Hydrodynamic Controls on the Particle Size of Resuspended Sediment from Sandy and Muddy Substrates in British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kassem, H.; Sutherland, T.F., and Amos, C.L., 2021. Hydrodynamic controls on the particle size of resuspended sediment from sandy and muddy substrates in British Columbia, Canada. Journal of Coastal Research, 37(4), 691–707. Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208.A benthic annular flume, Sea Carousel, was deployed at both sand-dominated (Baynes Sound) and mud-dominated (Carrie Bay) stations in British Columbia, Canada, to examine the character of near-bed flow over these contrasting bottom types and its control on particle size of resuspended sediment. An assessment has also been made of the turbidity-induced drag reduction due to suspension of bottom sediments. The median sizes of suspended material from the sandy sites have been compared with the well-known Rouse theory, whereas the aggregates resuspended from muddy stations were scaled with the energy dissipation rate (ε) determined from high-frequency three-dimensional flow measures in the flume. There was no evidence in the turbulence spectra in the Sea Carousel of energy inputs in the paddle and lid rotational frequencies, and a f–5/3 slope for f > 2 Hz in turbulent transitional flows was evident. The bed roughness length of sandy sites was Reynolds-number dependent but was asymptotic to a constant value of 2 mm at high flows. This equated to a dimensionless drag coefficient at 1 m above bed of a constant, 3 × 10–3 (also at high Reynolds numbers), which agrees well with values reported in the literature. The median size of suspended sand (from the sandy sites) and equivalent still water settling rate (ws) scaled with the friction velocity (u*) in the form ws/u* = D*/8. The median size of resuspended aggregates (df) scaled inversely with dissipation (ε) in the form df = 5 × 10–6ε–0.24m, which is close to the relationship found in the literature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".