Brodsky 1

Analysis of Sediment Particles and Sector of the Beach

Matt Brodsky

Abstract
Sand is found all over the world and there are many minerals which contribute to
its composition. Each of these minerals tend to have different sediment particle sizes.
Sediments are spread throughout the beach by wind and the longshore transport, and
certain types are more easily spread than others. The mass of sediment is measured in
grams (g). On September 24, 2018, MATES students went to various sites along 8th
Street Beach to collect sediment samples. A sieve was needed to separate the sediment
particles. The mass of each specified sediment type varied based on the sample site on the
beach. A series of ANOVAs were run to compare the masses of specified sediment from
the foreshore, backshore, and toe of the beach. Due to the significance produced between
the values, a Post-Hoc Tukey HSD Test was used for furthermore statistical analyzation.

Introduction
Sand is composed of silicon dioxide in the form of quartz (Krestemi 2002).
Besides SiO2, there are other compounds and elements found in sand including : NaCl
(due to seaspray evaporation) and CaCO3 (biogenic sands from shells of bivalves)
(University of Hawai’i-Manoa 2018). Each of these particles are all different sizes. To
determine the size of the sediment particle, the Wentworth scale is utilized. This can be
applied to sieving techniques and which particles belong in the corresponding disk
(Kitchen 2014). A sieve pan contains a mesh bottom that can filter and separate the
sediment particles into size groups. Although beaches are typically uniform in
composition, all of the particles vary in size. The three main parts of a beach are its
foreshore, near the ocean; midshore, the middle of the beach; and the backshore, the area
in front of the dunes(University of Hawai’i-Manoa 2018). Sand composition tends to
vary depending on these sites as the foreshore is the only location constantly affected by
the tides and oceanic erosion. The collection of sand sediment samples was carried out by
the use of a hand auger. By twisting and pushing down on the handle, soil below the
surface gets caught in the metal tube (Kitchen 2014). Once the sediment is collected, any
parameter can be observed or calculated. To determine the mass of the sediment, an
analytical balance was used. Prior to every measurement, it was required for it to be
 Brodsky 2

calibrated to reduce error. This study was conducted to determine if there is a correlation
between the percent composition of very fine particles and location on the beach.

Methods
Study Site:
On September 24, 2018, MATES students went to three sites along the 8th Street
beach in Long Beach Island, New Jersey (Figure 1). At these sites, the students also
selected areas on the foreshore, nearshore, and backshore to collect soil samples. Two
days later, the students analyzed the sample in a laboratory at MATES in Manahawkin,
New Jersey.

Procedure:
On September 24, 2018, MATES students from the Oceanography class went to
collect beach soil samples from various sites along the 8th Street Beach in Long Beach
Island, New Jersey (Figure 1) .Students selected three starting points perpendicular to the
Atlantic Ocean to collect beach soil samples. Three samples were collected from the
backshore, foreshore, and nearshore. To collect these samples, the students utilized a
hand auger (Figure 3). Once all of the sediment samples were collected, the students
returned to MATES so they could be dried overnight. In addition to this initial drying
procedure, the sediment samples were dried in an oven at 140 °C. The analyzation of the
soils had a specific process. First, approximately of 100 grams of the soil had to be placed
into a weigh boat. Next, the measured sediment was placed into a series of sieve pans
(Figure 2), which would separate the particles depending on the sieve pan number
(10,30,40,60,70,140,>140). To assist in the separate, the students utilized a RoTap
Cascade Shaker for 3 minutes to help disperse the sediment. After the completion of this,
the students separated each sieve pan and measured the mass of the sediment contained in
that pan. The mass values were then analyzed.
 Brodsky 3

Statistical Analysis:
A series of regression tests and an ANOVA (single factor) was used to determine
any correlations between the collected data points. An alpha value of 0.05 was used to
determine if there was any significance between the parameters. A Post-Hoc Tukey HSD
Test would be needed if the data was found to be significant (Table 1).

Results
The mass values from the coarse sieve pans were compared with the mass values
of the fine and medium pans (Figure 4). For the mass from the coarse pan, the lowest
mass was 2.388 g from the toe of Site 2 and the highest mass was 23.755g from the
foreshore of Site 1. For the mass from the medium sieve pans, the highest mass was
95.723 g from the toe of Site 2 and the lowest mass was 75.892 g from the foreshore of
Site 1. For the mass from the fine pan, the lowest mass was 0.797 g from the foreshore of
Site 1 and the highest mass was 2.951 g from the foreshore of Site 3. An ANOVA was
run on these values, producing a significance value of less than 0.01, showing there was a
significance between the data. Separate ANOVA tests were run to compare each location
of the beach. They were all significant for the foreshore, backshore, and toe. A Post-Hoc
Tukey HSD Test was also conducted due to the significance between the data (Table 1).
It verified all of the data had a significant difference between each other.

