pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.03700 · v1 · pith:4YPWN42Bnew · submitted 2019-06-30 · ❄️ cond-mat.soft · physics.flu-dyn

Consolidation of freshly deposited cohesive and non-cohesive sediment: particle-resolved simulations

Bernhard Vowinckel , Edward Biegert , Paolo Luzzatto-Fegiz , Eckart Meiburg This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 12:12 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.soft physics.flu-dyn
keywords sediment consolidationGibson equationparticle-resolved simulationcohesive sedimentnon-cohesive sedimentimmersed boundary methodeffective stressself-weight consolidation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Particle-resolved simulations yield a complete parameterization of the Gibson equation for sediment consolidation from first principles.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The authors perform direct Navier-Stokes simulations that resolve individual particles to study how freshly deposited cohesive and non-cohesive sediments consolidate under their own weight. They derive the stress balance of the fluid-particle mixture directly from the governing equations and connect it to the classical effective stress concept. The resulting datasets allow every term in the balance to be evaluated, producing a full parameterization of the Gibson equation without any fitted constants. A reader would care because this replaces empirical models with predictions based only on material properties for applications such as riverbed formation or waste settling.

Core claim

The simulation results yield a complete parameterization of the Gibson equation, which has been the method of choice to analyze self-weight consolidation. We obtain the stress balance of the fluid-particle mixture from first principles and link it to the classical effective stress concept. The detailed datasets obtained from our simulations allow us to evaluate all terms of the derived stress balance. We compare the settling of cohesive sediment to its non-cohesive counterpart, which corresponds to the settling of the individual primary particles.

What carries the argument

Immersed Boundary Method particle-resolved direct Navier-Stokes simulations that compute the mixture stress balance term by term from resolved particle-fluid interactions.

If this is right

  • The Gibson equation receives a full set of coefficients directly from the simulation data for both sediment types.
  • Every term in the derived stress balance can be computed individually from the resolved flow and particle fields.
  • Cohesive particles produce different settling and consolidation behavior than non-cohesive primary particles because of aggregation captured at the particle scale.
  • The effective-stress concept emerges directly from the first-principles stress balance without additional assumptions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The calibration-free approach could be applied to predict consolidation under varying fluid salinities or temperatures by changing only the input material properties.
  • Coupling these self-weight results with external shear flows would connect consolidation models to sediment-transport problems in rivers and coasts.
  • The same simulation framework might generate parameterizations for other particle-laden flows such as slurries or avalanches where effective-stress concepts are used.
  • Direct comparison of the simulated stress profiles against high-resolution X-ray or acoustic measurements in lab columns would provide a stringent test of the first-principles link.

Load-bearing premise

The simulations, when parameterized solely by material properties, correctly reproduce the physical interactions that govern real sediment consolidation.

What would settle it

Laboratory settling-column experiments on freshly deposited cohesive or non-cohesive sediment whose measured consolidation rates and stress profiles deviate from the Gibson-equation parameters extracted from the simulations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.03700 by Bernhard Vowinckel, Eckart Meiburg, Edward Biegert, Paolo Luzzatto-Fegiz.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. DLVO curve for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Initial settling behavior at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Schematic of the control volumes for (a) the particle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Particle configurations during the settling process. (a) Co = 0 and (b) Co = 5. The color scheme reflects the vertical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Zoom into the lower third of the domain with settling [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: figure 6. Figure 6 shows the number of settling parti [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. a) Number of settling particles ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Contours of the horizontally-averaged particle volume fraction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. (a) Vertical stress distributions reflecting the configurations illustrated in Figure 4; (b) Permeability [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Zoom into the horizontally averaged interparticle stress at the time when [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We analyze the consolidation of freshly deposited cohesive and non-cohesive sediment by means of particle-resolved direct Navier-Stokes simulations based on the Immersed Boundary Method. The computational model is parameterized by material properties and does not involve any arbitrary calibrations. We obtain the stress balance of the fluid-particle mixture from first principles and link it to the classical effective stress concept. The detailed datasets obtained from our simulations allow us to evaluate all terms of the derived stress balance. We compare the settling of cohesive sediment to its non-cohesive counterpart, which corresponds to the settling of the individual primary particles. The simulation results yield a complete parameterization of the Gibson equation, which has been the method of choice to analyze self-weight consolidation.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents particle-resolved direct Navier-Stokes simulations using the immersed boundary method to study consolidation of freshly deposited cohesive and non-cohesive sediment. The computational model is parameterized exclusively by material properties with no arbitrary calibrations. The authors derive the fluid-particle mixture stress balance from first principles, connect it to the classical effective-stress concept, evaluate every term in the balance using the simulation datasets, compare cohesive versus non-cohesive settling, and extract a complete parameterization of the Gibson equation for self-weight consolidation analysis.

