## 6 Conclusions  
This paper focuses on the Macarena Wall, a well-known rammed earth construction in Seville. The urban development of the city throughout the centuries has led to this structure working as a retaining wall. Despite the fact that it is a military structure, it was not conceived for this situation. Taking this into account, the geotechnical stability of the Macarena Wall has been studied. One of the main problems to achieve this goal is the lack of specific codes for the assessment of historic constructions. In order to fill this gap, actual \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Overturning**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Sliding**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Bearing**} \\ \hline  & **CTE** & **EC** & **CTE** & **EC** & **CTE** & **EC** \\ \hline Case 1 & 61.98\% & 61.47\% & - & - & \(-46.47\%\) & 1.97\% \\ Case 2 & 57.66\% & 58.23\% & 39.37\% & 46.96\% & 48.63\% & 50.35\% \\ Case 3 & 57.38\% & 58.03\% & 23.85\% & 41.92\% & 55.58\% & 59.20\% \\ \hline Average & 59.01\% & 59.25\% & 31.61\% & 44.44\% & 52.10\% & 54.78\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 10: Percentage reduction in safety based on ODF taking the persistent situation (i), with imposed load on pavement as leading variable action, and seismic situation (ii), with vertical downward acceleration. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Overturning**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Sliding**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Bearing**} \\ \hline  & & **CTE** & **EC** & **CTE** & **EC** & **CTE** & **EC** \\ \hline Persistent Design & Leading Variable & Imposed Load on & 22.36\% & 22.36\% & - & - & 35.52\% & 55.36\% \\ Situation & Action & Wind & 22.36\% & 22.36\% & - & - & 42.76\% & 58.04\% \\ Seismic Design & Vertical & Downward & 13.55\% & 15.83\% & - & - & 77.39\% & 77.39\% \\ Situation & Acceleration & Upward & 19.78\% & 20.09\% & - & - & 75.32\% & 75.76\% \\ \hline  & & Average & 19.51\% & 20.16\% & - & - & 57.75\% & 66.64\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 11: Percentage difference between ODF: Case 1 to Case 2. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Overturning**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Sliding**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Bearing**} \\ \hline  & & **CTE** & **EC** & **CTE** & **EC** & **CTE** & **EC** \\ \hline Persistent Design & Leading Variable & Imposed Load on & 1.71\% & 1.71\% & 58.85\% & 54.36\% & 34.87\% & 25.27\% \\ Situation & Action & Wind & 1.71\% & 1.71\% & 59.26\% & 54.88\% & 34.37\% & 24.93\% \\ Seismic Design & Vertical & Downward & 1.05\% & 1.23\% & 64.41\% & 62.49\% & 18.21\% & 18.17\% \\ Situation & Acceleration & Upward & 1.50\% & 1.52\% & 63.59\% & 62.27\% & 19.35\% & 19.31\% \\ \hline  & & Average & 1.49\% & 1.54\% & 61.53\% & 58.50\% & 26.70\% & 21.92\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 12: Percentage difference between ODF: Case 2 to Case 3.  
codes for new structures have been used, namely the Spanish Technical Building Code (CTE DB SE, v2019) and Eurocode 7 (EC7-1, v2005). Urban fortified enclosures, as well as many other ancient buildings, have a high heritage value. The magnitude of the actions acting on a structure over its lifetime can change, either by natural factors or by human action. In this context, an Excel spreadsheet has been developed to quickly obtain the geotechnical verifications of this building, speeding up the decision-making process in the case of instability. This analytic tool is designed on the assumption that the retaining wall is infinitely long. It includes lateral earth pressure on both sides of the retaining wall, an imposed load on pavement, and the action of the wind together with seismic action. By changing the cross-section geometry and the mechanical properties of the soil, it is possible to analyze any stretch of the fortified enclosure, either in the current state or any other situation.