See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/26448077

Engineering classification of karst ground conditions

Article · January 2005

Source: DOAJ

CITATIONS READS

43 9,764

2 authors, including:

Tony Waltham

112 PUBLICATIONS 1,466 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Marine Geo-environment View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Tony Waltham on 10 July 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Engineering classification of karst ground conditions
A.C. Waltham1 & P.G. Fookes2
1
Civil Engineering Department, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham NG1 4BU, UK
2
Consultant Engineering Geologist, Lafonia, 11a Edgar Road, Winchester SO23 9SJ, UK

Abstract Karst processes

n a world scale, the dissolution of limestone Karst occurs primarily on limestones (and dolomites),

O and gypsum by natural waters creates

extensive karst landforms that can be very
difficult ground for civil engineers. Caves
threaten foundation integrity, notably where their width is
greater than their roof thickness. Sinkholes pose many
and ground cavities and dissolutional landforms develop
best on competent, fractured rocks whose intact uncon-
fined compressive strength is generally 30–100 MPa.
Weaker limestones, chalk and unlithified carbonate
sediments lack the strength to span large cavities,
problems, and are classified into six types, including and develop limited suites of karst features that are
subsidence sinkholes formed in soil cover within karst generally smaller than those on stronger limestones
terrains. Rockhead morphology varies from uniform to (Higginbottom 1966; Jennings 1968; White 2000).
pinnacled, also creating difficult ground to excavate or Offshore carbonate sediments normally have no karst
found upon. A proposed engineering classification of features, as most seawater is saturated with calcium
karst defines various complexities of ground conditions carbonate. Dissolution and redeposition typify the
by the geohazards that they provide, mainly the caves, coastal sabkha environment, but are components of
sinkholes and rockhead relief. Ground investigation diagenesis, and karstic features are modest. Subsea karst
techniques and foundation design philosophies are con- may develop in limestones carrying drainage from adjac-
sidered so that they are appropriate to the ground ent land and may also include features inherited from
conditions provided by the different classes of karst. erosion during past times of lower sea levels. Gypsum
karst has many features comparable with those on
Keywords: karst, classification, geohazards, limestone, gypsum limestone, but is distinguished by wider development of
interstratal karst and greater numbers of breccia pipes
(Klimchouk et al. 1996), and it does not mature through
to cone karst or tower karst; the following notes are
Introduction generally applicable to gypsum karst except where
identified separately. Rock salt is so rapidly dissolved
Karst problems worldwide create huge annual costs that that it has its own suite of landforms and ground
are increased due to insufficient understanding of karst conditions (Waltham 1989); this classification is not
by engineers. Karst is a distinctive terrain developed on applicable to salt karst.
soluble rock with landforms related to efficient under- Dissolution of calcium carbonate in water is primarily
ground drainage. Disrupted surface drainage, sinkholes dependant on the availability of biogenic carbon
and caves are diagnostic. Three-dimensionally complex dioxide, which occurs at the highest concentrations in
natural cave passages create uniquely difficult ground deep soils and in tropical areas where decomposition of
conditions for civil engineering (Sowers 1975; Waltham organic matter is rapid. Regional climate has a strong
influence on karstic landforms by its control of recharge
1989). Solid limestone of high bearing capacity is inter-
to water flow regimes. Thus the most mature karst
spersed with open and sediment-filled voids at shallow
occurs in wet tropical environments. Limestone dissol-
depth that threaten foundation integrity and excavat-
ution is reduced in temperate regions, and is minimal in
ability. The unpredictability of these features increases
arid, periglacial and glacial regimes (Smith & Atkinson
the problem for the ground engineer. 1976). However, while an expectation of ground con-
An engineering classification of karstic ground con- ditions in civil engineering sites on karst is broadly
ditions provides guidelines to the potential variation in related to climate, past climates are also significant.
landforms and ground cavities that may be encountered Features may survive from previous environments that
in civil engineering works on karst. The different karst were wetter and/or warmer, and many of these may be
landforms relate to each other, but the local geological, buried as palaeokarst.
hydrological and climatic conditions create suites of Limestone dissolution is slow. Surface lowering and
karstic features with almost infinite variety (Ford & wall retreat within fissures and caves are no more than a
Williams 1989). In our experience, there is no substitute few millimetres per 100 years, though may be faster in
for a proper understanding of local karst processes – and fissures under very high flow conditions created by dam
accepting that ground cavities may be encountered leakage (Dreybrodt et al. 2002). The major engineering
almost anywhere. hazard is the downward washing of soil into old and
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 36, 101–118 1470-9236/03 $15.00  2003 Geological Society of London
102 WALTHAM & FOOKES

Fig. 1. Dissolution features in the Yorkshire Dales karst of England. The Buttertubs are vertical-sided sinkholes that have been cut
into the limestone, leaving between them undercut and unstable rock pillars about 10 m tall. These features are largely subaerial, but
comparable sinkholes lie hidden beneath the soil cover in the same karst region.

stable rock voids to create failures. A lesser hazard is Caves – cavities typically metres or tens of metres across
failure of limestone over voids that are marginally formed within the rock by its dissolution, and left empty
unstable after dissolution lasting a million years. or filled with sediment (Ford & Williams, 1989).
Gypsum dissolution is much faster, and creation of a
cavity potentially 1 metre across within 100 years is an
extra geohazard in gypsum karst. Karst types
Surface macro-features combine to make the distinctive
landscapes of karst. Assemblages of karst landforms
Karst morphology create the main types of limestone karst, each of which
has its own characteristics, and is developed largely in
Karst has an infinitely variable and complex three-
a specific climatic regime (Ford & Williams 1989;
dimensional suite of fissures and voids cut into the
Waltham 2003).
surface and rock mass of the limestone (Fig. 1).
Glaciokarst has extensive bare rock surfaces with
Dissolution of rock occurs on exposed outcrops, at
limestone pavements, rock scars and deeply entrenched
the rockhead beneath soil, and along underground
gorges; it occurs at higher altitudes and latitudes, where
fractures. Surface, rockhead and underground land-
it was scoured by the ice and meltwater of Pleistocene
forms are integrated within karst systems, but fall into
glaciers and has minimal development of postglacial
five broad groups of features (Lowe & Waltham 2002):
soils; e.g. the Yorkshire Dales region of England.
Surface micro-features – karren runnels, mostly <1 m Fluviokarst has extensive dendritic systems of dry
deep, produced by dissolutional fretting of bare rock valleys, cut by rivers before they were captured by
(Bögli 1960), including grykes, cutters and inherited underground drainage into caves; most occurs in regions
subsoil rundkarren, and ranging in size up to pinnacles that were periglacial during the cold stages of the
2–30 m high in pinnacle karst (Waltham 1995); Pleistocene; e.g. the Derbyshire Peak District of
Surface macro-features – dry valleys, dolines, poljes, England.
cones and towers, all landforms on the kilometre scale Doline karst has a polygonal network of interfluves
that are elements within different types of karst (Ford & separating closed depressions (dolines), each 100–
Williams 1989); 1000 m across, that have replaced valleys as the
Subsoil features – complex morphologies of rockhead dominant landform because all drainage is under-
with local relief that may exceed tens of metres, created ground; it is a mature landscape, developed in temperate
by dissolution in soilwater (Klimchouk 2000); regions with Mediterranean climates; e.g. the classical
Sinkholes – various surface depressions, 1–1000 m karst of Slovenia and the low-lying karst of Florida.
across, that are related to underlying rock cavities (Bell Cone karst (fengcong karst) is dominated by repetitive
et al. 2004); conical or hemispherical limestone hills, 30–100 m high,
 CLASSIFICATION OF KARST 103

Fig. 2. Progressive bed failure of a passage roof in the Agen Allwedd Cave in South Wales. The breakdown process causes upward
migration of the void over an increasing pile of rock debris; in this case, the original dissolution cave was 12 m below the present
roof, but this migration has probably taken over 100 000 years.