Significance. If the central claims are substantiated, the work would supply a first-principles route to the constitutive relations required by the Gibson equation, a standard tool for analyzing self-weight consolidation in geotechnical and environmental engineering. Direct evaluation of all stress-balance terms and the absence of fitting parameters would strengthen the physical basis of the model and allow systematic comparison of cohesive and non-cohesive regimes. Such a parameterization could reduce reliance on empirical coefficients and improve predictive capability for sediment behavior.

minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract is information-dense; breaking the description of the stress-balance derivation and the Gibson parameterization into separate sentences would improve immediate readability.
  2. Notation for the mixture stress components and effective stress should be introduced with explicit definitions at first use to avoid ambiguity for readers outside the immediate subfield.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of the manuscript, the accurate summary of our contributions, and the recommendation for minor revision. The significance assessment aligns with the goals of providing a first-principles parameterization of the Gibson equation via particle-resolved simulations.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The derivation obtains the mixture stress balance from first principles via IBM particle-resolved DNS, evaluates all terms directly from the simulation data, and extracts constitutive relations for the Gibson equation without any indicated fitting of outputs to themselves or load-bearing self-citations. The model is stated to be parameterized solely by material properties with no arbitrary calibrations, making the parameterization an output of the first-principles computation rather than a reduction to inputs by construction. No self-definitional, fitted-prediction, or ansatz-smuggling steps are present in the abstract or described chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; ledger populated from stated claims. Model uses material properties as inputs; no ad-hoc constants mentioned.

axioms (2)
  • standard math Navier-Stokes equations govern the fluid motion around particles
    Basis for the direct numerical simulations described in the abstract.
  • domain assumption Immersed Boundary Method correctly enforces no-slip conditions at particle surfaces
    Method chosen for the particle-resolved simulations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5660 in / 1186 out tokens · 27935 ms · 2026-05-25T12:12:54.260373+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel echoes
    ?
    echoes

    ECHOES: this paper passage has the same mathematical shape or conceptual pattern as the Recognition theorem, but is not a direct formal dependency.

    The computational model is parameterized by material properties and does not involve any arbitrary calibrations. ... The simulation results yield a complete parameterization of the Gibson equation

  • IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction echoes
    ?
    echoes

    ECHOES: this paper passage has the same mathematical shape or conceptual pattern as the Recognition theorem, but is not a direct formal dependency.

    We obtain the stress balance of the fluid-particle mixture from first principles and link it to the classical effective stress concept. ... evaluate all terms of the derived stress balance

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

80 extracted references · 80 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The collective motion of a sediment bed sheared by a viscous flow was compared to the experi- mental data of [54] and we found satisfactory agreement

    and [53]. The collective motion of a sediment bed sheared by a viscous flow was compared to the experi- mental data of [54] and we found satisfactory agreement. B. Particle-particle Interaction We use the computational approach of Biegert et al

    work page

  2. [2]

