Proceedings of the 14th Australia and New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics, Cairns 2023 (ANZ2023)

Developing richer engineering geological models through a data-centric approach

to site investigation

Ian Shipway
EDG Consulting, Australia, ian.shipway@edgconsult.com.au

Tim Swavley
Macquarie Geotechnical, Australia, tswavley@macgeo.com.au

ABSTRACT: Geotechnical workflows require the development of engineering geological models (EGM) which are used to inform
analysis and design objectives. EGMs are “developed” through consideration of data from multiple sources, with some of the most
detailed data sources including manually “logged” boreholes and test pits.
Collation of the data obtained from boreholes and test pits against a depth scale on printable “log reports” is a practice which has
remained relatively unchanged since the early days of modern geotechnical practice. We postulate that reliance on such page bound
reports as the primary “truth reference” for the results of investigation activities cripples the subsequent geotechnical interpretation,
analysis and design workflows, reducing the opportunity for them to be digitally transformed.
Reversing this industry orientation such that the underlying data is the main truth reference enables a broad range of digital
opportunities. We demonstrate how good site investigation data sets can enhance interpretation, allow for greater interrogation, and
enable more efficient practice; ultimately allowing the development of more robust EGMs reduced geotechnical risk and other
benefits to projects.
KEYWORDS: models data geotechnical investigation

