Originally published in

Journal of the Boston Society of Civil En ~ineers

January, 1958
JOURNAL OF THE

BOSTON SOCIETY OF CIVIL

ENGINEERS
- - - -- -- -- - -
Volume 45 JANUARY, 1958 Numher I

CONSULTANTS, CLIENTS AND CONTRACTORS

Bv K. TERZAGHr ,* Honorary Member, B.S.C.E.
(F' re se111ed a t a j o int m ee ting of the Bos ton Socie t y o f Civi l En g in eer~ and /ll assacht1set t•
Secti on, A. S .C. E. , he ld o n Oct ober 23, 1957.)

SYNOP SJS

IN THIS paper the writer describes some of his experiences as a

consultant to enginee ri ng organizations on fi ve continents , on projects
involving large earthwork operations. Special emphasis is given to
the factor which may lead to partial or complete failure of a project
in spit e of sound advice rendered by the consultant.
I NTRODU CTI ON
A consultant is a person who is supposed to know more about a
subject under consideration than his client. Once an engineer has
acquired a reputation for superior knowledge and discovers that there
is a demand for his services, his future career depends upon what he
expects to get out of life. If he longs for financial success and social
prestige , he will find that his aims can hardly be satisfied without
the assistance of an engineering organization. Once the organization
exists he becomes a slave to it. His income increases, but so do his
worries. ometimes he has sleepless nights becau e he does not know
how to handle all the orders which have rained into his lap , and at
other times, because, his overhead charges begin to exceed his income.
In any event , the Tax Collector sees to it that his income does not as-
sume staggering proportions. He may still believe that he is a con-
sultant, but in reality he has turned into a bu iness man and executive,
equipped with all the prerequisites for stomach ulcers.
_. Pr fe ssor of th e P ract ic e of C iv il Eng lneer jng, Emeritus , H a rvard U niversl I y .
 BOSTON SO CIE TY OF CIVI L E!'-JGJNEERS

On the other hand, if he derives his principal satisfaction from

practicing the art of engineering, he will desist from establi shing an
organization and concentrate all his efforts on broadening his knowl-
edge in the field of his choice. In order to be successful in this pursuit
he must be not only willing but eager to spend...,a t least half of hi time
on unprofitable occupations such as research or the digest of his ob-
servational data. Therefore, his money-making capacity remains
limited, but in exchange he has fewer worries and retains his freedom
of action. That is the type of occupation which turned out to agree
with my disposition.
INITIATION INTO THE CONSULTING FRATERNITY

I never felt tempted to make a blueprint for my professional

career, except inasmuch as I always considered the performance of
work for the mere sake of earning money a waste of time and acted
accordingly, quite often on the spur of the moment. Therefore , I did
not join the consulting fraternity deliberately. I was dragged into it
by accident and discovered afterwards that it was amazingly congenial.
·This happened about thirty-five years ago .
I was then forty years old and I was teaching applied mechanics
and related subjects at the American Robert College in I stanbul.
However, I spent most of my time on research concerning the physical
properties of sedimentary deposits such as sand and clay. My interest
in this field had been acquired in earlier years , while I was still engaged
in the practice of earthwork engineering. During those years I be-
came more and more impressed by our incapacity to predict the per-
formance of soils under field conditions , and my affiliation with Robert
College gave me a welcome opportunity to search for a remedy.
My research activities had no relation to my duties as a teacher,
and they yielded no financial compensation . Yet I felt perfectly happy
because I earned enough to live on and my venture into the unknown
was so exhilarating that I felt no desire to exchange it for a more profit-
able occupation.
At the time ref erred to, I was engaged in digesting the results of
my investigations concerning the consolidation of clay strata. In con-
nection with this occupation I visited an industrial plant located at
the head of the drowned portion of a valley in the proximity of Istan-
bul, because I was told that an open excavation was being made at
the site of the plant. From the general geology of the region I knew
 CO. SGL'L\NTS, CLIENTS, AND CONTR.-\ CTORS

that the subsoil of the plant consists of a deposit of soft silt and clay ,
wit h a maximum depth of several hundred feet , and I wanted to
collect some specimens to be tested in my make-shift laboratory.
Whe n I arrived at the site, I found , in addition to the excavation,
a heap of precast reinforced concrete piles and the setup for a pile
loading test. Thi s fact aroused my interest , because I knew that the
predecessors to the new structure rested on mat foundations . There-
fo re, I called on the general manager of the plant , whom I had met
socially, and asked him to explain the project to me.
According to the construction drawings which I was shown , one-
half of the proposed structure would have rested on point-bearing piles
and the other half on friction piles embedded in soft clay. I was
shocked and explained to the manager that the piles would do more
harm than good. The portion resting on point-bearing piles is rigidly
supported, whereas the portion on friction piles would settle at least
several inches, whereupon the pile-supported foundation would fail
like an overloaded cantilever beam by bending. Therefore , I sug-
gested that the Company should sell the piles or throw them into the
Bosporus.
After lengthy discussions , the manager began to realize the weight
of my arguments but , he added, he would never succeed in inducing
the design department of his organization, with headquarters in
France, to accept my unconventional proposal. Therefore, he invited
me to make a trip to France and try it myself. At the headquarters
of the organization I , an obscure teacher, faced engineers with a well-
established reputation, full of confidence in the soundness of their
judgment. My arguments were received with utmost skepticism . The
pile loading test had already shown that the settlement of the friction
piles under the design load was negligible and, as a consequence , my
pessimistic settlement forecast was considered to be wrong. Neverthe-
less , the mere existence of arguments in favor of the gloomy prediction
made the designers of the foundation somewhat uneasy. Therefore, a
compromise solution was proposed and accepted . The piles were re-
tained as part of the foundation , but the site of the building was
shifted away from the slope, whereupon all the piles assumed the
func tion of friction piles.
I left France with the conviction that the structure would settle
as if the piles had not been driven, whereas my clients believed that
the results of the settlement observations would demonstrate the ab-
 BO T O:\! "OClETY F CIVTL E:'\ GI.'JEER S

surdity of my ettlement estimate. The preceding controversie were

very instructive and suited my ta te to perfection . Thus I had di -
covered an interesting field for the practical applica tion of the result
of my research activities and I wished to get more as ignments of a
similar kind .
I did not have to wait very long, because as soon a the st ructure
under consideration was completed, it started to settle approximately
at the rate predicted by me, whereupon confidence in my judgment was
established and the use f ulne s of my professional ervices was recog-
nized.
A few months after I had returned to I stanbul the manager of
the plant howed me the settlement record of the older portion of
the plant. The structures were at that time about twenty years old
and all of them rested on reinforced concrete mats . According to the
settlement forecast of the designers, based on the re ults of surface
loading tests the foundation should have settled by amounts not in
excess of half an inch. In reality the settlement of the structures had
reached a value of 16 inches. That wa the reason why it was intended
to establi h the new building on a pile foundation. Yet the perform-
ance of the new structure showed that piles had practically no influ-
ence on the settlement of structures re ting on the subsoil of the plant.
At the time when the new building was started the rate of settle-
ment of the older ones had already become insignificant. However,
while the new plant was under construction the rate of settlement of
the existing structures increased again to several inches per year,
and I was asked to inve tigate the cause of this surprising develop-
ment. Upon inquiry I found out that the rate of settlem ent of the old
structures had tarted to increase at almost exactly the time whe n
the sinking of a nearby caisson well wa completed and pumping opera-
tions were tarted. The water wa drawn from a gravel tratum lo-
cated between the clay stratum and the surface of the underlying
bedrock. At the time of the inquiry I already had a clear conception
of the mechanic of the consolidation of clay trata and there was no
doubt in my mind that the increa e of the rate of ettlement was due
to the reduction of the porewate r pre ure in the gravel tratum pro-
duced by the pumping operation . Therefore I had no difficulty in
per uading the management to plug the well. A soon a th i was done
the rate of settlement again became incon equ ential.
Immediately a fte r the well wa plugged, the foundation of the
 CO :\" UL T A N TS , CU E ~ TS, _\ ~ D CO:-J T RA.CT OR S

crane rail of a revolving derrick located at the waterfront of the plant

site started to settle unequally, at an alarming rate, although the settle-
ment of the rail had previously been too small to be noticed. The
crane rail was mounted on a semi-circular platform, resting on un-
treated timber piles acting as friction piles embedded in soft clay.
The space between the original ground surface , a few feet below low
tide level, and the base of the platform, about seven feet above this
level , consisted of an uncompacted cinder fill.
At the time the settlement started, the manager of the plant was
already fully aware of the undesirable properties of the clay deposit
underlying his plant. Therefore , he blamed the performance of the
derrick foundation on the clay and asked me to remedy the situation
by underpinning, or some other suitable procedure. However , the
history of the settlement of the derrick foundation appeared to me to
be incompatible with the consolidation characteristics of the clay.
Therefore, I started my investigations at the platform. A single test
pit excavated at the edge of the platform through the fill to the original
ground surface sufficed to show that the clay was innocent, and the
culprit was the teredo. Above low tide level, portions of the piles,
with a diameter of 14 to 16 in. , were almost completely destroyed by
the marine borers. After the fill was removed, some of the piles could
even be knocked over by the laborers. Yet below the teredo-infested
top section the piles were perfectly sound. Therefore, the reconstruc-
tion of the derrick foundation was performed by cutting the piles below
low tide level and establishing the reinforced concrete rail support on
the intact portion of the piles.
IMPORTANT CONSEQU EN CES OF CAS U AL OBSERVATIONS

The assignments described under the preceding heading are typi-

cal of many others I had to handle during the following decades in
various parts of Europe, the United States and North Africa. How-
ever, quite often the most essential services I rendered to my clients
had no relationship to the original assignment. They grew out of casual
observations I made while inspecting the site. The observations at
the site of a multiple-arch dam are an example.
One of the buttresses of the dam had cracked and I was asked to
make proposals for protecting it against further damage . At the time
of my arrival at the site the reservoir was still empty. I found that
the outer parts of the base of the buttress rested on sandstone and the
 BOSTON SOCIETY OF CI VIL ENGI:N'EERS

middle part on shale. The cracks were produced by the compression

of the sale and further damage could be prevented by a simple under-
pinning operation.
As a by-product of my visit to the site I noticed the follow ing
facts which had previously not received any attention. The shale bed
responsible for the unequal settlement of the buttress formed part of
a stratified formation composed of practically impervious layers of
shale and intensely jointed beds of hard sandstone. The strike of the
bedding planes intersected the direction of the crest of the dam at
approximately right angles and the dip was approximately equal to
that of the dip slope of the valley at the site of the dam.
A few hundred feet upstream from the left abutment , the left hand
slope of the valley cut across the sandstone strata, providing free com-
munication between the water in the reservoir and the joint system in
the sandstone, whereas downstream from the dam the uppermost
sandstone stratum was covered by a shalebed. Hence , while the rese r-
voir was being filled the hydrostatic pressure on the base of the
sloping shale bed would increase, and before the reservoir was full , the
shalebed would be lifted off its seat and the dam would fail.
As a result of this discovery, the settlement of the buttress became
a minor issue and the center of gravity of the problem shifted to the
hydrostatic pressure conditions prevailing in the joint system of the
rock strata underlying the site. By similar casual observations durin g
construction, which had no direct connection with my assignments, I
also prevented the failure of three major dams of the earth and rock-
fill type.
DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS AND FIELD CONDITIONS

The assignments referred to under the preceding headings have

one essential feature in common. In each case an engineering organiza-
tion was in serious trouble and therefore willing to accept the con-
sultant's recommendations . If the consultant is invited to cooperate
on a project before unanticipated difficulties have been encountered ,
conditions may be radically different. This is due to the fact that some
engineering organizations are subdivided into three independent com-
partments-the survey, design , and construction departments-or else
they assign the supervision of construction to inspectors who ha ve
neither the duty nor the qualifications to judge whether or not the
design assumptions are compatible with the field conditions.
The survey department is in charge of the topographic survey and
 CONSUL T.-\ N T S, CUE. T S, .-\::--;-D CO N TR .\ CT OR S

the subsoil exploration by borings. The results of their labors are

represented in a set of drawings which are turned over to the design
department . The engineer in charge of the design may have visited
the site of the proposed structure a couple of times, but the principal
source of his information concerning the subsoil conditions is the
boring records . These are accepted at face value, sometimes even
without any inquiries concerning the qualifications of the personnel
engaged in the boring operations. The draftsmen who prepare the
construction drawings have not even seen the site. After the drawings
are completed , "checked" and approved, they are transmitted, to-
gether with a set of specifications, to the construction department,
whereupon the association of the design department with the project
is practically terminated. The construction department receives orders
to erect the structure in accordance with drawings and specifications,
and has no obligation to make any inquiries concerning the design.
Similar conditions prevail if the functions of the construction depart-
ment are assigned to a group of inspectors who have not been con-
nected with the design of the project.
In connection with structural engineering this administrative set -
up is perfectly satisfactory, provided the engineers in charge of design
are reasonably familiar with the methods of construction. On the
other hand , in the realm of earthwork and foundation engineering the
absence of continuous and well organized contacts between the design
department and ·the men in charge of the supervision of the construc-
tion operations is always objectionable and can even be disastrous.
This is due to the fact that boring records always leave a wide margin
for interpretation . If the site for a proposed structure is located on a
deposit with an erratic pattern of stratification , such as a marginal gla-
cial deposit , the boring records may not disclose a single one of the
vital subsoil characteristics, and the real subsoil conditions may be
radically different from what the designer believed them to be. There-
fore, the design assumptions may be utterly at variance with reality.
The consequences of these conditions depend on the qualifications
of the personnel engaged in the supervision of the construction opera-
tions. If the supervision is in the hands of a construction department
it also depends to a large extent on whether or not design and con-
struction departments are on friendly terms with each other. More
often than not the two departments despise each other sincerely, be-
cause their members have different backgrounds and different mental-
 BOST N SOC IETY OF IVIL ENGINEERS

ltles. The con truction men blame the design personnel for paying
no attention to the construction angle of their projects , but they are
blissfully unaware of their own shortcomings. The design engineers
claim that the construction men have no conception of the reasoning
behind their de ign , but they forget that the ame end in design can
be achieved by various means ome of which can be easily realized
in the field, whereas others may be almost impracticable. If none of
the men in charge of de ign has previously been engaged in construc-
tion , the design may be unneces arily awkward from a construction
point of view. In any event, the con truction men have no incentive
to find out whether or not the design as umptions are in accordance
with what they experience in the field during construction, and serious
discrepancies may pass unnoticed. If conditions are encountered which
require local modifications of the original design , the construction en-
gineer may make these changes in accordance with his own judgment,
which he believes i sound , although it may be very poor. Important
changes of this kind have even been made on the job without indi-
cating the change on the field set of construction drawings.
Furthermore, the layout of temporary in tallations is commonly
left to the discretion of the superintendent of construction. The drain-
age provisions for unwatering the site for an earthdam and those for
the dispo al of the water coming out of a wet tunnel belong to this
category.
The drainage provisions for unwatering the site for an earthdam
prior to the beginning of the filling operation may introduce an ele-
ment of seriou weakness into the structure without the superintendent
of con truction suspecting it. In one instance the box drains leading
to the umps at the site for an earthdam were laid out in such a manner
that the completed structure would have failed by piping through the
drains. When I arrived at the ite the drains were already buried be-
neath fill material and no record was kept of the location of the drains.
Fortunately, the thickne s of the layer of fill located above the drains
was still moderate . After I reconstructed the layout of the drains
on the ba is of the results of cross-examination, it was not yet too late
to eliminate the source of weakness represented by the drain .
On another project the excavation for a powerhouse wa being
made at the foot of a fore t-covered talu slope . The talu consisted
of a m ixture of rubble and the sandy and silty products of rock
weathering. The slope rose at the an gle of repose of the talus material
 COK SULTANTS, CLIENTS, AND CONTRACTORS

to the exit of a wet tunnel at an elevation of about one thousand feet.

The water coming out of the tunnel was allowed to flow into the upper-
most portion of the accumulation of talus, where most of it disappeared
into the voids of the material. When the quantity of discharge reached
a value of about 3 cfs a talus slide occurred. The slide removed the
forest cover of the slope, killed two men who were working in the
excavation and filled the excavation with a mixture of rocks and trees .
Subsequent investigation showed that neither the resident engineer
representing the construction department, nor the contractor's super-
intendent of construction had suspected that the flow of water into
the uppermost part of the talus slope could have disastrous conse-
quences.
Such can be the qualification of the men who are placed in re-
sponsible charge of erecting a structure "in accordance with drawings
and specifications." If the field conditions are radically different from
the design assumptions they may not even notice it. The following
example illustrates the possible consequences of the failure of a field
inspector to pay any attention to the design assumptions. The project
involved the construction of a tall reinforced-concrete structure. The
site was located above a steep rock slope which was subsequently
buried in succession under a blanket of gravel, a layer of soft clay, a
peat deposit and artificial fill. The site was explored by borings spaced
50 feet both ways. According to the soil profile which was constructed
on the basis of the boring records, the surface of contact between
the gravel structure and the overlying soft and highly compressible
sediments was well defined and fairly even. Therefore, the design
department decided to establish the structure on spread footings sup-
ported to pointbearing piles to be driven through the soft sediments
to refusal in the gravel blanket.
When the piles were driven, the total depth of penetration varied
within each cluster by amounts up to 16 feet. Yet the superintendent
did not notice that this fact is incompatible with the design assumption.
After all the piles were driven and the structure almost completed, the
structure started to settle unequally by amounts up to one inch per
month. It was not until then that the abnormal performance of the
piles was brought to the attention of the design department. Subse-
quent investigation showed that the thickness of the gravel stratum
was very much greater than the original borings indicated and that
it contained thick lenses of soft clay. The bearing capatity of the
 EO STO 1 SOCIETY OF CIVIL EN GTl\EERS

individual piles was much greater than the design load, and the settle-
ment was exclusively due to the consolidation of clay lenses. Some of
the piles had met refusal in the gravel above a clay lens and others
went through several clay lenses into the lower portion of the gravel
stratum. This was the reason for the erratic variation in the total
depth of penetration of the piles. If this variation had been brought
to the attention of the design department as soon as it was observed,
the causes would have been investigated and the pile driving proce-
dure modified in such a manner that all the piles could be driven to
bedrock.
PERFORMANCE BY THE CONTRACTOR

If a job is carried out on a contract basis, one more element of

uncertainty enters into the operation. It is the attitude of the con-
tractor towards his work. The contractor cannot be expected to be
interested , or even aware of, the reasoning behind the design. His sole
aim is to perform the work covered by the contract at a minimum ex-
pense. ( Occasional discrete departures from the specifications reduce
the cost quite considerably.) The inspectors , too, may be inclined to
consider uncomfortable items in the specifications as superfluous refine-
ments , conceived in the hothouse atmosphere of the design depart-
ment. Such an attitude is not conducive to rigorous inspection . There-
fore , a consultant can never be sure how a structure was built unless
he maintains continuous contact with the construction operations. To
illustrate this statement the writer adds an account of some observa-
tions he made during the construction of a dam resting on decomposed
rock.
The dam was a clay dam with internal drainage supplemented by
a row of filter wells which were drilled through the decomposed rock
into sound, jointed rock at a depth ranging between 40 and 90 feet.
In order to coordinate the construction operations with the time
schedule, the upstream portion of the embankment was constructed
before the filling operations on the downstream side of the base of the
dam were started.
The dam was built by a contractor with considerable experience
in the field of earth dam con struction. Yet every one of the memo-
randa I wrote describing my findings at the site after returning from
my inspection trips contained passages like the following :
" At the site of the dam , the cutoff trench was already backfilled.
Along the west slope of the fir st installment of the fill , the new fill was
 CONSCLT .\XT S, CLI EXT S, :\:\" D CO ~TR.-\ CT OR S

placed against older , dried out and uncompacted material. The gradi-
ent of the surface of the new fill was such that the next rainstorm will
produce a pool in the northeast corner of the new fill. The pumping
equipment is inadequate. Although the job calls for a large amount of
hand tamping, the contractor has made no provisions for tamping
equipment. On the upper level, in the upstream portion of the dam ,
filling operations should be discontinued because the water content of
the borrowpit material is at present too low and the contractor has
made no provisions for sprinkling.
" At the southeast corner the contractor has blocked the exit for
the accumulating rainwater by a pile of waste material. Originally
the lowest point of the saddle southeast of the site was 505 . Now it
is already 508.5 and the diversion of the rainwater towards the south-
east will require a substantial amount of excavation which could have
been avoided by intelligent planning.
" In my last memorandum I requested that the north end of the
cutoff trench should be excavated down to decomposed rock. The in-
spector assured me that he has passed this request on to the contrac-
tors. evertheless, I found that the fill was placed against the pocket
of very permeable alluvial materials.
" If the contractors continue to disregard the elementary rules
for the construction of earth dams and to ignore the instructions of
the inspector wherever they can , the resulting structure will be unsafe
in spite of conservative design."
CONSULTANTS OR SCAPEGOATS
Conditions like those described under the preceding heading pre-
vailed on many of the projects with which I was associated in the
course of my professional career. In some instances they were con-
siderably worse. Hence it is evident that the success of large-scale
earthwork operations depends on many factors other than the ade-
quacy of the original design. This fact introduces serious complica-
tions into the relationship be.tween the client and a consultant who
is retained in an advisory capacity in the design stage of a project.
The incentive for retaining a consultant commonly grows out of
the fact that the functions of most engineering organizations cover a
very broad field , including earthwork , structural , hydraulic, mechani-
cal and electrical engineering. Few, if any, of the members of such
an organization have the time and the opportunity to specialize.
 BOS TO !\ 5 0U E.TY OF CIVI L ENGIN E ERS

H ence , if a new p rojec t assigned to s uch a n orga niza tion in volves

design p ro blem s of an unusua l cha racter , a co ns ult ant is retained who
is exp ec ted to coope rat e in th e solution of the problem_.
In enginee ring organi zati ons with a watertight partition b etween
designer s a nd the p ersonnel engaged in -cons tru cti on , the consult a nt is
quit e obviously pla ced a t th e disposal of the des ign depa rtm ent. After
th e de5ign is co mpleted his service p eri od on th e projec t , like tha t of
the design depa rtment is co nsid ered terminat ed. H e has no control
ove r what the in sp ec tors a nd th e contrac tor chose to mak e out of the
drawin gs and sp ecifications, and h e cann ot even know wh eth er or not
th e men on the jo b a re compet ent enough to notic e signi ficant differ-
ences between des ign a ssumption s and fi eld conditions . If th e engi-
neering firm does n ot maintain a construction department 1 or if the
owner rese rves the right to supervise con structfon , co nditions m ay be
even worse . The co nsequences depend on the type of service the con-
sultant was asked to render, a s shown by the foll owin g examples:
(a) The client requests the con sultant to pa rticipate in the de-
sign of a s tructure and in th e drafting of th e specifications . He has
the since re int ention of acting in accordance \Vith the consultant 's
recommendations , but the service period of th e consultant ends a s soon
as cons tructi on s tarts . The consultant 's advice cannot be sounder
than his knowl edge of the subsoil conditions at the tim e when the
advice was rendered . If these conditions are radically different from
wha t the boring records indicated- which is by no mean s uncommon-
the s tru cture may fail in spit e of conscientious adh erence to the con-
sultant's advic e.
( b ) The client invites th e consultant to make proposal s concern-
ing design and constru cti on , bu t he reserves- o r a ss umes-the right to
deviate fr om the recommendati ons a s he dee m s fit , without informing
the consultant about th e final deci5ion co ncernin g the design . If this
decis ion is the res ult of misjud gme nt or ignorance, th e consultant is
unable to prevent it s consequenc es.
( c) T he co nsultant gets th e assignment o f participating in the
design of a small p orti on of a large unit , e.g. the design of th e core
for an ear thdam whi ch has bee n designed by ot hers. If the s truc ture
fail s on account o f conditions which have no bearing on the perform-
ance of the porti on inve tiga ted by the consultant , this portion goes
with it , and a ft er failure it may be imprac ticable to find out which
part fail ed first.
 CO NSU LT :\!\T S, C LIE:1\T S, .· ND CONTR .A. C TOHS

( d) The consultant is asked to express an opinion concerning the

design of a st ructure without being given an opportunity to make a
thorough investigation of all those field conditions which determine
the performance and safety of the structure. The consultant's opinion
may be sound or unwarranted , depending on circumstances unknown
to all the parties involved.
( e ) An engineering firm requests a consultant to participate in
the preliminary stage of a large project merely for the purpose of using
his name as window dressing. If and when the firm gets the job, the
consultant is shelved and remains in his state of retirement unless
something goes wrong. After the shortcomings of the design have
become noticeable it may be too late to correct the mistakes .
In each one of these five cases the name of the consultant remains
permanently associated with the project. Proceeding from case (a) to
case ( e) the hazards to the good reputation of the consultant increase.
In any event , if the project ends in disaster the consultant will find him-
self in the front row of scapegoats, because he was .introduced to the
owner as the foremost authority among the persons who participated
in the design.
CONCLUSIONS

On account of the hazards involved in the lack of contact between

design and construction departments on jobs involving large earth-
work operations, progressive and competent engineering organizations
maintain a soil mechanics department. During the design period this
department supervises the boring operations and performs the soil
tests. During the subsequent construction perioc;l. it has the function
of testing intermittently the materials derived from the borrow pits,
supervising the compaction procedure and adapting it to changes in
the character of the borrow pit mat erials. It has the additional f unc-
tion of comparing the design assumption concerning subsoil conditions
with the conditions encountered in the field and , if necessary, modify-
ing the design in accordance with the findings, requesting the design
department to make the required changes. The importance of the
services of the soil mechanics department is particularly notable on
projects involving the design and construction of earth dams, because
most of the favorable dam sites have already been utilized and soil
conditions at the remaining ones may be so complex that the design
assumptions based on the results of the subsoil exploration preceding
 8O .."fON SO I ETY OF C !VTL E GI:--J EER .·

the rlesign s tage are utterly at va riance with those encountered dur ing
cons truction.
If a consult ant is retained by an engineering o rganizat ion in
which the soil mechanic. department maintain. a con tinuou and inti-
mate contact be tw een design d partment .;1.nd the job durin g the con-
tru ct ion period, the coo peration between con: ultant and client is com-
mon ly frictionle_ · and ati. factory , provided th e member. of the . oil
mechanics depa rtm ent a re well trained a nd competent. Furt hermore ,
the o n. ultant can rend er a maximum of ser ice in a minimum amou nt
of time becau se the . oil mechanics depa rtm ent keeps him in fo rmed
on whateve r differences b tween de ign assumption. and field condi-
tion. are detected during the constructi on ope rat ions and th e depart-
ment can be expected to take ca re that hi.· instruction.. will be carried
out o n the job .
H oweve r in mos t engin eerin g organi zation s . de- ign a nd s uper-
vision of construction are still divorc d , though this fact may be
cam ouflaged by a . mall soil mechanics departm eot with no fun ct ion
other tha n providing the design department with th e ba ic data for
design. If a con ul tant is invited by an engineering organization with
s uch an adminis trative setup to cooperate on a projec t in th e design
s tag , he sh ould wat ch hi. step. Fir. t o f all , he should turn down
the assign ment unless it in volves th duty to remain in active contac t
with th e project until th e end of the r,n iod of cons truction , and to
insp c t th e job whenever he considers it neces ·ary . In order to be
able to pe rform hi duty he must ge t d tai l d weekly repo rt s inform-
ing him of all tho. e observational facts which have a significa nt bea r-
ing on the validity of the design assumptions . uch a repo rt can be
prepared only by a competent soiL engineer , who _tay on the job
permanently . Second if the con ul tant accept th a ssignment he
should find out as soon as possible whe th er or not the inspec tion of the
con truction ope rati ons on the job is satisfactory . If he arrive. at the
co nclusion that the inspection is inadequate a nd his efforts to amelio-
rate the co ndition ar e un ucce s ful , he should s ubmit hi s resignatio n
lea ving no doubt conc ernin g th e reasons whi ch compelled him to do so.
The subject of this paper is of vital int eres t to consultant s a s well
as to th ei r client and to the per:ons who furni : h th e capital for
real izin c, their projects. The need for expert adv ice on difficult projects
is universally recog nized . H owever , the coop eration of cons ul ta nts
of high standing on · uch projects creates an unwarranted feeling of
 CO. -~LI.T.\. TS, CU E~T.' . :-\:\"l CO~T IUCTOR .·

ecu rity, unle full advantage is taken of the . ervices they are able to
render. A satis factory formula for accomplishing thi: purpose has not
y t been established .
The preceding sugges tion - are based on my per · onal experience_
a nd observati ons, the scope of which is inevitably limited . Therefore .
other con ultant and engineering firm . employing con ultant could
render a valuable ervice to the engineering prof es ion by presenting
in the di.cu. ions to this paper some of their ex periences and opi nions
concerning the relationship between con: ultanL and client: .