between which the smaller closed depressions are stellate water’s aggressiveness (degree of chemical undersatur-
dolines and the larger are alluviated poljes; it is a very ation) mainly determine rates of cave enlargement,
mature landscape, largely restricted to inter-tropical which originates on bedding planes and tectonic frac-
regions; e.g. the Cockpit Country of Jamaica, and the tures (Lowe 2000). These enlarge to networks of open
fengcong areas of Guizhou (China). fissures, and favourable flowpaths are enlarged selec-
Tower karst (fenglin karst) forms the most dramatic tively into caves (Palmer 1991; Klimchouk et al. 2000).
karst landscapes with isolated, steep-sided towers rising Caves may be abandoned when their water is captured
50–100 m above alluviated karst plains; it is the extreme by preferred routes, they may be wholly or partially
karst type, restricted to wet tropical regions with critical filled with clastic sediment or calcite stalagmite, or they
tectonic uplift histories that have allowed long, uninter- may degrade and collapse when their dimensions create
rupted development (Zhang 1980); e.g. the Guilin and unstable roof spans (Fig. 2). Filled caves may appear as
Yangshuo region of Guangxi (China).
sand or clay pipes within the solid rock. Progressive roof
There are recognizable subdivisions of these main
collapse, and cavity stoping that propagates upwards
karst types, and there are also additional landscape
may create a pile of fallen rock in a breccia pipe within
styles, e.g. formed in arid regions where karst develop-
the solid limestone.
ment is minimal. Construction practice is inevitably
related to these geomorphological types, but an engin- Cave dimensions vary greatly. In temperate regions
eering classification of karst is more usefully based on cave passages are generally less than 10 m in diameter;
the specific features that have the major influence on caves 30 m in diameter are common in the wet tropics.
ground conditions, namely the caves, the sinkholes and The largest single cave chamber is over 300 m wide and
the rockhead morphology. 700 m long, in a cave in the Mulu karst of Sarawak,
Malaysia. All voids in a block of karstic limestone are
interconnected because they were formed by through
Caves in karst drainage; narrow fissures, wide river passages and
Caves form in any soluble rock where there is an large chambers are merely elements of a cave system.
adequate through flow of water. Flow rates and the Though cave morphology may be understood in terms
104 WALTHAM & FOOKES

Fig. 3. Cave stability related to cave width and rock mass quality (Q value after Barton et al. 1974). The envelope of the limestone
caves field is derived from observations of caves around the world. The labelled fields of stable, support and unstable are those
applied in guidelines for the Norwegian Tunnelling Method; they refer to engineered structures with public access, and are therefore
conservative when related to natural caves. The top apex of the envelope is defined by the parameters for Sarawak Chamber; the
roof span of this chamber is stable on engineering timescales, but isolated blockfall from the ceiling would render it unsatisfactory
were it to be used as a public space.

of limestone geology and geomorphic history, the distri- that do not exceed 2 MPa – which is half the Safe
bution of cave openings in an unexplored limestone Bearing Pressure (SBP in Fig. 4) appropriate for sound
mass cannot be predicted (Culshaw & Waltham 1987). limestone.
Unknown cave locations remain a major problem in Simple beam failures provide a ‘worst-case’ scenario,
civil engineering. as caves naturally evolve towards arched roof profiles
Most natural caves in strong limestone are stable in with partial support from cantilevered rock at the mar-
comparison to artificially excavated ground caverns gins. This concept of required roof thickness is therefore
(Fig. 3). Most caves lie at depths within the limestone conservative. It covers limestone with a normal density
where stable compression arches can develop within of fractures and bedding planes; local zones of heavy
the roof rock so that they constitute no hazard to fissuring may reduce cave roof integrity. Gypsum is
normal surface civil engineering works. The potential weaker. A greater cover thickness is therefore required
hazard lies in the large cave at shallow depth, where it over a gypsum cave, even for low foundation loads, and
may threaten foundation integrity. An informal guide- this must also account for further enlargement of the
line to the stability of the natural rock roof over a cave cave within the lifetime of an engineered structure.
is that the ground is stable if the thickness of rock is
equal to or greater than its span; this excludes any
thickness of soil cover or heavily fissured limestone at Sinkholes in karst
rockhead. This guideline is conservative. In typical
limestone karst the rock mass is of fair quality (Class The diagnostic landform of karst is the closed depres-
III), with Q = 4–10 on the classification scheme of sion formed where the ground surface has been eroded
Barton et al. (1974), and RMR = 40–60 on the rock around an internal drainage point into the underlying
mass rating of Bieniawski (1973). In such material, a limestone. These depressions are labelled dolines by
cover thickness of intact rock that is 70% of the cave geomorphologists, but are generally known as sinkholes
width ensures integrity (Fig. 4) under foundation loads by engineers (regardless of whether streams sink within
 CLASSIFICATION OF KARST 105

Fig. 4. The stability of cave roofs in limestone under engineering imposed load, related to the thickness and structural morphology
of the roof rock. Data points are derived from destructive tests of laboratory scale models of caves all 4 m wide in limestone with
unconfined compressive strengths (UCS) of about 80 MPa, centrally loaded by foundation pads of 1 m2. Scale factors were
calibrated by numerical modelling to a full-scale test, and the required loading capabilities are for Safe Bearing Pressures of 2 MPa
and 4 MPa multiplied by a Factor of Safety of 3.

them). Sinkhole diameters vary from 1 m to 1 km and large collapse sinkholes are not common, small-scale
depths may be up to 500 m. They are classified into six collapse does contribute to both surface and rockhead
types (Fig. 5), each with its own discrete mechanism of degradation in karst, and there is a continuum of
formation (Lowe & Waltham 2002); examples of all morphologies between the collapse and dissolution
types are described by Bell et al. (2004). Dissolution, sinkhole types.
collapse and caprock sinkholes occur in rock, and are Caprock sinkholes are comparable to collapse sink-
essentially stable features of a karst terrain except that holes, except that there is undermining and collapse of
open fissures or caves must exist beneath them. Natural an insoluble caprock over a karstic cavity in underlying
events of rock collapse are rare, so constitute a minimal limestone. They occur only in terrains of palaeokarst or
engineering hazard. The greater hazard in karst terrains interstratal karst with major caves in a buried limestone,
is created by sinkholes formed in soil covers. and may therefore be features of an insoluble rock
Dissolution sinkholes are formed by slow dissolutional outcrop (Thomas 1974).
lowering of the limestone outcrop or rockhead, aided by Dropout sinkholes are formed in cohesive soil cover,
undermining and small scale collapse. They are normal where percolating rainwater has washed the soil into
features of a karst terrain that have evolved over geo- stable fissures and caves in the underlying limestone
logical timescales, and the larger features are major (Fig. 6). Rapid failure of the ground surface occurs when
landforms. An old feature, maybe 1000 m across and the soil collapses into a void that has been slowly
10 m deep, must still have fissured and potentially enlarging and stoping upwards while soil was washed
unstable rock mass somewhere beneath its lowest point. into the limestone fissures beneath (Drumm et al. 1990;
Comparable dissolution features are potholes and Tharp 1999). They are also known as cover collapse
shafts, but these are formed at discrete stream sinks and sinkholes.
swallow holes, whereas the conical sinkholes are formed Suffosion sinkholes are formed in non-cohesive soil
largely by disseminated percolation water. cover, where percolating rainwater has washed the soil
Collapse sinkholes are formed by instant or progress- into stable fissures and caves in the underlying lime-
ive failure and collapse of the limestone roof over a large stone. Slow subsidence of the ground surface occurs as
cavern or over a group of smaller caves. Intact limestone the soil slumps and settles in its upper layers while it is
is strong, and large-scale cavern collapse is rare (most removed from below by washing into the underlying
limestone gorges are not collapsed caves). Though limestone - the process of suffosion; a sinkhole may take
106 WALTHAM & FOOKES

Fig. 5. A classification of sinkholes, with respect to the mechanisms of the ground failure and the nature of the material which fails
and subsides; these features are also known as dolines (in the same six classes). The two types on the right may be known collectively
as subsidence sinkholes. The structures, cave patterns and sinkhole profiles tend to be more complex in dipping limestone, but the
concepts remain the same as those shown by these examples in horizontal limestone; except that the caprock sinkhole cannot exist
in conformable vertical beds.

