The engine returns millimetres with an error bar.

03

Two dates make a trend

One capture is a snapshot; five are a slope. The record keeps every visit, so the question changes from “how bad is it” to “how long until it is worse than we can fix”.

04

A queue, not a report

Rate, exposure and structural criticality resolve into a ranked list of repairs under the money actually allocated, with the cost of deferral shown beside the cost of work.

The measurement screen showing a 3.04 mm result, the highlighted crack and the drawn 100 mm ruler
Plate 02 — 3.04 mm p95 · 1.708 px/mm · ±0.88% scale · operator confirmed
02 — Limits

It refuses more often than a demo would.

Rejected

No tag in frame. No scale, so no millimetres. The capture is rejected rather than estimated from a guess about distance.

Rejected

Tag too small. At 114 px across, one pixel is 0.88 mm of wall. A millimetre figure from that frame would be a fiction, so the engine asks you to move closer.

Rejected

Nothing coherent. Wall texture, joints and fittings produce dark lines too. If nothing is long and thin enough to be damage, the answer is nothing.

The platform refusing a capture because the printed tag was too small in frame
Plate 03 — a real rejection: tag 114 px wide, 0.88 mm per pixel, no millimetres returned

The operator confirms

The engine proposes a highlighted region. A human looks at it and says whether it is damage. No measurement enters the record without that decision, because a confident wrong number is worse than a refusal.

Screening is labelled

Salt crust, damp and surface loss are read by colour and texture statistics — a heuristic, reported as one. It is not a trained classifier and the interface never implies that it is.

03 — The record

Seven real sites. Real names, real places.

The demonstration portfolio is built on places that exist and appear in the Najran Municipality record, the Saudi Press Agency and the archaeological literature. Two construction dates are published; the rest are estimates, and the table says which is which. Condition values are illustrative — the buildings are not.

Year
Site
Village
Date basis
1688
Al-Aan Palace — Sa‘dan
Al-Aan
documented
1961
Emara Palace
Aba Al-Saud
documented
—
Ra‘oum Castle
Jabal Ra‘oum, Al-Hadn
estimated
—
Al-Lijam
Al-Qabil
estimated
—
Al-Manjam village
North bank, Wadi Najran
estimated
—
Al-Ukhdood
South of Najran city
archaeological
—
Al-Midmar Tower
Badr Al-Janoub
restored

Measure the wall. Decide with the number.

The platform opens on the portfolio: twenty-four records across seven sites, ranked by how soon they fail and what it costs to wait.