The Geological Society of America

A PPL IC A TIO N OF GEOLOGY

TO ENGINEERING PRACTICE

Be r k e y V o l u m e

SIDNEY PAIGE, Chairman

Papers By
J o h n L . S a v a g e , R o g e r R h o a d e s , E d w a r d B . B c r w e l l , J r ., G e o r g e D .
R o b e r t s , B e r l e n C. M o n e t m a k e r , J a m e s F. S a n b o r n , K a r l T e b z a g h i ,
G e o r g e D . L o p d e r b a c k , O. E. M e in z e r , E. F. B e a n , W . C. K k u m b k in ,
D o n c a n M c C o n n e l l , R ic h a r d C . M ie l e n z , W il l ia m Y. H o l l a n d , K e n ­
n e t h T . G r e e n e , K . C . H e a l d , M u r l H . G id e l , a n d C b a s . B . H u n t

PUBLISHED BY THE SOCIETY

1950

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
 Made in United States of America

PR IN T E D B T W A V ER LY PR E S S , IN C .
B A L TIM O R E , U D .

P U B L IS H E D B T T H E GEO LO G ICA L SOCIETY O P AM ERICA

Address all communications to T he Geological Society of America
419 West 117 Street, New York 27, N . Y .

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
 This Volume is Made Possible
Through the Bequest of
Richard Alexander Fullerton Penrose, Jr

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf
by guest
 INTRODUCTION
Some years ago a group of geologists led by Professor C. R. Longwell of Yale
University and Professor A. I. Levorsen of Stanford University proposed to honor
Dr. Charles Peter Berkey, Newberry Professor Emeritus of Columbia University,
for his life-long contributions in the field of engineering geology, by assembling and
publishing a number of original papers each of which would deal with a special facet
of the subject.
The Geological Society of America, through its President Dr. N. L. Bowen, ap­
pointed a committee to carry out this proposal and agreed to publish the symposium.
Dr. W. O. Hotchkiss was duly appointed Chairman of a working group, among whom
were Sidney Paige, W. S. Mead, J. P. Buwalda, and B. C. Moneymaker.
The authors, each selected for his particular knowledge in the field, have given
generously of their time. It was agreed that broad principles, rather than engineer­
ing or geologic detail, should be emphasized, but aside from this broad considera­
tion each author was to prepare his material independently. To them all our thanks
are due.
It is doubtful whether these papers need further introduction. Each is addressd
to a technically trained audience and is planned to emphasize principles, rather than
the minutiae of engineering and geologic practice. The title of the boor—The Ap­
plication of Geology to Engineering Practice—is self-explanatory and is well under­
stood by engineers and geologists.
No single individual of our generation has done more than Doctor Berkey to stim­
ulate the application of geology to the art of engineering. That the two professions
are mutually supporting should be obvious.
Yet, error, obvious today, was the accepted wisdom of yesterday, and there will
always remain in the relations of men to each other, or of groups to one another,
attitudes that appear somewhat contrary to common sense. Thus there is always the
danger of “ingrown” thinking, emphasized by over-specialization, and hence the ever­
present, and increasing, need of encouraging understanding among related groups
in order that advances in knowledge in one field may be applied steadily and usefully
in another. It is equally important to distinguish motives and objectives from the
tools one employs to fulfill them. Not that the fashioning of tools is per se unim­
portant; but in one’s immersion in the job of perfecting tools one should not lose
sight of the ends for which they were fashioned in the first place.
William Smith, for example—a canal engineer, bom nearly two hundred years
ago—was concerned chiefly with practical matters. While he was a builder and a
land agent we may feel sure that, for the best of reasons, he was not concerned with
the relative value of engineering and geology. Unconsciously he laid the foundation
of stratigraphy while at the same time he pursued his engineering activities. Since
the economy and safety of the stmctures he planned were affected by the natural
characteristics of the terrain on which he built them, he made it his business syste­
matically to study this terrain, understand its nature and the processes concerned
with its evolution, and even to map it. So successful was he that he was awarded

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
 vi INTRODUCTION

the Wollaston medal of the Royal Geological Society of London, an institution, by

the way, that preceded the birth of the Society of Civil Engineers by several years.
Can one imagine—pursuing the same vein—that Agricola was concerned with
“pure” science as opposed to “applied” science when he wrote in the year 1556 what
may now be acknowledged as the first systematic account of physical geology, min­
eralogy, and ground water? Could Archimedes have been disturbed by any such
compunctions when he observed that the increase in the head of water above an ori­
fice increased the velocity and hence the volume of its flow? One may feel sure he
made use of the observed fact before he essayed to explain it. The principle of the
lever, likewise, no doubt was used milleniums before he explained it.
In our own times, Terzaghi used physics, mathematics, geology, and engineering
to place the useful art of soil mechanics on a firm foundation, and thus secured the
“foundations” of countless engineering structures, without debating the place of
soils mechanics in the field of engineering geology, as some are still inclined to do.
Engineering geology is neither more nor less than the application of geologic knowl­
edge to engineering art and development, and that part of this knowledge which is
applicable should be increasingly sought out and used. Otherwise geology will partly
fail in its mission, and the art of engineering will limp.
Consider the amazing advance of the petroleum and the mining industries, to which
applications from geology have done so much, advancing both Science and Industry.
Today the same evolution, slow to start, but proceeding at an accelerated rate,
appears in the co-operation between civil engineers and geologists. As the science of
geology has grown, subdivided, and specialized, so likewise the art of engineering
has progressed, subdivided, and specialized.
True, the use of a dual term such as engineering geology at once suggests a border­
line subject—and so it is. Yet engineering geology is specifically that field wherein
geologists apply principles of geology to civil-engineering construction at the planning,
design, and construction stages.
Industry and engineering, hand in hand, are concerned with very concrete ob­
jectives—dams to be built, reservoirs to be appraised and located, floods routed,
canals constructed, tunnels driven, foundations made secure, ground water utilized
—all part of an increasingly complex, group-conscious, competitive economy where
planning is imperative.
For the day has dawned when men, through the application of the scientific
method, have gained such control over their environment, conceived projects on such
a vast scale, explored the unlimited heights of the atmosphere, the depths of the
crust and the sea, devised such delicate, ingenious instruments to augment their
limited senses, that what they do may affect many diverse groups and many natural
phenomena.
But here may I emphasize that without thorough training in the geologic field, in
theory and in practice all summed up in the word experience, a geologist cannot ren­
der service to an engineer. This experience, if possible, should encompass engineering
practice also—the more the better. Otherwise, how can he advise on the construc­
tion of ditches that must stand up under use while delivering stated quantities of
water; or the driving of tunnels that must carry heavy pressure heads; or the con­

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
 INTRODUCTION V II

struction of dams on poor dam sites; or the selection of reservoirs that will not leak;
or guard against the destruction of water rights, surface or underground—all en­
gineering ventures wherein experience is important.
To proceed safely, economically, and wisely, all relevant knowledge must be in­
tegrated and brought to bear on the best solution of any problem.
The symposium that follows is a stepping stone leading toward this desirable goal.
S id n e y P a ig e , Chairman
November 9, 1949

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf
by guest
 CONTENTS
Page
Charles Peter Berkey. By John L. Savage and Roger Rhoades......................................................... xi
The Geologist in the Engineering Organization. By Edward B. Burwell, Jr., and George D.
Roberts.................................................................................................................................................. 1
Geology in dam construction. By Edward B. Burwell, Jr., and Berlen C. Moneymaker 11
Engineering Geology in the design and construction of t u n n els. By James F . Sanborn............... 45
Mechanics of landslides. By Karl Terzaghi............................................................................................ 83
Faults and Engineering Geology. By George D. Louderback............................................................. 125
Geology and Engineering in the production and control of ground water. By 0. E. M einzer... 151
Engineering Geology of highway location, construction, and materials. By E. F. Bean............... 181
Geological aspects of Beach Engineering. By W. C. Krumbein......................................................... 195
Petrology of concrete affected by cement-aggregate reaction. By Duncan McConnell, Richard C.
Mielenz, William Y. Holland, and Kenneth T. Greene............................................................... 225
Geologic Engineering in the petroleum industry. By K. C. H eald................................................... 251
Geology in the discovery, development, and exploitation of mineral deposits. By Murl H.
Gidel....................................................................................................................................................... 273
Military Geology. By Chas. B. H unt...................................................................................................... 295

ix

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf
by guest
Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf
by guest
 Bachrach
ton

