Pitfalls in Generating an Engineering Geological Model, Using a Landslide on the D8 Motorway near Dobkovičky, Czech Republic, as an Example

  • Pavel PospisilEmail author
  • Naďa Rapantova
  • Petr Kycl
  • Jan Novotny
Conference paper


The variability of ground conditions resulting from different types of rocks with a varying origin, degree of weathering, tectonic deformation, hydrogeological conditions, and other factors poses considerable problems for engineering geological model generation and the subsequent analysis of rock mass behaviour. The authors demonstrate, through a case study of the D8 motorway in the Czech Republic, the problems that can occur during construction if the engineering geological model generation is not applied correctly during construction. It demonstrates the importance of the conceptual model and its application at the beginning of the project. The case study is also used to present experience with an observational engineering geological model generation. The simplification of the complex geological setting represented the key problem of the observational model generation for engineering purposes. The authors critically assessed the available archive data, the ability to generate 3D models using various software (RockWorks, GMS), and transferring engineering geological model to simulation software (MIDAS GTS NX). It is very demanding to construct the geometry of individual lithostratigraphic units and to define quasi-homogeneous engineering geological units based on their characteristic values for the simulation of the slope stability of the rock massif.


Engineering geological model Observational model Landslide 



The paper was prepared with the support of the Competence Centres of the Technology Agency of the Czech Republic (TAČR) within the project Centre for Effective and sustainable transport infrastructure (CESTI), project number TE01020168.


  1. Baynes, F.J: Sources of geotechnical risk. Q. J. Eng. Geol. Hydrogeol. Geol. Soc. London, 43(3), 321–331 (2010). ISSN 1470-9236
  2. Digital Terrain Model 5th Generation: [on line]. ČÚZK [cit. 25.11.2017] (2016) Accessible from
  3. Kycl, P.: Geomorphological Map of Dobkovičky Landslide, Manuscript March 2014. CGS (2014)Google Scholar
  4. Novotný, J.: Engineering geological models—some examples of use for landslide assessments. In: Lollino, G. et al. (eds.) 12th IAEG Congress Torino 2014, Engineering Geology for Society and Territory, vol. 7, pp. 11–15. Springer International Publishing Switzerland (2014).
  5. Parry, S., Baynes, F.J., Culshaw, M.G., Eggers, M., Keaton, J.F., Lentfer, K., Novotný, J., Paul, D.: Engineering geological models: an introduction. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. [online]. 73(3), 689–706 (2014). [cit. 2017-06-04]. ISSN 14359529. Accessible from:
  6. Parry, S. Baynes, J.F., Novotný, J. (in print): Conceptual engineering geological models. In: XIII IAEG Congress—San Francisco 2018. Engineering Geology for a Sustainable World, San Francisco, 17–21 Sept 2018Google Scholar
  7. Pašek, J., Janek, J., Hroch, Z., Francek, J.: Engineering Geological Survey of D8 Motorway in part Chotiměř—Radejčín, km 62.2–67.8, II. stage. Final Report of Geological Institute of Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences Praha and (in Czech) Inženýrskogeologický průzkum dálnice D8 v úseku Chotiměř—Radejčín, km 62.2–67.8. II. etapa. MS Geologický ústav ČSAV—Stavební geologie, n.p. Praha (1972)Google Scholar
  8. Pašek, J., Janek, J.: Engineering Geological Survey of D8 Motorway in part Chotiměř—Radejčín, km 62.2—67.8, I. stage. Final Report of Geological Institute of Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences Prague (in Czech) Inženýrskogeologický průzkum dálnice D8 v úseku Chotiměř—Radejčín, km 62.2—67.8. I. etapa. MS Geologický ústav ČSAV Praha (1972)Google Scholar
  9. Rybář, J., Nemčok, A.: Landslide investigation in Czechoslovakia. In: Proceedings of the 1st Session of the International Association of Engineering Geology, pp. 183–198, Prague (1968)Google Scholar
  10. Rybář, J.: Examples of deep-seated slope movements in Bohemian Massif. In: Moser, M. (ed.) Proceedings of 15th Conference on Engineering Geology, Erlangen, 06–09 Apr 2005Google Scholar
  11. Schumm, S.A.: To Interpret the Earth: Ten Ways to Be Wrong. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1991)Google Scholar
  12. Stapledon, D.H.: Subsurface engineering—in search of a rational approach. Aust. Geomech. News. 4, 26–33 (1982)Google Scholar
  13. Sullivan, T.D.: The geological model. In: Williams, A.L. et al. Geologically Active: Proceedings of the 11th Congress of the International Association for Engineering Geology and the Environment, Auckland, New Zealand, pp. 155–170. CRC Press, London (2010)Google Scholar
  14. Varnes, D.J.: The Logic of Geological Maps, with Reference to Their Interpretation and use for Engineering Purposes.: Professional Paper 837. United States Geological Survey, Washington (1974)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pavel Pospisil
    • 1
    Email author
  • Naďa Rapantova
    • 1
  • Petr Kycl
    • 2
  • Jan Novotny
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.VSB-Technical University of OstravaOstravaCzech Republic
  2. 2.Czech Geological SurveyPragueCzech Republic
  3. 3.Faculty of ScienceCharles UniversityPragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations