International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 216 (2023) 124529

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhmt

Thermal conductivity changing mechanism of frozen soil-rock mixture and

a prediction model
Liyun Tang a, *, Shiyuan Sun a, 1, Juanjuan Zheng a, 1, Peiyong Qiu b, 1, Ting Guo a, 1
a
School of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Xian University of Science and Technology, Xi’an 710054, China
b
Department of Civil, Geological, and Mining Engineering, École Polytechnique de Montréal, Research Institute of Mines and Environment (RIME) UQAT - Polytechnique,
Montréal, QC, Canada

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The thermal conductivity of frozen soil-rock mixture (S-RM) is an important parameter affecting its temperature
Soil-rock mixture field distribution, and it is also the basic physical parameter for studying the thermal-melting disaster mechanism
Thermal conductivity of S-RM slope in cold regions. However, the effect of ice-water phase change on the thermal conductivity of the
Temperature
frozen S-RM has not been reported. In this paper, the influence of temperatures and rock contents on the thermal
Rock contents
Prediction model
conductivity of frozen S-RM were systematically studied by Hot Disk thermal conductivity and NMR tests.
Considering the influence of ice-water phase change and high thermal conductivity and inhomogeneity of rock
on the thermal conductivity of frozen S-RM, a new effective thermal conductivity (ETC) prediction model of
frozen S-RM is established by introducing freezing rate coefficient and weighting ratio. The results showed that
the thermal conductivity decreased with the increase of temperature and increased with the increase of rock
contents. The correlations of the predicted results are all above 0.97, by calculating the correlation between the
predicted value of thermal conductivity and the measured value. The thermal conductivity model has good
prediction performance, and can be used to accurately predict the thermal conductivity of S-RM.

1. Introduction Currently, in the aspect of the thermal conductivity of S-RM research,

Thermal conductivity is a key parameter for temperature field
research and thermal calculation in frozen soil areas, which reflects the
heat flow propagation speed and temperature field distribution of S-RM
[1–3]. Thermal conductivity characterizing the heat transfer ability of
materials is invariant when the environment and material properties are
constant. Due to the presence of ice and gravel, the thermal conductivity
of frozen S-RM is dramatically affected by temperature changes [4–6].
The change of heat transfer skeleton and the increase of unfrozen water
content and gas volume inside of frozen S-RM lead to different melting
rates of frozen soil site under temperature changes, and induce diseases
such as slump, landslide and subsidence [7,8]. However, the thermal
conductivity mechanism of frozen S-RM has not been studied. Therefore,
it is of great significance to clarify the effects of temperature and rock
content changes on the thermal conductivity of frozen S-RM and to
predict the effective thermal conductivity of frozen S-RM, which is
helpful for the study of heat transfer mechanism of frozen S-RM and the
prevention and control of hot melt disasters.
Sunet al. [9] found that the thermal conductivity of S-RM decreases with
the increase in its porosity. However, no reports show the influence of
other factors on the thermal conductivity of frozen S-RM. It would be
helpful to further explore the variation law of the thermal conductivity
of frozen S-RM by studying the thermal conductivity of frozen soil and
rock (which determine the characteristics of S-RM). Therefore, domestic
and foreign scholars have studied the thermal conductivity of frozen soil
and rock through macro and micro tests, and found that the thermal
conductivity changes complicatedly under the influence of factors such
as porosity [10,11], soil texture [12,13], temperature [14] and water
content [15]. In view of the porosity influence on thermal conductivity,
Tavman [16] believed that the increase of porosity will lead to the
decrease of soil thermal conductivity, and the particle content difference
is the main reason for the porosity influence on thermal conductivity.
The more particles, the lower the thermal conductivity. Wen et al. [17,
18] performed field tests and found that the proportion of gas and ice
crystals in the pores were the main controlling factors of the thermal
conductivity of the undisturbed frozen soil, and the composition was the