CH A RLES PETER BERKEY

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
 CHARLES PETER BERKEY
L. S avage and R o ger R h oa des
B y J ohn
Consulting Engineer, formerly Chief Designing Engineer, Bureau of Reclamation;
Chief Geologist, Bureau of Reclamation
Charles P. Berkey became a geological consultant to the Bureau of Reclamation
in 1928 just as the proposed Hoover Dam was passing into the stage of final study.
The design and construction of Hoover Dam imposed new and unprecedented tech­
nical problems involving grave decisions and heavy responsibility. Everything about
Hoover Dam was big—huge tunnels were planned, enormous amounts of concrete
aggregate and excavation were required; the great height and weight of the proposed
structure would load the foundations beyond engineering precedent; the water
weight on the reservoir floor might cause the subsidence of a large surrounding area;
the seismicity of the region required sharp appraisal and integration with the en­
gineering design; the possibility was recognized that the weight of the dam and water
might generate new stresses sufficiently large to stimulate seismicity—to mention
only a few of the many Hoover Dam problems requiring both geological and en­
gineering insight.
Although the solution of these problems frequently would require extrapolation
beyond engineering experience, mistakes would be intolerable because the structure
would be so costly and the consequences of failure so tragic. Doctor Berkey’s as­
sistance was sought because of the obvious need to marshal the best technical talent,
the widest engineering experience, and the most mature judgment if the construction
of Hoover Dam were to be successfully consummated.
Since 1905, when he was first retained in connection with the construction of the
Catskill Aqueduct, Doctor Berkey had been continuously associated with the Metro­
politan Board of Water Supply of the City of New York and with a great variety of
other engineering works for numerous agencies in this and other countries. There­
fore, at the age of 61, he came to the Bureau with a reputation already achieved in
the field of engineering geology. The association, begun in 1928, has continued since
and with little curtailment with the advancing years.
This first association of Doctor Berkey with the Bureau’s engineering work was
effected when President Coolidge appointed him to the Colorado River Commission,
charged with studying and reporting on the feasibility of the Boulder Canyon Project
In this capacity, his attention was not restricted to Hoover Dam itself but also em­
braced a number of related features, such as the All-American Canal, which in it­
self was an unprecedented undertaking. His influence on these plans and projects
was felt immediately. He proved at once his competence to make sound judgments
and to translate them into practical recommendations. Moreover, he quickly demon­
strated his unusual ability to grasp the attention and hold the interest of engineers.
Undoubtedly, one of his greatest contributions has been that on this and sub­
sequent projects he has given engineers their first insight into the peculiarly intimate
relationship between geology and civil engineering and their first understanding of

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
 xii Charles P eter B erk ey

how vital the knowledge of the geological environment may be to an engineering

undertaking. This service was appreciated in high quarters from the outset as shown
by the following letter from Elwood Mead, an engineer of international distinction,
then serving as Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation:
Dear Professor Berkey:
I have read your report as have all the members of my family who have been visitors of Boulder
City. Reading it, I thought how fortunate the Bureau and the engineering profession generally are
that this report has been written. One does not need to be a geologist or an engineer to understand
and be fascinated by your speculations and conclusions.. . .
Sincerely yours,
Elwood Mead
Today, it is a commonplace accepted by most engineers that the success and econ­
omy of an engineering work may be largely measured by the degree to which a struc­
ture has been adapted to the geological environment in which it is placed. Most civil
engineering works are founded on rock or soil and are constructed wholly or in part
of rock and soil materials; and the ground water, the topography, the seismicity,
the faults, and folds are all geological factors which must be reconciled with the
engineering plan if a structure is to be effective and appropriate. Most engineers
today admit their need for the special knowledge of the geologist, but 20 years ago
the interdependence between geology and engineering was not so generally recognized.
No individual has been more influential than Doctor Berkey in cultivating this
recognition.
However, the most remarkable thing about Doctor Berkey is not the extent of his
activities and influence in engineering geology—although that is the major theme
of this writing—but how many other things he has also managed to do. When he came
to the Bureau of Reclamation, he was already distinguished in five careers: as a
professor and academic administrator at Columbia University, as a scientist in the
field of petrography, as an explorer (most notably in Mongolia), as Secretary and for
many years the guiding steward of The Geological Society of America, and finally
as an engineering geologist.
He had joined the faculty of Columbia University in 1903 and in the intervening
time taught general, structural, and engineering geology and petrology and ore
deposits, besides assuming increasing administrative responsibility which led ul­
timately to his appointment as executive officer of the department of geology. Sub­
sequently, in 1929, he was to become Newberry Professor of Geology.
As a scientist he had built a new philosophy in interpretive petrography. Petrog­
raphy had always been his major field of academic interest, but he brought to this
subject a strong bent toward the practical or applied side of geologic science, and his
petrographic studies inclined primarily toward the interpretations of the history of
rocks and of the environment and episodes which could be adduced to account for
their present character. Because of his talent for petrographic interpretation, his
former students, when they encountered rocks whose nature or meaning seemed
obscure, sent him samples from all over the world for diagnosis. He developed an
extensive advisoiy service on petrographic interpretation (his files contain 823
“case” reports of this kind) and finally established at the university a new course—

