Comparison of Automated Image-Based Grain Sizing to Standard Pebble-Count Methods
Publication: Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
Volume 136, Issue 8
Abstract
This study explores the use of an automated image-based method for characterizing grain-size distributions (GSDs) of exposed open-framework gravels by comparing the GSDs measured with the image-based method to distributions obtained with two pebble-count methods. Selection of grains for the two pebble-count methods was carried out using a gridded sampling frame and the heel-to-toe Wolman walk method at six field sites. At each site, 500-particle pebble-count samples were collected with each of the two pebble-count methods and digital images were systematically collected over the same sampling area. For the methods used, pebble counts collected with the gridded sampling frame were assumed to be the most accurate representations of the true grain-size population. Therefore, results from the image-based method were compared to the grid-derived GSDs for accuracy estimates; comparisons between the grid and Wolman walk methods were conducted to give an indication of possible variation between commonly used methods for the particular field sites used in the study. The grain-size comparisons were made at two spatial scales. At the larger scale, results from the image-based method were integrated over the sampling area required to collect the 500-particle pebble-count samples. At the smaller sampling scale, the image derived GSDs were compared to those from 100-particle, pebble-count samples obtained with the gridded sampling frame. The comparison shows that the image-based method performed reasonably well on five of the six study sites. For those five sites, the image-based method slightly underestimated all grain-size percentiles relative to the pebble counts collected with the gridded sampling frame, but the method performed well in estimating the median grain size (the average bias for , , and was , , and , respectively). The Wolman pebble-counts yielded coarser results than the pebble counts obtained with the gridded sampling frame, especially for the smaller percentiles (the average bias for , , and was , , and , respectively). Oversegmentation of large pitted grains in the image-analysis procedures was identified as a leading cause for failure of the image-based method at one of the sites. It is likely that lower degrees of oversegmentation and physical particle orientation contributed to the slight underestimation of all grain-size percentiles in the image-based method.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The writers would like to thank Charles Tamborello, Remya Kumar, Georges Comair, and Channing Santiago for their assistance in data collection and processing. We are also very grateful to Kristin Bunte and two anonymous reviewers who helped to greatly improve the quality of the paper. Funding from National Science Foundation (Award No. NSFEEC-0649163) and the University of Houston New Faculty Research Program are gratefully acknowledged.
References
Baker, V. R. (1977). “Stream-channel response to floods, with examples from central Texas.” Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 88(8), 1057–1071.
Barnard, P. L., Rubin, D. M., Harney, J., and Mustain, N. (2007). “Field test comparison of an autocorrelation technique for determining grain size using a digital ‘beachball’ camera versus traditional methods.” Sediment. Geol., 201, 180–195.
Bunte, K., and Abt, S. R. (2001a). “Sampling frame for improving pebble count accuracy in coarse gravel-bed streams.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 37(4), 1001–1014.
Bunte, K., and Abt, S. R. (2001b). “Sampling surface and subsurface particle-size distributions in wadable gravel- and cobble-bed streams for analyses in sediment transport, hydraulics, and streambed monitoring.” General Technical Rep. No. RMRS-GTP-74, USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colo.
Buscombe, D. (2008). “Estimation of grain-size distributions and associated parameters from digital images of sediment.” Sediment. Geol., 210(1–2), 1–10.
Buscombe, D., and Masselink, G. (2009). “Grain-size information from the statistical properties of digital images of sediment.” Sedimentology, 56(2), 421–438.
Butler, J. B., Lane, S. N., and Chandler, J. H. (2001). “Automated extraction of grain-size data from gravel surfaces using digital image processing.” J. Hydraul. Res., 39(5), 519–529.
Church, M. A., McLean, D. G., and Wolcott, J. F. (1987). “River bed gravels: Sampling and analysis.” C. R. Thorne, J. C. Bathurst, and R. D. Hey, eds., Sediment transport in gravel-bed rivers, Wiley, New York, 43–88.
Crawley, M. J. (2007). The R book, Wiley, New York.
Diplas, P., and Fripp, J. B. (1992). “Properties of various sediment sampling procedures.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 118(7), 955–970.