    This reference provides validation results for var- ious benchmark experiments

    for modeling cohesionless particle-particle interac- tions. This reference provides validation results for var- ious benchmark experiments. In addition, the present study employs the cohesive force model proposed and val- idated by Vowinckel et al. [45]. The particle-particle in- teraction comprises short-range effects due to unresolved hydrodynamic lubric...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Here, we choose the salinity of sea water with 35ppt

    as κ = 0.304·10−9m−1 |z|√Csalt in meters, where z is the va- lency of the salt and Csalt is the salt concentration in mol/liter. Here, we choose the salinity of sea water with 35ppt. These parameters yield Csalt = 0.6mol/liter and κ = 0.393nm; (v) Since a key feature of our model is to have vanishing forces for particle contact, i.e. ζn = 0, we set AR = A...

    work page

  4. [4]

    As time progresses the impact of cohesive forces on the settling behavior becomes evident (figure 4 att = 240τs)

    and Winterwerp [14]. As time progresses the impact of cohesive forces on the settling behavior becomes evident (figure 4 att = 240τs). The cohesive sediment starts to built aggregates as parti- cles attach to each other once they come into close enough contact. The flocculation process is exemplified in figure 5, which shows a zoom into figure 4b at t = 240τs....

    work page

  5. [5]

    Hamaker, The London–van der Waals attraction be- tween spherical particles, Physica 4, 1058 (1937)

    H. Hamaker, The London–van der Waals attraction be- tween spherical particles, Physica 4, 1058 (1937)

    work page 1937

  6. [6]

    Visser, Van der Waals and other cohesive forces affect- ing powder fluidization, Powder Technology58, 1 (1989)

    J. Visser, Van der Waals and other cohesive forces affect- ing powder fluidization, Powder Technology58, 1 (1989)

    work page 1989

  7. [7]

    Black, T

    K. Black, T. Tolhurst, D. Paterson, and S. Hagerthey, Working with natural cohesive sediments, Journal of Hy- draulic Engineering 128, 2 (2002)

    work page 2002

  8. [8]

    H. Fang, M. Fazeli, W. Cheng, and S. Dey, Transport of biofilm-coated sediment particles, Journal of Hydraulic Research 54, 631 (2016)

    work page 2016

  9. [9]

    C. Amos, H. Daborn, G.R.and Christian, A. Atkinson, and A. Robertson, In situ erosion measurements on fine- grained sediments from the bay of fundy, Marine Geology 108, 175 (1992)

    work page 1992

  10. [10]

    Berlamont, M

    J. Berlamont, M. Ockenden, E. Toorman, and J. Winter- werp, The characterisation of cohesive sediment proper- ties, Coastal Engineering 21, 105 (1993)

    work page 1993

  11. [11]

    L. P. Sanford and J. P.-Y. Maa, A unified erosion formu- lation for fine sediments, Marine Geology 179, 9 (2001)

    work page 2001

  12. [12]

    Burchard, H

    H. Burchard, H. M. Schuttelaars, and D. K. Ralston, Sediment trapping in estuaries, Annual Review of Marine Science (2017)

    work page 2017

  13. [13]

    H. E. De Swart and J. T. F. Zimmerman, Morphodynam- ics of tidal inlet systems, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.41, 203 (2009)

    work page 2009

  14. [14]

    Meiburg and B

    E. Meiburg and B. Kneller, Turbidity currents and their deposits, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 42, 135 (2010)

    work page 2010

  15. [15]

    G. J. Kynch, A theory of sedimentation, Transactions of the Faraday society 48, 166 (1952)

    work page 1952

  16. [16]

    Richardson and W

    J. Richardson and W. Zaki, The sedimentation of a sus- pension of uniform spheres under conditions of viscous flow, Chemical Engineering Science 3, 65 (1954)

    work page 1954

  17. [17]

    Ham and G

    J. Ham and G. Homsy, Hindered settling and hydrody- namic dispersion in quiescent sedimenting suspensions, International journal of multiphase flow 14, 533 (1988)

    work page 1988

  18. [18]