Drscu · ·10N
Bv ARTHlJ R CASAGRA1" DE ,* Memb er

A frank di sc ussion of the use and abuse of on ultants m earth-

work a nd foundati on enginee ring by engineers with broad experience
was long overdue . It is, indeed , fortunate that Profes or Terzaghi
has undertaken the ta. k to init iate and encourage . uch a disc us ion
because , more than anyon else h combine. all the qualifications
needed for pointing out clearly where the trouble lie and how they
can be overcome.
The problem i complicated not only because of the great variety
of technical questi ons on which the advice of a consultant is ought ,
but becau. e many a,:;pects of "human engineering'' are in volved. The
most effective approach would be by a frank discus ion of a number
of typical case records. Unfortunat ely that cannot be done without
stepping hard on somebody 's toes or kicking some other delicate
part of the human anatomy. I regret to admit that I am re:ponsible
fo r having counseled Professor Terzaghi to delet e some exceed in°ly
in truct ive case hi ~tori fr om hi original manuscript.
1 he . ituation i. imilar to the publication of settlement record.
and ot her obse rvations on s tructures which have not performed satis-
factori ly. Progres: in earthwork and foundation engineering would
have been much more rapid if publication of such data would be the
rule rather than the exception.
Prof es or Terzaghi ha made it quite clear that principal cau es
of trouble are ( 1) the fact that the actual subsoil conditions cannot
be kn ow n exactly during the de ign st age and that appropriate change.
' Pr o f e sor nf S 01 l l\l ec h~n\ c anrl Fou n cla ti l, n En~inerdng . ll.1n·ard t · ni \ ,~r5 i t~. - --
 BOSTON OCIETY OF IVIL E~ Gl:--1 EER '

in design must be made as construction proceed and ( 2 ) the changes

that the construction department will make or authorize without
notifying the de igners or the "di crete departure from the specifica-
tions" by contractors. Profe sor Terzaghi points out that the principal
requirement for solving such difficulties ,,i a competent oil mechanics
department that creates the liaison be ween the de ign and the con-
struction departments, and that is empowered with ufficient authority.
Mo t of the large con truction organizations in this country which
are engaged in earthwork and foundation engineering maintain such
soil mechanics department . They include the Corp of Engineers,
the Bureau of Reclamation and many State Highway Departments,
to name ju t a few of tho e doing excellent work in applied soil
mechanics: California, Illinoi , Indiana, ew York and Texas. I re-
gret that the Department of Public Works of Massachusetts is an
example that lacks uch a liaison between the design and construction
departments. The result of such lack of cooperation culminated last
year in a case that has made the newspaper headlines, and which is a
good example of a consultant being -made the capegoat for mistakes
by a contractor which are allowed to pass because of the lack of soils
engineers who form the necessary link betwen design and con truction.
It would seem that if a consultant values his reputation higher than
public ervice, he cannot afford to work for tho e State and M unicipal
engineering organizations which are subject to exce sive political
pressure. But if no competent professional men were willing to risk
being made the scapegoat, we would certainly not find such men in
public service, and politicians would run everything.
The in tance ref erred to above was made wor e by the fact that
field inspection was not part of the design contract. Therefore, the
firm that prepared the design had no way of checking whether con-
struction was carried out in accordance with the de ign. In con-
nection with this question, attention is called to an excellent edi-
torial on page 128 of the ovember 21 , 1957 is ue of Engineering
News-Record that critici es the practice of "design without designer
in pection."
When discu sing the relation hip between the engineering firms
and special consultants they employ, there are certainly instances
·when the firm may have a right to make the final deci ion. The
senior partner of a firm once made this comment: " After all, we are
the ones who carry the responsibility, not our con ultant . Be ides,
 C C LT.\:'\T , L1 - - T , A D 0. TR . T R.

whene er w employ m r than one con ultant th y u ually di agr e

among them el e and th n it i up to u , th de igner to make up
our mind .·
It would certainly m logical that the divi ion of re pan ibility
hould be cl arly d fined when con ultant are employ d. But even
that i impl r aid than d ne be au e in many in lance the r pon i-
bility of th con ultant grow and change a the job progre
trictly peaking, v ry consultant, or board of con ultant , i
limited in th cope of th ir duti s. How v r a con ultant hould be
free to qu tion any a p ct of a project, even outsid the defined
cope if he believe that it may affect the saf ty of the project.
E.g., on a number of dam projects I have que tioned the fr board
becau e I did not tru t the hydrologic data. On everal project as a
result of my in i tance, a differential of sev ral fe t in fr eboard wa
e tabli hed between the main dam and on or several addl dam
o that the addle dams would b overtopped first which would re ult
in relatively minor damage. In other word , the saddle dam may
become emergency pillways, although thi may not be officially r -
corded in order to prevent prote ts from tho e who would suff r from
the failure of such a saddle dam.
In conclusion, I should like to repeat my b lief that there ar
too many variable involved in the relation hips b tween Consultant
Client and Contractor to permit hard and fa t rule in order to assur
that con ultants will be u ed to the be t interest of a project. But a
careful study and re-reading of Profe sor Terzaghi s pap r by all con-
cerned will do much to d velop a better awarenes and judgment of the
ramifications of the relationship between these three ' of th con-
flicts that may ari e from a lack of clarity in the definition of the
duties of a consultant when he is employed , and of the paramount im-
portance of continuou in pection of earthwork and foundation proj-
ects by competent oils engin er who form the liai on between the
construction job the de ign office and the con ultant.
 HOSTON SOCIETY OF CIVI L ENG I>lEERS

D1scuss10N
Bv M . H . C U TLER*

As Dr. Terzaghi spoke of his experiences at the " Annual Stu-

dent 's Night' ', the good fortune of the n{e mbers of the audience , both
younger and older , in being able to listen to the voice of international
experience came to mind. Now that others will be able to benefit by
publication of this talk , there are comments on certain phases which
occur to me, based on my past 35 years of experience with a fully
integrated engineering and construction organization which has been
in existence more than twice this period.
This paper contains sound advice for the Engineer in any status ,
for the Client and for the Contractor. His recommendations are in
line with organization procedures within a properly organized and
integrated engineering and construction firm. Experiences similar to
some of those described are the reason our organization by long estab-
lished policy declines to function simply as design engineers without
supervision of the construction.
The responsibility of an engineer to see that his design is executed
within the framework of his assumptions and in accordance with his
intents can not be avoided. Yet all too of ten inspection is cursory
or regarded as something which can be left in the hands of a boy
just out of school as a kind of "on the job training" . The deficiencies
in school and other construction revealed by earthquake disasters
have led to the widespread revision in inspection of public construction
in those areas and the development of a corps of capabl e inspectors
with wide construction experience and sound judgment. And yet there
are all too many oth er areas where this inspection is considered only
as a political plum.
The comments regarding design assumptions and field conditions
are particularly pertinent. Certainly complete cooperation among
the departments involved in the design and execution of a project is
essential. We have found it particularly advantageous to include one
or more of the supervisory construction personnel in the early explora-
tion and planning of a project in the office , during the time the basic
design is initiated . In any case , continuous contact is maintained
between the engineer and the field work by personal visits , telephone
and teletype. There is, of course 1 no substi tute for qualified and experi-
•Chief Struc t ural Eng in ee r, Sta n e & \ Vebster En gi neering Corpo r a t ion.
 co ·s LT.'\ T ' CUE T · ..'\ ·n CO . 1TRACTOR

enced per onnel in all pha ·e of the work . Earthwork and founda-
tions particularly demand pecial care and cooperation between field
and office, since compatibility between a umptions and actual condi-
tions mu t be continuously checked wi th full appreciati on that th e
earth·s cru t is not a uniform and quality controlled product. such
a most of the element making up a building superst ructure. There
is more than a germ of truth in the generality that the greatest con-
sistency in foundation co nditions lies in the variability .
The remarks on wor k ca rried out on a contract ba i struck a
re pon ive note. If the interest of the Owner the Enginee r and the
Co ntractor are opposed " the Co ntractor can not be expected to be
interested or even aware of the reasoning behind the design. ' It is our
philosophy that the best solution to this dilemma lies in a contract
under which the interests of these parties are common.
There was a circumstance where we were constructing a plant
from de igns by others. Our ~uperin tendent 's experience yardstick
told him there was a discrepancy between the size of footings at the
allowable soil bearing and the load to be carried. His comment to this
effect was brushed off by the Engineer rather peremptorily but, being·
a persistent individual, the upe rintendent referred the matter to our
engineering department which quickly verified that an arithmetic
error had re ulted in footing ¼ the proper ize.
In another instance a manufacturer had placed the re ponsibility
for a proj ect design of hi s process enginee r, who, with the assistance
of a contractor , had selected a site, cut and driven more than 3,000
sp ruce piles 50 ft long and poured some of the foundation , without
benefit of uitable subsoil investigation . ome of the pile did not
'' fetch up and another 50 ft length of pile wa spliced weakly on th e
lower section. When three 50 ft length of piles , one on the other,
still did not '' fetch up", it was decided to obtain consulting advice, and
we were call ed in . Subsoil in ves tigation developed information that
a urface stratum of sand was underlain by a su bstantial and variable
depth of very so ft plastic clay. Below the clay and above bedrock was
another sand layer containing appreciable artesian pres ure . Further
!n ves tigation indicated that most of the piles as driven had their tips
in the soft clay and that prohibitive diff erential settlements must be
expected. During the investigation , evidence of suspec ted bank in-
stability wa proved and it appeared prudent to move the entire
plant construction to another portion of the site where rock founda-
 BOSTO.'-J SOCIE TY OF C TVIL E:KGTK EERS

tions were readily accessible. This procedure , of course, involved the

abandonment of a substantial sum already spent on the plant con-
struction and required prolonged and detailed discussion s of the
reasons for abandonment, particularly since " a similar plant had been
built on another site in another section o.£., the country on 50 ft wooden
piles and had proved to be sat isfactory. " We are indebted to Dr.
Terzaghi for his assistance as our consultant in this case and the
added weight of his experience and confirming testimony which re-
sulted in the mill being moved to a safe location .
In closing this discu ssion , it is a pleasure to pay tribute to Dr.
Karl Terzaghi for his invaluable assistance as consultant to our or-
ganization on many complex foundation problems over the past 30
years.

DISC USS ION

Bv D . J. BLEIFuss*

I have read Mr. Terzaghi 's paper with considerable interest ; the
subject is one which sho uld be given a good deal of attention . I must
start my discussion by disagreeing with him when he says his personal
experiences and observations are limited ; the scope of his experience
is about as unlimited as it is possible for any one man's to be. There
are few consultants as well qualified to discuss this subject.
He is quite right in saying that consultants are often not used
to the best advantage. A client may not employ a consultant at all,
when he really needs one badly. A client may select the wrong con-
sultant. A client may make the wrong arrangement with the right
consultant.
It is a curious fact that many laymen consider themselves quali-
fied to criticise an engineer , or to do their own engineering. Time and
education will take care of this, as the public comes more and more
to realize that this civilization of ours is based on the work of the
engineer. The roads we travel on ; the cars we ride in ; the machinery
we use; the energy to drive our machinery ; our communication sys-
tems; our water systems ; they are all based on the work of the
engineer.
A client may select the wrong consultant . To many people, an
engineer is an engineer; they make no distinction between bridge,
.. B le if uss, H os te tter & Associates, Consulting En g ineers , Sacramento, Ca liforni a.
 CO ): · t;LTANTS, CLJl~\:T ~ . . \ \" D ·oN TR .\ 'T OR S

hydroelectric, anitary , and other en°in eers. The same peopl e would
not dream of employin an ob tetrician when they really ne d a skin
peciali t. Reputable con ultant will not accept mployment in a
fie ld where they feel they cannot do the best work. con sultant may
be hopele sly incompetent; fortunately. there are very few of this
cla s and they u ually do not la t long. A great nam e and reputation
are no good guide in lection, which hould be ba ed on only one
consideration , i.e ., what the con ultant has actually done in the fi Id
whe re hi advice i being ought.
A client may make the wrong arrangem nt with a consultant.
Wi hing to save money he may limit the con ultant'. employment to
one particular phase of the work, such as preliminary layout and
gathering data, design, or the supervision of construction. In the fir ·t
two case there may be no " follow through /' in the la t cas the con-
sultant may be called on to supervise the construction of something
he knows could be improved or is radically wrong. If limited to pre-
liminary layout and gathering data, the con ultant has no control
ove r detailed de ign or the field changes inevitably n cessary as con-
struction develops new information. If limited to detail design he
may find his data insufficient ( very common ) that it ha been mis-
interpreted, or that the preliminary layout i wrong. He will have
no assurance that his careful de ign will be carried out and again no
control over field change .
In such cases, if trouble develops , all the engineering on the job
gets tarred with the ame bru h regardless as to where the fault
specifically lies. It is difficult to see what can be done about this
since a consultant cannot very well ref u e employment on the grounds
he is not being asked to do enough.
I wi h to cite a few illu trations:
A. A dam ite had been chosen and inve tigated. On being called
upon to make a preliminary de ign and estimate, I found that a much
better site close by had been di regarded.
B. An earthfill dam project-it had been reported that perviou
material was plentiful and imperviou material scarce. When called
upon for detailed design , we wi hed to check these data in the field ,
?ut the client insisted this was unnecessary and that he placed
~mplicit reliance on his own engineers. The dam was designed accord-
~ngly. pon personal investigation later , I found the data wrong;
impervious material was plentiful, and pervious material scarce. The
 BOS T O.:--1 SO lET'l: OF C l\ IL E GINEE RS

contractor had already tarted work but the dam had to be re-
designed. Then the client prote ted the extra expense .
C. We de igned an eartbfi 11 dam , but the client insisted on _uper-
vi ing construction with hi own force · we were to have nothing to
do with it. On casually vi iting the dam during con truction, I found
to my horror that where we had specified sand and gravel silt was
being placed , and very wet silt at that. It was merely the clients
and our own good luck that we caught this in time .
D. \\ e designed a concrete dam but were to have nothing to
do with supervision of con struction. However , when placing of con-
crete was started, I looked at the fir t test reports and found the
concrete was not up to specifications. Although it wa none of my
busine , i protested vigorously and the condition was corrected.
A consultant' relation hip with a contractor may be of two
kind , the contractor may be his client , or the con ultant may be the
owner client> repre entative. Many contractors consider the engi-
neer as an unmitigated nuisance and evi l and think they could very
well get along without him · some contractors have progressed to the
point where they admit the engineer is a necessary evil ; the best con-
tractor cooperate whole-heartedly with the engin eer. Quite often ,
the contractor employee regardless of his attitude , have a mi taken
idea of loyalty, and think that by cutting corners , they are serving
the contractors be t interest. Or they have not the slightest notion
as to the rea on why certain things mu t be done in a certain fa hion ,
and regard any requirement which may interfere with speed and pro-
duction as quite unneces ary . A foreman who two year ago was a
laborer will argue with an engineer of thirty years' experience. I
may cite one case: a lift of concrete had been placed , with dowel steel
projecting upward from it surface to tie in the next lift. As soon as
the concrete had attained its set and could be walked on without foot-
prints being left , the contractor men warmed over it, erecting form
for the next lift. The dowel steel was pushed around with the result
that each rod was oon standing in a hole with no bond at all for per-
haps twelve inches below the urface . It was a rush job, and my
prote t was regarded as unreasonable interference with progre . An-
other case: transmission tower foundation s had been placed a much
a three inches out of line and guide ; steel towers erected on them
were in con equence very much di torted and it was necessary to
take down the towers , dig up the foundation s and start over. A totally
unwarranted interference with progress.
 CO'.\TSUL Tt\~TS, CLTE~T , _-\:'.\'D CO . TR _-\ CTOR

Our trouble with an engineer performance is this: if hi job is

we ll done the work goes smoothly and client and contractor alike are
apt to consider that the money pent on engineering has been wasted;
if the work does not go smoothly , they are apt to place the blame on
incompetent engineering.
A consultant may bettf'r hi relations with a contractor by ade-
quate explanation · most men really like to know why they must do
thus and o. A very fundamental thing : a con ultant must design with
an eye on what construction methods are to be u ed and material
available.
A client employs a consultant becau se he think the con ultant
knows more than he does, and he wi hes the benefit of superior knowl-
edge. It is only common sense to make an arrangement which will
insure he does get such benefit. He wishes to be as ured the project
is safe, that it will function properly, and be economically designed
both as to first and annual costs.
Many consultants are speciali ts in rather narrow fields , and it
would be quite useless to employ them in broader field , and expect
them to perform well. Others are more general in their knowledge, and
they hould be employed to coordinate the work of the pecialists. I can
best illustrate this in the hydroelectric field, with which I am familiar.
A hydroelectric project should have an engineer of broad experience
in this field in over-all charge . He doe not need to be an expert in
all the detailed phases of his work , but he must be able to know when
he needs a specialist's help ; he must be willing to ask for it; and be
able to use it when he gets it. ( The same may be said of an engineer
in charge of supervision of construction.) The client's own forces may
be able to do this coordination- if they are not, a general con ultant
should be employed to do it.
Mr. Terzaghi is unquestionably correct in tating that the co-
operation of consultants in high tanding creates an unwarranted
feeling of security, unless full advantage is taken of the services they
are able to render. While a atisfactory formula for accompli hing
this purpose has not yet been evolved , it mu t lie in the directions of
coordinating their activities, and giving them all a chance to follow
through."
 RO TON SO IETY OF CI\'IL E GIN EER S