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
 Sav age an d R h o a d es xiii
the first of its kind—on the interpretation of rocks and ores. Such studies continue
to interest him to this day to such an extent that not infrequently he will turn for
relaxation to an evening with his petrographic microscope.
Doctor Berkey’s interest in foreign explorations originated in connection with the
Natural History Survey of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands initiated by the New
York Academy of Science. As a result of this work, he published in 1914 A geological
reconnaissance of Puerto Rico. Although an important contribution in itself, this
association with foreign explorations is significant mainly because it qualified him to
accept the position of Chief Geologist for the 1922 and 1925 Mongolian expeditions
conducted under the auspices of the Museum of Natural History and under the leader­
ship of Roy Chapman Andrews. In these expeditions Doctor Berkey accomplished
5000 miles of reconnaissance traverse in an uncharted and virtually unstudied land.
One volume on the geology of Mongolia (Volume 2 of the Natural history of central
Asia) records a part of the observations then made. A companion volume is in prep­
aration.
Doctor Berkey’s deep interest in The Geological Society of America led to his
appointment in 1922 to the secretaryship, a position which he held for 18 years. It
was during the period of his office that The Geological Society of America ascended
to an entirely different and much higher plane of usefulness and responsibility through
the bequest of Dr. R. A. F. Penrose, Jr. He guided the organization surely through
those difficult transitional times. The scope of the Society’s affairs and activities in­
creased greatly, and his duties as Secretary became increasingly burdensome, but
he continued to administer them until 1940. In 1941 he was elected President of the
Society. His influence on the Society over the years and his responsibility for the
character which the Society now assumes are enormous.
The influence of a man of such diverse and important activities and his impact
upon his profession naturally have been great. His hundreds of students are dis­
tributed widely over the world. Partly through his connection with The Geological
Society of America, and partly through his extensive personal travels, he has national
and international associations and acquaintances, both personal and professional.
He has published in the fields of mining geology, petroleum geology, glacial geology,
aerial geology, mineralogy, petrography, water supply, stratigraphy, historical ge­
ology, paleogeography, and orogeny, to mention only the broad subjects exclusive
of engineering geology. But, although he has influenced the geological profession
significantly in these several ways, his greatest contribution may finally be reckoned
to be in engineering geology, because in that field he has brought the concepts and
techniques of geological science strongly to bear upon the outstanding engineering
accomplishments of our time, and these accomplishments are an important part of
the achievement of the first half of the twentieth century.
Doctor Berkey was introduced to engineering geology by Professor Kemp, his
elder associate at Columbia, who had pioneered in the application of geology to the
extensive engineering works of the City of New York. He became Kemp’s able as­
sistant and then his acknowledged successor and carried on from there to translate
his experiences in New York’s engineering for the benefit of engineering at large.
His first publication on engineering geology came in 1909 when he described the

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
 xiv Charles P eter B erkey