    Winterwerp, On the flocculation and settling velocity of estuarine mud, Continental Shelf Research 22, 1339 (2002)

    J. Winterwerp, On the flocculation and settling velocity of estuarine mud, Continental Shelf Research 22, 1339 (2002)

    work page 2002

  19. [19]

    Dorrell and A

    R. Dorrell and A. J. Hogg, Sedimentation of bidisperse suspensions, International Journal of Multiphase Flow 6, 481 (2010)

    work page 2010

  20. [20]

    Dorrell, A

    R. Dorrell, A. Hogg, E. Sumner, and P. Talling, The structure of the deposit produced by sedimentation of polydisperse suspensions, Journal of Geophysical Re- search: Earth Surface 116 (2011)

    work page 2011

  21. [21]

    Been and G

    K. Been and G. Sills, Self-weight consolidation of soft soils: an experimental and theoretical study, G´ eotechnique31, 519 (1981)

    work page 1981

  22. [22]

    Townsend and M

    F. Townsend and M. McVay, Soa: Large strain consoli- dation predictions, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 116, 222 (1990)

    work page 1990

  23. [23]

    Sills, Development of structure in sedimenting soils, Philosophical Transactions-Royal Society of London

    G. Sills, Development of structure in sedimenting soils, Philosophical Transactions-Royal Society of London. Se- ries A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences , 2515 (1998)

    work page 1998

  24. [24]

    Toorman, Sedimentation and self-weight consolida- tion: constitutive equations and numerical modelling, G´ eotechnique49, 709 (1999)

    E. Toorman, Sedimentation and self-weight consolida- tion: constitutive equations and numerical modelling, G´ eotechnique49, 709 (1999)

    work page 1999

  25. [25]

    Chauchat, S

    J. Chauchat, S. Guillou, D. Pham Van Bang, and K. Dan Nguyen, Modelling sedimentation–consolidation in the framework of a one-dimensional two-phase flow model, Journal of Hydraulic Research 51, 293 (2013)

    work page 2013

  26. [26]

    Z. Zhou, M. van der Wegen, B. Jagers, and G. Coco, Modelling the role of self-weight consolidation on the morphodynamics of accretional mudflats, Environmental Modelling & Software 76, 167 (2016)

    work page 2016

  27. [27]

    Pane and R

    V. Pane and R. Schiffman, A note on sedimentation and consolidation, G´ eotechnique35 (1985)

    work page 1985

  28. [28]

    Toorman, Sedimentation and self-weight consolida- tion: general unifying theory, G´ eotechnique 46, 103 (1996)

    E. Toorman, Sedimentation and self-weight consolida- tion: general unifying theory, G´ eotechnique 46, 103 (1996)

    work page 1996

  29. [29]

    Gibson, G

    R. Gibson, G. England, and M. Hussey, The theory of one-dimensional consolidation of saturated clays: 1. fi- nite non-linear consildation of thin homogeneous layers, G´ eotechnique17, 261 (1967)

    work page 1967

  30. [30]

    Terzaghi, Theoretical soil mechanics (Chapman And Hall, Limited.; London, 1951)

    K. Terzaghi, Theoretical soil mechanics (Chapman And Hall, Limited.; London, 1951)

    work page 1951

  31. [31]

    J. C. Winterwerp and W. G. Van Kesteren, Introduction to the physics of cohesive sediment dynamics in the ma- rine environment, Vol. 56 (Elsevier, 2004)

    work page 2004

  32. [32]

    Le Hir, F

    P. Le Hir, F. Cayocca, and B. Waeles, Dynamics of sand and mud mixtures: a multiprocess-based modelling strat- egy, Continental Shelf Research 31, S135 (2011)

    work page 2011

  33. [33]

    Grasso, P

    F. Grasso, P. Le Hir, and P. Bassoullet, Numerical mod- elling of mixed-sediment consolidation, Ocean Dynamics 65, 607 (2015)

    work page 2015

  34. [34]

