Bull Eng Geol Env (2006) 65: 209216

DOI 10.1007/s10064-005-0020-3 ORIGINAL PAPER

Helmut Bock Common ground in engineering geology, soil

mechanics and rock mechanics: past, present
and future

Received: 14 May 2005

Accepted: 1 October 2005
Published online: 16 February 2006
Springer-Verlag 2006
H. Bock
Q+S Consult, International Consulting for
Quality Control and Safety Management in
Geotechnical Engineering, Stoltenkampstr.
1, 48455 Bad Bentheim, Germany
E-mail: QS-Consult@t-online.de
Tel.: +49-5922-2700
Abstract Engineering geology, to-
gether with soil mechanics and rock
mechanics, is commonly considered
to be one of the three fundamental
scientic disciplines in ground engi-
neering. Historically, the interrela-
tion between these three disciplines
has never been free of ambiguity.
This, for instance, is highlighted by
the fact that both Karl von Terzaghi,
the founder of soil mechanics, and
Leopold Muller, the founder of rock
mechanics, considered themselves
foremost as engineering geologists
without, however, succeeding in
establishing engineering geology as a
free-standing discipline with auton-
omous intellectual merits, methods
and procedures. This situation has
changed recently as evidenced in
Knills fundamental publication
(2002) on Core Values in Engineer-
ing Geology and by the fact that the
relevant three International Societies
are currently in the process of mov-
ing together towards a Federation
of Geo-Engineering Societies.
Keywords Engineering geol-
ogy Soil mechanics Rock
mechanics
Resume La geologie de lingenieur, Mecanique des sols Mecanique des
avec la mecanique des sols et la
mecanique des roches, est com-
munement consideree comme lune
des trois disciplines scientiques
fondamentales dans le domaine de la
geo-ingenierie. Historiquement, les
relations entre ces trois disciplines
nont jamais ete denuees dambi-
gute. Ceci, par exemple, est mis en
lumiere par le fait que a la fois Karl
von Terzaghi, le fondateur de la
mecanique des sols, et Leopold
Muller, le fondateur de la mecanique
des roches, se consideraient eux-
memes avant tout comme des spe-
cialistes de geologie de lingenieur,
sans cependant avoir reussi a etablir
la geologie de lingenieur comme une
discipline a part entiere avec des
valeurs, des approches et des meth-
odes autonomes. Cette situation a
change recemment comme la de-
montre la publication fondamentale
de J. Knill (2002) sur les valeurs
premieres de la geologie de lingeni-
eur et par le fait que les trois societes
internationales concernees sont ac-
tuellement engagees dans un pro-
cessus de rassemblement vers une
Federation des Societes de Geo-
ingenierie .
Mots cles Geologie de lingenieur
roches

