The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The shape of rock particles, a critical review
Abstract
An attempt was made to distinguish aspects of the shape of rock particles, and to discover by analysis and empirical considerations the most appropriate parameters for describing these aspects. The shape of a rock particle can be expressed in terms of three independent properties: form (overall shape), roundness (large‐scale smoothness) and surface texture. These form a three‐tiered hierarchy of observational scale, and of response to geological processes. Form can be represented by only two independent measures from the three orthogonal axes normally measured. Of the four pairs of independent measures commonly used for bivariate plots, the two sphericity/shape factor pairs appear to be more efficient discriminators than simple axial ratios. Of the two, the most desirable pair is the maximum projection sphericity and oblate‐prolate index for both measures show an arithmetic normal distribution for the range investigated. A measure of form that is independent of the three orthogonal axes, and measures derived from them, is the angularity measure of Lees. Roundness has measures of three types, those estimating average roundness of corners, those based on the sharpest corner, and a measure of convexity in the particle outline. Although each type measures a different aspect, they are not independent of each other. Only roundness from corners is considered in detail. As neither average nor sharpest corner measures are inherently more objective or more quantitative, purpose should determine which is more appropriate. Of the visual comparison charts for average roundness, Krumbein's appears best. The Modified Wentworth roundness is the most satisfactory for estimating roundness from the sharpest corner. The Cailleux Roundness index should not be used because it includes aspects of roundness and form. Shape is a difficult parameter to use for solving sedimentological problems. Even the best of the commonly used procedures are limited by observational subjectivity and a low discriminating power. Unambiguous interpretation of particle shape in terms of source material and processes will always be made difficult by the large number of natural variables and their interactions. For ancient sediments satisfactory results can be expected only from carefully planned studies or rather unusual geological situations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
An investigation of single sand particle fracture using X-ray micro-tomography
Zhao, B., Wang, J., Coop, M. R., Viggiani, G., & JIANG, M. (2015) · Géotechnique · doi:10.1680/geot.4.p.157 · Cited by 360
(2008) · doi:10.1061/(asce)0893-1321(2008)21:4(272
Metadata
- Authors
- BARRETT, P. J.
- Venue
- Sedimentology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1980-06
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 291-303
- ISSN
- 0037-0746 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-3091
- OpenAlex
- W2023450509
- Cited by
- 702
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The shape of rock particles, a critical review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-3091.1980.tb01179.x
- The paper
- BARRETT, P. J. (1980). The shape of rock particles, a critical review. Sedimentology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3091.1980.tb01179.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.