    Weiland, Y

    R. Weiland, Y. Fessas, and B. Ramarao, On instabilities arising during sedimentation of two-component mixtures of solids, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 142, 383 (1984)

    work page 1984

  35. [35]

    F. Xu, J. Kim, and S. Lee, Particle-induced viscous fin- gering, Journal of Non-Newtonian Fluid Mechanics 238, 92 (2016)

    work page 2016

  36. [36]

    Torfs, H

    H. Torfs, H. Mitchener, H. Huysentruyt, and E. Toor- man, Settling and consolidation of mud/sand mixtures, Coastal Engineering 29, 27 (1996)

    work page 1996

  37. [37]

    Cuthbertson, P

    A. Cuthbertson, P. Dong, S. King, and P. Davies, Hin- dered settling velocity of cohesive/non-cohesive sediment mixtures, Coastal Engineering 55, 1197 (2008)

    work page 2008

  38. [38]

    A. J. Manning, J. V. Baugh, J. R. Spearman, and R. J. Whitehouse, Flocculation settling characteristics of mud: sand mixtures, Ocean dynamics 60, 237 (2010)

    work page 2010

  39. [39]

    J. R. Spearman, A. J. Manning, and R. J. Whitehouse, The settling dynamics of flocculating mud and sand mix- tures: part 2numerical modelling, Ocean Dynamics 61, 351 (2011)

    work page 2011

  40. [40]

    Te Slaa, Q

    S. Te Slaa, Q. He, D. S. van Maren, and J. C. Winter- werp, Sedimentation processes in silt-rich sediment sys- tems, Ocean Dynamics 63, 399 (2013). 15

    work page 2013

  41. [41]

    Te Slaa, D

    S. Te Slaa, D. van Maren, Q. He, and J. Winterwerp, Hindered settling of silt, Journal of Hydraulic Engineer- ing 141, 04015020 (2015)

    work page 2015

  42. [42]

    A. J. Cuthbertson, O. Ibikunle, W. J. McCarter, and G. Starrs, Monitoring and characterisation of sand- mud sedimentation processes, Ocean Dynamics 66, 867 (2016)

    work page 2016

  43. [43]

    Vowinckel, T

    B. Vowinckel, T. Kempe, and J. Fr¨ ohlich, Fluid-particle interaction in turbulent open channel flow with fully- resolved mobile beds, Advances in Water Resources 72, 32 (2014)

    work page 2014

  44. [44]

    Vowinckel, R

    B. Vowinckel, R. Jain, T. Kempe, and J. Fr¨ ohlich, Ero- sion of single particles in a turbulent open-channel flow: a numerical study, J. Hydraul. Res. 54, 158 (2016)

    work page 2016

  45. [45]

    Vowinckel, V

    B. Vowinckel, V. Nikora, T. Kempe, and J. Fr¨ ohlich, Mo- mentum balance in flows over mobile granular beds: ap- plication of double-averaging methodology to DNS data, Journal of Hydraulic Research 55, 190 (2017)

    work page 2017

  46. [46]

    Vowinckel, V

    B. Vowinckel, V. Nikora, T. Kempe, and J. Fr¨ ohlich, Spatially-averaged momentum fluxes and stresses in flows over mobile granular beds: a DNS-based study, Journal of Hydraulic Research 55, 208 (2017)

    work page 2017

  47. [47]

    Biegert, B

    E. Biegert, B. Vowinckel, and E. Meiburg, A collision model for grain-resolving simulations of flows over dense, mobile, polydisperse granular sediment beds, Journal of Computational Physics 340, 105 (2017)

    work page 2017

  48. [48]

    Biegert, B

    E. Biegert, B. Vowinckel, R. Ouillon, and E. Meiburg, High-resolution simulations of turbidity currents, Progress in Earth and Planetary Science 4, 33 (2017)

    work page 2017

  49. [49]