Fig. 6. A deep dropout sinkhole in glacial till, over a fissure 20 m deep in the underlying limestone. This is the new entrance to
Marble Pot, in the Yorkshire Dales karst (class kIII) in England; the passages below are now choked with the collapsed till, though
sinking water still drains through the debris.
 CLASSIFICATION OF KARST 107

years to evolve in granular sand. They are also known as inadequate drainage lines along highways (Moore 1988;
cover subsidence sinkholes. A continuum of processes Hubbard 1999). Numerous sinkholes develop where
and morphologies exists between the dropout and karstic limestone is dewatered beneath a soil cover, by
suffosion sinkholes, which form at varying rates in soils either groundwater abstraction (Jammal 1986; Sinclair
ranging from cohesive clays to non-cohesive sands. Both 1982; Waltham & Smart 1988) or mine and quarry
processes may occur sequentially at the same site in dewatering (Foose 1969; LaMoreaux & Newton 1986; Li
changing rainfall and flow conditions, and the drop- & Zhou 1999). New subsidence sinkholes are most likely
out process may be regarded as very rapid suffosion. to develop when the water table declines past the
Dropout and suffosion sinkholes are commonly and rockhead, thereby inducing downward vadose drainage
sensibly described collectively as subsidence sinkholes and sediment transport into the limestone voids. Of
and form the main sinkhole hazard in civil engineering sinkhole failures that impact upon civil engineering sites,
(Waltham 1989; Beck & Sinclair 1986; Newton 1987). those induced by human activities far outnumber those
Subsidence sinkholes are also known as cover sinkholes, created by totally natural processes. Drainage control is
alluvial sinkholes, ravelling sinkholes or shakeholes. essential in areas of soil cover on karstic limestones; by
Buried sinkholes occur where ancient dissolution or appropriate reaction to proper investigation, the hazard
collapse sinkholes are filled with soil, debris or sediment of collapsing sinkholes is largely avoidable.
due to a change of environment. Surface subsidence may
then occur due to compaction of the soil fill, and may be
aggravated where some of the soil is washed out at depth Rockhead in karst
(Bezuidenhout & Enslin 1970; Brink 1984). Buried sink-
holes constitute an extreme form of rockhead relief, and Subsoil dissolution at the soil/rock interface (and sub-
may deprive foundations of stable footings; they may be aerial dissolution at the outcrop prior to burial) creates
isolated features or components of a pinnacled rock- a clean rockhead without the gradual transition through
head. They include filled sinkholes, soil-filled pipes and a weathering sequence in insoluble rocks. However,
small breccia pipes that have no surface expression. rockhead profiles may be extremely irregular on karstic
Large breccia pipes formed over deeply buried evap- bedrock. Inclined or vertical joints and dipping bedding
orites (Ford & Williams 1989; Lu & Cooper 1997) are planes, that intersect the exposed or buried surfaces,
beyond the scope of this paper. Slow settlement of the provide pathways into the rock mass for rainwater and
fill within buried sinkholes, perhaps induced by water soil-water, so that they are preferentially enlarged into
table decline, creates shallow surface depressions known fissures. This is most rapid at and close to the rock
in South Africa as compaction sinkholes (Jennings surface, where corrosive soil-water first meets the lime-
1966). stone. With time, the upper part of the rock mass
becomes more fissured, while intervening blocks of
The sinkhole hazard in engineering limestone are reduced in size and progressively isolated
from their neighbours. The end product is a pinnacled
The major sinkhole hazards to civil engineering works rockhead that provides very difficult engineering
are created by the rapid failures of soil to form dropout ground conditions, notably where isolated and undercut
or suffosion sinkholes. Instantaneous dropouts are the pinnacles are supported only by the surrounding soil.
only karst hazard that regularly causes loss of life, Between the remnant pinnacles of limestone, fissures
and most soils have enough cohesion that arches may may enlarge downward into caves that are either soil-
develop over growing voids until they collapse cata- filled or open. Narrow, vertical, soil-filled pipes are
strophically. Sinkhole failures are smaller and more particularly common in the more porous limestones,
numerous in thinner soil profiles, and most foundation including both the younger reef limestones and the
problems occur where soils 2-10 m thick overlie a chalks (Rhodes & Marychurch 1998).
fissured rockhead. There is no recognizable upper bound Karstic rockhead topography is notably unpredict-
of soil thickness beyond which sinkholes cannot occur; able, with variations in the depth and frequency of
occasional large failures are known in soils 30–50 m fissuring, the height and stability of buried pinnacles, the
thick (Jammal 1986; Abdullah & Mollah 1999). extent of loose blocks of rock and the frequency of
Subsidence sinkholes (both dropout and suffosion) are buried sinkholes. Figure 7 depicts ground profiles that
created by downward percolation of water, therefore vary from a modestly fissured rockhead to conditions
many occur during heavy rainfall events (Hyatt & of great complexity that provide major difficulties in
Jacobs 1996). Many other failures occur when the excavation and establishment of structural foundations
natural drainage is disturbed by civil engineering activity (Tan 1987; Bennett 1997).
(Waltham 1989; Newton 1987). Sinkholes are induced Broadly, the degree of rockhead chaos is a function of
by civil engineering works that create local increases climate and geological history. Large-scale pinnacled
of water input to the soil (Knight 1971; Williams & rockheads are almost limited to the wet tropics (Fig. 8),
Vineyard 1976), and failures are commonly triggered by where they have had the time and environment to
108 WALTHAM & FOOKES

Fig. 7. Rockhead profiles at various karst sites, drawn from exposures and borehole profiles; scale and ornament are the same in
each drawing. The notations kII etc refer to the karst classes to which their morphologies belong (see Fig. 9); some are atypical of
their region in that the local rockhead profile represent a karst class that is different from the class of the regional landscape. Most
of the isolated limestone blocks in the Malaysia profile are connected to bedrock in the third dimension, unseen in the drawing,
though some may be ‘floaters’ left as dissolutional remnants within the soil.

mature fully. Most limestone that was covered by unpredictability of isolated caves or sinkholes that can
Pleistocene ice was at that time stripped down to a threaten integrity of a single structure.
strong surface, and post-glacial dissolution has created
only minimal fissuring up to the present time. Site
conditions are also relevant, and a karst rockhead An engineering classification of
beneath a valley floor or adjacent to a shale outcrop karst
is likely to be more complex where it has been corroded
by acidic, shale-derived run-off or soil-water drain- A classification of ground conditions that is usable and
ing towards it. Rockhead relief may vary across an useful for the civil engineer identifies the degree to which
engineering site, but it generally lacks the extreme any parameter or group of parameters is present. It
 CLASSIFICATION OF KARST 109

Fig. 8. Pinnacled rockhead partially exposed on a construction site in class kV ground at Lunan, in Yunnan, China. The original
ground surface had only a few protruding pinnacle tips. Excavation to a lower level achieves a greater proportion of rock to soil for
bearing purposes, but requires removal of the taller pinnacles.

