Geo-Marine Letters

, Volume 11, Issue 3–4, pp 174–178 | Cite as

Consolidation and erosion of deposited cohesive sediments in Northern Chesapeake Bay, USA

  • Jeffrey Halka
  • William Panageotou
  • Lawrence Sanford


Deposits of dredged cohesive sediments were monitored for changes in volume, bulk characteristics, and susceptibility to resuspension and erosion at disposal sites in Chesapeake Bay. There is a 23–48% volume reduction during the first six months, with correspondingly greater changes over longer time periods. A bulk density increase from 1.15 to 1.3 g/cm3 due to dewatering and compaction accounts for the majority of the volume change. Tidal current induced resuspension is a minor process. The observed suspended sediment load can be accounted for by erosion of only a fraction of a millimeter of sediment on each tidal cycle.


Disposal Site Turbidity Maximum Cohesive Sediment Disposal Area Bottom Shear Stress 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bennett RH and Lambert DV, 1971. Rapid and reliable technique for determining unit weight and porosity of deep-sea sediments.Marine Geology 11:201–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Department of the Army, 1984. Shore Protection Manual. U.S. Army Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Coastal Engineering Research Center.Google Scholar
  3. Maa PY and Mehta AJ, 1987. Mud erosion by waves: A laboratory study.Continental Shelf Research 7:1269–1284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Nichols MM, 1984. Effects of fine sediment resuspension in estuaries. In: Mehta AH (Ed.), Estuarine cohesive sediment dynamics. Proceedings of a Workshop on Cohesive Sediment Dynamics, Tampa, Florida. Springer-Verlag, New York. 5–42.Google Scholar
  5. Panageotou WP and Halka JP, 1990. Monitoring of sediments dredged from the approach channel to the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. Maryland Geological Survey Open File Report 10, 70 pp.Google Scholar
  6. Sanford L, Panageotou, WP, and Halka JP, 1991. Tidal resuspension of sediments in northern Chesapeake Bay.Marine Geology 97:87–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Schubel JR, 1971. Tidal variation of the size distribution of suspended sediment at a station in the Chesapeake Bay turbidity maximum.Netherlands Journal of Sea Research 4:283–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeffrey Halka
    • 1
  • William Panageotou
    • 1
  • Lawrence Sanford
    • 2
  1. 1.Maryland Department of Natural ResourcesMaryland Geological SurveyBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, Horn Point Environmental LaboratoriesUniversity of Maryland SystemCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations