Assessing the Risk of Karst Subsidence and Collapse

Benson, Richard C.; Yuhr, Lynn B.; Kaufmann, Ronald Douglas

doi:10.1061/40698(2003)2

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It should be noted that the method does not a priori fix the criteria for assessing the collapse susceptibility of underground structures in general, but offers management tools once the most relevant of these have been identified. The quality of the obtained results depends entirely on the relevance of the selected criteria and thus on the understanding of the phenomena (Upchurch and Littlefield, 1988;Benson et al 2003;Hubbard, 2003;Brinkmann et al, 2008). Although the method endeavours to control and limit the subjectivity of expert judgement, the expertise is still the central point.…”

Section: Concluding Remarks and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1), the expert, on the basis of his experience and his regional knowledge, synthesizes and interprets the commonly imprecise, if not vague, information obtained from the inventory and the geological and historicaleconomic contexts. As several authors have already pointed out relative to all types of underground structure (Upchurch and Littlefield, 1988;Benson et al 2003;Hubbard, 2003;Brinkmann et al, 2008), the essential aspect of the expertise is the identification of the theoretical controlling factors regulating the occurrence of the disturbances, i.e. the equivalent of the step 2 of the methodology.…”

Section: 3mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Managing expert-information uncertainties for assessing collapse susceptibility of abandoned underground structures

Nachbaur¹,

Rohmer²

2011

Engineering Geology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessing the collapse susceptibility of abandoned cavities at a regional scale is associated with large uncertainties that are mainly related to the very nature of the phenomena, but also to the difficulty in collecting exhaustive information at such a scale on often "forgotten" structures. In this context, the expert's role is essential, because he is able to synthesize the information resulting from the inventory and from the commonly imprecise, if not vague, criteria on the basis of his experience and his knowledge of the regional geological and historical and economic context. In this article, we propose mathematical tools for representing and processing this information in order to give flexibility to this step and manage the uncertainty inherent in the expert's information. The first tool, based on the weight of evidence theory, is for managing the uncertainty due to the heterogeneous spatial distribution of the data, whereas the second tool, based on the fuzzy set theory, is for managing the imprecision and incompleteness of available data, which hinder the definition of the class boundaries of the quantitative decision criteria. Based on an appropriate representation of the uncertainty sources (related to the input data and to the expert diagnostic), we then propose a methodology that integrates the uncertainty in the final output of the collapse susceptibility assessment and provides a confidence indicator useful within the decision-making process. The proposed methodology is applied to the Arras territory in the North of France, where abandoned chalk pits (dating back to the Roman ages) and war saps (i.e. covered trenches) located in the vicinity of the First World War front lines both raise difficulties for urban planning

show abstract

Section: Concluding Remarks and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: 3mentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing expert-information uncertainties for assessing collapse susceptibility of abandoned underground structures

Nachbaur¹,

Rohmer²

2011

Engineering Geology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, a risk assessment is ultimately often very subjective and largely based upon professional experience. The authors have successfully applied the strategy for site-specifi c risk assessment for the past few decades in areas of collapse, subsidence and paleokarst (Benson et al 2002(Benson et al , 2003Benson 2001 ;Benson and Hatheway 2001 ). It has also been used to assess mine subsidence and collapse (Hatheway et al 2000 ).…”

Section: Site-specifi C Risk Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Therefore, when a site-specifi c risk assessment for subsidence or collapse is required, it should be an integral part of the site characterization process. The risk assessment strategy summarized by Benson et al ( 2003 ) is based upon having completed a site characterization and having a good understanding of site conditions along with a solid base of supporting data. However, a risk assessment is ultimately often very subjective and largely based upon professional experience.…”

Section: Site-specifi C Risk Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Assessment

Benson¹,

Yuhr²

2016

Site Characterization in Karst and Pseudokarst Terraines

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Once the site characterization is complete, there is often the necessity of completing a risk assessment. Here the focus is twofold. The risk of sinkhole or collapse associated with natural voids in soluble rock, abandoned mines, other open structures within the ground or the vulnerability of groundwater in karst terrains. A brief introduction is provided to risk assessment including objective and subjective approaches. Risk assessment can be of a regional nature providing general trends or can be site-specifi c. A few examples are provided for both.

show abstract

“…Varnes (1984) description of the total risk in terms of the hazard, the elements at risk and the vulnerability is well known even though it sometimes is not applied. For example, Benson et al (2003) published a strategy for assessing the "risk" of karst subsidence, which, according to…”

Section: Hazard and Risk Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From concept towards reality: developing the attributed 3D geological model of the shallow subsurface

Culshaw

2005

QJEGH

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, engineering geology has been trying to redefine itself in terms of a set of 'core values' or 'special scientific principles. ' John Knill (2003) illustrated the essence of engineering geology in the engineering geological triangle. One way of trying to understand the relationships between some of the 'core values' is through the engineering geological ground model, which seeks to combine understanding of the spatial distribution of engineering boundaries with knowledge of rock and soil material, and mass, properties and the geological processes that alter these through time. The rapid development in information technology over the last twenty years and the digitisation of increasing amounts of geological data has brought engineering geology to a situation in which the production of meaningful 3D spatial models of the shallow subsurface is feasible. The paper describes how this can be done and points the way to the next stage that involves the attribution of these spatial models with physical, mechanical and chemical property data. Some new developments in the provision of geohazard susceptibility information at the national scale are also discussed. A future is proposed in which site investigation sets out to test a preexisting spatial model based on real data, rather than trying to create such a model based on concepts alone.

show abstract

Assessing the Risk of Karst Subsidence and Collapse

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Managing expert-information uncertainties for assessing collapse susceptibility of abandoned underground structures

Managing expert-information uncertainties for assessing collapse susceptibility of abandoned underground structures

Risk Assessment

From concept towards reality: developing the attributed 3D geological model of the shallow subsurface

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About