1 INTRODUCTION development is initially compromised, with the efforts of each

tender team focused on laboriously trying to digitise the minimal
The recently published IAEG Guidelines for the development of subset of data practical to allow production of a rudimentary long
Engineering Geological Models (Baynes et al, 2022) present the section or cross section. This often requires some data to be
“state of the art” for model development for engineering projects omitted, because there is no time available to reproduce it to a
of all scales. As noted in the Guidelines, standard where it can be usefully incorporated into the EGM.
geological/geotechnical models of some sort have been used to In practice, more hours can be spent on this activity than
improve understanding of ground conditions since the 1950s. interpreting the ground conditions and understanding the impact
Current good geotechnical practice requires that a model is of the project on those conditions, and data entry/transcription
developed for all projects, and AS1726-2017 requires that a errors are likely under such circumstances.
“geotechnical model” is developed for every geotechnical site
investigation. Similarly, the ANCOLD Guidelines for
Geotechnical Investigation of Dams, their foundations and
Appurtenant Structures (ANCOLD, 2020) require the
development of an engineering geological/geotechnical model as
part of the geotechnical investigation process.
Regardless of the degree of complexity of the site conditions
and therefore the Engineering Geological Model (EGM), the
mechanics of model development requires integration and
synthesis of geotechnical data from multiple sources often
ranging from surface observations, mapping data, through to
subsurface investigation data including that from boreholes,
insitu and laboratory tests, and geophysics. Figure 1 illustrates
typical data sets which need to be integrated for an infrastructure
project where ground conditions are dominated by soils/soft
soils. Similar guides are available for projects where rock
dominates the sub-surface such as that provided in Eggers et al
(2021). As is evident from Figure 1, the broad range of
information to be considered makes integration of a large volume
of data necessary when working on large infrastructure projects.
The integrity and completeness is essential to the development of
a robust EGM.
Although the level of sophistication and quantity of the data
obtained in sub-surface investigation has increased significantly
over the last 30 years, the base standard for presentation of that Figure 1. The components that should be synthesized and cross correlated
data is still centered around the “paginated” borehole log. For to develop an engineering geological model for a soils/soft ground
example, tenderers for design and construct contracts on large infrastructure project (Ameratunga et al 2021).
infrastructure projects are often provided only with a PDF
version of the A4 log, low resolution printed imagery and other
data in a form that is not immediately transferable across
software applications. In these circumstances, EGM
 Proceedings of the 14th Australia and New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics, Cairns 2023 (ANZ2023)
2 THE BOREHOLE LOG IN GEOTECHNICAL PRACTICE
2.1 Definitions
The term “borehole log” used throughout this document is in
reference to any set of information which is collated primarily
from visual-tactile assessment of material removed from the
ground, is supplemented with data from field and laboratory
testing, and which makes a contiguous representation of ground
conditions encountered from hole commencement to
termination. This term is intentionally broad and is agnostic to
hole construction methodology (for example auger vs cored hole
construction). This definition would also include similar
information recorded from excavations or existing exposures.
Distinction is also made between the term “borehole log”
referring to the set of information, and “borehole log report”
which refers to a specific presentation of the information,
rendered onto a template and arranged for presentation of a
physical page (pagination).
Figure 2. Sketch section of a borehole drilled in 1884 in the Parish of
Rodborough, Victoria, reported by Geol. Survey of Vic (1909).
2.1 History & Purpose
The example section in Figure 2 indicates that boreholes were
being drilled in Australia to investigate geological conditions
prior to the beginning of the 20th century, and probably well
before that. The depth-scaled, paginated borehole log report has
been in common usage in Australia since at least the 1960s (as
exemplified in Figure 3).
The broad presentation format of such log reports has not
significantly changed over time with the main refinement being
to group information in three broad categories relating to hole
construction and field activities, materials/mass description, and
interpretations of geological origin.
Involvement within a wide range of infrastructure projects by
the authors over the last 40 years suggest that the information in
the borehole log report is usually treated as a major source, and
in many cases the primary source of “truth” on ground
conditions. To some extent this is understandable because the
descriptions and classifications made by geotechnical
professionals on site and presented on the log report are
important primary information, much of which can’t be collected
through other means, despite the availability of sophisticated
testing methods. The removal of material from a hole by any
means triggers breakdown/corruption of its observable
characteristics. This breakdown especially accelerates as
material is handled and transported away from site. Even where
decomposition of materials does not take place, it is often
impractical for anyone other than the field logger to assess and
deduce the characteristics of the material. Until new site
investigation methods are invented the primary observations
made when logging will remain one of the most essential sources
of information for ground engineering projects.
Despite the similarities with information presented on log
reports from 60 years ago and now, in modern geotechnical
workflows the borehole log serves as a reference set of
information into which data from rig-side logging, the logging
bench, downhole instrumentation, and laboratory sources is
consolidated. The life of a modern log report often
commences with rig-side information added first, with other
information updated onto a log as it becomes known. In this
way the “final” version of a log can be markedly different from
its initial draft, although it remains a “roundtable” around which
project stakeholders continually reference to inform actions
contributing to project goals.
Therefore, although the information collected in the field by
geologists and engineers that is presented on logs is critical to
development of a robust EGM, the log report itself may provide
only a filtered subset of data rather than all of the available
information.
Figure 3. Part of a typed borehole log from a Qld infrastructure project
of 1966.
2.1 Methods of log report production
From the beginning, the size of the page and log production
method limited the information that could be included within the
page margins. Logs of the 1960s such as the extract shown in
Figure 3 were limited in the information that they could
practically display by the characteristics of the typewriter.
In modern practice log reports are most commonly produced
by a ground data management system (GDMS). Such
applications contain paginated report “templates” which leverage
the base principles of computerised report generation,