Introduction engineer Morgenstern (2000) emphasised the need to

make the general public much more aware, than is
In his keynote address to the millenium conference currently the case, of the pivotal role of ground
GeoEng 2000 in Melbourne, the eminent Canadian engineering. In his contribution, Morgenstern (2000)
210
employed the term geotechnical engineering to our
lives. As this term is commonly associated with the
application of soil mechanics to civil engineering prob-
lems, within this paper and in line with JEWG (2004) the
wider term ground engineering is preferred. An alter-
native term to ground engineering is geo-engineer-
ing (JTF 2004).
Ground engineering is engineering with, on or within
geological materials. In creating solutions which are
both environmentally and technically sustainable as well
as cost-eective and safe, ground engineering contrib-
utes to the well being and advancement of our society in
many ways. Examples include (JEWG 2004):
Safety of residential and industrial structures (foun-
dations of dwellings and industrial plants)
Cost eective design and construction of the engi-
neering infrastructure (all types of transportation
routes, pavements and tunnels; buried lines of power,
gas, water, sewerage, electricity and communication
cables)
Supply of water, energy and minerals (groundwater;
hydro-power energy from reservoirs and underground
caverns; oil and gas from wells; coal, metals and
minerals from open-cast and underground mines)
Mitigation of geological hazards (geologically com-
patible urban and regional planning including ood-
ing, earthquakes, landslides, volcanic activities,
liquefying and/or collapsing ground)
Alleviation of human-induced hazards (ground pol-
lution; land remediation; unstable ground in aban-
doned mining areas; sub-surface emplacement of
chemical and radio-active waste in geological reposi-
tories), and
Sustainable development (conservation of the envi-
ronment including geological habitats, historic mon-
uments, landforms and artefacts in local, urban and
regional development).
Morgenstern (2000) also emphasised the need for an
integrated (or holistic) approach to solving ground
engineering problems. His contribution, appropriately
entitled Common Ground, paved the way for a re-
newed sense of common purpose across the various
disciplines involved in ground engineering. The scientic
disciplines which are fundamental in ground engineering
are soil mechanics, rock mechanics and engineering
geology.
Historically, the interrelationship between these three
disciplines was never free of ambiguity and animosity.
This will be underlined in the following section by some
observations on Karl von Terzaghi and Leopold Muller
who are commonly recognised as the fathers of soil
mechanics and rock mechanics respectively. Currently,
and in the sense of Morgenstern (2000), the international
Learned Societies ISSMGE, ISRM and IAEG are
H. Bock
undertaking promising steps to overcome the reserva-
tions which, for decades, have existed between the
various ground engineering disciplines. This and rele-
vant perspectives into the future will be outlined in the
nal section of this contribution.
Renewed co-operation between the three fundamen-
tal geotechnical disciplines oers considerable potential
for further scientic progress in ground engineering.
In Bock Bluming and Konietzky (2005), this is demon-
strated by means of a micro-mechanical model of
the Opalinus Clay, a soft rock which currently has the
attention of the scientic community as well as the
general public as a potential host rock for the safe
embedment of radioactive waste, one of the most urgent
ground engineering problems of our times.
Engineering geology, soil mechanics and rock
mechanics in the past
The advent of engineering geology occurred at about
the same time that modern geological concepts were
being worked out (i. e. around the turn of the eigh-
teenth to nineteenth century). It was also at the time of
a new demand for civil engineering expertise on con-
struction projects at the onset of industrialisation. The
earliest years of engineering geology are often reected
in the person of William Smith. He is noted as The
Father of British Geology (Legget 1962) as well as for
his eminence as a civil engineer. He was involved in
important projects as diverse as coal mines, land
drainage and canal construction. Within his own
expertise, William Smith was thus able to cover all
pertinent aspects which, at that time, were relevant to
ground engineering.
Soil mechanics and Karl Terzaghi
In line with the accelerated pace of industrialisation in
the early twentieth century, the body of technological
and scientic knowledge and methods increased im-
mensely. So, too, in the eld of ground engineering. It
became increasingly dicult to stay in command of all
relevant aspects of any broader subject area, circum-
stances which fostered specialists rather than generalists.
This dilemma was even experienced by Terzaghi (1883
1963) (Fig. 1) who is universally recognised as the father
of soil mechanics and admired as one the most out-
standing engineers of the twentieth century.
Throughout his professional life Terzaghi considered
himself not only as an engineer but equally as an engi-
neering geologist. He considered engineering geology as
an absolutely essential component of ground engineer-
ing: If you do not succeed in grasping the concepts of
Common ground in engineering geology, soil mechanics and rock mechanics 211

International Society for Soil Mechanics and

Geotechnical Engineering.

Rock mechanics and Leopold Muller

Strangely enough, like Terzaghi, Muller (1908 1988)

