2005
DOI: 10.1007/s00603-005-0044-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of Fragmentation Measurements by Photographic and Image Analysis Techniques

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Clasts were manually outlined from each mosaic in a drafting program to differentiate between clast and matrix, producing a black (clast) and white (matrix) image. Manual outlining was required because the gray scale separation between clasts and matrix was commonly too small to accurately distinguish them using image analysis software [e.g., Sudhakar et al , 2006]. The outlines were analyzed with NIH ImageJ for clast count, area, circularity, and boundary shape.…”
Section: Fractal Analysis Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Clasts were manually outlined from each mosaic in a drafting program to differentiate between clast and matrix, producing a black (clast) and white (matrix) image. Manual outlining was required because the gray scale separation between clasts and matrix was commonly too small to accurately distinguish them using image analysis software [e.g., Sudhakar et al , 2006]. The outlines were analyzed with NIH ImageJ for clast count, area, circularity, and boundary shape.…”
Section: Fractal Analysis Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some scholars compared fragmentation measurements using photographic and image analysis techniques on the actual images of fragments. They found that the photographic method was time-consuming, and manual editing was required to improve the accuracy of the image processing method [25]. The image analysis approaches could reach a satisfactory accuracy via comparisons with calculations from manual outlining and measurement [23][24][25].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…e fracture of intact rock mass is the main goal of bench blasting; therefore, macrofragmentation energy is the most typically used index to evaluate the utilization efficiency of explosive energy, which depends on the specific surface energy and the new surface area of rock fragments [7]. e surface area of fragments is difficult to measure; currently, it is generally assumed that the fragments are spherical or cubic particles [8], and the fragment size distribution (FSD) is obtained by a prediction algorithm [9] or photogrammetry [10]; then, the surface area can be calculated. Compared with the shape assumption, the specific surface area can better reflect the relationship between sieve size and rock fragment shape as well as yield more accurate measurements of macrofragmentation energy [11,12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%