“quality of bluestone in the vicinity of Ashokan Dam.” This was followed by two
important papers in 1911, the first on the geology of the Catskill Aqueduct and the
second on the geology of New York City in its relation to engineering problems.
For the next 20 years his writings on engineering geology comprised an increasingly
greater part of his total output. In the last decade and a half, most of his writing—
indeed most of his activity—has been confined to the field of engineering geology.
But the major part of his activity in engineering is unrecorded in formal publica­
tions. In appraising his place in engineering and engineering geology it is more signifi­
cant that he has been retained by some 30 major Government, State, or municipal
agencies for consideration of the 125 or 150 most important engineering works in
this country. These works include the world’s highest dam, the world’s most massive
dam, the largest canals, powerhouses, and pumping plants, the bridges, subways,
and tunnels of New York City, and the remarkable dams of the Tennessee Valley
Authority, and are in addition to hundreds of other engineering projects of lesser
magnitude. The engineering of the United States bears his indelible personal imprint.
Through association with these undertakings, Doctor Berkey has been the one
most influential individual in winning for geology its present recognition as an in­
separable adjunct to engineering and in gaining the acceptance of geologists in en­
gineering circles. These accomplishments benefit geologists individually and the
geological profession as a whole. Moreover, in demonstrating the indispensability
of geology to engineering, he has been responsible for better structures. Engineers
and engineering have therefore benefited also, as well as the public at large who profit
by engineering works.
For all these accomplishments in his various careers he has received public recog­
nition such as few men enjoy. He is a member of all the major technical and scientific
societies in the United States that impinge in any way upon geology or related phases
of engineering, as well as others in China, England, and France. He has received
honorary degrees from Columbia and Minnesota. Perhaps foremost among these
many honors was his election in 1941 to honorary membership by the American So­
ciety of Civil Engineers, a distinction awarded only for outstanding contribution to
engineering and never before to a geologist; and his receipt in 1948 of the first Kemp
Medal for distinguished service in geology. But the recognition most gratifying to
Doctor Berkey, personally, doubtless is the demand by engineers for his advice and
assistance. This demand far exceeds both his time and capacity and has made his
“retirement” the busiest period of his life.
It is interesting to speculate on the sources of such diverse and voluminous ac­
complishment. It is not explainable simply in terms of his years of steady applica­
tion, although the years have matured and ripened his talents and have given him the
balanced and judicial attitude that we associate with elderly men; it is not explained
simply by force of intellect, or by technical education or by the common virtues of
industry, integrity, persistence, and the like, although he possesses each of these to
a marked degree; nor is it explainable simply in terms of his broad and cosmopolitan
experience, although he does have the intellectual sophistication which comes to men
who have traveled widely and observed with perceptive minds.
Actually, he does not display outwardly the common marks of unusual talent or

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
 Sa v a g e a n d R h o a d e s xv
success. He is distinguished most by quietness, serenity, and simplicity. He possesses
the qualities of dignity, assurance, integrity, sophistication, and intrepidity—all
developed to a high degree—but he does not wear them conspicuously. They are
submerged and blended into the composite of his character, doubtless the result of
some inheritance of birth, and his early and later experiences.
Dr. Berkey was one of a large and religous family of farmers whose German,
English, and Irish background had been largely fused by six generations in the United
States. His earliest years were spent in a sober mid-west community which was en­
tirely self-contained, with social intercourse largely confined to weekly gatherings in
church or schoolhouse, and news of the outside world brought mainly by traveling
clergymen in religious matters and by traveling schoolmasters in matters of other
people and other places. He became inured as a youth to the long hours and hard
labor of farm life. He inherited a serious mind; and his environment, aided by native
inclination, developed habits of frugality and industry and an interest in natural
things.
His first schooling was in a country school in Clinton Township, Indiana, and was
continued as the family moved about in Grayson County, Texas, and then in Min­
nesota where he graduated from high school. After a period of school teaching, an
opportunity was presented to enter the University of Minnesota. There, his interest in
nature led him first to study zoology, but he later concentrated on geology. He grad­
uated in General Science in 1892, gained his Master of Science degree in geology in
1893, achieved his doctorate in 1897, and stayed on for 6 years as an instructor in
mineralogy.
He went to Columbia University in 1903, became Professor of Geology in 1916,
served as executive officer of the Department of Geology from 1914 to 1939, was
named Newberry Professor of Geology in 1929, and Newberry Professor Emeritus
of Geology in 1943.
Following his term as president of the Geological Society in 1941, he had rid him­
self also of the active demands of that organization which had previously absorbed
so much of his time and thought. With his “retirement” thus complete, he thought to
devote himself to the pursuits of leisure and to writing. As time has allowed, he has
devoted himself to the collection and recording of his scientific experience, but in­
creasingly rather than diminishingly his time has been usurped by active professional
engagements of an engineering nature in this and other countries. In the 12 months
which saw the arrival and departure of his eightieth birthday, he journeyed on Bureau
of Reclamation missions to the bottom of the Canyon of the Colorado River, to the
bottom of the Canyon of the Rio Grande, to the Continental Divide in Colorado at
12,000 feet (in a jeep), and traversed the almost trackless line of a 100-mile tunnel
proposed in northern Arizona, in addition to half a dozen other less spectacular as­
signments and numerous engagements of similar kinds for other agencies.
Several factors combine to account for this enormous demand by engineers for
his assistance. In the first place, he brings to an engineering undertaking an extra­
ordinary experience and maturity. Although the geological situation is never quite
the same on any two engineering projects, he has nonetheless been associated with
so many and such diverse kinds of projects that, almost literally, he has “seen every­