(Fig. 2), who is widely considered as the father of rock
mechanics, thought of himself foremost as a profes-
sional engineering geologist. Muller believed that all of
his undertakings were in the spirit of his university
teachers Josef Stini (the eminent Austrian engineering
geologist who introduced statistical joint measurements
into ground engineering) and Hans Cloos (the brilliant
structural geologist who intuitively discovered the scale
eects in geomechanical models). In many of his pub-
lications, statements can be found like this: Rock
engineering remains a sheer nonsense without engineering
Fig. 1 Karl von Terzaghi as painted by Harold Reiterer mid-1930s
(from Goodman 1999)
geology, it is even more dangerous than rock construc-
tion without rock mechanics (Muller-Salzburg 1980,
p 56).
engineering geology you ... better keep away from earth-
work engineering (1957). As is documented in Good-
mans (1999) thoroughly researched and brilliantly
written monograph, Terzaghi in marked contrast to
his pioneering work on soil mechanics experienced
major diculties in coming to grips with the principles
of engineering geology, this strangely elusive subject,
slippery like a reptile (1945). Terzaghi was talked into
co-authoring a textbook on engineering geology (Red-
lichTerzaghi and Kampe 1929); however, he never
identied himself with this work. In 1957, some 6 years
before his death, he conceded that there was no further
hope of nishing his own book on engineering geology
because this subject is, for the time being, too much in a
state of ux and my time is running out. This confession
is quite surprising as, in geo-engineering practice, Ter-
zaghi was a master of geological site characterisation
and the development of appropriate strategies as, for
instance, is documented in Rogers (2004). With a certain
degree of frustration, Terzaghi must have felt his own
failure to unify the theoretical and applied aspects of
engineering geology when stating in 1947, on the ques-
tion of a co-operation between geologists and engineers,
that ... time for publishing generalities on this subject has
already passed ... An example is always more convincing
than the expression of intention.
In contrast to engineering geology, and as is well
known across the engineering community, Terzaghi
was instrumental in the establishment of soil mechan-
ics as a free-standing scientic discipline. The land-
marks in this development were the publication of his
book on Erdbaumechanik ... in 1925, the First
International Conference on Soil Mechanics at Har-
vard in 1936 and the formation of an international
learned society now known as the ISSMGE, the Fig. 2 Leopold Muller in 1970 (from Baudendistel 1989)
212
In 1976, Muller was convinced that engineering
geology had established itself as an independent sci-
entic discipline and [the] basis of all geotechnical
practice. The latter view was reinforced by the
formation of the International Association for Engi-
neering Geology (IAEG) and the successful staging of
the First IAEG Congress in 1970 in Paris. However,
his views on the state of engineering geology as an
autonomous discipline were not generally shared by the
ground engineering community as is evidenced in Knill
(2002).
It may be of some interest to briey recall the coming
of age of rock mechanics as a free-standing scientic
discipline, particularly as this period was closely wit-
nessed by Niek Rengers as a Ph-D student of Leopold
Muller at the Institute of Soil Mechanics and Rock
Mechanics of the Technical University in Karlsruhe.
Amongst the landmarks of this development were the
formation of the International Society for Rock
Mechanics, ISRM, in 1962 in Salzburg, Austria with
Leopold Muller being Inaugural President; the publica-
tion of Mullers rst book on rock mechanics in 1963
and, in 1966, the First ISRM Congress in Lisbon,
Portugal.
The formation of a new scientic discipline along-
side soil mechanics, which, for some 30 years had been
an established discipline, occurred not without dispute.
Rock mechanics proponents pointed to the importance
of discontinuities which, in contrast to soil, are pre-
valent in rock in the form of joints, faults, bedding and
schistosity planes. It was argued that the mechanical
behaviour of such discontinuous materials is distinc-
tively dierent from that of soil and requires special
methods in testing, analysis and design (e. g. John
1962). Opponents argued that the principles of soil
mechanics (in particular the interaction between solids
and uids) are equally applicable to rocks. Terzaghi
himself (1963) was convinced that the high degree of
variability of rock masses, combined with the great
expense of available testing procedures, precluded the
possibility of obtaining sucient information for a
reliable assessment of the mechanical behaviour of rock
structures.
With hindsight and developments since that time,
Morgenstern (2000) acknowledged the specic and
valuable contribution of rock mechanics in the wider
eld of ground engineering. Particularly noticeable were
the development of powerful numerical models of join-
ted and discrete media and the fostering of links between
geotechnical, mining and petroleum engineers. He con-
cluded that, whilst there was much overlap in both
technical content and audience within the soil and rock
mechanics communities, it would have been unlikely
that the considerable progress in rock mechanics over
the last 30 or so years would have been achievable
without the formation of a new, identiable interna-
H. Bock