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: tangly@xust.edu.cn (L. Tang).
1
All co-authors’.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2023.124529
Received 12 April 2023; Received in revised form 5 July 2023; Accepted 20 July 2023
Available online 1 August 2023
0017-9310/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L. Tang et al.
key factor determining the thermal conductivity of the soil. The thermal
conductivity of soil matrix varies with soil texture [19,20], Cho et al.
[21] measured the thermal conductivity and found that the thermal
conductivity of the mixture increased with the increase of sand weight.
Zakharov and Makhover [22,23] pointed out that the increase of sand
content would improve the thermal conductivity of bentonite-sand
mixture and the coarser the texture, the greater the value of thermal
conductivity. Yang et al. [24] assessed the temperature and thermal
conductivity of permafrost soil by collecting soil data from different
observation stations on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau and found that the
thermal conductivity gradually decreased with the increase of temper­
ature. Zhang et al. [25] based on Johansen’s method and soil-water
characteristic curve found that temperature change (which affects the
unfrozen water content) is the key to the fluctuation of thermal con­
ductivity, and the thermal conductivity tends to be stable when the soil
is frozen to a certain degree. The rock thermal conductivity is a thermal
conductivity combination of rock matrix and pore fluid [26]. The heat
transfer process of rock structure is affected by rock density, porosity,
particle size, saturation and temperature. The influence of temperature
and particle size on thermal conductivity are as follows, Shen et al. [27,
28] found that the thermal conductivity of sandstone, limestone and
other rocks has the same downward trend with the increase of temper­
ature, meanwhile the thermal conductivity of coarse-grained sandstone
is greater than that of fine-grained. The distinct bedding characteristics
of shale lead to obvious anisotropy of thermal conductivity. – al. [29]
pointed out that the thermal conductivity in the direction parallel to the
bedding is twice to three times of the direction perpendicular to the
bedding. In addition, it is of great significance for analysis changes of
thermal conductivity by using Computed Tomography (CT), Nuclear
Magnetic Resonance (NMR) and Search Engine Marketing (SEM),
revealing the intrinsic connection between soil structure and thermal
conductivity. With comprehensive consideration of particles, mineral
composition and external conditions differences: Hu et al. [30–32]
explored the influence of the number, area and structural characteristics
of soil pores on the thermal conductivity by using CT scanning and
image processing, and found the predicted sand thermal conductivity is
accurate and effective considering the changes in particles, mineral
composition and external conditions. Li et al. [33,34] found kaolinite
with poor crystallinity has lower thermal conductivity by exploring the
kaolinite relevance between crystal structure evolution and thermal
conductivity. In conclusion, previous studies mostly focus on the ther­
mal conductivity of frozen soil or rock, while studies about the influence
of water-ice content change, rock thermal conductivity and rock content
on the thermal conductivity of frozen S-RM are not involved.
It is difficult to predict the thermal conductivity change only by tests
due to the inhomogeneity and the micro-structure complexity of the
rock-soil mass. Therefore, some scholars predict thermal conductivity by
using theoretical analysis and establishing ETC model. In the study on
the thermal conductivity model of porous media soil mass, Wiener [35]
proposed a theoretical model of vertical and parallel flows to predict the
thermal conductivity of three-phase medium, and found that the
measured value is in the middle of the two models predicted value.
According to the different thermal conductivity of each component in
the soil mass, De Vries [36] carried out an extended study on the basis of
Maxwell’s Equation and proposed a thermal conductivity prediction
Table 1
Working Condition Grouping Table.
Moisture content/% Temperature/℃ Rock contents/%
20 10 0, 10, 20, 30,
0 0, 10, 20, 30,
-1 0, 10, 20, 30,
-5 0, 10, 20, 30,
-10 0, 10, 20, 30,
-15 0, 10, 20, 30,
-25 0, 10, 20, 30,
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 216 (2023) 124529
model considering the weighting factors of soil components thermal