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
 C harles P eter B erkey

thing.” He can recall a parallel to almost any engineering problem, and his personal
recollections will usually supply solutions that have worked in comparable situations,
along with other attempted solutions that were unsuccessful. His own experience
has given him an almost instinctive sense of what can or should or cannot or should
not be done.
A second factor contributing to his successful association with engineering works
is his conviction that the geology applied to engineering must be good geology. He
has not originated new geological principles for the solution of engineering problems;
but he has insisted unremittingly that the geology involved be studied thoroughly,
scientifically, in great detail, and with imagination; he has argued and proved that
problems in engineering geology, however bewildering on the basis of superficial
study, frequently solve themselves when the entire geological situation is under­
stood; and he has consistently resisted the acceptance of conclusions and decisions
while any element of the geological picture remained unexplained, uncertain, or ob­
scure. This is not to say that Doctor Berkey shrinks from expressing an unsupported
opinion in an emergency when an opinion is required and the facts are not at hand—
engineering is a practical art, and the work frequently must proceed on the basis of
judgment alone; but in such cases he deplores the lack of complete geology, feeling
that it would have supported a better or more assured conclusion.
There are innumerable examples illustrating the kinds of practical answers he
has been able to give—with an air of apparent naturalness and ease—because he had
first developed a complete understanding of the geological situation. For instance,
during the foundation excavation for Coulee Dam, the rock proved to be sheeted in
horizontal layers, and progressive excavation failed to disclose any improvement at
greater depth. Nevertheless, in the belief that the joints were somehow associated with
near-surface conditions, the excavations continued as one layer after another, re­
sembling the shells of an onion, were removed. Doctor Berkey, who was steeped in
the basic geology of the area, quickly diagnosed the difficulty. Knowing the tectonic
history of the region, he realized at once that the rock possessed a residual stress and
that erosional unloading, aggravated by the excavation itself, was causing the sheet­
ing by relieving the superincumbent pressure and permitting stress relief through the
formation of “lift seams.” Accordingly, excavation was stopped, and the dam was
built, thus replacing the load which had been excavated from the foundation. Sub­
sequently, the “lift seams” were grouted under high pressure, and the foundation has
proved to be both competent and impervious.
Residual stress of a comparable kind baffled the constructors at Madden Dam in
Panama until Doctor Berkey explained the situation as “a slow-motion picture of
popping rock.” In this case the vertical walls of the cutoff trenches, cut in sandstone,
would gradually crack and spall within a few days after excavation. Realizing that
residual stress was being relieved, he recommended backfilling with concrete im­
mediately following excavation.
Also at Madden Dam, he was influential in solving the problem of severe potential
reservoir leakage. Large solution channels had been discovered, including a main
cavern over 70 feet wide and 70 feet high with five main branch caverns and many
ramifying channels of smaller size. Doctor Berkey was asked if any of these solution