tional society with its own interests and the clear man-
date of its members.
Engineering geology, soil mechanics and rock
mechanics of today and in the future
General
If, in the past, the dominant feature of the three scientic
ground engineering disciplines was dierentiation and,
to a certain degree, also segregation, then today, and
hopefully into the future, it is integration and co-oper-
ation. A number of reasons which have contributed to
such a change can be identied:
Decades after Terzaghis struggle to come to terms
with the strangely elusive subject, engineering geol-
ogy has nally found its own identity. As evidenced by
Knill (2002) it has established itself, next to soil
mechanics and rock mechanics, as a free-standing
discipline with autonomous intellectual merits, meth-
ods and procedures.
There is an ongoing debate about the particular con-
tribution and responsibilities of engineering geologists
and geotechnical engineers in the solution of problems
in ground engineering. This is emphasised by diering
professional denitions and accreditation rules that
exist for geologists and engineers within major in-
dustrialised countries. With the move towards unied
standards and the establishment of a world-wide
network of professional services, any deciencies in
this regard will be counterproductive to the ground
engineering profession at large. An integrated ap-
proach of all ground engineering partners is therefore
required.
In our media-dominated world there is a denite need
to raise public awareness and the prole of the ground
engineering profession with clients, the general public
and with decision makers and politicians. This can
only be achieved through an integrated eort.
Against this background and instigated by Morgenstern
(2000), expressions of interest for a closer co-operation
between the three international ground engineering
societies ISSMGE, ISRM and IAEG were formulated
by the respective Presidents of the societies and by the
organisers of the Geo Eng 2000 Conference in Mel-
bourne. Subsequent meetings of the presidents led, in
2002, to the formation of a Joint European Working
Group (JEWG) for the denition of a common scientic
and professional platform for the three ground engi-
neering disciplines (Bock et al. 2004) and, in 2003, to a
Joint Task Force (JTF), tasked with working out pro-
posals for a restructuring of the three international
societies in the move to establish a Federation of
International Geo-Engineering Societies. The JEWG
Common ground in engineering geology, soil mechanics and rock mechanics
delivered its Final Report to the three presidents in June
2004 (JEWG 2004), whilst the JTF submitted an Interim
Report in July 2004 (JTF 2004) with the intention to
release its nal report in February 2005.
The common platform as formulated by the JEWG
The following is a brief account of the common scientic
and professional platform developed by the JEWG. The
specication and acceptance of such a platform is one of
the keys in the intended formal co-operation of the
international geo-engineering societies. In August 2004,
the JWEG Report was endorsed by the IAEG Council
as a Reference Document of the IAEG.
In the process of specifying a common platform, the
JEWG identied the following three areas as funda-
mental to ground engineering:
Geomechanics, as the umbrella term for both soil
mechanics and rock mechanics
Engineering geology and
Design and implementation of ground engineering
structures (ground engineering in its narrow sense)
Each of the three areas was associated with three key
aspects that, in line with Knill (2002), are grouped in
subject specic interaction triangles as delineated in the
following three subsections.
The triangle of geomechanics: soil mechanics and rock
mechanics
Ground engineering is based on a sound understanding
of the mechanical behaviour of geological materials.
Due to the assemblage of solids and uids and their
intrinsic nature within a fractured system, the mechan-
ical behaviour of geological materials must incorporate
principles of solid mechanics, uid mechanics and the
mechanics of discontinua. These three mechanical dis-
ciplines dene the Triangle of Geomechanics (Fig. 3).
Within the triangle, the relative positions of soil
mechanics and rock mechanics can be located as shown
in Fig. 3. Soil mechanics is the discipline that is char-
acterised by the mechanical interaction between solids
and uids, whilst rock mechanics has a strong adherence
towards the mechanics of discontinua with major inu-
ences from solid and uid mechanics.
The arrows of Fig. 3 indicate that interaction be-
tween the three principal mechanical disciplines of solid
mechanics, uid mechanics and the mechanics of dis-
continua is intrinsic to geomechanics. Accordingly,
coupled (often numerical) models play an outstanding
role in both soil mechanics and rock mechanics.
Soil mechanics and rock mechanics, like solid
mechanics, uid mechanics and the mechanics of
213
Solid Fluid
Mechanics Mechanics
Soil Mechanics
Geomechanics
Rock
Mechanics
Mechanics of
Discontinua
Fig. 3 The triangle of geomechanics
discontinua, are branches of material science. Due to
their major eld of application, material science in
general and soil and rock mechanics in particular, are
commonly considered to be engineering disciplines.
The triangle of engineering geology
Ground engineering requires the project specic delin-
eation of the sub-surface ground conditions. The prin-
cipal aspects involved constitute the Triangle of
Engineering Geology (Fig. 4). The triangle is centred