conductivity. Haigh [37] established a soil thermal conductivity theo­
retical model, which considers the influence of thermal interaction
among solid particles, pore water and gas during the heat conduction
process. Abdulagatova et al. [38] used the existing theoretical and
semi-empirical models to deduce the ETC model of sandstone, with
comprehensive consideration of the influences of pore size and distri­
bution, mineral composition and temperature. Based on the elementary
series and parallel models, Chu et al. [39] established a series-parallel
two-phase heat transfer mode through studying thermal conductivity
of coking coal, sandstone and foamed concrete, and this mode can be
used to calculate ETC of solid matrix. Tong et al. [40] put forward a
thermo-hydro-mechanical coupling system ETC model for simulating
porous media with multi-phase flow considering the comprehensive
influences of temperature, porosity and solid-phase mineral composi­
tion. With the development of computing science, Rizvi et al. [41]
proposed deep neural network and thermal lattice element method, the
two calculation methods can be used respectively to calculate ETC of
sand mass with different porosities and water contents. Cote and Konrad
[42] reported different models of geotechnical thermal conductivity
under different conditions such as a simplified model considering the
influence of solid-flow and structure on effective thermal conductivity
[43], a thermal conductivity function established for estimating
well-graded gravel and other soils in unfrozen and frozen states [44] and
a geometric average model considering the thermal conductivity of clay
particles and their relationship with mineral content [45]. In summary,
from the basic multi-component series and parallel model to the
two-phase model, many scholars established the ETC prediction model
of soil mass considering the influences of temperature, components,
moisture content change and heat transfer path. However, the existing
ETC model is not well suited for predicting the thermal conductivity
change of frozen S-RM under the ice water phase transition and the rock
composition changes caused by temperature rise.
The existing problems that the effect of temperature and rock content
changes on the frozen S-RM and the prediction model are not addressed.
In this paper, Hot Disk thermal conductivity and NMR tests were con­
ducted to explore the variation of frozen S-RM thermal conductivity
under different temperatures and rock contents. The effect of unfrozen
water content and the change of rock fraction of frozen S-RM on the
thermal conductivity is also taken into consideration to reveal the
thermal conductivity mechanism of frozen S-RM. Based on the experi­
mental results and the theory of series-parallel heat transfer theory,
considering the influence of water-ice content change and uneven in­
ternal heat transfer path on heat conduction, the freezing rate coefficient
σ f and water-ice volume expansion coefficient ε were introduced and the
series-parallel weight ratio κ was put forward as well as the new pre­
diction model of equivalent thermal conductivity (ETC) of frozen S-RM
which considered above factors was established. The results are of great
significance for engineering design, thermal conductivity selection and
in-depth understanding of the formation mechanism of thermal melting
and slumping disasters of buildings, and are a further supplement to the
research on physical properties of S-RM in permafrost regions.
2. Sample preparation and method
In this paper, the frozen S-RM widely distributed in cold regions is
taken as the research object, and the thermal conductivity of the frozen
S-RM at different temperatures and rock contentss is tested by using the
Test Protocol Hot Disk TPS2500S thermal constant analyzer and nuclear
magnetic resonance instrument.
40, 50
40, 50
40, 50 2.1. Sample preparation and working condition division
40, 50
40, 50 According to the geological survey report of permafrost strata at
40, 50 stations along the Qinghai-Tibet Railway (such as Tanggula, Nan­
40, 50
shankou, etc.), it is found that the soil in this engineering traversed area
2
L. Tang et al.
Fig. 1. Grading of particle sizes in the present experiment.
is mainly silty clay, and there is a large amount of rock in the soil mass,
of which the rock content is mainly 10–50%. In this test, considering the
actual engineering soil conditions, the moisture content of the sample
was determined to be 20%, and the rock content was 0%, 10%, 20%,