Diplas, P., and Sutherland, A. J. (1988). “Sampling techniques for gravel size sediments.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 114(5), 484–501.
Graham, D. J., Reid, I., and Rice, S. P. (2005a). “Automated sizing of coarse-grained sediments: Image-processing procedures.” Math. Geol., 37(1), 1–28.
Graham, D. J., Rice, S. P., and Reid, I. (2005b). “A transferable method for the automated grain sizing of river gravels.” Water Resour. Res., 41, W07020.
Green, J. C. (2003). “The precision of sampling grain-size percentiles using the Wolman method.” Earth Surf. Processes Landforms, 28, 979–991.
Hey, R. D., and Thorne, C. R. (1983). “Accuracy of surface samples from gravel bed material.” J. Hydraul. Eng., 109(6), 842–851.
Inman, D. L. (1952). “Measures for describing the size distribution of sediments.” J. Sediment. Petrol., 22(3), 125–145.
Kellerhals, R., and Bray, D. I. (1971). “Sampling procedures for coarse fluvial sediments.” J. Hydr. Div., 97(HY 8), 1165–1180.
Leopold, L. B. (1970). “An improved method for size distribution of stream bed gravel.” Water Resour. Res., 6(5), 1357–1366.
Mabe, J. A. (2007). “Nutrient and biological conditions of selected small streams in the Edwards Plateau, Central Texas, 2005–06, and implications for development of nutrient criteria.” Scientific Investigations Rep. No. 2007-5195, USGS, Reston, Va.
Marcus, W. A., Ladd, S. C., Stoughton, J. A., and Stock, J. W. (1995). “Pebble counts and the role of user-dependent bias in documenting sediment size distributions.” Water Resour. Res., 31(10), 2625–2631.
McEwan, I. K., Sheen, T. M., Cunningham, G. J., and Allen, A. R. (2000). “Estimating the size composition of sediment surfaces through image analysis.” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng., Waters. Maritime Energ., 142, 189–195.
Olsen, D. S., Roper, B. B., Kershner, J. L., Henderson, R., and Archer, E. (2005). “Sources of variability in conducting pebble counts: Their potential influence on the results of stream monitoring programs.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 41(5), 1225–1236.
Rasband, W. (2008). “ImageJ.” U.S. National Institutes of Health, ⟨http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij/⟩ (June 1, 2008).
Rice, S., and Church, M. (1996). “Sampling surface fluvial gravels: The precision of size distribution percentile estimates.” J. Sediment Res., 66(3), 654–665.
Ridler, T., and Calvard, S. (1978). “Picture thresholding using an iterative selection method.” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., SMC-8, 630–632.
Rubin, D. M. (2004). “A simple autocorrelation algorithm for determining grain size from digital images of sediment.” J. Sediment Res., 74(1), 160–165.
Sime, L. C., and Ferguson, R. I. (2003). “Information on grain sizes in gravel-bed rivers by automated image analysis.” J. Sediment Res., 73(4), 630–636.
Sternberg, S. R. (1983). “Biomedical image processing.” Computer, 16(1), 22–34.
Strom, K. B., Hilldale, R. C., and Kuhns, R. D. (2007). “Comparison of grain size distributions derived from digital images to sieve and pebble count derived distributions.” Hydraulic measurements and experimental methods, ASCE/EWRI and IAHR, Lake Placid, N.Y., 415–420.
Wohl, E. E., Anthony, D. J., Madsen, S. W., and Thompson, D. M. (1996). “A comparison of surface sampling methods for coarse fluvial sediments.” Water Resour. Res., 32(10), 3219–3226.
Wolman, M. G. (1954). “A method of sampling coarse river-bed material.” Trans., Am. Geophys. Union, 35(6), 951–956.
Zingg, T. (1935). “Beitrage zur schotteranalyse.” Schweiz. Min. u. Pet. Mitt., 15, 39–140.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2010 ASCE.
History
Received: Nov 26, 2008
Accepted: Dec 26, 2009
Published online: Jan 5, 2010
Published in print: Aug 2010
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.