should broadly quantify rockhead variability, the spatial classified. Whereas rockhead relief may be quantified,
frequency of sinkholes and the sizes of underground the distribution of sinkholes and caves is so diverse,
cavities. Other karst features are generally less signifi- chaotic and unpredictable that a classification provides
cant. Intact rock strength is not a part of the classifica- only broad concepts of their likely abundances. The
tion, though the classes may relate back to broader karst is generally more mature and cavernous along the
definitions of rock mass strength. The following classi- outcrop boundaries with insoluble rocks that provide
fication of karst ground conditions is based on features inputs of allogenic drainage. Karst beneath a soil cover
that occur in the stronger limestones; suites of features inevitably provides greater geohazards than a bare karst
on gypsum and other carbonates, notably the weaker because dissolutional features are obscured. Such a
chalks, may be regarded as variants. covered karst will have a greater frequency of new
Karst ground conditions are divided into a progress- subsidence sinkhole events, which will indicate a higher
ive series of five classes, which are represented in karst class. New sinkholes in a soil cover are also related
Figure 9 by typical morphological assemblages, and are to short-term water movement at rockhead, and fre-
identified in Table 1 by available parameters. The five quencies therefore vary across a site of uniform mor-
classes provide the basis of an engineering classification phology (and karst class) in response to drainage
that characterizes karst in terms of the complexity and patterns and/or abstraction.
difficulty to be encountered by the foundation engineer. The class parameters (Table 1) cannot be more than
The concept diagrams in Figure 9 show horizontal guidelines to the typical state. A further problem is
limestone; folded limestones may have more complex caused by the lack of interdependence between the
dissolutional features, but this should affect the karst components of the karst. Within a region whose overall
classification only marginally. Most features of the lower topography is best classified as a mature karst of class
classes also appear within the more mature karsts. kIII, a single small construction site may reveal a
Parameters listed in Table 1 are not exclusive; a desert minimally fissured rockhead that is best ascribed to class
karst may have almost no current dissolutional develop- kII, and an isolated large cave chamber at shallow depth
ment, and therefore appear to be of class kI, while it may that is more typical of class kIV. The original classi-
contain large unseen caves remaining from phases with fication of the karst region into class kIII remains valid,
wetter palaeo-climates. In any karst, dissolutional whereas the local variations that typify karst ground
activity is greatest near the surface where aggressive conditions mean that any small site sample may fall into
water is introduced to contact with the soluble rock. a higher or lower class.
This creates a shallow zone of epikarst (Klimchouk
2000), and within any class of karst there is a vertical Previous classifications of karst
contrast between it and the less fissured rock at depth.
The extreme local variabilty of karst ground means Geomorphological literature classifies karst features and
that there are limits to how successfully karst can be types with reference to processes that are related largely
 110
WALTHAM & FOOKES

Fig. 9. Typical morphological features of karstic ground conditions within the five classes of the engineering classification of karst. These examples show horizontal bedding of
the limestone; dipping bedding planes and inclined fractures add complexity to most of the features, and also create planar failures behind steep cliff faces. The dotted ornament
represents any type of clastic soil or surface sediment.
Table 1. An engineering classification of karst. This table provides outline descriptions of selected parameters; these are not mutually exclusive and give only broad indications of likely
ground conditions that can show enormous variation in local detail. It should be viewed in conjunction with Figure 9, which shows some of the typical morphological features. The
comments on ground investigation and foundations are only broad guidelines to good practice in the various classes of karst. NSH = rate of formation of new sinkholes per km2 per
year.

Karst class Locations Sinkholes Rockhead Fissuring Caves Ground investigation Foundations

kI Juvenile Only in deserts Rare; Almost uniform; Minimal; low Rare and small; Conventional Conventional
and periglacial NSH <0.001 minor fissures secondary some isolated relict
zones, or on permeability features
impure carbonates
kII Youthful The minimum in Small suffusion or Many small fissures Widespread in the Many small caves; Mainly conventional, Grout open
temperate regions dropout sinkholes; few metres nearest most <3 m across probe rock to 3 m, fissures; control
open stream sinks; surface check fissures in drainage
NSH 0.001–0.05 rockhead
kIII Mature Common in Many suffosion and Extensive fissuring; Extensive secondary Many <5 m across at Probe to rockhead, Rafts or ground
temperate regions; dropout sinkholes; relief of <5 m; loose opening of most multiple levels probe rock to 4 m, beams, consider
the minimum in large dissolution blocks in cover soil fissures microgravity survey geogrids, driven
the wet tropics sinkholes; piles to rockhead;
small collapse and control drainage
buried sinkholes;
NSH 0.05–1.0
kIV Complex Localized in Many large Pinnacled; relief of Extensive large Many >5 m across at Probe to rockhead, Bored piles to
temperate regions; dissolution sinkholes; 5–20 m; loose pillars dissolutional multiple levels Prove rock to 5 m rockhead, or cap
CLASSIFICATION OF KARST

normal in tropical numerous subsidence openings, on and with splayed probes, grouting at
regions sinkholes; away from major microgravity survey rockhead; control
scattered collapse fissures drainage and
and buried sinkholes; abstraction
NSH 0.5–2.0
kV Extreme Only in wet Very large sinkholes Tall pinnacles; relief Abundant and very Numerous complex Make individual Bear in soils with
tropics of all types; of >20 m; loose complex dissolution 3-D cave systems, ground investigation geogrid, load on
remanent arches; pillars undercut cavities with galleries and for every pile site proven pinnacles,
soil compaction in between deep soil chambers >15 m or on deep bored
buried sinkholes; fissures across piles; control all
NSH Z1 drainage and
control
abstraction
111
112 WALTHAM & FOOKES

to climatic environments. The types therefore reflect Typical cave size is a dimension in metres, based
karstic maturity, greater in the wet tropics than in colder on available local data, to represent the largest cave
or drier regions, and form the background to this width that is likely to be encountered. This is larger than
classification that is concerned with the degrees of the mean cave width, but may reasonably exclude
karstification. The first engineering classification of karst dimensions of the largest cave chambers that are
(Fookes & Hawkins 1988) was later modified (Fookes statistically very rare (though these should be noted,
1997) and is replaced by this classification. It was based where appropriate).
largely on doline karst, with little reference to pinnacled Rockhead relief is a measure in metres of the mean
rockheads, and was not comprehensive as mature forms local relief in the karst rockhead, including depths
of tropical karst were omitted; its five classes all fall encountered within buried sinkholes. Where possible, a
within the first four classes of the classification in note should distinguish between pinnacled rockheads
Figure 9 and Table 1. and more tabular, fissured surfaces that are buried
A classification of karstic dangers to Russian railways pavements.
uses the frequency of recorded collapses to guide Though this four-element description may appear
engineering maintenance measures and hazard warning cumbersome, any lesser qualification is incapable of
systems (Tolmachev et al. 1999). A significant engineer- reasonable representation of the vagaries of karstic
ing hazard is recognized where the new sinkhole failure ground conditions.
rate exceeds 0.1 per km2 per year, and this is incor- Where it is helpful to design concepts, the engineering
porated into unpublished classifications used in Florida, classification of ground conditions may be applied to
USA. However, sinkhole collapse frequency cannot be a small units of ground, though rarely down to the scale of
sole guide to karst classification as it increases in areas applying rock mass classification metre by metre within
of thin soil cover and water table drawdown. Ground a tunnel heading. A single residual pinnacle of massive
conditions over the pinnacled dolomites of South Africa limestone may offer conditions of class kI to found a
are ascribed to one of three classes based only on the single column base within a region of pinnacled karst of
thickness of soil cover between the pinnacle tops and the class kV [i.e. kI (in kV)]. Conversely, a deeply fissured
ground surface (Wagener 1985). The classification of zone of fractured limestone with a large underlying cave
weathered rocks excludes karst as a special case, and in the same fracture line may represent immediate,
current engineering classifications of rock masses do not shallow ground conditions of class kV within a
refer to karst (Bieniawski 1973; Barton et al. 1974; Anon glaciokarst terrain that is regionally of class kI [i.e. kV
1995). (in kI)].
Engineers and ground investigators must recognize
The new full engineering description of karst that karst ground conditions are immensely variable,
and always demand thorough investigation and site-
A description of the karst ground conditions by a single specific comprehension. A face cut with a wire-saw on a
class label may be helpful in creating concepts of the building site (Fig. 10) within a karst (class kIV; few
scale of anticipated foundation difficulties, but the vari- sinkholes; caves 5 m across; rockhead relief 10 m) in
ations that are typical of karst demand a more specific Sicily revealed many small cavities and one larger buried
and more detailed definition. A full description of karst sinkhole adjacent to areas of sound rock. It is near to
ground conditions should therefore state whether it is on Palermo airport, where a cavern up to 20 m wide was
limestone or gypsum, and then embrace four terms, so found under a runway extension. Every site on karst
that it becomes ‘Karst class + sinkhole density + cave size should be regarded as unique. Classification provides
+ rockhead relief’. a broad indication of the engineering difficulties of a
Karst class is an overview figure in the range I to V, as karst site, and offers guidance on approaches to over-
defined in the classification within this paper (Fig. 9 and coming the ground difficulties, but it can apply only an
Table 1). approximate label to a medium as variable as karst.
Mean sinkhole density may be a simple number per The processes and landforms of gypsum karst
unit area, based on field mapping, available maps or air (Klimchouk et al. 1996) are broadly comparable to those
photographs. It should be noted if densities are low on limestone, except that gypsum is dissolved more
because the sinkholes are large. Ideally, this descriptor is rapidly in natural waters and is mechanically weaker
a rate at which new sinkholes occur (NSH), expressed in than most limestones. The engineering classification of
events per km2 per year. In practice, the data can only be karst is applicable to gypsum terrains, though extreme
derived from local records, which are rarely adequate for karst of class kV does not develop. Caves in gypsum
anything better than a broad generalization. Inevitably collapse before they reach very large dimensions, surface
the NSH is higher in karst areas with thin soil cover in crags are degraded, and denudation totally removes
which subsidence sinkholes are most easily formed. It gypsum before it can mature into the extreme karst
should also be noted if the NSH rate is temporarily landforms. Rapid dissolution and low strength favour
enhanced by engineering activities. development of large collapse sinkholes, and some
 CLASSIFICATION OF KARST 113