DISCUSSION

Bv R OBERT F. OGILVY*

In April 1957 , about half a year before Dr. Terzaghi read his
paper " Consult ants, lients, and ontractors ' at a meeting of the
Boston ociety of Civil Engineers, I wa a ked to talk at a luncheon
meeting of the Montreal oils Group on t.he topic " What the Struc-
tural Engineer Expect from the oi l Con ultant ' . This talk was
repeated in Ottawa in early October. My remarks on thi _ubject
upplement in many re pects the statements contained in Dr. Terza-
ghi s paper. Therefore , Dr . Terzaghi has uggested that I ubmit
the following abstract of my talk to the Montreal oils Group as a
contribution to the di. cu sion of his paper. Although my talk dealt
essentially with the relationship between the soils consultant and the
st ructural engineer, in many instance_ the _tructural engineer may
represent the owners or act as an intermediary between the soils
engineer and the owners, and as such may assume the po ition of
client as far as the soils con ·ultant i concerned. The oil consultant
and the structural engineer should be mutually and equally concerned
with the contractor's performance, and determined that the work
shall be carried out to con form to the basis of the design specifications.
The work of the soils consultant a nd of the structural engineer
lies quite largely within the field of general con truction work. Pos-
sibly a brief review of design and construction practices in North
America will provide some background for more detailed observations
later. On one of the first warm days of the spring of 1927 , several
engineers, engaged on the construction of the Gatineau mill for Cana-
dian International Paper Company, were itting in a quiet alcove
on the sunny side of the grind er building during noon hour discussing
the const ruction work which was ju t drawing to a close. An Austra-
lian engineer expressed great urprise in comparing his previous ex-
perience with what he con sidered the strange practices which had been
involved in the con truction of Gatineau Works . He de cribed the
procedure in Australia based on practice in Great Britain, which
required that all drawings for the entire project should be completed
and checked and approved before any construction work was started.
This was in very direct contra. t to the procedure followed at Gatineau
'Ge neral En gi ne eri ng D epa rtm e nt, Aluminum Company of Ca na da, Limit ed, M on treal ,
Ca nada.
 co :s;-S l.! LT ANTS, CLIENTS, AND CONTRACTOR S

and which is being followed throughout orth America to a very

large extent today. I bad joined the . I. P. staff at Gatineau, 1st
February 1926 , on the morning on which the concrete spread founda-
tions for the digester building had been blasted out to make way for
pile foundations. The entire plant had been designed to rest on spread
footings , but inve tigation during the previous three months of the
loaded spread footings and loaded concrete and timber piles had
hown that the very fine grey silty clay on the east bank of the
Ottawa River required the use of pile foundations. As a result all
the concrete foundations designed already as spread footings had
to be redesigned to re t on Raymond cast-in-place concrete piles.
Although thi did add con iderable un expected burden on the paper
company designing staff in ew York, it did not altogether explain
the fact that drawings came into Gatineau on the morning mail and,
in ome instances, were being used for actual construction a few hours
later . This is only an extreme example of the accepted practice in
North America which encourages construction work to be started
in the very minimum time after the deci ion to proceed has been made
at the highest level with the result that design drawings are used for
con truction purposes as soon as they become available for part of
the project. A design progresses for other sections of the undertaking
it may become necessary to revise or adjust the parts for which design
was completed fir t, and this may even involve changes in the field
if construction ha progressed far enough to require this. It is not
uncommon to have building under construction before certified prints
are received from manufacturers of equipment to be housed in the
buildings, and the final information contained on these prints of
equipment may show that adjustments have to be made to drawings
of buildings and foundations, which in turn may or may not require
adjustments in the field to structure already completed.
The owners represented by the company directors are anxious
to bring into production as soon as possible any enterprise which has
received approval. Management i eager to further construction
with the least time delay, and engineers themselves are ambitious to
accomplish the maximum in the shorte t time. Everyone involved
directly or indirectly in a construction undertaking must be aware
of, and recognize hone tly , the universal desire on this continent to
complete the job as soon as possible. This may be universal all round
the world but there are varying interpretations of what is «possible",
 BOSTON SOC IETY OF ClVlL ENGINEERS

and co rre pondingly varying degree of pres ure and differenc es m

meth od with th e North American viewpoint being one extreme.
When any tru ctur e is to be built today , the fir st qu e tion cer-
tainly i " What are foundation conditions? On what will thi structure
re t ?" To an increa ing extent in the past twenty years , this con idera-
tion ha gained recognition a the fir t es ential for structural design.
and ce rtainly is the fir t proper que tion oday . The co rrect answer
to thi que tion should avoid the observed damage to some st ruct ures
built many years ago without such consideration . The structural
engineer must tart by roughing out a ve ry general picture of the
st ructure itself . Befo re he can proceed to proper de ign he must know
what the ground conditions are and wha t bearing press ure the soil
will ta ke. Variations of thi req uirem ent apply to dams, to wharve
and to practically eve ry other type of struct ur e in addition to the more
co mm on demand for information needed for building ite .
Although organizati ons or companie may be involved in stru c-
tural de ign and soil investigation , it will be easier to consider the e
group as repre ented by individual in the person of th e structural
engineer and the soils consultant. The structural engineer normally
i responsible for layout and design of a tructure, and for final
design deci ions on matter on which the soil con ultant's advice has
bee n obtained. The soil consultant normally is responsible for investi-
gating the site and providing advice and recommendations concerning:
1. Suitabil ity of soil conditions forafe support of the proposed
structure .
2. Specific Limitation which oil conditions will impose upon
design construction and operation of the proposed structure.
These are qualification which may govern not only the type
of foundation but also th e type of stru cture which ca n be
used with normal safety.
3. Prediction of physical behaviour of the foundation soil under
the given applied conditions, and the effects of this be-
haviour on the st ructure and it intended u e. pecifically
(a ) what settlement is expected- what magnitude and during
what time period ; ( b ) what is the sheer strength of the soil
in relation to tres es applied ; and ( c ) for dam and other
hydraulic structure , what i the estimated seepage and hydro-
static pre ure .
 CO\.'SCLT.-\'.'<TS, CU E\.'TS , AND CONTRACTORS

The proper relation of these two persons involves almost complete

integration. The structural engineer and the soil consultant must work
together- not in parallel with a distance between them , but in full
coope ration with close interchange of thoughts to provide continu-
ity and consistency in the work , and avoid either a gap in thinking
or a misinterpretation of intent. This comes in several stages :
( a ) Preliminary. The structural engineer briefs the soil con-
sultant on the preliminary planning and layout for the project and
provides some basic data essential to a preliminary analysis of the
fou ndation problem such as the type and use of the structure con-
te mplated. The soil con ultant should be prepared to make prelimi-
nary recommendations as to the type and extent of the inves tigation
progra m.
( b ) Work in the Field. The soil consultan t plan s and directs
field investigation and laboratory analyses and tests. That work
sho uld be carried out competently and expeditiously.
( c) R eport Submitted. The soil consultant submits an interim
report or a final report , which normally includes an outline and ap-
praisal of the general soil conditions with general recommendations
pertinent to the design of the foundation structure. This work allows
the final choice of a site if there are several alternatives, or confirms
the practical suitability of a specific site. This provides the oppor-
tunity for an exchange of thought, and for a detailed discussion of
individual design problems. The structural engineer may want more
detailed interpretation of some item in the report, or further explana-
tion of soil conditions. At this time the soil consultant should be
given information as to the final site selected and details of the type
and loading of individual structures, and he should review these and
submit specific recommendations concerning foundations for individual
structures or special cases.
( d ) Review of Final Design . In order to be sure that exchange
of information has been thorough and without misunderstanding, the
soil consultant should review the final foundation design. For instance ,
at Kitimat, we were prepared at one time to provide more cover
against fro st protection than was necessary for foundations on that
particular type of thoroughly consolidated sand and gravel backfill.
Our soil consultant_ was informed of our thinking, and furnished
further information on that one point.
( e) Review of Site Conditions During Construction. The soil
 BOSTON SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS

consultant 's report is an interpretation of the probable soil conditions

over the entire site, based on soil borings which actually represent only
an infinitesimal cross-section of the total site. In many cases it is
advisable to check the validity of the interpretation when field condi-
tions are revealed in volume during construction, so that any varia-
tions from the original interpretation may be brought to light and cor-
rections applied to the design made by the structural engineer.
The work involved in a complete foundation analysis by a soil
consultant breaks down into five natural steps. All or part of these
may apply to an individual project depending upon its size, the degree
of complexity of the soil problem, and the terms of reference of the
consultant.
(a) Subsoil Investigation. Reconnaissance of site, supervisi9n
of drilling, sampling, and special field testing. This may or may not
include contract drilling by the consultant's force. There may be
some advantage in having the consultants carry out all work , although
some of the consultants pref er to devote their energies to engineering
supervision of the gathering of field data rather than being involved
as both soils consultant and drilling contractor. This relationship can
be debated at considerable length as each arrangement has its ad-
vantages and disadvantages. We have had satisfactory experiences
with both arrangements.
(b) Laboratory Testing. .\ laboratory testing program has to
be planned and executed with the specific purpose of investigating the
properties of the soil pertinent to the individual problem. The pro-
gram is carried out in two phases. The first consists of visual exam-
ination of the samples, together with elementary classification tests,
to obtain an indication of the soil types present and of the degree of
variation or uniformity of the soil profile. The second consists of
physical tests to determine settlement, shear strength, or permeability
characteristics, which can be used in a quantitative analysis of the
foundation behaviour. The first tests are routine whereas the second
tests are specifically aimed at particular soil conditions indicated by
the first tests.
Care should be taken to give particular attention to the second
group of tests as these results should be tailored to the intended use
of the soil and the soil type itself. In certain instances, the standard-
ized procedure has not yielded information pertinent to the problem,
because the problem itself had not been sufficiently explained to the
 CONSULT:\NTS, CLIE.1\TS, A. 1 D CO'.\TR .-\ CTORS

soil consultant , whereas the person using the data for design purposes
may not understand the limitations of its use. The soil consultant
should exercise great care to establish definitely that the data is under-
stood and is applied properly to the problem under consideration. This
further emphasizes the absolute necessity of close contact between
the soils engineer and the structural engineer. It is essential that
the soil consultant is absolutely sure that the test data obtained from
laboratory work does apply specifically to the structural engineer's
problem.
( c) Compilation of Data. This phase consists of assembly and
compilation of field and laboratory data covering the drill logs and
test results , and the presentation of this data in a concise and prob-
ably graphical form, in which it can be studied and digested. This is
drafting room work. It is essential that the vast mass of data obtained
on a large project should be summarized concisely in order that it
may be very much to the point and easily understandable by an en-
gineer not fully coversant with soil problems.
( d) Engineering Analysis and Report. This phase consists of
study and analysis of the data in relation to the engineering problem
by fully qualified professional personnel. This is the step in which
the closest liaison with the structural engineer is required.
( e) Inspection and Supervision of Construction. This phase in-
cludes review of actual field conditions in comparison to the assumed
conditions , field control testing to assure compliance with specifica-
tions in the case of earth construction, and provision of field soils en-
gineers as advisors to the construction engineering staff, when such
assistance is warranted. This is the final follow-up which is particu-
larly valuable in generating confidence in the owners as represented by
the structural engineering staff.
At the risk of repetition , it may be wise to run over in further
brief detail the factors which affect the close co-operation between the
structural engineer and the soil consultant. The basic problem of the
soil consultant is:
(a) To determine fro,n the structural engineer what conditions,
present and future, will be imposed upon the foundation soil
by the proposed structure.
(b ) To determine the soil conditions at the site by subsoil in-
vestigation.
 no TO '.\ SOCIET Y OF CI \ 'IL E ~ G I~E ERS

( c ) To analyze the behaviour of the particular foundation soil

under the imposed conditions and to interpret the behav iour
in terms of the effects it may have on design and construc-
tion aspects.
To enable the soil consultant to resolve this problem the struc-
tural engineer mu t provide the following information:
(a ) Plan area and average net loading applied over the plan
area of the tructure, because the magnitude of settlement
is related directly to these. Thi includes building loads
both live and dead , and anticipated fill loads.
( b ) Sensitivity of the structure and its enc losed plant to settle-
ment effects, in order to a se s the safe settlement tolerances
of the st ructure. The rigidity of the building frame, the type
of interior finish , and the sen_itivity of machinery are perti-
nent points of interest.
( c ) Special features of the structure which might affect or be
affected by the foundation. Such items as vibrating loads ,
deep excavations, adjacent fill or storage loads, probability
of future extensions to the structure , nature of foundations
of existing adjacent building , etc. , may have a critical
bearing _on the foundation behav iour .
Particular aspects of the general problem considered by the soil
consultant include the following details applied to specific types of
tructure :
A. Building Foundations, Bridges, Wharf Structures, Retaining
Walls , Bulkheads, etc.
1. Aspects Related to Design Considerations
1. Review of types of foundation support suited to soil
conditions.
11. Analysis of magnitudes of total and differential settle-
ments and of time-rate of settlement.
111. Analysis of shear strength of foundation soil.
1v. Analysis of effects of vibrations and earthquakes on
foundation soil.
v. Consideration of effects of future expansion of structure
on foundation of existing and future buildings.
vi. Analysis of lateral earth pressure to be resisted by re-
taining structures.
 co~ CLT ...\:\"TS, LIE;\'L, A;\'D C 1':TR . CTOR .

2. pect Related to on truction on ideration

1. Effect of weather and ea on of year on behaviour of
oil relative to working conditions and acce on ite
during con truction . Protective mea ures which might be
nece ary at variou period of year to prevent damage
to oil foundation uch a hrinkage due to drying swell-
ing due to wetting, expansion due to freezing.
11. nwatering-extent of problem and whether or not p -
cial methods required .
iii. Pile oundations- analy is of problems of driving pile ,
recommendation of criteria for e tabli hing adequate
penetration re istance to m et design requir ment re-
view of uitable types of driving equipment review of
special precautions to be taken to prevent interference
with driven piles during driving of ubsequent piles.
B. Embankment and Fill for Building Foundations Roadways
Dyke , al o Dams and their Foundation
1. A peel R lated to Design onsideration
1. Analy is of settlement of foundation and fill.
ii . Analy is of shear strength of foundation oil and stability
of slopes of fill section.
iii. Analy is of permeability , seepage and hydro tatic pre -
ure condition within fill and fou ndation, for dykes and
dams .
iv. Recommendations concerning dimensions, slopes and
cross- ection of fill dictated by fill and foundation soil .
v. Evaluation of borrow materials.
v1. pecifications for selection of borrow material and place-
ment of fill material .
2. A pect Related to Con true ti on Considerations
1. Review of mo t suitable type of equipment and con-
struction procedure in relation to oil condition pre-
vailing weather condition and specification requirements.
A variety of construction jobs come to mind in which the de-
demands on the soil consultant differed greatly in application . The
basic requirement on all job however i to earn the customer con-
fidence. The tructural engineer mu t be confident that the advice and
guidance he i receiving i well founded . The second requirement
 BOSTON SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS

on practically every job in North America today is speed- test results

and the consequent recommendations are required urgently in no
time at all I ! Nothing- shakes the client's confidence as much as being
given a series of unfulfilled promises on delivery of data and advice.
The third factor is the extent of responsibility the soil consultant
displays. Does he make a quick trip to the site, submit a report,
and then vanish? Or does he continue o appear at intervals during
construction and keep his recommendations up-to-date and refreshed
periodically? Perhaps the fee for the work won 't permit this further
attention, but in that case the soil consultant should do a better selling
job for his services. Get confirmation of the advice given, and stay
on the job until it is confirmed.
Some of the suggestions which have been outlined are based on
very practical experience. On the Peribonka River, north of Lake St.
John, the site for a concrete dam and powerhouse was established
and the construction work started. As the scope of the site investiga-
tion was expanded, it became apparent that a hillside covered by over-
burden on the east bank of the river did not consist of country rock
covered to the usual fairly shallow depth by earth and gravel but
actually was an earth and gravel hillside with the country rock at some
considerable depth. Investigation was required very promptly to
determine just what design of concrete abutment would be necessary
to fit into that hillside, and whether a core wall was necessary in the
hillside. In order to give the designers some indication of site condi-
tions in the very shortest time, a geophysical investigation was car-
ried out from the surface to determine rapidly the depth of bedrock,
and the results of this investigation were confirmed by diamond drill-
ing which required several weeks' more time. This is one example of
the work of the soils consultants being adapted to the time require-
ments of the particular job, which fairly definitely dictated how the
investigation should be carried out. On this particular location , ob-
servation wells were placed in this hillside to permit seepage measure-
ments to be taken at regular intervals to determine just how effective
the structural engineer's design had been , and these seepage readings
were discontinued only last April after a record of five years had shown
that the conditions are entirely satisfactory.
At Kitimat the smelter plant is located in the Kitimat River valley
and is built upon material laid down by the Kitimat River. Soft top
soil has been stripped off to a depth varying from 1 foot to a maximum
 CO~S CLT.-\)J T S, CLJ E>J T S , A~D COl\ T R ACT O R S