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
 Sav age a n d R hoad es xvii
channels penetrated the reservoir rim in a manner that would permit leakage of
reservoir water into the adjacent valley. His studies led to the conclusion that the
enlarged channels did not cross the ridge, but that the master joints along which the
channels had formed did cross the ridge, and possibly the ridge beyond, and that
leakage was inevitable unless they were sealed. This conclusion led to a comprehensive
program of clay grouting. Subsequent test pitting confirmed his conclusion and proved
the effectiveness of the clay-grout treatment. Related studies disclosed a soft, porous,
coquinalike limestone underlying the immediate foundation sandstone at Madden
Dam and proved that underdam leakage would occur unless the material were treated.
Doctor Berkey recommended grouting to close the existing pores and to arrest fur­
ther solution.
Among the first of the many important questions which the Bureau of Reclamation
has asked Doctor Berkey were: “Are the rock conditions at the site of Hoover Dam
suitable for the excavation of tunnels 56 feet in diameter?” “And how much support
will be required?” He replied that even tunnels of such large diameter could be ex­
cavated at that site with a minimum of support or none at all. Accordingly, the struc­
ture was designed with four diversion tunnels of that size instead of a larger number
of smaller bores. During actual construction, The Six Companies, contractors on
Hoover Dam, completed nearly 3 miles of these tunnels, using no roof or wall support
whatsoever.
A catalog of such usable practical engineering conclusions formulated for the
Bureau of Reclamation by Doctor Berkey on the basis of sound general geology could
be extended indefinitely. There was the study of the relation of rock jointing to tunnel­
ing at Palisades Damsite; the correlation of the sequence of lavas at Chiflo Damsite
and its relation to leakage and bank storage; the investigation of the glacial history
and buried gorges at Hungry Horse Damsite; the consideration of fault zones under­
lying Shasta Dam and their treatment; and other problems in great variety and num­
ber. A long fist of similar items could be drawn from his association with the Ten­
nessee Valley Authority, beginning with the Norris Dam studies in 1933 and con­
tinuing through all the structures built by that organization up to the present time.
They would all illustrate that Doctor Berkey brings no wizardry to the practice of
engineering geology but simply lets thorough and sound geology lead him to the
practical answer that the engineer requires.
A third reason for the cordial reception he— and through him the science of geology
—has received from engineers lies, undoubtedly, in the charm and interest with
which he describes a geological situation. In his relations with engineers he is guided
by a conviction that geology is not only enormously useful to engineering but also
is intrinsically fascinating. He believes that the more interesting and understandable
geology is made to engineers, the more appreciative they will be of its potential use­
fulness in their work, and the more receptive to geological conclusions and recom­
mendations. With this idea in mind, Doctor Berkey makes every visit to the field an
occasion for an illustrated lecture; he does not silently review the facts in his own
mind and then announce aloud his conclusions or recommendations; he describes
out loud the things he sees, he reconstructs from these observations the geological
events which brought them about, and, when he comes finally to the end, the engineer

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
 xviii Charles P eter B erkey

feels not only that the conclusions are based on manifest logic but he is usually
fascinated at the same time by the insight he has received into unfamiliar concepts
surrounding the familiar rocks and soils.
This effort to expose the mechanisms of geological reasoning is wholly conscious
on Doctor Berkey’s part. He has frequently discussed with both of the present
authors the trepidation which he experienced on his first engineering assignments.
He was unsure in his own mind in those early days that he would be able to contribute
effectively to the practical accomplishment of the projects, and he was advised by
elders, from whom he sought advice, to preserve an air of profound and serious pre­
occupation and to come forth with conclusions that sounded assured and authoritative
whatever his own inner uncertainties. This advice did not reconcile with Doctor
Berkey’s native frankness, and, to the dismay of his older colleagues, he adopted a
diametrically opposite approach. He concluded that he would strive to take the
mystery out of geology, to make the engineers understand the geological considerations
which led him to his conclusions, and to abjure any air of false professional dignity—
in short, he decided to explain lucidly the facts of geology and let those facts, and their
obvious practical usefulness, rest on their own merits.
There are literally thousands of engineers today who have received this “treat­
ment” in the course of field examinations and office conferences with Doctor Berkey;
and consequently, the acceptance of the science of geology as applied to engineering
has been enormously furthered. This treatment, of course, has not been restricted
to engineers; an equal number of young geologists have received a wholesome re­
education in the same way. Today, a large army of professional geologists, through
contact with Doctor Berkey, have been introduced to the fascination that can reside
in applying their science for the benefit of the engineering art.
Doctor Berkey carries into his written reports this same desire to simplify and
clarify and make interesting the principles of geology. Perhaps this attitude is best
illustrated through quotations from his reports. For example, in one section of a
report from the Hungry Horse Reservoir, he writes as follows:
“The rocks forming the floor belong to a series of ancient sediments; sandstones, quartzites,
limestones, shales, and their relatives, developed in great thickness; all of which have been pro­
foundly modified from their original condition through metamorphism which caused them to become
indurated and incipiently crystalline and consequently more hard and durable throughout. In general
they are regarded as an exceedingly substantial series of rocks.
“But in the course of accomplishing these changes, the whole series of strata, to thicknesses of
many thousands of feet, were thrown by regional deformation into great mountain folds so that they
now show these structural features everywhere. In addition they were strongly faulted, and those
disturbances mark the chief irregularities or structural breaks in continuity in these formations.
These movements account also for the thousands of minor slips, or fractures, and the development of
stresses in the rock which tend to weaken it locally and make it less resistant to weathering or decay
and also more susceptible to erosion.”
Such felicitous simplicity is uncommon in technical reports. But the paragraphs
are not quoted merely to show his literacy and style in writing; more important,
they illustrate his preoccupation that the engineer be given not only the practical
answers which he requires but that he be enlightened also on the causative past
events that made things as they are today. The usable facts and conclusions are
there, but they are made to seem more reasonable, assured, and acceptable simply