Fig. 10. A sawn face 10 m high on a construction site sections limestone just below rockhead in a karst of class kIV in northwestern
Sicily. Small caves and dissolutional-opened fissures are mainly aligned on dipping fractures, and a buried sinkhole is exposed on
the left after its fill has been removed. Note person at lower left of image for scale.

gypsum karsts of classes kIII and kIV are distinguished The depth probed should be a function of likely cavity
by a scatter of large, isolated collapses (Waltham 2002). size. In karst of classes kI – kIII, caves more than 5 m
wide are unusual, and probing 3.5 m should there-
fore confirm rock integrity. Engineering practice varies
Ground investigation on karst considerably, by proving 5 m of rock beneath pile tips in
cavernous Florida karst (Garlanger 1991), 4 m under
Some of the most difficult ground conditions that foundations in South Africa (Wagener & Day 1986),
have to be investigated in civil engineering are found in 2.5 m under caissons in Pennsylvania (Foose &
karst. Conventional practices are generally adequate to Humphreville 1979), and only 1.5 m under lightly loaded
investigate sites in karst of classes kI and kII, but sites bridge caissons in North Carolina (Erwin & Brown
in more mature karst (classes kIII–kV) demand more 1988). The limestone in Florida is weaker than at the
rigorous ground investigations managed by a team that other sites, but there is no consistency in empirical data
fully appreciates the complex characteristics of karst. from engineering practice on karst.
Adaptation and re-assessment are critical on karst,
where many ground conditions cannot be foreseen from
any reasonable programme of investigation. Geophysics on karst
A major difficulty in karst investigations is finding
underground cavities. There may be little alternative to Geophysical identification of ground voids has not
closely spaced probes, but a density of 2500 per hectare produced consistently reliable interpretations, but tech-
is needed to have a 90% chance of finding one cavity nology is advancing, and there are techniques that can
2.5 m in diameter. Probes beneath every pile foot and produce useful results in certain situations (Cooper &
column base are a better option, and are essential at Ballard 1988). All geophysical anomalies require verifi-
many sites on mature, cavernous karst. Exploration of cation by drilling, but a geophysical survey can reduce
pinnacled rockhead in a karst of class kIV or kV may costs by identifying drilling targets.
demand extensive probing, but there is no answer to the Microgravity surveys identify missing mass within the
question of how many probes are needed. Construction ground and produce good data that improve in value
of a viaduct on class kIII karst in Belgium initially had with increasing sophistication of their analysis. Individ-
31 boreholes for five pier sites; these missed two caves ual caves create negative anomalies, whose amplitude
revealed only during excavation for foundations. A relates to cave size and whose wavelength is a function
second phase of investigation checked the ground of cave depth. Fourier analysis of data from a grid with
with another 308 probes, but found no more caves spacing of 2 m can identify caves only 1 m across at
(Waltham et al. 1986). Investigation by 31 boreholes was specific depths (Butler 1984; Crawford et al. 1999;
inadequate; drilling 339 holes was over-cautious. At McDonald et al. 1999; Styles & Thomas 2001). Wider
many karstic sites, the true ground conditions are grids cover larger areas to identify low-density fills in
discovered only when foundations are excavated. buried sinkholes (Kleywegt & Enslin 1973). In the
114 WALTHAM & FOOKES

Fig. 11. A road cutting 4 m high in class kII karst in Korea, exposing two clay-filled sinkholes cut below a rockhead with minimal
fissuring.

future, when data from more sites have been accumu- problems. Installation of piles may require longer
lated, gravity values and anomaly profiles could be elements for some parts of a site (Statham & Baker
applied to the classification of karst. 1986), and reinforced ground beams can be designed to
Seismic velocities decrease in more fissured and more span small new ground failures (Mishu et al. 1997).
cavernous ground; they correlate with engineering In class kIII karst, rafts or groundbeams may bridge
classifications of rock mass, and could perhaps be used cavities (Sowers 1986; Clark et al. 1981; Green et al.
to characterize karst classes. Three-dimensional cross- 1995). In Florida, either rafts or preparatory grouting
hole seismic tomography (3dT) can identify caves are preferred where new sinkholes are recorded locally at
(Simpson 2001), but requires deep boreholes for data rates above 0.05 km2/a (Kannan 1999). Heavy geogrid
collection so that it is rarely applicable to surface stabilizes soil profiles, and can be designed to span
investigations of greenfield sites. potential voids to reduce the impact of any subsequent
Resistivity surveys are used for rockhead profiling
catastrophic collapses (Kempton et al. 1998). Grouting
(Dunscomb & Rehwoldt, 1999), but deeply pinnacled
of soils over highly fissured rockhead, before founding
rockheads in karst of classes kIV and kV are too
spread footings within the soil profile, may be more
complex to be resolved by surface geophysics. Resistivity
economical than piling to rockhead. A site of 10 000 m2
tomography is expensive, but can combine with micro-
on class kIII karst in Pennsylvania took 1200 m3 of
gravity to identify rockhead and distinguish buried
compaction grout through 560 boreholes to rockhead
sinkholes from caves (which have similar gravity sig-
around 9 m deep (Reith et al. 1999).
natures). Ground-probing radar is limited to shallow
Pinnacled rockheads of karst classes kIV and kV
depths, but has been applied to incipient sinkhole
generally require that structures are founded on sound
detection (Wilson & Beck 1988). In similar situations,
limestone by piling to rockhead or spanning between
low-density granular soils have been identified by SPT
sound pinnacle tops (Brink 1979). Driven piles may be
values below 5, but these are not always indicative of
bent, deflected or poorly founded on unsound pinnacles
active suffosion and potential sinkhole failure (Kannan
(Sowers 1986, 1996); bored piles are preferred. Each pile
1999).
tip is probed to ensure lack of voids beneath, and
narrow unstable pinnacles may require assessment by
probes splayed 15( from the vertical. As a guide for
Ground engineering on karst planning, adding 30% to the mean rockhead depth
indicates the mean final length of end-bearing piles
Limestone presents the foundation engineer with a range
(Foose & Humphreville 1979). The lower strength of
of difficulties that increase in scale and complexity with
gypsum means that it can support neither high loads on
increased maturity of the karst morphology.
rockhead pinnacles nor heavily loaded end-bearing piles.
A road or light structure can bear safely on the soil
Foundations over karstic rockhead over a deeply pinnacled rockhead of karst class kV,
where drainage is not disturbed, though geogrid rein-
Karst of class kI provides rockhead that is sound except forcement may be appropriate. Rockhead pinnacles
for unpredictable isolated fissures or shallow caves that 50 m high in some tropical karsts, offer dreadful ground
may require response during construction. Rockhead of conditions for heavy structures that demand founding
class kII karst (Fig. 11) generally creates only minor on bedrock (Bennett 1997). Each pile location requires
 CLASSIFICATION OF KARST 115

