4.6 Article

Evaluation of engineering-geological conditions for conurbation of Ostrava (Czech Republic) within GIS environment

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL EARTH SCIENCES
Volume 67, Issue 4, Pages 1007-1022

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12665-012-1547-9

Keywords

Relative cost map; Engineering geology; Workability; Flood; Radon hazard; Geo; factors; Conurbation of Ostrava

Funding

  1. Czech Science Foundation [GACR-205/07/1313]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The main aim of the presented study was to create a new type of engineering-geological maps for relative costs for foundation engineering. The newly proposed map in this paper can replace the formerly used maps of the suitability for foundation engineering which shows only the suitable and/or unsuitable sites and suggests the use of suitable areas for construction only. However, there are developed technologies that they can overcome the potential problems in unsuitable areas by relatively high costs. It means that unsuitable areas can also be used as construction areas. Therefore, the use of the newly proposed map of relative costs, which reflects the complexity of geo-factors by proportional category of larger, or smaller relative costs is satisfactory. Another part of this research was to assess various geo-factors (engineering-geological zones, workability of rocks, pre-Quaternary bedrock, flood land, radon hazard, mining subsidence and slope movements), which affect the foundation of future buildings. This study was carried out in the large industrial city of Ostrava in the Czech Republic with complicated engineering geological conditions and high anthropogenic influence factors including undermining. The use of complicated relationships is also generally difficult to be taken into account by the planners. Therefore, the use of the newly created synthetic map by planners is simple; even planners who are not geologists will be able to apply it easily.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available