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
 Sav age a n d R h o a d es xix
because they have been made intelligible and interesting. The point may be empha­
sized by quoting at greater length from his report on the Two Forks Damsite:
“The situation which on its face looks simple is in fact complex. All one sees at first is the gorge
shape, the floor of crystalline rock, and an overburden of talus and river debris. If the overburden
were uniformly distributed and if the rock floor were sound, there would be little problem for the
geologist or engineer, for in that case the upper site would doubtless be favored because of its ad­
vantageous position. The fact is, however, that the gorge is not uniform even in shape; the over­
burden is not uniformly distributed and covers weak spots, while the floor on its part is extremely
complex, both in rock type and physical condition. The most fundamental part of this setup is the
rock floor, the chief difficulties of which originate in the structure and composition and condition of
the rock itself.
“It is made up of four different recognizable members:
“First, a metamorphic rock series, part of which may have been of sedimentary origin but most
of which became so affected by igneous invasion and addition that nearly all trace of the originals has
been destroyed.
“Second, into this mass of metamorphic rock at some later date an igneous mass of diorite was
intruded. This is the most prominent rock type in the upper site. When it came in, the surrounding
formation was greatly disturbed and contact effects were produced on the margins. This mass of
diorite extends downstream on the right side and swings farther and farther to the right followed
by the embayment which is the most prominent feature of that site.
“The third member of the rock floor is a late granite invasion which fused its way up into this
complex of the ancient metamorphic series and penetrated its weaknesses everywhere, invading
portions of the areas in such large amount that it is now more granite than anything else. This effect
is strikingly developed downstream where the granite portion increases still further and dominates
everything.
“A still later happening in the geological history is the new invasion of granite in large areas break­
ing up through ana replacing everything that preceded. That type is developed in the reservoir area
but does not figure in these damsites.
“These four stages account for the complexity of rock, which would be good enough anywhere
for a great dam if it were not for the fact that later happenings have modified the situation. The
first one of these important happenings was a great mountain-making deformation which crowded
these formations together, fracturing them and causing a most complex lot of crushing effects. Some
of these crush zones were guided by the original variations in the quality and structural peculiarities
of the rock formation and this accounts for the great variety and extremely complex assemblage of
fractures, joints, seams, displacements, and crush zones. Seldom does one see in any country a more
complex physical situation.
“Although this broken condition introduces many weaknesses, the local situation takes on addi­
tional difficulty because these worst zones have been affected by deep weathering and decay. These
are the conditions that affect all of these sites more or less and account not only for the differences
that can be seen but also for many that cannot be seen but are inferred.”
A deep and sincere enthusiasm shines through both his conversation and his writing.
In a final analysis it is perhaps through his own enthusiasm for geology, his deep
desire that its applications be extended to the limit, and his unremitting preoccupation
that this enthusiasm and desire be transmitted to others that he has made his greatest
contribution to geological science. He has made geology interesting to others; he
has made it seem significant to others; in the field of civil engineering he has made the
practical usefulness of geology widely manifest, and thus has contributed uniquely
to its general acceptance.

Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf

by guest
Downloaded from https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/books/chapter-pdf/3744708/9780813759418_frontmatter.pdf
by guest