Julian Cope presents Head Heritage | The Modern Antiquarian Forum

nigelswift

8112 posts

Re: Silbury's structural integrity

Aug 09, 2007, 07:38

Well I'm very glad some real details have come out and particularly that at last, at last, the size of the known voids has been released for the very first time.

As has been said though its not the full story of the degree to which the hill is in trouble as for every cubic metre of voiding there is the danger of additional collapse in weakened layers above it (since it has always been accepted that the voids can't be fully filled and the fill will slump anyway). An estimate of the total likely loss, and over what time period, and whether it will reach the surface, is what most people would wish to know and IMO its something they are owed urgently. Just the working estimate, nothing more.

I don't think comparing the size of the voids with the size of the hill as a means to illustrate how small they are is valid. After all, that could have been done with regard to the anticipated voids if the hill had been left alone to settle naturally. That damage also would be small compared with the whole hill.

As I understand it, before the project started, at risk in the inner mound was just 38 cubic metres, and in the rest was 1715 cubic metres, both over as very very long period. Bearing in mind the inner mound was said to be the most precious and delicate and sensitive to water I wonder what effect a central collapse of a saturated 125 cubic metres has had upon it.

I also wonder about the amount of damage that is yet to come as a direct result of the work - will it be greater since new supports are to be inserted? And will it be greater because of the saturated condition of the chalk and clay? Yes to both, surely? But I doubt a clear answer can be known since from the start it was said "No prediction can be made for the amount of unintentional damage that might occur (through collapse caused by work disturbance)”. That always struck us as indicating a leap in the dark. I can hardly think it isn't even more so now.

In reply to:
Re: Silbury's structural integrity (Littlestone)

Replies:
Re: Silbury's structural integrity (Littlestone)

The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Silbury Hill » Silbury's structural integrity	Log In to post a reply

148 messages	Topic View: Flat \| Threaded