of somewhat more than 20 feet , and the stripped material has been
replaced to the required grade by sand and gravel backfill. Com-
paction of this backfill material has been very good and practically no
sett lement takes place in this replaced layer. However , at a depth
of approximately 40 feet, varying som ewhat with the location , there
is a horizontal strata of compressible gray silt which compacts under
pressure and very appreciable settlement takes place as buildings
loads are applied. Our soils consultants estimated these settlements
five years ago, and es timated variations in the settlement according
to the location. These predictions have been proven to be quite satis-
factory although there have been some minor variations. However,
actual settlements have been observed and measured very closely
du ri ng the intervening years with the result that this experience has
been sufficient to enable the soils consultants to prepare predictions
with increasing accuracy, so that we believe that the predictions of
settlement. for Potline 8 will prove to be almost exactly what will be
experienced during the next 5 years at that location.
The soils consultant must be persistent and must have self-
confidence. On one job, we took exceptional care to consolidate the
rock on which a concrete storage dam was being constructed. Every
means was taken to ensure that the rock was sound and an extensive
grout curtain was drilled and placed under the upstream face of the
da m. There was the rewarding satisfaction derived from the comment
by an experienced consultant in dam construction that he had never
witnessed a dam built from which leakage had been cut to such an
absolute minimum. However, our satisfaction with this accomplish-
ment was tempered somewhat by the question from one of our own
engi nee rs as to whether such care was really justified or whether it
would be better to take less pains and permit certain leakage. The
soils engineer may be faced with a similar question as to whether a
full inves tigation of soils conditions is actually necessary, or whether
construction work can be carried out to somewhat less exacting stand-
ards. T he soils consul tant must have the answers to justify the work
he is doing.
Of course, a very definite example of that justification was the
experience with a timber pile wharf designed for the west coast. When
this design was well under way and the type of construction definitely
established, a soils consultan t was asked to confirm the fact that this
design was satisfact ory fo r this particular location. This investigation
 BOSTON SOCIE TY OF C fVIL E?\GI.\:EERS

very promptly showed that normal loading of this wharf would stress
the piles at least 100 % and any combination of added wind loads or
wave action would very seriously overstress the piles. In thi s par-
ticular in stance , the soils consultant had to convince the owners that
his conclusions based on expert investigation were more reliable than
the owner's own previous experience with timber wharf construction
on the west coast but under somewhat different conditions.
The growth of soils engineering during the past 20 years has led
to an appreciation of the value of this work. However , it is still neces-
sary to increase this appreciation in some quarters and that is the
responsibility of the soils engineer. The structural engineer expects
from the soils consultant definite engineering advice presented with
sufficient confidence that it will be approved by the owners.
For material for this discussion, I am very much indebted to
personal contacts with the soils consultants in the Montreal district.
The engineering staff of the Aluminum Company of Canada, Limited,
has very kindly commented on specific details. Our soils consultant
on the west coast has provided invaluable information through dis-
cussion on what may be expected from the soils consultants.

DISCUSSION

BY RALPH B. PECK*

Probably every consultant acquires a professional personality

that reflects his own background and the fortunes of his professional
life. No two consultants would have identical views about the rela-
tions among consultants, clients and contractors. Yet the publication
and discussion of opinions and experiences concerning this subject
may serve a most useful purpose, and we are fortunate that Dr. Ter-
zaghi has ventured to open for debate a field with many controversial
aspects.
The writer has by necessity given considerable attention to the
special opportunities and problems of the professor-consultant. Soil
mechanics experienced much of its early growth in academic sur-
roundings and it is not surprising that many teachers and research
workers developed consulting practices. Nevertheless, there are all
shades of opinion regarding whether or how the professor-consultant
•Professor of Soi l Mechanics, University of lllinoi .
 CO~SULTANTS, CLIENTS, AND CO:--JTRACTORS

should operate. On the one hand, we find some universities-even

state-supported ones- formally serving as the vehicle for the consult-
ing practices of their staffs. On the other hand, a senior partner of a
well established firm specializing in oil mechanics recently sug-
gested** that professors should abandon independent consulting ac-
tivities forthwith , although such firms might upon occasion engage
professors to study selected problems.
The writer takes a middle ground. H e believes there are valid,
even compelling reasons why professors should maintain a consulting
practice. First , the experience cannot but improve the breadth and
vigor of instruction. Secondly, certain phases of the work afford an
opportunity for students to participate directly in the solution of cur-
rent engineering problems. Thirdly, the wor½ provides an impetus for
research and develops judgment regarding the significance of prob-
lems worthy of research. Finally, the experiences provide the profes-
sor with raw material for digests of case histories , professional papers ,
and even textbooks . The bare fact that the majority of modern texts
have been written by teacher-consultants rather than by members of
consulting firms is strong justification for participation in consulting
activity on the part of the professor.
Nevertheless , the writer feels that there should be sharp limita-
tions on the nature and extent of consulting services by academic
people. The professor should not allow himself to be in competition
with practicing engineers. Particularly if he is an employee of a tax-
supported institution, he should meticulously avoid the use of public
funds or the uncompensated use of public facilities for private gain.
Over a period of some 15 years the writer has gradually recognized a
few criteria that he considers useful for judging whether a consulting
assignment is appropriate. Of foremost importance, the assignment
should involve his personal services on a personal basis. It should
not involve participation in an organization or company having an
existence separate from the University. Secondly, the assignment
should involve the special skills of the consultant preferably in a
novel way, that is, the work should not be routine or of a character
within the ordinary scope of activities of the practicing engineer. For
the most part, in fact , his work should be done for practicing en-
gineers or engineering firms . Finally, the fee , which should be on a
per diem basis , should be not less than that which would be charged
'*T oo Much In -Fi ghting , Co n su lt ing Engineer, Dec. 1956, p. 6.
 BOS TOX SOCIETY OF CIVIL E ~GfNEERS

by an independent consultant; it should, in fact , be somewhat greater

to encourage the employment of the independent consultant if a com-
petent one is available.
From time to time, assignments may have to be accepted which
do not suit all these criteria. One caDJ)ot always tell in advance
whether a project will be routine. For some problems the type of
soil testing must be decided on a day-to-day basis as the project un-
folds , and at the end of the program one may realize that only routine
tests have been made. Occasional routine projects, moreover, have
educational value, especially for graduate students. But, with the cri-
teria to serve as a guide, the professor can usually pursue a consistent
policy. He will not, of course, advertise his services or solicit work.
As a matter of fact , the professor-consultant need not feel on the
defensive on account of his consulting practice. He has the oppor-
tunity , perhaps even the obligation, to provide a standard of profes-
sional competence not yet universal among consulting firms in the
field of soil mechanics. Many such firms fall into a routine of boring,
sampling, testing, and making recommendations for design that hardly
constitutes professional service. All too few firms pay more than
lip service to research or professional papers; they are too occupied
by the urgencies of the moment. Fortunately there are notable ex-
ceptions.
Dr. Terzaghi has mentioned several types of service performed
by the individual consultant before or during execution of a project.
Often, in addition to these , the consultant is called _u pon in connec-
tion with a controversy even after the project is completed. Here
there are both rewards and dangers . One of the rewards is the large
amount of factual data, often concerning construction difficulties, that
become available to the consultant in a brief time. Some of the writer's
most interesting records of experiences have come to his attention in
this way. In some instances, by assembling the facts from a dis-
interested point of view, the consultant may help to end the contro-
versy without litigation ; this is a rewarding situation indeed.
In controversial situations much depends on the attitude of the
client. Some clients truly seek out the facts and a fair estimate of
the situation. Others would like to direct the opinion of the consultant
to their own purposes on interests. Occasionally one can do no more
than withdraw from an assignment, if the client withholds or colors
pertinent data or exerts pressure toward a favorable opinion. In con-
 CONSULT .--\.~TS, CLIE): TS, .--\ND CO~TR.-\CTO:RS

troversies the true reputation of a consultant emerges. The writer has

been dismayed on occasion to discover that the "opposition" had re-
tained a particular consultant because he knew the consultant's opinion
·would reflect the desires of the opposing party. On other occasions,
the writer has been delighted to learn that a different consultant was
on the opposite side of a controversy, even though that consultant was
a highly competent individual , because he knew that the facts would
be fairly and dispassionately used. A consultant can hardly have a
more enviabl"e reputation than to be desired as an opponent in spite
of his great professional competence.
Finally, the writer would suggest that the consultant should be
wary of making non-technical judgments. He is not a lawyer. He
is of ten not called into a controversy until the battle lines are drawn.
Ii he ventures out of his technical specialty, he may become unwill-
ingly a pawn in the struggle.

DISCUSSION

BY FRAKK A. MARSTON,* Member

I recall seeing a bas relief copied from an Italian church, of some

centuries old, which depicted the head and shoulders of the architect,
the contractor and the owner, in that order. The contractor was
thumbing his nose at the other two. Apparently some of the problems
of today in the field of construction are not new, particularly as
regards human relations and responsibilities. Dr. Terzaghi's paper is
worthy of thoughtful consideration. His understanding of the problems
and experiences of a consultant in civil engineering can be appreciated
sympathetically by any engineer who has practised in that field over
a period of years.
There is no question but that the consulting engineer who can
carry on his professional practise with a small office and only a few
associates may have fewer worries than another who practises as part
of a large organization. On the other hand, the former may not have
the thrill and the satisfaction of accomplishment that comes to the
latter, who not only consults with others , but is closely identified
with all stages of the design and construction of important projects.
Much of the paper could have been titled , "The Importance of
• p~rtner of ~I etcalf & Eddy, Engineers.
 0 T O'.\' 0 IETY OF CI\"JL E:-,,: Gf:-,,:EER -

oil ~Iechani in Foundation ngin ering·, but the xp nenc - cit d

are ffectively u d to d mon trat th value f comp tent advice
from a c n ultant 1 and hi_ relation. to the project.
Inexperienced official are om time led to elect an naineer for
a projec t because of a proposed low fe rather than on the basi of
qualification . uch an en ine r may pr pare d ign which are un -
uitable for the oil cond ition actually en ount ered. uch fficials
may obj ct to exp ndin fund for adequate ub urface in e ti ati on-
b mean of boring test pit and geologi a l tudie . T o emplo_ a
on. ultant to advise during th d ign a nd on t ru tion tag s may
be con id red too expen i . Then again th cont ractor may conduct
his operations in a manner contrary to the spec ifi ation or at variance
with the a sumptions of de ign. Thu I condition re ult which riou ly
affect the int rest of the engin r the client and the contractor .
In building a sew r y tern , where ew r pipe. are to b laid in
deep cut if the plan and pecification require that nly narrow
trenches be xcavated and the contractor i all wed to d ig wide, V-
hap d trenches, a with a power ho el and without he tin or
bracing the load coming on the pipe may be reall y increa ed and
resu lt in th de truction of the p ipe. uch a ituation ma bring
ritici rn by the client of both the engin e r and the contractor.
Another exa mple concern d the building of a large r inforced
on rete ew r in a d ep trench. he xca ·ation w made in open
cut with teeply loping sid es. Th concret was poured during cold
weather. Before the concr te had attained it trength th contractor
backfilled th trench by pu hing excavated material over the edg of
the tren h and by dropping material into the tren h from a clam
hell bucket atta hed to a c rane boom. Th heavy ccentric loading
which re ulted caused th sew r to crack. F urthermore, an attempt
was mad durin th backfilling t con_olidate the backfill mat rial
between the ide o f the sewer and the .ide of th tre nch by dropping
the buck t on the fill as it wa. plac d . old weather , rain and clayey
. oil helped to agaravat conditions. Both th engineer and the contrac-
tor were criti cized.
con ultin en ineer can be of material en ice to a cit_ en-
in r or other local offi ial , by carry ing the re pon ibility for a
proj ct, ther by relie ing the local official of that bu rd n.
The m thod of making a boring to determ ine the cha rac ter of
ub urface conditions may hav an impo rtant b aring on the ample
 0 . "T R ..\ .T R-

obtain d and conclu ion rea hed. Informati n can b hi hly m1 •

lead ing if an un uitable m thod i u ed. H re a ain the ngineer ma_
be subj ct t critici m.
Th paper point to the imp rtan e of cl e operat i n that i
n ded betw en tho makin pr liminary field surveys the de ign
roup. and the con truction upe r L ion group. Th project engineer
wh has charge f the de ign hould b th rou hly familiar with th
work of th oth r two roup. and in do contact with th m.
prom ine nt con ultin n ineer made a pra ti e o f d dining to d i n
work unle he wa giv n general up rvUon of cons truction of it
includin an opportunity to i it the con truction wh nev r h de med
it ential to do so. There i merit in uch a p ition particularly a
re ard foundation and t ru tural f eatur .
Th pa r r fer to the ca e wher a c n ultant i hired for pre-
lim inary tudie on ly o a to get the valu of his nam as window
dr in '. ne v ay to di coura that practi i to r quir that a
stat d f b paid for a pecific time r gardle of how much se rvice
i r qu ted or a perc nta e f e mi ht be appro riat .
Th service of a compet nt con ultin en ineer will be valuabl
in the e ent of a tructural failur ev n though he may hav had no
contact with the proj ct prior to th failur . In uch a ase it i e -
. ential to d termine the fact in ofar as pos ible. On the basi of
hi report it ma b po ible to ttle the contro e r y without court
acti n. How ver it would be better to ha e had the b nefit of the
con ultant ad i throughout the e ral tage of the proj ct.
ompet nt in pe tion of con truction work i o f b nefit to all
con rn d ev n though th re may b no legal obligation for the client
to provid it. Th re ident en ineer and in pector hould not be paid
by the on tract r and . hould not be obli ated to him . When the
client i not a public authority and the cont ractor can be ele ted
for hi xperienc , abiUty and int grit it h ou ld be p racticabl to
reduce the c t f in pection. Howev r th engine r r pon ibl for
the de i n hould ha frequ nt contact with th pro re o f con-
tru tion to be ure that n unfor en condition d velop that mi ht
conflict with the des i n.
c nsultant hould cond uct him elf as to have th
hi f llov en ·neer . He will do w II to conform to th
Ethic " formulated by the En ineer ' ouncil for Pro fe i nal D evel-
opment. If h i a member of the merican oci ty of Ci il Engin ers
 RO TO ~ 0 IETY OF CIV IL ENGI :-.: EER

he -hou ld be guided by its 'Code of E thics", as well. imilarly mem-

bers of the Boston ociety of Civil Engineers are obligated to conform
to it "Code of Ethi cs". 1
I com mend Dr. Terzaghi paper to all engineer engaged in pri-
vate practise a nd to those who employ thei r ervice

DISCUSS ION

Bv CARL TON . PR OC TOR•

Dr. Te rzaghi s highly interesting paper , reminiscent of his bril-

liant pro fessional and pedagogical caree r points out many of the pit-
fall s that beset the client of the ' package deal" engineering-construc-
tion procedure. His paper makes clear the fact that such pitfalls are
inherent to "package deal s", whether practiced by the engineering-
const ructi on departments of the client organization or by an inde-
pendent contractor.
vVhile his paper primarily depicts a situation where the engineer-
ing-construction wor k is performed by the Owners ' engineering-
const ruction departments, the same arguments apply with equal or
greater force to the situation where the work is performed under a
package contract by contractors whose services include both design
and construction. In the latter case, the situation is additionally weak-
ened by top management pres ures to produce de igns fitting into
requirements for the use of the contractor's own equipment and lim-
ited to the cont ractor's experience.
The writer's experience over the past 39 years , as a member of
a firm o f Consulting Engineers spec ializing in ub tructure, marine,
dam and othe r " heavy" engineering completely endorses such con-
clusions.
Dr. Terzaghi 's pape r pre ents the case for the in dependent con-
ultant , unencumbered by an engineering organization· but it ignores
the obv ious fact that few independent consultants have acquired his
pre-em inence as expert in his field. Hence thi paper cites examples
of potential and actual failures and engineering mistakes which would
not normally be discovered in time by a lone consul tant but which
would have been precluded under standard professional provisions by
IJ 0 11r. B CE, Vol. 3 • July 1951, p. JJI.

'P.>nner, ~lo ran, P roctor, )l ueser & R utledge, Consulting Engineers, ew York i1y .
 co.;\ l1LT.-\'.\1T ' CLIENTS, .-\~D C0 1 TR .-\ CT OR

an integrated , experienced consulting engineering firm , whose practice

was limited to purely professional se rvice.
With the steady increase in complexity of engineering design in
thi engineering age; with the mounting demands for a practical work-
ing mastery of modern theory of engineering science coupled with
the all-important value of broad experienced engineering judgement ;
in an era of diminish ing supply ve rsus increasing demand for thor-
oughly trained and experienced engineers, only the well-integrated
engineering firm can meet today 's demands.
In the long established practice of the writer 's firm , full profes-
sional res ponsibility for design , specification s and super vision is
accepted only where our contract provisions permit full latitude as to
the acquisition of all pertinent data; our own laboratory soil investiga-
tions, comparative design studies to produce maximum stability , econ-
omy and utility ; detailed supervision and inspection. Where the
agreement for engineering services does not encompass these integrated
services, disclaimers as to professional responsibilities are clearly
established. Designers should carry through on supervision and in-
spection and each element of the project , from site selection to com-
pletion , should receive the benefit of specific experienced judgment
in all fields of specialized complexity.
The antagonisms, the mutual exclusiveness, and the lack of in-
centive between design and supervision forces, as depicted in Dr.
Terzaghi 's paper , are inconceivable within the organization of a
reputable consulting engineering firm ; they can obtain only where
the "package ' type of engineering services are utilized. And " the lay-
out of temporary installations is commonly left to the discretion of the
superintendent of construction " only when the responsible engineer-
ing services are departmentalized within a parent organization or where
engineering is organizati1mally interwoven with construction interests.
Because as the paper so aptly puts it , " the contractor cannot be ex-
pected to be interested in the reasoning behind the design. His sole
aim is .. . minimum expense".
Originally published in
Journal of the Boston So ciety of Civil Engineers
July, 1958

CONSULTANTS, CLIENTS, AND CONTRACTORS *

DISCUSSION
BY C. P. DUNNt

Dr. Terzaghi's account of some of his personal experiences is

extremely well written. There are no unnecessary words. There is a
worth-while thought in every line. Therefore, the paper is recom-
mended as sqmething which deserves to be read carefully, more than
once.
The writer of this discussion classifies himself as being a client,
and also a cqntractor, and, therefore , has frequent contact with con-
sultants, and has some measure of appreciation of their problems. It
is along these lines that he will attempt to add some worthwhile
discussions.
1. When a man reaches the status of having attained the title of
"Consultant" whether he asked for it or assumed it without asking
anybody, or just naturally grew into it, the title carries with it most
certainly and, at the very least, the modest definition given by Dr.
Terzaghi, C(A Consultant is a person who is supposed to know more
.about a subject under consideration than his client". All too of ten,
the client feels that the term "Consultant" designates a person who
is endowed with supernatural powers-who can do no wrong and who
can make no mistakes. In such cases, the consultant should make an
-effort to clear up the situation.
2. It has been the writer 's experience that the most highly re-
spected and well liked consultants are those who take the trouble
to explain each step in their analysis of a problem , and give a clear
and complete account of their reasoning behind a decision. This
procedure of stripping the mystery from a thing often causes the
dient to feel-"It's so simple, why didn' t I think of that myself? "
If be feels that way, it is a good healthy situation, and that client
will come to that consultant again and again.
3. Consultants are many times asked to serve in groups, called
((Boards". The writer has no quarrel with that procedure; it is
•Paper prin1 ed in January, 1958 JouRNAL, by Dr. Karl Terzagbi.
tVi ce President, Morrison-Knudson Company, San Franci sco , Cal.
 BOSTO T SOC rETY OF CIVIL E Gl NEERS

necessary in many cases, but a bit of comment on the way Boards

function may be worthwhile:
(a) If the client has simply employed say three consulting
engineers, and has told them " Gentlemen, you are my
Consulting Board, so please give me a written report
answering these questions which I now hand you", he
is likely to be unhappy with the result for several
reasons: such as , if no one has been designated as
Chairman, there may be some lost motion and lost time
during a period of adjustment within the Board before
one of them emerges as the leader ; if the client limits
the functioning of his Board to specific questions which
he asks, he may miss some very important items. It is
well if the client, in selecting a Board , gives some
thought to whether he is assembling a group which will
contain clashing personalities.
4. A Consulting Board, functioning as a body and making a
unanimous recommendation, is likely to come up with the most con-
servative of the recommendations made by any individual on the
Board.
5. There can be no compromise with safety. That must be
understood by all concerned. However, there are many situations
where an owner can and should take " calculated risks", such as mak-
ing a choice between immediate high investment with low maintenance
costs, and a lesser first cost with high maintenance costs. In situations
where calculated risks are proper, the client should frankly discuss
the problems with his consultants and ask them to help him in evaluat-
ing the risks.
6. Dr. Terzaghi has very ably discussed several situations where
a Consultant can become a "scapegoat" . In the writer's opinion, this
happens most frequently, with consultants the victim , when they are
asked to arrive at decisions based on incomplete information. We
might say it this way- "A Consultant can be compared to a modern
electronic computing machine ; the answers that come out of him can
be no more reliable than the data you feed into him ".
7. The writer is a strong believer in the desirability of a con-
sultant being attached to a job from the very beginning of a design
to the very end of construction. The client who waits until he is in
 CO Sl}LT A TS, CLIENTS, AND CO TRACTORS

trouble before calling a consultant is likely to experience trouble of

greater magnitude than necessary , and is more likely to stay in trouble
than would be the case if he called on the doctor while he was still
in good health.
8. A Consultant, to be most useful, must have the courage to
say unpleasant things, at times, when necessary. The client is not
looking for a "yes man" when he selects a consultant; he is in need
of sound advice ( even though he may not always follow it ).
9. There are some clients who, feeling timid about a special
problem, employ a specialist consultant and get his opinion, and then
develop courage to the point of ignoring the consultant's advice. The
writer has heard this situation expressed in this way: "It's a great
comfort to have some advice to ignore-much more satisfactory
than not having any advice at all ".
In closing this discussion, the writer wishes to again express his
sincere admiration for Dr. Terzaghi's paper, and to r~commend a
second and a third reading.

DISCUSSION

Bv F. E. SCHMITT

Dr. Terzaghi's noteworthy review of some of his experiences in

the birth period of modern applied soil mechanics or earthwork engi-
neering, which forms the first half of his paper, points out certain
major problems of construction work involving soils, especially soils
whose nature and future service behavior are not . well known. He in-
dicates clearly how such problems may ( and should) be dealt with.
Three steps are required on the part of the owner and his engineer:
( 1) to recognize the new conditions or difficulties of the projected
undertaking; ( 2) to realize that neither party knows enough about
these conditions to be certain of success in dealing with them; and
( 3) to enlist the cooperation of a consultant who does know and who
through past experience or suitable investigation or both can apply
the measures necessary for sound construction.
The new science and art of earthwork engineering was in the very
process of being born when Dr. Terzaghi entered consulting practice.
Fortunately, the initial application of his classic studies of friction
in sands and load consolidation in clays was successful, demonstrating
 BOSTO SOCIETY OF CIVI L E GI NEERS

brilliantly the importance of the studies. Fortunately, too this instant

success stimulated extension of the studies to other phases of the
mechanics of soils and to the behavior of mixed and special soils and
their structural changes. Yet in view of the great complexity of the
materials and phenomena it is not surpri~ ng that after nearly forty
years of diligent work by a host of abfe inves tigators neither the
science nor the art of soil mechanics and earthwork engineering can
be said to approach maturity. This is even more readily understood
in the light of the fact that the practical range of soils in their
engineering aspect ex tends from near-liquid slurries to sands, gravel
and talus on the one hand and to both plastic and brittle rock on the
other, and that each of these types of material is subject to complex
physical, chemical and geologic influences.
It is apparent that such diversity dictates utmost care in the
study and utilization of any specific soil for specific service in con-
struction, and that the fullest available stock of experience and study
should be drawn upon. Particularly is this true in a region of rela-
tively young soils such as the Great Plains, where water and wind
deposition have been active 1 on materials of widest range of origin,
from stream and glacial erosion products to volcanic flows and dusts.
The successful execution of great numbers of important structural
and hydraulic works in that region 1 accomplished largely without the
aid of soil consultants , reflects the acquired judgment and skill of
engineers and builders, developed in local practice. Today, soil
mechanics plays an ever larger part in shaping design and construc-
tion procedure there.
The record and analysis of experiences presented in the paper
serves to emphasize a further problem of construction practice, one
not neces arily involving soil mechanics. This is the importance of
establishing effective co rrelation of the required construction knowl-
edge and skill with responsibility and authority, to the end of assur-
ing that the objectives of the undertaking will be fully realized . Such
correlation is not always attained under the prevailing practice of
modern times, when large construction projects as commonly or-
ganized involve a separation of some or all of the fun ctions of plan-
ning1 exploration 1 test , design 1 and the direction of construction.
The separate participants in the project usually function in more
or less independent manner 1 and may not speak the same technical
language or have equally sensitive understanding of potentially se rious
 CONSULTANTS, CLIE NTS, AND CONTRACTORS

changes in conditions. The designers may even be unfamiliar with

the site, or they may be unable to interpret the full significance of the
field invest igations. The construction men may fail to appreciate the
usefulness or necessity of some design or specification element, and
may not foresee the effect of field design changes or of possible de-
partures from those fi eld conditions to which the design was adapted.
It is difficult to obtain ideal results under such relations within a
group of men that is expected to cooperate to a joint purpose.
Similar problems of coordination and cooperation turned up in
past ages , a soon as humanity embarked on the novel adventure of
erecting tall edifices. Therefore, an adequate solution had to be
found at an early date. It consisted in placing each major project
under the authoritative and respon ible direction of a master builder,
skilled in the details as well as the principles of the arts involved.
Without this organizational device the great cathedrals, halls and
aqueducts of bygone ages could not have been built.
During the last century engineering science and the techniques
of construction have made amazing progress, but corresponding de-
velopment of the organizational aspects of engineering has lagged.
Some of the consequences may be inf erred from the construction and
service experiences cited by the author. In consideration of these
and many other items it may perhaps be timely to turn back the pages
and recall how our forefathers maintained adequate cooperation be-
tween the numerous arts involved in the execution of their engineering
masterpieces.

DISCUSSION

BY ADOLPH J. ACKERMAN*
Dr. Terzaghi's services as an educator and his skillful wntmgs
in the technical field have had far-reaching effects on the engineering
profession . It is, therefore, all the more stimulating to gain a glimpse
of his personal philosophy as it has developed from his consulting
engineering practice.
Among the items in his paper which deserve special emphasis
are the following:
1. A prerequisite of a success£ ul consulting engineer is the
requirement that he must have " independence" and "time to think".
*Consuhing Enginee r, l\1adison. Wis con 9in.
 BO ' TO S 1£TY OF CTVIL E NG ! EERS

He mu t be in a po ition to ay o I when that is the correct an wer

to a proposal. He must al so be willing and ager to spend a sub-
stantial part of hi time on study and on his continuing profes ional
development without receiving immediate financial compen ation.
2. Competence i an essential qualification and, a Dr. Ter-
zaghi ha pointed out ome of hi mo t va luable and u e ful se rvices
hav grown out of casual ob ervation made while inspecting a con-
struction ite for ome other tat d purpo e.
3. "Confid nee " mu t be developed in the judgm nt of a con-
sulting ngineer. Thi invariably can onl y come from first hand ex-
perience and co ntact where succe s ful re ults peak for themselves.
In thi re pect Dr. Terzaghi ' career is unique; he has developed
the new scienc of soil mechanic and has help d to bring it to
maturity by means of practical applications to problems in founda-
tion . In ome case such problem had gravitated in the hand of
others to a point of dist ress and Dr. T rzaghi 's ability in working
out economical corrective m asures has produced, in the mind _ of
such client a high degree of mutual confidence.
4. " Participation in th planning and execution of a projece 1
provid a maximum of opportunity to render u eful service . In this
respect the employment of consul ting engineering ervices eems to
suffer unduly from unwi e habit . ( Perhaps the common habit , of
employing a physician only when there is iUne s and need for a cure,
carries over into th employment of consulting engineer ; th id ea of
retaining a phy ician on a continuing basi to keep a patient w 11 , is
us d only seldomly. ) A con ulting engine r can contribute his great-
est usef ulne s if hi capabili ties are employed at the planning . tage
and later on for k eping a project goi n(Y well ( or fot keeping it out
of trouble ). Unfortunat ly, s uch services tend to r move a yard tick
for mea uring their effecti ene s. client will recognize th value of
specialized services more readily wh n h e is in trouble and when he
foresee a loss from which h is aved by calling on the as i tan ce of
an experienced con ulting engin eer. It i not easy to demons trate
the ne d for competent advice before ther is trouble, and its greater
value.
5. killful r lationships ' with a clients organi zati on are of
major importance. competent con ulting engineer who works di-
r ectly with a chief engineer 1 vice-president or pr sid en t 1 at a level
where there is mutual re pect and confidence , ha_ ery littl difficulty
 CO 1 SU LT A T , CLIENT , .'\ D ONTRACTOR .

in r ndering valuable ervice . However a Dr. T erzaghi poin t out ,

difficulti sometimes arise in attempting to maintain good relation
with a ma sive organ ization . There may be lack o f under Landing
regarding the im po rtance of the con_ulting engineers participation,
and difficulty in identifying hi contributions and those made by in-
dividua l members of the organization. A succe ful relation hip can
be maintained only if the top xecutive of the organization see to it
that hi confidence in the con ulting engineer is respected by the
organization. nder uch circum tance a continuing relation hip i
mo t Likely to lead to up rior performance on the part of th entire
organ izat ion .
6. clear definition of the consulting engineer,s responsibil-
itie ' i a prerequisite to uccess ful service . Hi authority and re-
sponsibility may range anywh re from zero to 100 per cent , or, a
Dr . Terzaghi ha indicated , he can be anything from a cape-goat'
to a " avior, . Unfortunately the concept of a con ulting engineer
serving a ' window-dr ing ' i all too common· occasionally a well-
in tentioned beginning gravitate to this type of relationship simply
because there wa no satisfactory definition at the tart. The con-
sulting engineer i under ome handicap in developing a tatement
of procedures and relationship with re pect to someone else s organiza-
tion . I t i therefore advi able that th cli nt or the executive in
charge, take the initiative in communicating proper definitions of
relation hips to hi organization, once they have been agreed upon
with the co nsulting engineer. On the other hand a competent con-
sulting engine r in ists on knowing in advanc what he may be getting
in to or what may be expected of him, before he comm its his s rvic s.
If more of thi were practiced it would help to rai e the 1 vel of p r-
forman ce of the con ulting engineering prof ssion.
It i_ hoped that Dr. Terzaghi ,s timulating paper will lead to a
furt h r effort, on the part of consulting engineers to create definitions
for various type of ser ices along with definitions of re pon ibility
and authority . These could readily become tandards of reference in
connection with the engagement of con ulting services.
 BOSTON SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGI EERS