Discussion
These results show that different locations on the beach have varying sediment
size compositions. When an ANOVA was ran on all of the masses of sand falling under
the categories of very fine, medium, and coarse, a significant difference could be found.
Although all of the values ranged, there should have been a similar composition of sand
for every sampling site. There are several possible reasons why this occurred. During the
summer and autumn of 2018, there had been a beach replenishment project to assist in the
creation of dunes (US Army Corp of Engineers 2018). This causes sediment from the
 Brodsky 4

deeper ocean to be exposed to the current sediment, possibly skewing the results.Wind
erosion occurs quite frequently, which causes sediment particles to be transferred across
the beach (Krestemi 2002). Another possible reason is that there was an error while
calculating the mass of the sediment collected from the sieve container. The sampling
method was flawed as the students were missing critical data values. In addition to this,
the analytical balance may not have been calibrated correctly. The data should not have
been significant at all. However, significance was found between the values. After
analyzing the data, it can be concluded that very fine sediment particles are dispersed
evenly throughout the beach, while coarse and medium sized sediments have a larger
presence on the backshore and toe (Figures 5-7). A larger sample size and improved
sampling methods would produce more effective results.

Conclusion
The values calculated for the masses of sediments collected from the coarse,
medium, and fine sieve pans showed major variation contingent on where they were
located sitewise. However when all of the data was compared, there was a significance
between the masses contingent on the location. The information from this study can be
used in estimating the composition of beach sediment particle size based on sample site
location.

Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Dr. Wnek for supplying me with all of the previously collected data.
and for assisting in the process of writing this field report. I would also like to thank the MATES
alumni for collecting all of the data so it could be used for this report. My final thanks goes out
to MATES for giving the students access to the proper field equipment so that the data could be
calculated properly.
 Brodsky 5

References

Kitchen, T. (2014). SIEVE ANALYSIS. Retrieved October 15, 2018, from

http://chem.engr.utc.edu/Webres/435F/sieve/sieve.HTML

Krestemi, R. E. (2002). Silt - Clay - Mud - Sand - Soil: What Is The Difference? Retrieved

October 15, 2018, from http://kremesti.com/water/silt_clay_mud.htm

University of Hawaii-Manoa. (2018). Exploring Our Fluid Earth. Retrieved October 15, 2018,

from https://manoa.hawaii.edu/exploringourfluidearth/physical/coastal-

interactions/beaches-and-sand

US Army Corp of Engineers. (2018). Long Beach Island Project Status. Retrieved October

15, 2018, from http://www.nap.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/Long-Beach-Island-

Storm-Damage-Reduction/
 Brodsky 6

Figure 1: The sampling sites were along the 8th Street Beach on Long Beach Island, New
Jersey. MATES students collected samples from the foreshore, backshore, and toe of the beach. Commented [1]: Provide a date of the sampling
 Brodsky 7

Figure 2: An example of a sieve used for the Figure 3: A hand auger was used to
study. There were several sieve pans used collect sediment from the beach.
including #30, #40, #60, #70, and #140.

Figure 4: All of the masses of the collected sediment Figure 5: The masses from the foreshore were
types were tabulated. The medium sediment was most compared. It is predominantly sediment of
prominently found in the samples, resulting in the large the medium size. When an ANOVA was run
presence. The ANOVA used to calculate the significance on the data, it produced a p value less than 0.01.
stated that the p-value was less than 0.01, resulting in the
need for a Post-Hoc Tukey HSD Test, which verified that
all of the data had a significant difference with each other.
 Brodsky 8

Figure 6: The backshore masses were compared an most Figure 7: The toe sediment samples were mainly

of its composition was medium sized sediment particles. comprised of medium sized particles. There was
This is due to the larger sediment particles near the dunes. a significant difference between the values (p<0.01).
All of the data had a significant difference (p<0.01).

Table 1: A Post-Hoc Tukey HSD Test was conducted on the larger data set due to the calculated significance
from the ANOVA. The Tukey Test verified that there was a significant difference between all of the data points

treatments Tukey HSD Tukey HSD Tukey HSD

pair Q statistic p-value inference

A vs B 47.0916 0.0010053 ** p<0.01

A vs C 5.6951 0.001376 ** p<0.01

B vs C 52.7866 0.0010053 ** p<0.01

Good job. Overall, you’ve earned 39 out of 40 points

Brodsky 9