Sample Pretreatment and Size Analysis of Poorly-Sorted Cohesive Sediments by Sieve and Electronic Particle Counter

  • D. I. Little
  • M. F. Staggs
  • S. S. C. Woodman


Electrical sensing-zone particle counters are being used increasingly by sedimentologists for the particle size analysis of both suspended and deposited sediments, and also for the study of floccu-lation. Flocculation studies, however, are hampered by the effect of aggregate porosity on counter response and suitable corrections for this problem should be made (Treweek and Morgan, 1977). Several comparisons with the standard pipette method (British Standard 1377, 1975) have been made (e.g. Shideler, 1976; Behrens, 1978). Techniques using older and more recent instruments, usually based on the analysis of very small samples, have been presented and evaluated (e.g. Sheldon and Parsons, 1967; Walker et al., 1974; Dudley, 1977). Comparatively little has been written about the problems of sample pretreatment and particle size analysis of deposited cohesive sediments using the relatively low-cost Coulter Counter® Model D Industrial» This stems partly from the fact that some controversy still surrounds the use of electronic particle counters in sedimentology. This controversy relates mainly to the pretreatment of the sample and the artificial nature of the experimental system, both of which substantially alter the aggregated character of the mud.


Sample Pretreatment Particle Counter Sand Fraction Coulter Counter Cohesive Sediment 
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. Avery, B. W., 1974, Introduction, in: “Soil Survey Laboratory Methods, Soil Survey Technical Monograph No. 6, B. W. Avery and C. L. Bascomb, eds,, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden.Google Scholar
  2. Behrens, E. W., 1978, Further comparisons of grain size distributions determined by electronic particle counting and pipette techniques, J. Sed, Pet., 48: 1213.Google Scholar
  3. Belderson, R. H., 1964, Holocene sedimentation in the western half of the Irish Sea, Mar. Geol., 2: 147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. British Standard 1377, 1975, “Methods of Test for Soils for Civil Engineering Purposes,” British Standards Institution, London.Google Scholar
  5. Buller, A. T. and McManus, J., 1979, Sediment sampling and analysis, in: “Estuarine Hydrography and Sedimentation,” K. R. Dyer, ed., Estuarine and Brackish Water Sciences Association, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Coulter Electronics Ltd., 1976, “Instruction Manual for Coulter Counter® Model D (Industrial),” 4th edition, Harpenden.Google Scholar
  7. Dudley, R. J., 1977, The particle size analysis of soils and its use in forensic science: the determination of particle size distributions within the silt and sand fractions, J. Forens. Sci. Soc, 16: 219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kelley, J. C. and McManus, D. A., 1970, Hierarchical analysis of variance of shelf sediment texture, J. Sed. Pet., 40: 1335.Google Scholar
  9. Krumbein, W. C., 1936, Application of logarithmic moments to size frequency distributions of sediments. J. Sed. Pet., 6: 35.Google Scholar
  10. McCave, J. M. and Jarvis, J., 1973, Use of the Model T Coulter Counter® in size analysis of fine to coarse sand, Sedimentology, 20: 305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Meddis, R., 1975, “A Statistical Handbook for Non-Statisticians,” McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead.Google Scholar
  12. Sheldon, R. W. and Parsons, T. R., 1967, “A Practical Manual on the Use of the Coulter Counter® in Marine Science,” Coulter Electronics Sales Co., Canada.Google Scholar
  13. Shideler, G. L., 1976, A comparison of electronic particle counting and pipette techniques in routine mud analysis, J. Sed. Pet., 46: 1017.Google Scholar
  14. Swift, D. J. P., Schubel, J. R. and Sheldon, R. W., 1972, Size analysis of fine-grained suspended sediments: a review. J. Sed. Pet., 42: 122.Google Scholar
  15. Till, R., 1974, “Statistical Methods for the Earth Scientist,” MacMillan, London.Google Scholar
  16. Treweek, G. P. and Morgan, J. J., 1977, Size distributions of flocculated particles: application of electronic particle counters, Environ. Sci, and Tech., 11: 707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Walker, P. H., Woodyer, K. D. and Hutka, J., 1974, Particle size measurements by Coulter Counter® of very small deposits and low suspended sediment concentrations in streams,.J. Sed. Pet., 44: 673.Google Scholar
  18. Zeichner, G. R. and Schowalter, W. R., 1977, Use of trajectory analysis to study stability of colloidal suspensions in flow fields, A.I.Ch.E. Journal, 23: 243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. I. Little
    • 1
  • M. F. Staggs
    • 1
  • S. S. C. Woodman
    • 1
  1. 1.Field Studies Council Oil Pollution Research UnitOrielton Field CentrePembroke, DyfedUK

Personalised recommendations