DISCUSSION

Bv HE NRY GRA CE*

The difficulties described by Professor Terzaghi indicate that

there is something radically wrong with many of the engineering or-
ganizations operating today.
The writer has spent most of the last twenty-five years working
with consulting engineers, initially as an assistant engineer and
laterly, as a partner employing his own staff to carry out the works
entrusted to his firm. H e has at times acted as a consultant to other
consulting engineers and at times his firm has employed consultants
to advise him on difficult aspects of the work . He has, therefore,
had the opportunity of viewing the client-consultant relationship in
both directions. In his experience this relationship has usually been
a happy one, resulting from the mutual understanding between the
client and the consultant. In all cases the consultant has been di-
rec tly responsible to the Engineer who controlled all aspects of
the work. According to British practice " The Engineer" is the in-
dividual who is responsible to the owners for the execution of the
work. Both legally and in practice he is responsible for formulating
the original proposal preparing the designs and specifications and
supervising the construction of the work, which in most cases is
carried out by Contract. Under the Contract " The Engineer" is
given very wide powers to ensure that the work is carried out to his
entire satisfaction . He can require unsatisfactory work to be re-
placed, unsatisfactory members of the contractor's staff can be re-
moved and in extreme cases he can expel the Contractors from the
site. If, therefore, the consultant has confidence in "The Engineer"
responsible for the project he should experience little or no difficulty.
For short periods ihe writer has worked for larger organizations.
These organizations are usually run by Governments or groups of
businessmen or financiers . who have little interest in the technical
aspects of engineering. The organization is usually divided into .a
number of departments with little or no liaison between them. " The
Engineer" defined in the Contracts prepared by these organizations
is someone who acts primarily as an administrator. He has very
little detailed knowledge of the job he is responsible for controlling,
because the volume of work handled by his organization is too great
•Wilson, Kirkpatric k & Partn ers, 47 Vi,;toria St reet, Londo n SWI, EngL:ind.
 CO NS ULT .ANTS , CLI EN T S, A>l"D CO N TR A CTORS

for him personally to exercise any detailed control. Such organiza-

tions can carry out routine engineering works. Engineering works
which require skill and judgement of a high order cannot in the
writer's opinion be carried through successfully without the control
and guidance of "The Engineer" . It is this type of engineering work
which usually calls for the services of a consultant. In the writer's
opinion the consultant would be well advised to turn down the assign-
men t unless he is satisfied that he will be directly responsible to
"The Engineer" who perform the functions previously described and
who has a knowledge and appreciation of the aspects on which the
Consul tant is asked to advi e.

DISCUSSION

BY H. J. B. HARDI NG*

Dr. Terzaghi's paper is full of wit and wisdom, and exposes an

area not of ten explored in technical literature.
Civil Engineering in Great Britain has developed on rather differ-
ent lines from European practice, and in some ways from that of the
United States. The independent consultant is rare in Great Britain,
where the established firms of Consulting Engineers have existed and
developed for many years. In the days of private enterprise they were
all-powerful in the profession, but their power has been somewhat
diminished by the great increase in nationalized industries and Gov-
ernment and Local Government departments. They still cover a wide
field due to the increased complexity of engineering.
The partners and senior staff of such firms will probably agree
somewhat wrily with Dr. Terzaghi 's introduction. Such an established
firm has the advantage of stored experience, which is available as
long as its filing system is efficient.
The independent consultant can give good service if he is not
pressed with too many simultaneous enquiries and has time for un-
disturbed consideration of the problems. It is also true that an in-
dependent consultant spends half his time on occupations described
by the author which cannot be allocated to any particular client.
Although he has no partner to share his responsibility, he has the
• consultmg Engineer, Londo n.
 B T N SOCIETY OF CIVIL E GIN EERS

compensation of only having to explain any per onal difficulties to

himself.
In Great Britain independent con ultant are often professors in
engine ring coll ges who und rtak con ultation and re earch in order
to wid n their fi Id and improve the value of their teaching.
The r lation b tween client and con ·ultant i et out in a most
intere ting way. A consultant will find himself a more popular figure
when he i called in after trouble ha a i n than in the early stages
when his warnings may be unwelcom in the prevailing atmosphere.
In pite of training ch me mo t p ople learn only by bitter ex-
perience.
ome years ago I was d tail d to introduce veral g otechnical
proces s into reat Britain and so met many con ulting engineers
and contractors to discuss possible application of proc sses to their
problems. Thi brought experience which would nev r have been
gained by merely carrying out one project after anoth r in the same
organi ation , and led to di cussions on other problems which had
ari en. To on urpri e one found on self being asked for and
giving opinion to older men on various other aspects of their prob-
lem . om who had got into troubl were looking for a quick cure
and tried t per uad e th mselve and the writ r that some particular
proce v.ould immediat ly olve their difficulti s. This led me to say
lat r at a meeting of the In titution of Civil Engin ers that <'Among
Civil Enginee rs wi hf ul thinking amounts to an occupational disease".
ometime wh n pr caution ha e b en taken and all ha gone
well , p opl forget t he risks whi h were possible and con ider that
the approach wa o r-cautiou . In th British tunnel world in which
I was train d my g neration wa the third aft r Greathead and was
taught to take certain precautions which our senior had learned
from the pione r fir t generation as bein good practice o we did
not hav experience of collap es and runs of soil. The fourth genera-
tion and firm which came in later ,; ith le experience began · to
deride this chool of thought , and took to u ing light r timber and
riskier method . The writer then had the experience of being called
in after troubl bad ari en and had th opportunity to tudy the
effects and app arance of collap e in the work of others, which he
might never ha e encountered in his own work .
Dr. T rzaghi's remark on the consequences of ca ual observa-
tions are worth noting . Th re i no doubt that a detached trained
 CO SULT A TS , LIE NT , A. D CO TR CTOR S

mind notices unsu pected a peel which can be overlooked by th se

engro ed in the problem. The internal pres ure from personalities,
and the urge to get on with the work without having to re-de ign or
recon truct often impairs the vi ion. A ound training in the b ic
sciences may improve the mind, but doe not n ce arily alter
psychology.
The diff erenc in approach between inside and outside depart-
ment is well de cribed in the paper and i fundamental. Even when
engineers are interchanged they are apt to develop into " inside" or
'out ide per onalitie .
The authors ucce s i founded on early int nsiv practical ex-
perience. I was fortunate enough , for all too bri f a period , to be in
attendance on him whj} he wa collectin information on everal dif-
ferent suggestions for dealing with a difficult problem by rival g o-
technical proc sse . Hi approach wa comp! tely d tacb d and un-
prejudiced . He started from fundamental be innings and moved for-
ward by a series of logical que tion and r asonings which was an
object le on in bow to arrive at a balanced opinion .
The ingl -handed con ultant has the advantage that each prob-
lem olved bring him fre h per onal xperienc which , from the
nature of his work , accumulate mor quickly than the experi nee of
men who pend y ars in actually completing each project but such
a po it ion which can only be r ach d after accumulated xperience,
requires moral courag a ~ well as tact and per onality to back a
personal opinion ba ed on information which of nece ity must oft n
be provid d by other . The author ha also set us an example of
how to approach problems with the humility which difficult oil condi-
tions demand until sufficient evidence has been collected to nable
good deductions to be made.
nother experience of the independent con ultant is that enior
men are often glad to discu s their problem with someone out ide
their own organization. Thi is not nece arily to obtain advice, but
for reass uranc that their own rea oning i correct. Here the in-
dependent con ultant of wide experience can oft n provide that re-
a surance by being able to cite parallel ca s. His contribution is
then welcome ven if it is not making any addition to decision which
have been arrived at.
. Dr. Terzaghi' evolution through inten ive practical experience
into a in le-handed consultant has resulted in hi b coming a form
 BOSTON SOCIETY OF CIVIL E GINEERS

of civil engineering Sherlock Holm es. He has unfortunately had no

permanent Dr. Watson to record hi exploit , o we mu t be grateful
for such examples as he gives in this paper of the problem which
he has faced and the solutions which he has propounded.
More can be learned from actual exa 1ples than from reading
generalized statements. It would be use ful if a ymposium could be
made of the various cases which the author describes, not only in this
paper, but in selections from his other writings, in order that such a
wide range of cautionary examples should be available to Civil Engi-
neer of all ages.
If Dr. Terzaghi had not been a great engineer he would certainly
have made a great detective.

DISCU SS ION
Bv G. L. McKENZIE* AND R. PETERSON**

The excellent paper by Professor Terzaghi entitled "Consultants,

Clients and Contractors" is very timely because many engineers with
training in soil mechanics who are now going into consulting practice
will certainly encounter the problems outlined. Although the majority
of these men will no doubt be well qualified technically , they may
not be adequately prepared to deal with clients and contractors. It
is for this reason that the sound advice based on Professor Terzaghi's
wide experience is most valuable.
One of the main points of the paper is that the soils consultant
should be retained throughout the project until the completion of
construction. This is imperative if the client is to get the maximum
benefit from these specialized services.
It is also highly desirable that the soils consultant be associated
with the job from the very early stage . If this is not done and it is
the intention to present the de igns for approval just prior to con-
struction, the client may find himself in an embarrassing situation.
For example, in the case of an earth dam the con ultant might recom-
mend that a different type of dam at a nearby location , where no
sampling had been carried out, would be the best solution. Firms are
somewhat hesitant to call in a consultant in the early stages before a
definite plan has been formulated , a their proposals are often vague
*D irec tor. Prairie Farm Rehabilita ti o n Adm ini s tr.ition . Re gina. Saska tc hewa n.
••Chief Soil Mechanics and Mat erials Engineer, P . F.R . A . . aekatoon , askatc hew.in.
 CON SUL TANTS, CUE TS, A D CONTRACTORS

and not shown on plans. The consultant will be more than pleased
to accept these shortcomings in the early stages in order to have
some assurance that investigational work will be carried on to pro-
vide the most useful information , rather than design studies which he
feels are not particularly pertinent.
The desirability of contact with the project through construction
~s becoming increasingly important with the tendency on major and
difficult earth work to modify the design as the job proceeds. This
makes it possible to utilize the more accurate soils information re-
vealed by excavations and also the observations which are generally
taken during construction . As pointed out by Professor Terzaghi,
there is a considerable difference between the necessity for such con-
tinuity in the fields of structural engineering and soils engineering.
There is an old adage which states that a poorly designed dam well
built may be far superior to a well designed dam poorly built. It is
therefore obvious that if a consultant is required at all, it would be
in the interests of those concerned to have him associated with the
project from its inception to its completion.
Professor Terzaghi has emphasized the importance of contact
between the design and construction departments in earthwork and
foundation engineering. In the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Adminis-
tration we have found that good liaison between surveys and investiga-
tion , design, and construction can be accomplished by having an engi-
neering board composed of representatives of all three functions. This
board should function during the entire period of design and con-
struction and should inspect the project regularly during construction.
Our policy for years bas been to have all features of the design
of dams pertaining to or affected by the foundations and the materials
to be used in construction originate in the Soil Mechanics Section.
When construction is under way that section is required to maintain a
thoroughly qualified soils mechanics engineer on the project at all
times. He functions administ ratively under the Construction Engineer
and functionally under the direction of the Senior Soils Mechanics
Engineer. We have found from experience that this procedure works
satisfactorily and the Construction Engineer finds it relieves him of
tremendous responsibility. One important qualification is that the
soil specialist must be a practical man and recognize the fact that
textbook examples rarely occur in practice. Decisions must often
be made on the site without recourse to consultants or senior officers.
 OCf ETY OF IL E 'G I:\f E ER

Dr cu IO

Bv JACOB Fno•

Thi pap r i of extreme intere t ince ery eldom doe a man

of Dr. Terzaghi's experienc outline h' approach to hi clients as
individual and as ource of a livelihood. It was e pecially aluable
that this lecture wa given at a tudenl Night me ting when the
younger men could probably be in flu need in their future prof e ional
careers and approach thi v ry erious problem of wh n and how to
go into private pra tice. It is a big tep to leave the curity of em-
ployment in engineering to that f consultant private practice. How-
ever, it i a st p not taken by enough men and the writer has talked
to a number of student and junior engineer groups urging them to
make the tep as i done by o much larger a percentage of profe -
sional people in the field of medicine, law and a countancy.
f ter all , the purpo e of the con ultant in any profe ional field
is very similar to the work of a teacher. He must give instruction to
those who cannot pro ure it for them elve . Howe er he differs
from a teacher in that hi instruction concern a specific problem
and shows the solution thereof or el e pr pare a diagnosi of causes
re ulting from unknown condition . Just a a teacher i not a chool,
so a consu ltan t is not an engineering organization but a p rsonal
entity. That distingui hes him from an engineering firm doing all
kinds of work.
Basi ally, just a a teach r must know what he teaches and
al o mu t know how to teach, a consultant mu t have background
and experience for the pecific problem which he trie to solve and
must be able to explain the solution to his client . That client may
be a technical organization and th refore he explain in technical
t rm . That client may be a layman and he mu t tran late his techni-
cal solution into word which can be und r tood by a layman . Other-
wi e, his ervices are of no value. A de igning engineer can prepare
a drawin and that drawing i under tandabl in all languag s.
Graphical pres ntations of a con ultant's xplanation are of value but
only a illu tration of his de cription in word .
It is really strange how small incid nt lead to an engineer be-
coming a consultant. Dr. Terzaghi explanation i an intere ting one.
The writer him elf went into con ulting practice at what is con ider d
in engine ring a very young age. Th rea on for it was that a assi t-
 CONSULTANTS, CUE TS, AN D CONTRACTORS

ant to the chief engineer of a construction company, he had been

loaned out to a consulting firm to study and design a special problem.
Finding that his knowledge of this special problem was sufficient to
provide an economical solution and that this rather large engineering
office did not have access to such knowledge resulted in a decision
to put out his shingle and open an office. Chances are that just as it is
easier for a young man to dive into cold water, it is easier eco.
nomically, for a young man to enter consulting practice. Of course,
he cannot expect, because of lack of background and experience, to
undertake the more serious problems, but there are a great number
of rather simple problems in engineering work which require study
and solution. These problems are in the offices of the contractors, the
architects, the banking and finance companies and quite often, in the
municipal and other governmental agencies. It is not difficult at all
to build up a reputation among these groups to get as much work as
one can or should handle. It is most important very early in the
consultant's practice to learn a very important word, and that is the
word "no". It is not necessary that every question that comes in be
accepted as a commission. It is best that some, and probably a good
many, be refused. In that way, as Dr. Terzaghi says in his intro•
duction, one can avoid stomach ulcers.
It is also not essential that a consultant be always in the same
rut. If he continues his education after graduation, as Dr. Terzaghi
so wisely recommends, and never stops his education, there is no
reason why his reputation cannot transcend more than one specialty
as defined in college curricula. Basically, the fundamentals of most
of the problems are the same scientific facts and solutions in many
apparently unrelated fields stem from the same logical procedures
based upon these facts. The consultant will find it necessary to be
able to handle men on the job during his field inspections of conditions
known or unknown and learn how to collect the facts without hurting
personal pride and endangering the jobs of men from whom he must
get the information. After all, some of the troubles which a consultant
must diagnose are the results of someone making an error and at the
same time, a consultant must be ready to admit that the people whom
he contacts do know something and some times more than he does.
In the field of " construction incidents", an expression used in
some European countries as a translation of the more common word
" failures ", one of the greatest difficulties is to find what the legal
profession calls the " proximate'' cause. It is a combination of many
 BOSTO N SOC I ETY OF CIVIL ENGL 1 EERS

conditions and many deviations from safe and proper procedure. Yet
in the common law it is necessary to blame a single item that is known
as the proximate cause. It is one of the difficulties in expert testimony
for a consultant who is being pinned down and cross-examined on
this question of what caused it and what did not contribute to the
incident. The consultant in this type of_,work must be scrupulously
honest. If there is not p roof that a single cause existed, there is no
reduction in the value of his services to honestly say so.
The problem of how to treat a client soon becomes an important
question. Some consulting officers, usually the larger groups of
several partners and associates, find it necessary to maintain as either
associates or employees men who, although graduate engineers , are
really politicians. Possibly these men have previous background and
experience in related fields, but their purpose is to get work and
collect for it. Smaller organizations, fortunately , do not need such
help but a small or individual consultant should be warned to have
no connection with what in '\Vashington has been known as the ('Five
Percenters" group. If he cannot get the work on his own reputation,
he'd better do a little more studying and get a better reputation or
else leave the field.
The writer feels completely in accord with Dr. Terzaghi in the
over-all approach and agrees that if one is not interested in becoming
the largest firm in the world or the future owner of the most pre-
tentious mausoleum in the cemetery, the field of consulting engineer-
ing can be sufficiently remunerative to permit comfortable living and
sufficiently rewarding to permit a good life.