its own ground investigation, and designs must adapt acceptable where they are sealed onto open fissures and
to unique ground conditions as they are revealed by cased below rockhead (Crawford 1986; Vandevelde &
excavation. Schmidt 1988). To found a road in Puerto Rico, natural
soils in class kIV cone karst were replaced with granular,
permeable engineered soils with diversionary clay caps
Foundations over caves and drainage wells (Vazquez Castillo & Rodriguez
Molina, 1999). Control of water abstraction is also
Caves are unpredictable. Every site in karst has to be
critical, especially where the water table is close above
assessed individually in the context of its geomorphol-
rockhead. Florida’s Disney World stands on 20–30 m of
ogy, and engineering works must respond to the local
soils over limestone of class kIII, and its wells are
conditions. Local records and observations may indicate
monitored so that pumping is switched where a local
typical and maximum cave sizes, and these define the
water table decline is detected; sinkholes have not
minimum of sound rock to be proven by drilling beneath
yet occurred on the site (Handfelt & Attwooll 1988).
structural footings (see above). Major variations occur
Dewatering by quarrying has been stopped at some
within a mature cavernous karst; in Slovenia, cave
sites by legal action to prevent further ground failures
discoveries and collapses are common during road con-
(Quinlan 1986; Kath et al. 1995; Gary 1999).
struction, but subsequent collapses under operational
Grout sealing of rockhead fissures is problematical,
roads have not occurred (Sebela et al. 1999).
but may be appropriate on any karst except that of class
Caves typically reach widths of 10 m in karst of class
k1; pinnacled rockheads of classes kIV and kV require
kIV, so probing to 7 m is appropriate in limestone.
elaborate ‘cap grouting’ with cement slurries after plug-
Larger caves are common in class kV karst, and can
ging open fissures with viscous grouts (Kannan &
occur in less mature karst. Many large caves at shallow
Nettles 1999; Siegel et al. 1999). Compaction grouting
depths have open entrances, and are best assessed by
(with slump <25 mm), forming within the soil a solid
direct exploration. Dynamic compaction or monitored
block that bridges over fissures, has been used to reme-
surcharge may collapse small shallow cavities in weak
diate sinkholes over pinnacled rockheads of classes kII –
limestone of karst classes kIII or kIV.
kIV, though grout flow is uncontrollable and its place-
Caves at critical locations under planned foundations,
ment may not remedy the initial cause of a failure
are normally filled with mass concrete, or may be
(Henry 1987; Welsh 1988; Siegel et al. 1999). In karst of
bridged. In Ireland, a cave 6 m wide beneath just 2.5 m
classes kII–kIV, sinkhole hazards are reduced by laying
of limestone, supported a railway for many years, but a
a geogrid into the soil (Villard et al. 2000), combined
concrete slab was installed to lessen the risk when a main
with proper drainage control.
road replaced the railway. Grout injection through
Where a subsidence sinkhole does develop, a perma-
boreholes may incur considerable losses by flowage into
nent repair requires exposure of rockhead and choking
karstic cavities that extend off site, and perimeter grout
of the causative fissure or cave with blocky rock, covered
curtains may reduce total costs. Access to a cave allows
with graded fill, with or without a concrete slab or
installation of shuttering and removal of floor sediment
geogrid mat (Dougherty & Perlow 1987; Bonaparte &
before filling. Relocation of footings may prove essential
Berg 1987, Hubbard 1999). Whether such action is
over complex caves (Waltham et al. 1986). Piles that are
preventative before site development or remedial after
preformed or cast in geotextile sleeves can transfer load
failure, depends largely on how well the problems of
to a solid cave floor, but costs may approach those of
karst are understood. It is further complicated in gyp-
simpler total cave filling (Heath 1995). Grout filling of
sum karst where rapid development of new voids in
caves in gypsum is often inappropriate because the
adjacent ground must not be instigated by blocking a
greater dissolution rates can allow significant amounts
natural drainage conduit.
of intact gypsum to be removed within engineering
timescales. An underground stream re-routed round a
concrete plug can excavate a new adjacent cave, with
implications for subsequent collapse, within the lifetime Conclusion
of an overlying engineered structure.
Karst frequently presents ‘difficult ground conditions’ to
engineers, and is often inadequately understood by those
Remediation and prevention of sinkhole only familiar with insoluble rock. An improved classifi-
failure cation is presented to provide starting points in recog-
nizing the scale of karst geohazards in widely varying
The key to minimizing sinkhole failures in karst is terrains. It relates to the engineering techniques appro-
proper control of water flows. Design specifications for a priate to different classes of cavernous ground and offers
karst site (except some of class kI) should include a ban guidelines towards more efficient ground investigation.
on soakaway drains, use of flexible infrastructure lines A proper understanding of karst is essential to good
and diversion of inbound surface flows. Dry wells are practice in ground engineering.
116 WALTHAM & FOOKES

Acknowledgements. This paper originated from work for the Bowling Green area, Kentucky. Field trip guidebook.
the International Society of Soil Mechanics and Ground Centre for Cave and Karst Studies, Western Kentucky
Engineering sub-committee TC-26 on carbonate ground con- University.
ditions. We thank Dr Fred Baynes, of Perth, Australia, and C, N.C., L, M.A., W, S.A. & W,
other members for constructive discussions, and also Prof. J.A. 1999. Microgravity techniques for subsurface
Peter Smart of Bristol University for his very helpful referee’s investigations of sinkhole collapses and for detection of
comments. groundwater flow paths through karst aquifers. In: B,
B.F., P, A.J. & H, J.G. (eds) Hydrology and
Engineering Geology of Sinkholes and Karst. Balkema,
Rotterdam, 203–218.
References C, M.G. & W, A.C. 1987. Natural and arti-
ficial cavities as ground engineering hazards. Quarterly
Journal of Engineering Geology, 20, 139–150.
A, W.A. & M, M.A. 1999. Detection and
treatment of karst cavities in Kuwait. In: B, B.F., D, P.H. & P, M. 1987. The Macungie sink-
P, A.J. & H, J.G. (eds) Hydrology and hole. Leigh Valley, Pennsylvania: cause and repair. In:
Engineering Geology of Sinkholes and Karst. Balkema, B, B.F. & W, W.L. (eds) Karst Hydrogeology:
Rotterdam, 123–127. Engineering and Environmental Applications. Balkema,
A. 1995. The description and classification of weathered Rotterdam, 425–435.
rocks for engineering purposes: Geological Society D, W., R, D. & G, F. 2002.
Engineering Group Working Party Report. Quarterly Karstification below dam sites: a model of increasing
Journal of Engineering Geology, 28, 207–242. leakage from reservoirs. Environmental Geology, 42,
B, N., L, R. & L, J. 1974. Engineering classifi- 518–524.
cation of rock masses for tunnel design. Rock Mechanics, D, E.C., K, W.F. & Y, C.J. 1990. Application of
6, 189–236. limit plasticity to the stability of sinkholes. Engineering
B, B.F. & S, W.C. 1986. Sinkholes in Florida: an Geology, 29, 213–225.
introduction. Institute Report 85-86-4. Florida Sinkhole D, M.H. & R, E. 1999. Two-dimensional
Research. resistivity profiling; geophysical weapon of choice in karst
B, F.G., C, M.G. & W, A.C. 2004. Sink- terrain for engineering applications. In: B, B.F.,
holes and subsidence. Praxis, Chichester, in press. P, A.J. & H, J.G. (eds) Hydrology and
B, D. 1997. Finding a foothold. New Civil Engineer (4), Engineering Geology of Sinkholes and Karst. Balkema,
24–25. Rotterdam, 219–224.
B, C.A. & E, J.F. 1970. Surface subsidence E, J.W. & B, R.A. 1988. Karstic foundation
and sinkholes in the dolomite areas of the Far West Rand, problems Sunny Point Railroad. In: S, N. (ed.) Geo-
Transvaal, Republic of South Africa. International Associ- technical aspects of karst terrains: exploration, foundation
ation of Hydrological Science, 89, 482–495. design and performance, and remedial measures, Geotech-
B, Z.T. 1973. Engineering classification of jointed nical Special Publication, 14. American Society of Civil
rock masses. Transactions of the South African Institute of Engineers, New York, 74–85.
Civil Engineers, 15, 335–343. F, P.G. 1997. Geology for engineers: the geological
Bö, A. 1960. Kalklosung und Karrenbildung. Zeitschrift fur model, prediction and performance. Quarterly Journal of
Geomorphologie, 2, 4–21. Engineering Geology, 30, 293–424.
B, R. & B, R.R. 1987. The use of geosynthetics F, P.G. & H, A.B. 1988. Limestone weathering:
to support roadways over sinkhole prone areas. In: B, its engineering significance and a proposed classification
B.F. & W, W.L. (eds) Karst Hydrogeology: scheme. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology, 21,
Engineering and Environmental Applications. Balkema, 7–31.
Rotterdam, 437–445. F, R.M. 1969. Mine dewatering and recharge in carbonate
B, A.B.A. 1979. Engineering Geology of South Africa, 1. rocks near Hershey, Pennsylvania. Geological Society of
Building Publications, Pretoria. America Engineering Geology Case Histories, 7, 45–60.
B, A.B.A. 1984. A brief review of the South Africa F, R.M. & H, J.A. 1979. Engineering geo-
sinkhole problem. In: B, B.F. (ed.) Sinkholes: their logical approaches to foundations in the karst terrain
geology, engineering and environmental impact. Balkema, of the Hershey Valley. Bulletin of the Association of
Rotterdam, 123–127. Engineering Geologists, 16, 355–381.
B, D.K. 1984. Microgravimetric and gravity gradient F, D.C. & W, P.F. 1989. Karst Geomorphology and
techniques for detection of subsurface cavities. Hydrology. Unwin Hyman, London.
Geophysics, 41, 1016–1130. G, J.E. 1991. Foundation design in Florida karst.
C, R.G., G, J.C., F, A.E. & J, P.G. Concrete International, 13(4), 56–62.
1981. Engineering geology for a major industrial complex G, M.K. 1999. Maryland’s zone of dewatering influence
at Aughinish Island, Co Limerick, Ireland. Quarterly law for limestone quarries. In: B, B.F., P, A.J. &
Journal of Engineering Geology, 14, 231–239. H, J.G. (eds) Hydrology and Engineering Geology
C, S.S. & B, R.F. 1988. Geophysical exploration of Sinkholes and Karst. Balkema, Rotterdam, 273–277.
for cavity detection in karst terrain. In: S, N. (ed.) G, M.R., F, R.A. & B, D. 1995. Land
Geotechnical aspects of karst terrains: exploration, founda- subsidence on Magnesian Limestone terrain in County
tion design and performance, and remedial measures, Geo- Durham, England. International Association of Hydrologi-
technical Special Publication, 14. American Society of cal Sciences, 234, 423–431.
Civil Engineers, New York, 25–39. H, L.D. & A, W.J. 1988. Exploration of
C, N.C. 1986. Karst hydrological problems associated karst conditions in central Florida. In: S, N. (ed.)
with urban development: groundwater contamination, Geotechnical aspects of karst terrains: exploration, foun-
hazardous fumes, sinkhole flooding and sinkhole collapse in dation design and performance, and remedial measures,
 CLASSIFICATION OF KARST 117

Geotechnical Special Publication, 14. American Society of Alabama. Environmental Geology and Water Science, 8,
Civil Engineers, New York, 40–52. 25–40.
H, W.E. 1995. Drilled pile foundations in porous L, G. & Z, W. 1999. Sinkholes in karst mining areas in
pinnacled carbonate rock. In: B, B.F. (ed.) Karst China and some methods of prevention. Engineering
GeoHazards. Balkema, Rotterdam, 371–374. Geology, 52, 45–50.
H, J.F. 1987. The application of compaction grouting to L, D.J. 2000. Role of stratigraphic elements in speleo-
karstic foundation problems. In: B, B.F. & W, genesis: the speleoinception concept. In: K,
W.L. (eds) Karst Hydrogeology: Engineering and Environ- A.B., F, D.C., P, A.N. & D, W. (eds)
mental Applications. Balkema, Rotterdam, 447–450. Speleogenesis: Evolution of Karst Aquifers. National
H, I.E. 1966. The engineering geology of chalk. Speleological Society, Huntsville, 65–76.
Proceedings of Symposium on Chalk in Earthworks and L, D. & W, T. 2002. Dictionary of karst and
Foundations. Institution of Civil Engineers, London, 1–13. caves. British Cave Research Association Cave Studies, 10,
H, D.A. 1999. Remediation of sinkholes along 1–40.
Virginia’s highways. In: B, B.F., P, A.J. & L, Y. & C, A.H. 1997. Gypsum karst geohazards in
H, J.G. (eds) Hydrology and Engineering Geology China. In: B, B.F. & S, J.B. (eds) The
of Sinkholes and Karst. Balkema, Rotterdam, 413–417. Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology of Karst Terranes.
H, J.A. & J, P.M. 1996. Distribution and mor- Balkema, Rotterdam, 117–126.
phology of sinkholes triggered by flooding following MD, R., R, N. & D, R. 1999. Integrated
Tropical Storm Alberto at Albany, Georgia, USA. geophysical surveys applied to karstic studies. In: B,
Geomorphology, 17, 305–316. B.F., P, A.J. & H, J.G. (eds) Hydrology and
J, S.E. 1986. The Winter Park sinkhole and Central Engineering Geology of Sinkholes and Karst. Balkema,
Florida sinkhole type subsidence. International Associ- Rotterdam, 243–246.
ation of Hydrological Sciences, 151, 585–594. M, L.P., G, J.D. & M, J.R. 1997. Foundation
J, J.E. 1966. Building on dolomites in the Transvaal. remedies for residential construction over karst limestone
The Civil Engineer in South Africa, 8, 41–62. in Nashville. Tennessee. In: B, B.F. & S,
J, J.N. 1968. Syngenetic karst in Australia. Publication J.B. (eds) The Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology of
G/5. Australia National University Department of Karst Terranes. Balkema, Rotterdam, 319–321.
Geography, Canberra, 41–110. M, H.L. 1988. Treatment of karst along Tennessee
K, R.C. 1999. Designing foundations around sinkholes. highways. In: S, N. (ed.) Geotechnical aspects of karst
Engineering Geology, 52, 75–82. terrains: exploration, foundation design and performance,
K, R.C. & N, N.S. 1999. Remedial measures for and remedial measures, Geotechnical Special Publication,
residential structures damaged by sinkhole activity. In: 14. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York,
B, B.F., P, A.J. & H, J.G. (eds) Hydrology 133–148.
and Engineering Geology of Sinkholes and Karst. Balkema, N, J.G. 1987. Development of sinkholes resulting
Rotterdam, 135–139. from man’s activities in the eastern United States. US
K, R.L., ML, A.T., S, W.R. & H, Geological Survey Circular, 968, 1–54.
R.W. 1995. Engineering aspects of karst: three engineer- P, A.N. 1991. Origin and morphology of limestone
ing case studies in Cambrian and Ordovician carbonates caves. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 103, 1–21.
of the Valley and Ridge Province. In: B, B.F. (ed.) Q, J.F. 1986. Legal aspects of sinkhole development
Karst GeoHazards. Balkema, Rotterdam, 469–474. and flooding in karst terranes. Environmental Geology and
K, G.T., L, C.R., J, C.J.F.P. & Water Science, 8, 41–61.
D, M. 1998. The use of geosynthetics to prevent R, C.M., C, A.W. & N, C.J. 1999. Engineers
the structural collapse of fills over areas prone to challenged by Mother Nature’s twist of geology. In: B,
subsidence. In: G, M.B. , H, G. D & B.F., P, A.J. & H, J.G. (eds) Hydrology and
T, R.J. (eds) Geosynthetics: Applications, Design Engineering Geology of Sinkholes and Karst. Balkema,
and Construction. Balkema, Rotterdam, 317–324. Rotterdam, 149–155.
K, R.J. & E, J.F. 1973. The application of the R, S.J. & M, I.M. 1998. Chalk solution
gravity method to the problem of ground settlement and features at three sites in southeast England: their forma-
sinkhole formation in dolomite on the Far West Rand. tion and treatment. In: M, J.G. & E, M.
South Africa. Proceedings of Symposium on Sinkholes and (eds) Geohazards in Engineering Geology. Engineering
Subsidence. International Association of Engineering Geology Special Publication, 15. Geological Society,
Geologists, Hannover, 301–315. London, 277–289.
K, A.B. 2000. The formation of epikarst and its S, S., M, A. & S, T. 1999. The vulnerability
role in vadose speleogenesis. In: K, A.B., map of karst along highways in Slovenia. In: B, B.F.,
F, D.C., P, A.N. & D, W. (eds) P, A.J. & H, J.G. (eds) Hydrology and
Speleogenesis: Evolution of Karst Aquifers. National Engineering Geology of Sinkholes and Karst. Balkema,
Speleological Society, Huntsville, 91–99. Rotterdam, 419–422.
K, A., L, D., C, A. & S, U. (eds) S, T.C., B, J.J. & T, M.W. 1999. Compaction
1996. Gypsum karst of the world. International Journal of grouting versus cap grouting for sinkhole remediation in
Speleology, 25(3-4), 1–307. east Tennessee. In: B, B.F., P, A.J. & H,
K, A.B., F, D.C., P, A.N. & D, J.G. (eds) Hydrology and Engineering Geology of
W. (eds) 2000. Speleogenesis: Evolution of Karst Aquifers. Sinkholes and Karst. Balkema, Rotterdam, 157–163.
National Speleological Society, Huntsville. S, D. 2001. It’s a vision thing. Ground Engineering, 34,
K, F.J. 1971. Geologic problems of urban growth 22–23.
in limestone terrains of Pennsylvania. Bulletin of the S, W.C. 1982. Sinkhole development resulting from
Association of Engineering Geologists, 8, 91–101. groundwater withdrawal in the Tampa area, Florida. US
M, P.E. & N, J.G. 1986. Catastrophic Geological Survey Water Resources Investigation, 81-50,
subsidence: an environmental hazard, Shelby County, 1–19.
 118 WALTHAM & FOOKES

