Geotechnical News September 2011
43
BOOK REVIEWS
This is an absolutely fascinating
book on the early history of geotech-
nology, from 1922 to 1961, as seen
through the written words of Rudolp
Glossop and his contributions to the
growth of geotechnics. The book is
compiled from selected extracts from
Glossop’s journals, diaries and let-
ters and includes correspondence with
Bjerrum, Skempton and Terzaghi. It
starts in 1922, when Glossop did sum-
mer field work at the old Levant mine
near Land’s End, through to 1961 when
his diaries cover issues associated with
the construction of the Derwent Dam in
N.E. England.
Glossop graduated as a mining engi-
neer from the Royal School of Mines in
1924. In his early years he worked with
mining companies in Canada (1924-
1930) and the Gold Coast (1933-37)
and a short introduction to civil engi-
neering working on the construction
of the Leicester Square underground
station in (1930-32). Glossop joined
Mowlem in 1937 to manage their part-
nership with Siemens. It is a joy to read
his words, which often cover the con-
tractual and people issues associated
with engineering works. Skempton,
in his obituary of Glossop, refers to:
works of original scholarship, writ-
ten with the clarity and style of which
Glossop was a master - by his own ex-
ample and by the example of others,
he never lost sight of the importance
of bringing together the practical and
academic aspects of both geology and
soil mechanics”.
Some examples: Glossop describes
his summer assignment at the Levant
Mine in 1922 near Land’s End:
“but if
the place was beautiful, working con-
ditions, both on surface and under-
ground, were primitive in the extreme,
for mining at Levant started in 1820
and in 1922 machinery and methods
had not changed very much”.
His de-
scription of using wooden ladders to
climb down and up about 1000 feet
to the mine workings are captivating
and could be well used in the setting
to a mystery novel. In 1931 he writes
about the challenges of finding work in
London following the financial crash,
which curtailed his dreams of complet-
ing a doctorate at Harvard. Glossop de-
scribes his interview with the general
foreman of Brand’s, another UK con-
struction company. He was offered a
job for 3 GB pounds a week to work as
a miner’s labourer.
For a young Eng-
lish engineer to have accepted such an
offer would, in those days, have been
unthinkable, but after my years in Can-
ada I was free from such snobbery”.
Flash forward to 1961. At this time,
Glossop is a director of Mowlems
(Soil Mechanics Ltd). There are dif-
ficulties with the construction of the
Derwent Dam in N.E. England. Bore-
holes put down by Soil Mechanics Ltd
at the start of the contract showed a
geological section markedly different
from that communicated in the con-
tract documents. This was brought to
the attention of the Engineer and the
significance with respect to ground
water lowering. The construction pro-
gramme envisaged by the Engineer
could not be carried out and work was
disrupted for over a year. The client
had retained Peter Rowe to carry out a
detailed analysis of the pumping tests.
Glossop writes:
“Rowe’s report pur-
ports to demonstrate that all pumping
tests show that Soil Mechanics Ltd’s
view of the geology of the site are ir-
relevant, and that as regards response
to pumping from wells, the ground-
water behaves as might be expected
from the study shown on the contract
drawings”.
Soil Mechanics Ltd. pre-
pared their report with the assistance
of Skempton. Glossop describes the
meeting in September 1961, at which
Rowe and Skempton were present to
discuss the implications of these re-
ports. He writes;
“although I believe
we somewhat weakened Rowe’s posi-
tion, the fact remains that our views
were not wholly accepted. If their views
prevail, the consequences to us will be
grave indeed. To sum up, the post-con-
tractual causes of our troubles are, in
my opinion due to:
1. The fact that the Engineer will not
accept that his original site inves-
tigation was badly done, and that
the whole work has been disrupted,
largely at our expense, for a year.
2. We have followed a policy of ap-
peasement and failed to press home
our advantage a year ago by invok-
ing Clause 12(2). Our position is
now no stronger than it was then
and it is harder for the Engineer
to retreat, for about 250 000 GP
pounds has been frittered away in
the meantime.
3. We may have lost the confidence of
the Engineer by not accepting his
invitation to collaborate with him.
Glossop continues by recommend-
ing future action by John Mowlem &
Co. Ltd. and measures to prevent a re-
occurrence of such a situation.
The book is only 280 pages, which
includes selected writings and letters.
The editor, Ronald E. Williams, has
carefully selected Glossop’s words.
In today’s world of computers and in-
stant communications, and of so called
“standard project reporting systems”,
Glossop’s writings are a classic ex-
ample on what is required in preparing
project diaries and as-built reports. I
was fortunate to receive a copy of this
book from John Dunnicliff – I heart-
edly thank him. What a great read -
highly recommended for all engineers
– regardless of where or for whom they
work.
John Gadsby, Vancouver, Canada.
Published by: Whittles Publishing;
Dunbeath, Scotland. Available on
Amazon.ca for about $60.00.
What a great
read - highly
recommended
for all engineers
– regardless of
where or for
whom they work.