around the main engineering geological activities of site
characterisation and synthesis based on the genetic
understanding of geological materials, structures and
processes.
The objective is the setting up of a comprehensive
geological model. This model requires the specication
of two general features, namely, composition and geo-
logical boundary conditions.
The composition of the ground and the geological
processes prevailing at the site are most clearly identied
and specied if they are considered within a genetic
context. This places engineering geology rmly within
geological science.
Current geological conditions and landscapes are the
result of past and ongoing geological processes, which
can pose a hazard to ground engineered structures. The
design and construction of sustainable structures re-
quires understanding and accommodation of these
processes.
The triangle of ground engineering (in its narrow sense)
The Triangle of Ground Engineering (Fig. 5)
encompasses the main activities which are intrinsic to
engineering in a narrow sense, i. e. the analysis and
design of ground engineering structures and the super-
214
Composition:
material, structure,
state conditions, Site characterisation
ground water
Synthesis
(based on genetic
understanding)
Geological Model
of the site
Fig. 4 The triangle of engineering geology
vision and monitoring of their construction. The focus is
to predict the ground behaviour that is the key to cost
eective and safe structures.
Ground engineering is based on a ground model that
incorporates the geological model and the relevant
engineering parameters and material properties. For
analysis and design, the ground model is subjected to a
series of modelling investigations (conceptual, physical
and/or numerical). The ground is analysed under the
inuence of external and internal, natural and man-in-
duced, static and dynamic forces. The analysis includes
the safety of the ground against various types of failure
and the deformational behaviour that might impair the
performance of the structure. An optimal conguration
of the design parameters is established and provided in
project drawings and specications for tendering, con-
tracting and construction. During the construction the
ground performance is monitored and the actual
behaviour compared with the predictions. In the case of
major discrepancies, adjustments may be implemented,
usually in line with scenarios considered as part of
an observational design procedure. In the analysis and
design, and depending on the type of structure, it is
commonly necessary to cooperate with engineers who
specialise in other elds of engineering (e. g. structural,
civil, mining, petroleum).
Ground
Model
Analysis and Design
Construction:
Specification,
supervision,
monitoring
Ground behaviour: predicted / actual
Geotechnical uncertainty
Fig. 5 The triangle of ground engineering (narrow sense)
H. Bock
Boundary conditions: Ground engineering in its broad sense
Geological processes
Geological hazards Ground engineering in its broad sense is understood to
comprise all of the aspects shown in Figs. 3, 4, 5 and
described in the previous sections: Geomechanics (Soil
Mechanics and Rock Mechanics), Engineering Geol-
ogy and Ground Engineering (in its narrow sense).
When auxiliary terms are eliminated, the terms reduce to
Mechanics, Geology and Engineering. The latter
three terms constitute the fundamental elements of
Ground Engineering.
The integrated approach to solving ground engineering
problems
Ground engineering is essentially a serial process direc-
ted towards the ground engineering structure. The pro-
cess is characterised by an integration of all relevant
aspects, shown in Figs. 3, 4, 5, into a comprehensive
scheme as depicted in Fig. 6.
Eective ground engineering requires feedback be-
tween the various disciplines and interaction across the
numerous aspects involved (interaction arrows
throughout Figs. 3, 4, 5, 6). This, in particular, applies
to the central oval of Fig. 6 which is characterised by
the links between all three interaction triangles consid-
ered (Figs. 3, 4, 5).
The development of the ground model is central to
this process and includes the embedment of engineering
parameters and material properties into the model. The
task which is required in this phase is considerable and,
in the end, often critical to the quality of the overall
result. Amongst others, it includes an actualisation of
the geological model, the specication of constitutive
laws appropriate for the soils and rocks in the model, the
derivation of their mechanical properties in laboratory
and/or eld testing and interpretation in terms of char-
acteristic and design values. The transfer from derived
(EN 1997-2) to characteristic and design values (EN
1997-1) is based on the evaluation of sampling and
testing procedures, possible scale eects, regional con-
Modelling: text and experience with the materials.
conceptual, It is obvious that this central catalogue of tasks is best
physical,
numerical discharged in co-operation between engineering geolo-
gists and geotechnical engineers.
Degree of co-operation between engineering geologists
and geotechnical engineers
The requirement for formal linkages and feedback be-
tween the various professional practitioners within the
eld of ground engineering is project specic. It is
highest in projects of the geotechnical category 3 de-
ned in Eurocode 7, encompassing the most demanding
Common ground in engineering geology, soil mechanics and rock mechanics 215