S, D.I. & A, T.C. 1976. Process, landforms and V, P., G, J.P. & G, H. 2000. A geosynthetic
climate in limestone regions. In: D, E. (ed.) reinforcement solution to prevent the formation of
Geomorphology and Climate. Wiley, London, 367–409. localized sinkholes. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 37,
S, G.F. 1975. Failures in limestones in humid 987–999.
subtropics. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering W, F..M. 1985. Problems of soils in South Africa:
Division ASCE, 101(GT8), 771–787. dolomites. The Civil Engineer in South Africa, 27,
S, G.F. 1986. Correction and protection in limestone 395–407.
terrane. Environmental Geology and Water Science, 8, W, F..M. & D, P.W. 1986. Construction on
77–82. dolomite in South Africa. Environmental Geology and
S, G.F. 1996. Building on Sinkholes. ASCE Press, New
Water Science, 8, 83–89.
York.
S, I. & B, M. 1986. Foundation problems on W, A.C. 1989. Ground subsidence. Blackie, Glasgow.
limestone: a case history from the Carboniferous W, A.C. 1995. The pinnacle karst of Gunung Api,
Limestone at Chepstow, Gwent. Quarterly Journal of Mulu, Sarawak. Cave and Karst Science, 22, 123–126.
Engineering Geology, 19, 191–201. W, A.C. & S, P.L. 1988. Civil engineering
S, P. & T, E. 2001. The use of microgravity for the difficulties in the karst of China. Quarterly Journal of
characterisation of karstic cavities on Grand Bahama. Engineering Geology, 21, 2–6.
Bahamas. In: B, B.F. & H, J.G. (eds) Geotech- W, A.C., V, G. & E, C.M. 1986.
nical and Environmental Applications of Karst Geology and Site investigations on cavernous limestone for the
Hydrology. Balkema, Rotterdam, 389–394. Remouchamps Viaduct, Belgium. Ground Engineering,
T, B.K. 1987. Some geotechnical aspects of urban develop- 19(8), 16–18.
ment over limestone terrain in Malaysia. Bulletin of the W, T. 2002. Gypsum karst near Sivas, Turkey. Cave
International Association of Engineering Geologists, 35, and Karst Science, 29, 39–44.
57–63. W, T. 2003. Karst terrains. In: F, P.G., L, M.
T, T.M. 1999. Mechanics of upward propogation of & M, G. (eds) Geomorphology for Engineers.
cover-collapse sinkholes. Engineering Geology, 52, Whittles Press, Caithness.
23–33. W, J.P. 1988. Sinkhole rectification by compaction
T, T.M. 1974. The South Wales interstratal karst. grouting. In: S, N. (ed.) Geotechnical aspects of karst
Transactions of the British Cave Research Association, 1, terrains: exploration, foundation design and performance,
131–152. and remedial measures, Geotechnical Special Publication,
T, V.V., P, S.E. & B, T.A. 14. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York,
1999. The system of antikarst protection on railways 115–132.
in Russia. In: B, B.F., P, A.J. & H, J.G. W, S. 2000. Syngenetic karst in coastal dune limestone: a
(eds) Hydrology and Engineering Geology of Sinkholes and review. In: K, A.B., F, D.C., P, A.N.
Karst. Balkema, Rotterdam, 423–429. & D, W. (eds) Speleogenesis: Evolution of Karst
V, G.T. & S, N.G. 1988. Geotechnical Aquifers. National Speleological Society, Huntsville,
exploration and site preparation techniques for large mall 234–237.
in karst terrain. In: S, N. (ed.) Geotechnical aspects of W, J.H. & V, J.D. 1976. Geological indicators
karst terrains: exploration, foundation design and perform- of catastrophic collapse in karst terrane in Missouri.
ance, and remedial measures, Geotechnical Special Transportation Research Record, 612, 31–37.
Publication, 14. American Society of Civil Engineers, W, W.L. & B, B.F. 1988. Evaluating sinkhole hazard
New York, 86–96. in mantled karst terrane. In: S, M. (ed.) Geotechnical
V C, L. & R M, C. 1999. Geo- aspects of karst terrains: exploration, foundation design and
technical engineering for a highway through cone karst performance, and remedial measures. Geotechnical Special
in Puerto Rico. In: B, B.F., P, A.J. & H, Publication, 14. American Society of Civil Engineers,
J.G. (eds) Hydrology and Engineering Geology of Sink- New York, 1–24.
holes and Karst. Balkema, Rotterdam, 431–445. Z, Z. 1980. Karst types in China. GeoJournal, 4, 541–570.

Received 29 August 2002; accepted 29 April 2003.

View publication stats