Stamou & Gkesouli (2015) report the turbidity measurements for the scenario S-2 at x = 63 m at the plane 0.1 m away from the side wall of the tank. The suspended solid concentrations of the four solid classes were computed from the computed volume fractions at the same location for S-2, and the total SS concentrations are compared in Figure 8. Accordingly, the computed concentrations show a good agreement with the measured turbidity in the study by Stamou & Gkesouli (2015) with a correlation coefficient of 0.8. The volume fraction contour plots in the yz plane at x = 63 m are shown in Figure S1, and the data used in Figure 8 are presented in Table S2 in Supplementary Information. The slight differences in the SS concentrations could be due to the assumptions made in the simplified ‘Algebraic Slip Model’ utilized in this study and also due to the possible errors in observations in this complex flow. The comparison of the percentage removal of solids classes is shown in Table 3. The removal efficiency of the solid class C1, which is the class of particles with the highest diameter, is 99% in the study by Stamou & Gkesouli (2015), while it is 100% in this study. The removal efficiency of the solid class C4, which is the class of particles with the smallest particle diameter, is approximately 9% in the study by Stamou & Gkesouli (2015) and 8% in this study. The computed removal efficiencies of solid class C2 and solid class C3 show differences of 2 and 4%, respectively, with the measurements given in the study by Stamou & Gkesouli (2015). However, the total solid removal efficiencies R% of the tank in scenario S-2 in the study by Stamou & Gkesouli (2015) and in this study show the same value of 67%.