{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0186219739292365, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00186219739292365, 'mean_word_length': 6.196428571428571, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A comparison of grain‐size analysis methods for sand‐dominated fluvial sediments

Grain‐size distribution is a fundamental tool for interpreting sedimentary units within depositional systems. The techniques assessed in this study are commonly used to determine grain‐size distributions for sand‐dominated sediments. However, the degree of consistency and differences in interpretation when using a combination of grain‐size methods have not yet been assessed systematically for sand‐dominated fluvial sediments. Results obtained from laser diffraction, X‐ray attenuation and scanning electron microscopy grain‐size analysis techniques were compared with those obtained from the traditional sieve/hydrometer method. Scanning electron microscopy was shown to provide an inaccurate quantitative analysis of grain‐size distributions because of difficulties in obtaining representative samples for examination. The X‐ray attenuation method is unsuitable for sand‐dominated sediments because of its upper size range of only 300 μm. The consistently strong correlation between the laser diffraction results and the sieve/hydrometer results shows that these methods are comparable for sand‐dominated fluvial sediments. Provided that sample preparation is consistent, the latter two methods can be used together within a study of such sediments while maintaining a high degree of accuracy. These results indicate that data for sand‐dominated fluvial sediments gained from the long‐established sieve/hydrometer method can be compared with confidence to those obtained by modern studies using laser diffraction techniques.