Solid Fluid
Mechanics Mechanics

ISSMGE Soil Mechanics

Geomechanics

Rock
ISRM Mechanics

Idealisation of Modelling:
geomaterial conceptual, physical,
behaviour numerical
Mechanics of
Discontinua Ground
Engineering
Structure
Constitutive laws Cost effective
Laboratory and field testing Ground and safe
Ground
Material properties Engineering Geologically and
Model
Derived, characteristic and technically
design values sustainable

Composition:
material, structure,
state conditions Geological
Ground behaviour:
ground water Model predicted / actual
Geotechnical
uncertainty

Engineering
IAEG Geology

Boundary conditions:
Geological processes Project Partners
Geological hazards General Public, Clients, Planners, Funders, Insurers
Engineers (e. g. Civil, Structural, Mining, Petroleum)

Fig. 6 The position of soil mechanics, rock mechanics and engineering geology and the associated international societies within ground
engineering (modied after JEWG 2004)

geotechnical projects. Such dominance gradually de-
creases with the geotechnical categories 2 and 1.
Accordingly, the degree of explicit co-operation be-
tween engineering geologists and geotechnical engineers
can be linked to the geotechnical categories as specied
in Table 1.
Engineering geologists and geotechnical engineers are
unied in their overall objective to create a geologically
and technically sustainable, cost eective and safe
engineering solution.
Table 1 Level of co-operation between engineering geologists and
geotechnical engineers
Geotechnical Co-operation
categoryEurocode 7
1 Optional
2 Desirable
3 Essential
Resume of the position of engineering geology within
ground engineering
To our knowledge, it is for the rst time ever that, on an
international level, the position of engineering geology
in ground engineering has been dened within an ocial
document, unanimously with the soil and rock
mechanics engineers. Clearly, this is an achievement in
its own right.
As shown in Fig. 6 and as elaborated upon
throughout the JEWG Report, engineering geology is
seen as one of the scientic disciplines intrinsic to
ground engineering in its broad sense. Although based
on a non-engineering scientic eld, engineering geol-
ogy is positioned at the same hierarchical level as soil
mechanics and rock mechanics, interacting with them
in many aspects. There is no room for some of the
more traditional views that engineering geologys role
...... is essentially that of a service agent to engineers
216
(Fookes 1997). Clearly, within the broader ground
engineering context, all aspects must be kept in balance
References
Baudendistel M (1989) Dem Lehrmeister
Professor Leopold Muller-Salzburg. In:
Egger P, Fecker E, Reik G (eds) Geol-
ogie, Felsmechanik, Felsbau. Clausthal-
Zellerfeld (Trans Tech Publ.) pp 4346
Bock H et al (2004) The joint European
working group of the ISSMGE, ISRM
and IAEG for the denition of profes-
sional tasks, responsibilities and co-
operation in ground engineering. Lec-
ture Notes in Earth Science Berlin
(Springer), 104:18
Bock H, Blumling P, Konietzky H (2005)
Study of the micro-mechanical behav-
iour of the Opalinus Clay an example
of co-operation across the ground
engineering disciplines. Bull Eng Geol
Env (in press) DOI 10.007/s10064-005-
0019-9
Eurocode 7. Geotechnical designEN
1997-1. Part 1: General rules. EN 1997-
2. Part 2: Ground investigation and
testing
and no pertinent aspect should be omitted (Knill 2002,
p. 15).
Fookes PG (1997) Geology for engineers:
the geological model, prediction and
performance. Quart J Eng Geol 30:293
424
Goodman RE (1999) Karl Terzaghi, the
engineer as artist. ASCE Press, Reston,
p 340
JEWG (2004) Professional tasks, responsi-
bilities and co-operation in ground
engineering. In: Report of the joint
European working group of the IAEG,
ISRM and ISSMGE
John KW (1962) An approach to rock
mechanics. In: Proceedings Amercian
Society Civil Engineering 88:SM 8:130
JTF (2004) Federation of international geo-
engineering societies. In: Report of the
Athens Meeting, June 2004
Knill J Sir (2002) Core values: the rst Hans
Cloos Lecture. In: Proceeding of 9th
IAEG Congress, Durban pp 145
Legget RF (1962) Geology and Engineer-
ing. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 884
Morgenstern NR (2000) Common ground.
Int Conf Geotech Geol Eng, Melbourne
1:130
Muller L (1963) Der Felsbau, vol 1. Enke,
Stuttgart, pp 624
H. Bock
Muller-Salzburg L (1976) Geology and
engineering geology. Reections on the
occasion of the 25th anniversary of the
death of Hans Cloos. Bull IAEG 9:75
78
Muller-Salzburg L (1980) Aktuelle Fragen
auf dem Grenzgebiet zwischen Ingeni-
eurgeologie und Felsmechanik. Rock
Mech Suppl 10:18
Redlich K, Terzaghi Kv, Kampe R (1929)
Ingenieurgeologie. Springer, Wien, p
708
Rogers JD (2004) Lessons on site charac-
terization gleaned from geoforensic
studies. In: Proceedings of Symposium
of AEG, special publication 19, vol 3,
Site characterization
Terzaghi Kv (1925) Erdbaumechanik auf
bodenphysikalischer Grundlage. Deu-
ticke, Wien, p 399
Terzaghi Kv (1963) Discussion on John
KW. An approach to rock mechanics.
Proceedings of American Social Civil
Engineering 89:SM 1:295300