2021
DOI: 10.1061/(asce)gt.1943-5606.0002425
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Thermal Conductivity of Sand–Silt Mixtures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The field data were obtained from Prince Albert weather station, with a silty soil closely matching the investigated material [103]. Such soils have a hydraulic conductivity range of 10 −5 to 10 −7 m/s [86,94] and a thermal conductivity range of 0.0007 to 0.0029 kJ/s/m• • C [121,122]. The hydraulic (Figure 5b) and thermal (Figure 5c) properties of the investigated soil fell within the above range and, as such, the model was considered to adequately capture field conditions.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The field data were obtained from Prince Albert weather station, with a silty soil closely matching the investigated material [103]. Such soils have a hydraulic conductivity range of 10 −5 to 10 −7 m/s [86,94] and a thermal conductivity range of 0.0007 to 0.0029 kJ/s/m• • C [121,122]. The hydraulic (Figure 5b) and thermal (Figure 5c) properties of the investigated soil fell within the above range and, as such, the model was considered to adequately capture field conditions.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This outcome follows, for instance, a study by Busby et al [41], where dry sand had the least thermal conductivity and silt had the highest thermal conductivity values. Pure sand showing very low heat extraction values is comprehensible because of its low water holding capacity; thus, the thermal connectivity can be notably diminished [42]. Busby et al showed that only values for saturated soil exceed the thermal conductivity of silt.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The analysis of the effective range (spatial dependence), was defined as the distance at which the semivariance value achieves 95% of the sill, and indicated that it was lower for the thermal properties of the in situ than for the laboratory measurements. The lower spatial dependence of the thermal properties in situ could be influenced for the most part by the effect of the spatially differentiated soil water content and bulk density and the associated air-filled porosity and also by the more stable organic matter content (Abu-Hamdeh and Reeder, 2000;Schjønning, 2021) as well as the textural and mineralogical composition (Usowicz et al, 2020;Roshankhah et al, 2021;Schjønning, 2021). This explanation may be supported by the greater effective ranges in the cross-semivariograms including soil thermal properties as primary variables and sand content as a secondary variable.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%