Abstract
ABSTRACT Five methods for estimating the surface areas of river rocks were compared. True surface area was assumed to be estimated most accurately by wrapping the rock in a single layer of aluminum foil. Foil weight and tracing methods provided the closest estimates of true area. A volume displacement method was a poor estimator of area. A caliper method always underestimated true area, although the caliper method was fastest and could be completed in situ. Predictive relationships were established between true area and caliper method estimates for rocks from two rivers with distinctly different rocky substrates.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