    Vowinckel, J

    B. Vowinckel, J. Withers, P. Luzzatto-Fegiz, and E. Meiburg, Settling of cohesive sediment: particle- resolved simulations, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 858, 5 (2019)

    work page 2019

  50. [50]

    Biegert, B

    E. Biegert, B. Vowinckel, L. Hua, and E. Meiburg, Stress balance for a viscous flow with a single rolling particle, in E3S Web of Conferences, River Flow 2018 , Vol. 40 (2018) p. 04003

    work page 2018

  51. [51]

    E. K. Biegert, Eroding Uncertainty: Towards Under- standing Flows Interacting with Mobile Sediment Beds Using Grain-Resolving Simulations, Ph.D. thesis, Univer- sity of California, Santa Barbara (2018)

    work page 2018

  52. [52]

    Uhlmann, An immersed boundary method with direct forcing for the simulation of particulate flows, Journal of Computational Physics 209, 448 (2005)

    M. Uhlmann, An immersed boundary method with direct forcing for the simulation of particulate flows, Journal of Computational Physics 209, 448 (2005)

    work page 2005

  53. [53]

    Kempe and J

    T. Kempe and J. Fr¨ ohlich, An improved immersed boundary method with direct forcing for the simulation of particle laden flows, Journal of Computational Physics 231, 3663 (2012)

    work page 2012

  54. [54]

    Mordant and J

    N. Mordant and J. F. Pinton, Velocity measurement of a settling sphere, The European Physical Journal B- Condensed Matter and Complex Systems 18, 343 (2000)

    work page 2000

  55. [55]

    Ten Cate, C

    A. Ten Cate, C. H. Nieuwstad, J. J. Derksen, and H. E. A. Van den Akker, Particle imaging velocimetry experiments and lattice-Boltzmann simulations on a sin- gle sphere settling under gravity, Physics of Fluids 14, 4012 (2002)

    work page 2002

  56. [56]

    Gondret, M

    P. Gondret, M. Lance, and L. Petit, Bouncing motion of spherical particles in fluids, Physics of Fluids 14, 643 (2002)

    work page 2002

  57. [57]

    S. F. Foerster, M. Y. Louge, H. Chang, and K. Allia, Measurements of the collision properties of small spheres, Physics of Fluids 6, 1108 (1994)

    work page 1994

  58. [58]

    Aussillous, J

    P. Aussillous, J. Chauchat, M. Pailha, and E. M´ edale, M.and Guazzelli, Investigation of the mobile granular layer in bedload transport by laminar shearing flows, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 736, 594 (2013)

    work page 2013

  59. [59]

    G. G. Joseph, R. Zenit, M. L. Hunt, and A. M. Rosen- winkel, Particle-wall collisions in a viscous fluid, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 433, 329 (2001)

    work page 2001

  60. [60]

    G. G. Joseph and M. L. Hunt, Oblique particle-wall col- lisions in a liquid., Journal of Fluid Mechanics 510, 71 (2004)

    work page 2004

  61. [61]

    Derjaguin and L

    B. Derjaguin and L. Landau, Theory of the stability of strongly charged lyophobic sols and of the adhesion of strongly charged particles in solutions of electrolytes, Acta Physicochim. USSR 14, 633 (1941)

    work page 1941

  62. [62]

    Verwey and J

    E. Verwey and J. Overbeek, Theory of the Stability of Lyophobic Colloids: The Interaction of Sol Particles Having an Electric Double Layer (Courier Corporation, 1948)

    work page 1948

  63. [63]

    Israelachvili, Adhesion forces between surfaces in liq- uids and condensable vapours, Surface Science Reports 14, 109 (1992)

    J. Israelachvili, Adhesion forces between surfaces in liq- uids and condensable vapours, Surface Science Reports 14, 109 (1992)

    work page 1992

  64. [64]

    Pednekar, J

    S. Pednekar, J. Chun, and J. F. Morris, Simulation of shear thickening in attractive colloidal suspensions, Soft matter 13, 1773 (2017)

    work page 2017

  65. [65]

    J. N. Israelachvili, The nature of van der Waals forces, Contemporary Physics 15, 159 (1974)

    work page 1974

  66. [66]

    R. Sun, H. Xiao, and H. Sun, Investigating the set- tling dynamics of cohesive silt particles with particle- resolving simulations, Advances in Water Resources111, 406 (2018)

    work page 2018

  67. [67]

    Gerbersdorf, S

    S.U. Gerbersdorf, S. Wieprecht, M. Thom, D.M. Pa- terson,, and M. Scheffler, INew insights into MagPI: a promising tool to determine the adhesive capacity of biofilm on the mesoscale, Biofouling 34(6), 618-629 (2018)

    work page 2018

  68. [68]

    Bergstr¨ om, Hamaker constants of inorganic materials, Advances in colloid and interface science 70, 125 (1997)

    L. Bergstr¨ om, Hamaker constants of inorganic materials, Advances in colloid and interface science 70, 125 (1997)

    work page 1997

  69. [69]

    J. C. Berg, An introduction to interfaces & colloids: the bridge to nanoscience (World Scientific, 2010)

    work page 2010

  70. [70]

    Nikora, F

    V. Nikora, F. Ballio, S. Coleman, and D. Prokrajac, Spatially-averaged flows over mobile rough beds: defi- nitions, averaging theorems, and conservation equations, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering-ASCE 139, 803 (2013)

    work page 2013

  71. [71]

    A. J. Mehta, E. J. Hayter, W. R. Parker, R. B. Krone, and A. M. Teeter, Cohesive sediment transport. i: Pro- cess description, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering 115, 1076 (1989)

    work page 1989

  72. [72]

    W. Lick, H. Huang, and R. Jepsen, Flocculation of fine- grained sediments due to differential settling, Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 98, 10279 (1993)

    work page 1993

  73. [73]

    J. C. Winterwerp, A simple model for turbulence induced flocculation of cohesive sediment, Journal of Hydraulic Research 36, 309 (1998)

    work page 1998

  74. [74]

    Merckelbach and C

    L. Merckelbach and C. Kranenburg, Equations for effec- tive stress and permeability of soft mud–sand mixtures, G´ eotechnique54, 235 (2004)

    work page 2004

  75. [75]

    Bear, Dynamics of fluids in porous media (Courier Corporation, 2013)

    J. Bear, Dynamics of fluids in porous media (Courier Corporation, 2013)

    work page 2013

  76. [76]

    Houssais, C

    M. Houssais, C. P. Ortiz, D. J. Durian, and D. J. Jerol- mack, Onset of sediment transport is a continuous tran- sition driven by fluid shear and granular creep, Nature Communications 6, 6527 (2015)

    work page 2015

  77. [77]

    Boyer, ´E

    F. Boyer, ´E. Guazzelli, and O. Pouliquen, Unifying sus- pension and granular rheology, Physical Review Letters 107, 188301 (2011). 16

    work page 2011

  78. [78]

    C.-H. Lee, Y. Low, and Y.-M. Chiew, Multi-dimensional rheology-based two-phase model for sediment transport and applications to sheet flow and pipeline scour, Physics of Fluids 28, 053305 (2016)

    work page 2016

  79. [79]

    Cheng, T.-J

    Z. Cheng, T.-J. Hsu, and J. Calantoni, Sedfoam: A multi-dimensional Eulerian two-phase model for sedi- ment transport and its application to momentary bed failure, Coastal Engineering 119, 32 (2017)

    work page 2017

  80. [80]

    Panah, F

    M. Panah, F. Blanchette, and S. Khatari, Simulations of a porous particle set- tling in a density-stratified ambient fluid, Physical Review Fluids 2(11), 114303 (2017)

    work page 2017