comprising report and page level header and footer elements,
between which are “sandwiched” depth-scale graduated textual
and graphical column bodies. Beneath the templates are data
tables containing rows of information with each row explicitly
having a nominated relevant depth (or depth range). In this way
log reports of infinite length can be generated by simple
reproduction of the information from the data table(s) in the
 Proceedings of the 14th Australia and New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics, Cairns 2023 (ANZ2023)
appropriate column at the nominated depth within the report
body. In rare instances (relative to industry scale) logs are
produced via spreadsheet templates or even manually drafted by
hand.
Workflows for log report production via GDMS have several
advantages over hand/type written forms, in that they produce
log reports that:
• Are easily edited and reproduced.
• Are generally cleanly spaced with clear presentation.
• Incorporate algorithmic rule-based compilation and
presentation of information.
• Allow more precise placement of information at the
requisite depth.
The way the printed logs can be used, however, remains
generally unchanged in modern practice.
2.1 Methods of borehole log transmission
Historical practice has required delivery of rendered copies of
reports to users. Initially this required delivery of a physical
copy of the document, however as technology has evolved
transmission by fax, and subsequently by email, digital storage
media, and shared cloud storage has become possible.
In modern practice delivery of borehole log information is
almost wholly via digital means, including in rasterized manner
(scans producing grids of pixels or pixelization of vector
objects), vectorized (with text and symbol objects dynamically
rendered at the desired position from data), and in a datafile
manner free of typographic and rendering information.
Scanned and vectorized methods commonly use PDF format and
are generally paginated and do not possess the ability for the
presentation style to be changed. The most common datafile
format is AGS datafiles (comprising multiple text tables of
comma separated values).
3 MANAGEMENT OF LOG DATA & PRODUCTION OF
LOG REPORTS
3.1 Report-centric practice
3.1.1 Definition
We use the term “report-centric” to refer to the approach where
geotechnical workflows (both inter and intra-organisational; and
within and outside of the project context) are orientated such that
the borehole log report is the only valued product of borehole log
information.
Report-centric practice has a mutual relationship with GDMSs
configured to operate as a “reportbase”, that is a “database
structure [that] is built as a one-to-one image of the desired report”
(Caronna, 2005). In simple terms this means the underlying
data tables and report template only accept pre-completed
“sentences” of information and will present it “as written” at the
designated depth.
In the authors’ experience it is likely that reportbase GDMS
have been popular in Australia because:
• They more closely imitate the familiar approach to log
production (typewriter).
• Fewer digital skills are required to establish and use such
configurations.
However, reportbases can only support report-centric practice,
essentially compromising outputs by the limitations of the
printed page.
In some situations, projects require log information to be
converted retrospectively to a similar form as data-centric
outcomes. This is not an impossible task to perform, however
as report-centric information is largely unstructured it is virtually
impossible to transfer the whole of the information between the
two formats without possible mistranslation of terms and
loss/translation of meaning. The ultimate outcome of this is
that the digital data set and paginated log reports convey differing
(sometimes conflicting) representations.
3.1.2 Drivers and pitfalls of report-centric practice
Other than technical limitations associated with GDMS
configuration, report-centric practice is commonly driven by the
manner in which stakeholders engage with the information.
Report-centric data generators expect that all stakeholders
requiring their product will refer primarily to the paginated log
reports when information about a test location is sought. This
is convenient for users wanting to mentally interpret the overall
conditions encountered (a task for which one is best to consider
all available information), however it creates a manual reentry
requirement for all subsequent use (including collation into a
digital EGM or analytical model).
Although in some cases report-centric data generators can
transfer the underlying data in a datafile format, the information
is not machine interpretable (today’s computing tools can readily
recognize a word, but not understand the meaning of that word
in a sentence), and without the benefit of well thought out data
governance, data is unable to be algorithmically processed
without significant reprocessing. An example of the latter is
contiguity “gaps” in rock strength tables for unstated reasons
(“no core”, soil material, or forgotten to log).
At the field data collection level, paginated reporting practice
cripples the data informing the EGM in several ways:
• Dense data (relative to intended scale) is culled to prevent
overcrowding on the page (or important information is lost
amongst relatively unimportant data).
• There is still often a requirement to cull or group data to
ensure clarity of presentation because of the limited page
space.
• Page space is used inefficiently as information cannot “cross
lanes” between columns.
• Information not included on the main log is readily forgotten.
• PDFs are often compressed for emailing leading to images
becoming pixelated and useless.
Beyond the initial collection of field information, report-
centric thinking can continue to compromise the data set. In some
cases, digital transmissions include contractual terms stating that
the paginated representation is superior to the digital data set and
that digital results are an afterthought provided for convenience
only. Such terms diminish the value of the digital data set or
transfer liability for the generator’s mistakes and poor data
management onto the receiving party.
Report-centric project owners can also cripple data generators
by requiring paginated reports as the primary deliverable. This
can trigger the same outcomes as above. Over emphasis on the
importance of the visual aesthetics of the paginated product can
reduce opportunity to benefit from data-centric practice, and
force compromise of the quality of the underlying dataset.
3.2 Data-centric practice
3.2.1 Definition
We use the term “data-centric” to refer to the approach where
geotechnical workflows are orientated around a single set of data
maintained in a systematically truthful and machine-readable
state. That is, the results of site investigation are collected and
recorded in a manner which is consistent with an established set
of rules governing how a computer (rather than its subsystems)
is to read and interpret the data, to ensure that the computer-
interpreted meaning of the information matches the original
generators intention.
Data-centric practice stores data in a data base which possesses
sets of information sufficiently divided into smaller components
of detail to allow for algorithmic interpretation (“data
granularity”). The data is stored with respect of the rules of
interpretation, rather than specifically for presentation on one
 Proceedings of the 14th Australia and New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics, Cairns 2023 (ANZ2023)