DIS CUSSION
BY R . M. HARDY *

It is a refreshing change to have one with the status of Dr.

Terzaghi so forthrightly place the practise of the "art of engineering"
on at least an equal basis with executive management as an ultimate
goal for professional achievement. It is also of interest to note the
emphasis he places on the necessity for research and digest of ob-
servational data by an engineer who would aspire to superior knowl-
edge in a particular field. By implication it follows that , contrary
to opinions so widely held, experience in engineering work is by itself
no guarantee of a high degree of professional competence.
•Dean of Engineering, U nivend ty of Alberta, Canada.
 CO SULT ANTS, CLIENTS, A D CO TR ACTORS

There is one aspect of the relationship between consultants, cli-

ents and contractors that is worthy of attention, which perhaps is
somewhat beyond the immediate interests of the student audience to
which Dr. Terzaghi's comments were directed. The specific problem
and some of its consequences will be best stated by two examples.
In the first case competitive bids were invited for the construc-
tion of some six miles of tunnel through rock. The contract provided
for payment at a unit price per foot of tunnel with additional unit
prices for lining and grouting where required. The description of
the underground conditions was included in the specifications in five
sentences totalling about one hundred words. It was based on a pre-
liminary geological examination and defined the rock type in the
mountain; the fact that faults would be encountered, but that their
nature and frequency could not be predicted ; and that a major shear
zone would be crossed, but no undue tunnelling difficulties were to be
expected. The specifications further stated that if the underground
conditions encountered differed from those described no extra pay-
ment would be made to the contractor.
As the work progressed the underground conditions were found
to vary widely from those predicted in the specifications. The job
records reported blocky and badly broken rock , squeezing and heavy
ground, mud seams, numerous shear zones and water in quantities
up to 10 cfs. Two most undesirable consequences resulted from the
form of the contract documents and the gross variation in actual
underground conditions as compared to those predicted. The first
was that the conflict of financial interest created between the owner
and the contractor resulted in the work progressing without the bene-
fit of adequate engineering advice, which the conditions encountered
so badly needed. Second, the eventual adjustment of payment for the
work, despite the terms of the contract, resulted in loss to the owner
of the advantages he anticipated in inviting competitive tenders for
the work.
In the second case bids were invited for the construction of a
canal. The investigations of the subsoil conditions at the site were
extraordinarily complete. The results were made available to the
bidders along with a statement to the effect that the information was
essential to the proper prosecution of the work. However the subsoil
data were not made a part of the contract documents, and these went
to some length in asserting that the owners took no responsibility for
 BOS TO N S OCIETY OF CIVIL E J\'G l NE E RS

the accuracy of their engineering data and that the contractor as-
sumed full responsibility for completion of the work at his bid prices
irrespective of the conditions encountered.
The job involved the excavation of a considerable yardage of
glacial till which the sub oil data classified as being dense but non-
cohesive. However, as the job progressed experience showed that
much of the glacial till was highly cemented and that it could not
be excavated by equipment usually used for " common excavation 11 •
It had to be quarried. Again , in this case, eventual adjustment of
payment for the work re ulted in the owner lo ing much of the ad-
vantages to him of competitive tenders for the work.
These two cases have the common factor that the contract docu-
ments attempted to make the contractor financially respon ible for
errors in judgment or even inadequate engineering on the part of the
owners ' engineering advisors. The inclusion of such clauses in con-
tracts and specifications may be dictated by the legal advisors to the
owners, and therefore the engineers concerned may have no say in
the matter. Moreover there is good reason to make a contractor
financially responsible for any risk on the job which can properly be
insured against, the cost of such protection becoming a part of the
cost of the work. However the ethical position of the professional
engineer is surely not too strong if he becomes a party to procedures
which place the financial responsibility for engineering deficiencies on
the contractor. Moreover the interests of the client, in the great ma-
jority of such cases, are not properly protected and the adequacy of
the engineering may be jeopardized. It is perhaps time that some
attention was given by professional engineers to the formulation
of a more equitable policy concerning responsibility in such circum-
stances.

DISCUSSION

Bv NORMAN D. LEA*

The author, as is his practice when wntmg technically, has

chosen a timely topic and made an out ·tanding contribution. In this
paper he has also given the readers an illuminating glimpse into his
own character and per onal philosophy.
The author has defined a consultant as a person. This clarity
•V ic e Pre ,d dc nt , Fo undat io n o f Ca narla Engi ne er in g Co rp o ra l ion Lim il ed .
 CON U LT.A TS, LT ITS , D CO TRACTORS

i commendable and much need d in the ngineer ing prof e ion where
the strange practi e has d veloped of r ferring to engine ring design
firms a con ulting firm · . lany engine ring acti itie are be t done
by a team but con ulting i basically an individual a tivity. It is true
that ometimes board of co n ultant are u ed. In medicine it is
common for doctor to be called in for con ultation. It i important
to note , however , that in both the_· in tances each individual con-
ultant opinion i con_idered on it own merit . \\'h en the chairman
of a con_ulting board i a wise administrator he weighs each consult-
ants opinion in the light of the con ultant's experience, training and
rep utation before reaching a decLion .
The ffici nt design and execution of the complex. engineering
a_.ignment now facing our profe_ ion require organization-oft n
into larg and complex companies. lost engineering is now being
done either by such ind pendent companies or by sim ilarly organized
ngineering depa rtmenL within even lar er co rporation or agencie .
Many individual spec ialL L within the e organizations perform in-
ternally th functions of a con ultant. They too are faced with ome
of the problem d scribed by the author. Engin ering organizations
do not normally have internally all of the specialized knowledge they
require and thus they may be exp cted to employ out ide consult-
ants whenever this will benefit a particular project.
From the author exten ive experience with engineering organi-
zations, he ha been able to point out four important shortcom ing ,
namely:
( 1) ompartmentaliz ed Organization. Organization ir1to depart-
ment for surveys de ign and con truction i not :\ defect
in it elf , but only when accompanied by inadequat com-
munications between groups or by incompetent taff. The
basic problem of communications i one receiving much
attention in admini trative ci rcl es the e day and it i cer-
tainly vital to engineering admini tration.
( 2) Incomp etent taff can get any organization into trouble.
, mid the pre ent lamoring for more engineer the prof e -
sion is in grave danger of de-emphasizing quality. There
i po iti evidenc indicating that there ha been no hort-
age of rank-and-file engineers in orth America during thi
century. There does eem to be a hortage in the upper
 BO TON SOCIETY OF CIVIL EN ,fNEERS

grades, however, and , in the future, this hortage may well

become more acute while in the lower grade greater sur-
pluses develop .
(3) Jna,dequ.ate Sp cialization. This i · no doubt a ju t criti-
ci m of some organizations. Mo t progre sive engineering
firm_, however, have recognized that pecialization is vital,
not only for competence but also for efficien y. A special-
ist who is given adequate time for tudy and research is
able to produce at much higher efficiency
( 4) Failure to accept advice from consultants. Such an action
is a fault only if the con ultant i right. It i a virtue if the
consultant i wrong. Sometimes consultan ts are wrong. For
example, I have seen an engineering administrator decide,
on the basis of his own experience and that of some of his
staff, to have a design based on only half the settlement pre-
dicted by the soils con ultant. \\ hen the tructure was
built, it settled only a quarter of the con ultant's forecast.
The last point accents the engineering administrator. I would
define the engineering administrator as an engineer who mu t make
technical d cisions in matter involving either a number of special-
ties or a conflict between specialists . As engineering becomes more
complex and specialists become more specialized , the role of the
engineering administrator becomes more important. The engineer-
ing admini_trator must, in the fir t place, decide when a con ultant is
required and who is to be called. H e must th en decide how to treat
the consultant and his recommendations. The consulting engineer
may have a very inadequate knowledge of some of the related tech-
nical considerations bearing on a problem or he may have a person-
ality requiring pedal treatment to obtain be t re ult . The '~atis-
factory formula " for taking full advantage of a consultant's services
is thus a person-the engineering administrator.
In summary when a good ngineering organization utilizes a
good consultant, the results will be good. If either are inferior diffi-
cultie may be expected.
 CONSULTANTS, CUE TS, AND CONTRACTORS

CLOSURE TO THE DISCUSSION

Bv K. TERZAGHI

The paper under discussion presented the thesis, that the success
of projects involving earthwork operations requires intimate coopera-
tion between the construction organization and the soil mechanics
division from start to finish, and not only during the design stage.
If this fundamental rule is disregarded failure may ensue in spite of
competent advice rendered by the consultant.
Although the paper was discussed by sixteen prominent engi-
neers with very different professional backgrounds, none of the dis-
cussers disagreed with the writer and each one of them contributed
thoughts, observations and experience records confirming the thesis.
The discussers represented the following categories: (a) Owners who
maintain permanent staffs for design or supervision, (b) Consulting
firms operating on a large scale in a great variety of fields, ( c) Full
time consultants assisted by a small organization or none at all, and
( d) Professor-Consultants .
(a) Owners Who Maintain Permanent Staffs for Design and
Supervision
G. L. MacKenzie and R. Peterson (Prairie Farm Rehabilitation
Administration, Saskatoon, Sask.) report that their organization in-
cludes a soil mechanics section, continuously engaged in maintaining
contact between the design section and the construction operations.
The soil mechanics section is assisted by a board of outside consult-
ants. R. F. Ogilvy (Aluminum Company of Canada) describes in
detail the duties which are assigned to the soils engineers in his
organization. They involve the maintenance of continuous contact
between the design department and the men engaged in construction
from start to finish for the purpose of detecting significant discrepan-
cies between assumed and real soil conditions before it is too late
to correct the design .
( b) Consulting Firms Operating on a Large Scale in a Great
Variety of Fields
Like all the other discussers, those associated with such firms
admit the importance of close cooperation between the design depart-
ment and the men in the field until the end of construction. M. H.
Cutler ( Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation) , F. A. Mars-
 BOSTON SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGL EERS

ton ( Partner , Metcalf and Eddy) and C. S. Proctor ( Moran, Proc-

tor , Mueser and Rutledge ) describe the benefits which their clients
derive from the close cooperation which prevails in their respective
organizations between office and field. If problems are encountered
which require highly specialized knowledg_e , the services of a quali-
fied outside consultant are secured. C. P. Dunn ( Morrison and Knud-
sen ) compares a consultant of this category to a modern electronic
computing machine: "The answers that come out of him can be no
more reliable than the data you feed into him " . This remark hits
the nail on the head and also applies without any modification to the
men in charge of projects involving earthwork operations.-H. Grace
(partner, Wilson Kirkpatrick ) comments on the relationship between
consultant and client in British engineering practice.-N. D. Lea
(Foundation of Canada Engineering Corporation Ltd.) discusses the
functions of the Engineering Administrator in large engineering
organizations.
(c) Full Time Consultants Operating With a Small Permanent
Staff or No Staff at All
A. J. Ackerman ( formerly Vice President Brazilian Light and
Power Company) emphasizes the importance of a clear understanding
between client and consultant concerning the responsibilities to be
carried by the consultant.-D. J. Bleifuss ( Bleifuss, Hostetter and
Associates , formerly Chief Engineer , International Engineering Com-
pany Ltd.) cites examples of serious mistakes committed by clients in
securing the services of independent consultants.-H. J. B. Harding
(formerly John Mowlem and Company, contractors, London, Eng-
land) mentions the fact that an independent consultant " can give
good service if he is not pressed with too many simultaneous inquiries
and has time for undisturbed consideration of the problems. " This is
a fact of outstanding importance, because there is no doubt that a
consultant's competence increases rapidly with the amount of time
he spends on a digest of his case records and related research, every-
thing else being equal. For the same reason Ackerman points out
that a consulting engineer "must be willing and eager to spend a sub-
stantial part of his time on study and on his continuing professional
development without receiving immediate financial compensation",
and Jacob Feld is justified in recommending that the independent
consultant should learn very early in his practice to use the word
 CONSULTANTS, CUE TS, AND CONTRACTORS

"no". "It is not necessary that every question that comes in be ac-
cepted as a commission " . Every independent consultant can limit
the commissions he accepts to the number compatible with his pro-
fessional development provided he has the required self-control.-
F. E. Schmitt ( formerly Editor of Engineering ews-Record ) ex-
amined the conditions described in the paper from a historic point
of view. He arrived at the conclusion that the recent rapid advance
of design and construction procedures was not matched by an equally
rapid development in the field of coordination. The discrepancy
between the improvement of the tools and the development of the
skills for coordinating the actions of the men using the tools has
temporarily thrown the mechanism of production in the field of earth-
work engineering out of gear.
(d) Professor-Consultants
A. Casagrande (Harvard University) discussed the dangers to
the consultant's reputation growing out of assignments which do not
permit the consultant to remain in intimate contact with the job until
construction is completed.-R. B. Peck (University of Illinois) points
out, that "the work ( of the Professor-Consultant) should not be rou-
tine or of a character within the ordinary scope of activities of the
practicing engineer." Compliance with this specification requires
rigorous self-control, which is by no means a common attribute of
the human species. However, if self-control prevails, a gifted Pro-
fessor-Consultant has a unique opportunity to become outstandingly
competent in his field. As R . 1\,1. Hardy (University of Alberta) says,
"contrary to opinions so widely held, experience in engineering work
is by itself no guarantee of a high degree of professional compe-
tence." Experience furnishes only the raw material and competence
is the result of a strenuous process of digestion.
Since each one of the participants in the discussion has a pro-
fessional personality of his own and since in addition, each one of
them has a broad background of experience in his particular line,
the discussions represent an outstandingly valuable supplement to
the contents of the paper. Therefore they deserve the attention of
every practising civil engineer and I wish to express my gratitude
to all those who gave the readers the benefit of their thoughtful con-
sideration of the topics of the paper.