template in one application.
This approach can be considered the application of the base
principles of the greater concept of “digital engineering”, which
is broadly defined in many sources as “an integrated digital
approach that uses authoritative sources of systems’ data and
models as a continuum across disciplines” (attribution unknown).
The AGS data format (first developed in the United Kingdom)
provides a data structure designed by industry which is suitable
for most machine-reading applications. The Australian
Geomechanics Society has published a localized version adopted
for Australian practice (AGS AU).
3.2.2 Opportunities enabled by data-centric practice
One primary value proposition of data-centric practice is the
construction of sets of machine readable data. When data can
be read by a computer, programs can algorithmically perform
“work” which would otherwise be performed by human effort.
Some examples of data-centric replacement of human effort
include:
• Algorithmic compilation of material descriptions.
• Algorithmic/rule based presentation of information (for
example automatically detecting and flagging incomplete
descriptions.
• Introduction of rules to validate and identify erroneous,
conflicting, or incomplete data, for example algorithmic
validation field observations with lab results.
• Direct reading of material description and condition data
into an analysis package allowing "single click” analysis to
be performed.
• Scripted derivation of rock-mass properties (eg RQD,
RMR, Q etc).
• Cross correlation of data from different sources, for
example defect descriptions against televiewer data.
Machine readable data can also be easier to consume as it can
be presented in many different formats and styles, reduced to
relevant subsets, or presented along with other foreign data etc.
These characteristics provide opportunity for enhanced
correlation/analysis of borehole log data with other sources of
information, enabling richer and more easily developed EGMs.
The above examples consider primarily single-task exercises,
where data is extracted and pushed through an analysis as a
manually driven but automation assisted process. There is,
however, much greater opportunity on offer for our industry.
when the databases supporting data-centric practice are designed
with digital engineering principles in mind (sharing data between
applications and across disciplines). When the data is stored in
a common data environment it becomes directly accessible to all
stakeholders. When stakeholders use applications which can
access live data sets and detect changes in state, analysis and
design on a project can be performed in near real-time, as site
investigation information becomes available. Contractual and
data reliability reform is needed to support such working
arrangements in the Australian context.
assessment of the engineering geological conditions and allows
the interaction of these conditions with the proposed project to
be evaluated, so that appropriate engineering decisions can be
made throughout the life cycle of the project from inception to
decommissioning”.
Implicit in that definition is the requirement that an EGM for a
large infrastructure project requires a broad range of data to be
cross correlated and integrated into the overall model.
A data-centric approach provides the opportunity for important
primary data from sub-surface investigation to be recorded in its
entirety and retained with integrity throughout the project. It
also allows the observations of the logger on site to be readily
correlated against other digital data sources such as televiewer
data and the results of other down-hole testing. Importantly it
also ensures that information such as the logger’s assessment of
geological origin which sits at the “interpretive” side of
fieldwork is recorded and retained as part of the digital dataset.
5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to thank Timothy Thompson for introducing us
and suggesting that we collaborate on this paper.
6 REFERENCES
Ameratunga, J., Sivakugan, N. and Das, B.M. 2021. “engineering
geology of soft clay,” in Soft Clay Engineering and ground
improvement. Abingdon, Oxon: CRC Press.
Australian National Committee on Large Dams 2020. “Guidelines for
geotechnical investigations of dams, their foundations and
appurtenant structures.
AS1726 – 2017 Geotechnical Site Investigations, Standards Australia
Caronna, S. 2005. "Data Granularity in the storage and reporting of Soil
Exploration Information", The Second Annual Geotechnical,
Geophysical, and Geoenvironmental Technology Transfer
Conference and Expo, Charlotte, North Carolina, 14-15 April 2005.
Baynes, F. J. and Parry, S. 2022. Guidelines for the development and
application of engineering geological models on projects.
International Association for Engineering Geology and the
Environment (IAEG) Commission 25 Publication No. 1, 129 pp.
Eggers, M. J. & Bertuzzi, R. 2020. Chapter 1 The Engineering Geological
Model. In: Tunnel Design Handbook 4th Edition; PSM publication
Hunter, S. 1909 “The Deep Leads of Victoria” Memoirs of the
Geological Survey of Victoria.

4 CONCLUSIONS

The information collected by field geologists and engineers is

important primary data on ground conditions. Many important
characteristics of soil and rock which are critical to geological
interpretation can be observed only as the data is collected at the
drilling rig. The report-centric approach, where the borehole
log report provides the main source of truth for this information
often leads to compromises in data integrity, both at the point of
data collection, and later in the project lifecycle.
Conversely, a data-centric approach allows all data to be
collected and maintained through the reporting process without
consideration of space on a “standard page”.
As defined in Baynes et al (2022) an EGM “is a comprehensive
knowledge framework that supports the interpretation and