30%, 40% and 50%, respectively. The sample temperatures were -25,
-15, -10, -5, -1, 0 and 10 ℃. The specific working conditions were
grouped in Table 1. According to the Hot Disk test requirements, the
sample height should be greater than (test probe radius×2 + 10) mm
(choose 5501 probe, radius 6.403 mm). Therefore, the sample size is
determined to be 68 mm in diameter and 40 mm in height.
The silty clay was dried and then crushed and sifted through a
standard geoseive (2 mm) prior to sample preparation. The dried and
screened clay is configured to 20% moisture content and mixed with
rock, and retested the moisture content. Pouring the evenly mixed
mixture into the mold and compacting it. The maximum size of crushed
rock used in this test did not exceed 5 mm. Samples with different rock
contents are configured on the basis of particle separation processing
when control their gradation (as shown in Fig. 1). According to the
proportion of particle size components, weigh the required sample
weight successively and start from 10% rock content, and then add the
required particle size component gradually to control the overall mass
ratio. According to the “Test Methods of Soils for Highway Engineering”
(JTG 3430-2020), the maximum particle size of crushed rock should
generally not exceed 1/4 of the sample height and 1/8 of the sample
diameter. Therefore, the maximum size of the gravel used in this test did
not exceed 5 mm, and the oversized gravels were removed using
equivalent replacement method [46]. The used equal weight substitu­
tion method aims to eliminate the super-size particles. Covering the
demoulding compacted samples with plastic wrap and moving then into
Fig. 2. Thermal conductivity test instrument.
3
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 216 (2023) 124529
a high-precision low-temperature environment test box together with
parallel samples for freezing. The samples temperature reach the pre­
determined temperature after 48 h freezing and are ready to be put into
test.
On the basis of considering the soil conditions of the actual project,
the water content of the sample is determined to be 20%, the rock
contents is 0, 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50%, and the test temperature of the
sample is selected as -25, -15, -10, -5, -1, 0 and 10℃.
2.2. Experimental methods
1 Measurement of thermal conductivity
The Test Protocol Hot Disk TPS2500S thermal constant analyzer (as
shown in Fig. 2) was used to test the thermal conductivity. The S-RM
sample was frozen to a predetermined temperature according to the
operating mode set, and then the test was started. As the Hot Disk test is
a double-sided test, two identical samples need to be prepared and set as
a group. When a group of samples start the first test, it is necessary to set
the heating power (W) parameter in the test system and adjust the
heating time (S) to calculate the initial measurement data. The measured
result is needed to be confirmed valid after the result obtained, and then
the two parameters are needed to be corrected accordingly. It is
confirmed as valid test data when the system control parameters are
within 0.3–3 K.
To avoid an inaccurate test results caused by the sample temperature
change, resulting from long testing time, the heating time (S) and
heating power (W) are needed to be adjusted during the Hot Disk test.
The three measures were taken as follows:
(1) Making a group of parallel samples under the same operating
mode and inserting a temperature sensor inside the sample can
ensure the sample temperature at the set temperature during the
test;
(2) The heating time (S) and heating power (W) are adjusted by the
parallel samples before the test in order to meet the formal test
requirements and greatly shorten the test time;
(3) To ensure the test temperature in the whole process, the samples
have been putted into the test box, placed into the test incubator,
and added the insulation ice pack.
4 Test principle
The thermal conductivity of soils is commonly measured by steady-
state and non-steady-state (transient) methods [47]. The thermal con­
ductivity of the rock was determined by applying the non-steady-state
method of Cao et al. [48], which solves the radial one-dimensional
steady-state heat conduction problem of a constant power line heat
source in an infinite medium. It can be seen that the heat flow of each
section is not equal in the direction perpendicular to the heat flow (as
L. Tang et al. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 216 (2023) 124529

Fig. 3. Hot disk thermal conductivity measurement mechanism.

Fig. 4. Flowchart of the experiment.

shown in Fig. 3). The non-steady-state method permits a shorter mea­

surement time with simpler devices than the steady-state method, and
has become an important method in thermal conductivity testing. In the
present study, the soil thermal conductivity was measured using a Test
Protocol Hot Disk TPS 2500S thermal constant test system, which was
applied by the Freeze-Thaw Disaster Laboratory of Xi’an University of
Science and Technology (China). After determining the thermophysical
properties, the probe is assumed to be placed in an infinite medium in
which the temperature response from the heat source can be transient
[49].
During the test, the probe was placed between two samples and
heated by power transmission. The heat through the probe was con­
ducted to the surface of the contacted sample and penetrated the sample
interior. The temperature change of the probe was obtained by
measuring the resistance changes in the probe. From these data, the
thermal conductivity of the sample was derived.
The mathematical model [50] of the test is:
( )− 1
ΔT(τ) = P0 π 3/2 αΛ D5 (τ) Fig. 5. Variation diagram of thermal conductivity of earth rock mixtures with
different rock contents under temperature change.
where P0 is the total power output, ɑ is the radius of the sample, and
D5 (τ) is the size-independent time-dependent equation . The thermal
unfrozen water content of S-RM at different temperatures was calcu­
conductivity (λ) is obtained from the slope of the temperature (T) versus
lated. The testing principle is that the hydrogen nuclei will remain stable
time (τ) curve, which can be experimentally measured. The specific heat
without disturbance, and it will change and then recover slowly after
capacity c is computed from the thermal diffusion coefficient formula α
receiving the electromagnetic pulse and this recovery period is called
= ρλc, where α is the thermal diffusion coefficient and ρ is the density. relaxation period. Under the same electromagnetic field conditions, the
hydrogen nuclei relaxation period of frozen ice crystals in soil mass is
3. Unfrozen water content test different from that of unfrozen water, and both are positively correlated
with the signal strength [53–55]. The whole test process is shown in
The SE-SPI stratified sequence within nuclear magnetic NMR test Fig. 4.
system was used to obtain the signal intensity of S-RM samples at
different temperatures [51,52]. Then the T2 spectral curve was obtained 1 3 Test results and analysis
from the tested signal intensity monitoring results, in this way, the

4
L. Tang et al.
Fig. 6. The thermal conductivity of S-RM changes with different unfrozen
water contents.
Based on the tested results, the influences of temperature and rock
content change on the frozen S-RM thermal conductivity were analyzed,
and the essential reasons why the temperature and rock content change
influence the thermal conductivity were revealed.
3.1. Influence of temperature change on thermal conductivity
The influence of temperature on the thermal conductivity of frozen
S-RM can be divided into three stages as shown in Fig. 5: stable - drastic -
stable: The stable change (-25 ~ -10℃), during which the thermal
conductivity of S-RM continues to decrease with the increase of tem­
peratures. At this stage, the thermal conductivity and thermal conduc­
tivity changed moderately, and the average thermal conductivity
reduction rate under the six stone content rates was 2.92%. The drastic
change (-10 ~ 0℃), during which the thermal conductivity of S-RM rises
sharply with the increase of temperatures. S-RM is in the transition zone,
and the thermal conductivity of S-RM decreased because of water-ice
transition. The phase transition of ice water led to a rapid decrease in
the thermal conductivity of S-RM, which decreased by 30.18% when the
stone content was 20%, and the thermal conductivity of the six stone
content rates decreased by 28.72% on average at this stage. The stable
change (0 ~ 10℃), during which the thermal conductivity decrease
slowly with increasing temperature. Although the thermal conductivity
decreases at this stage, the overall decrease is low (the average decrease
rate was 2.71%) and the influence of temperature on thermal conduc­
tivity is quite small.
The main influence of external factors on the frozen S-RM comes
from the internal unfrozen water variation caused by temperature
change. Frozen S-RM is very sensitive to temperature change due to its
large content of ice crystals. The water stage change into ice stage not
only leads to the change of thermal conductivity medium but also leads
to the volume change of each stage component. NMR technology was
used to study the variation rule of unfrozen water within frozen S-RM,
revealing the essential reason for the temperature influence on the
thermal conductivity of frozen S-RM as shown in Fig. 6.
From the Fig. 6, it can be found that there is a negative correlation
between the changes of unfrozen water content and the thermal con­
ductivity with the changing temperatures. In the negative temperature
state, the water in S-RM mainly exists in the form of ice, and the thermal
conductivity is large. With the increase of temperature, the ice in S-RM is
in the transition stage ranging from -1 to 0℃, and gradually melts into
water. The thermal conductivity of water is much smaller than that of
ice, so the thermal conductivity of S-RM decreases rapidly. When the
temperature rises to 5℃, the soil melts almost completely and the
5
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 216 (2023) 124529
Fig. 7. Influence of rock content on thermal conductivity of frozen S-RM.
unfrozen water content of S-RM is equal to the initial moisture content.
With the continuous increase of temperature, the content of unfrozen
water in the soil does not change too much, and the reduction and range
of thermal conductivity of S-RM gradually decrease.
3.2. Influence of rock contents change on thermal conductivity
The external environment and the rock content within the frozen S-
RM will affect the thermal conductivity of the frozen S-RM. The rock
content has a significant impact on the thermal conductivity as shown in
Fig. 7. It can be found that the thermal conductivity of S-RM presents an
increasing trend with the increase of rock content, and the thermal
conductivity growth trend keeps almost the same at different
temperatures.
The rock content influence law on thermal conductivity of frozen S-
RM was divided into four stages as shown in Fig. 7. Slowly increasing
stage (0–10%). With the increase of rock content, the thermal conduc­
tivity increased by around 2.34%, and the thermal conductivity
increased slowly with the increase of rock content. This is because the
soil component plays a leading role in the whole heat transfer under a
low rock content rate. In the frozen state, the soil density increases with
the gradual shrinkage of soil particles, while the contact thermal resis­
tance decreases due to the gradually closer contact between particles.
The heat exchange is mainly completed through solid particles, and a
small amount of rock is hard to affect the overall heat transfer path.
Rapid rise stage (10–20%): the thermal conductivity increased signifi­
cantly (by 3.95%) with further increasing the rock composition, and also
increased with increasing rock content. This is because increasing rock
content with high thermal conductivity begin to play the main heat
transfer function in the overall heat transfer. And the gap between solid
particles is filled by the appearance of ice crystals with the decrease of
temperature, which leads to a full play of rock components thermal
conductivity. Rapid growth stage (20–40%), the thermal conductivity of
S-RM increased from 3.95% to 6.95% compared with the rapid rise
stage. At this time, the rock has begun to exert its thermal conductivity
function steadily. The increase of rock content make the high thermal
conductivity components increase continually. Stable stage (more than
40%), the increase of thermal conductivity tends to be stable, and the
change rate of thermal conductivity remains at 1.73%. During this
period, the increase of rock components has slight influence on the
thermal conductivity and the thermal conductivity increase steadily.
The influence of rock content on the thermal conductivity of frozen
S-RM is mainly due to the internal thermal conductivity components
variation caused by the rock content change. The rock with high thermal
L. Tang et al. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 216 (2023) 124529

Fig. 8. Influence mechanism of thermal conductivity of S-RM under the change of rock content.

Fig. 9. Three-dimensional layered structure of the frozen S-RM in the one-dimensional serial heat-conduction model (left) and a simplified model diagram (right).

Fig. 10. Three-dimensional layered structural unit of the frozen S-RM in the one-dimensional parallel heat-conduction model (left) and a simplified model (right).

conductivity within the frozen S-RM begins to play a leading role in heat
transfer with the increase of rock content and the rock forms a new
stable skeleton structure when its content exceeds 20%. The thermal
conductivity of frozen S-RM with more rock content is large because the
thermal conductivity of solid particles is far greater than that of gas and
water in the pores, and the increase of the crushed stone content will
provide more landing points for ice crystals. In addition, the increase of
the number of contact points between solid particles will increase the
heat flow path and effective heat flow surface area, as shown in Fig. 8.
4. Effective thermal conductivity prediction model of frozen S-
RM
In the above sections, the thermal conductivities of the frozen S-RM
were measured by Hot Disk, and the influences of rock content and
temperature on the frozen S-RM were evaluated by plotting character­
istic curves. To elucidate the heat-transfer mechanism of the frozen S-
RM from the previous experimental data and analyses, a heat-
conduction model was constructed in a three-dimensional structurally
layered unit cube. The model was based on the one-dimensional hybrid
series and parallel heat-transfer method (in Figs. 9 and 10). This type of
model was first used in soil conductivity studies, and was later extended
to calculations of soil thermal parameters. Tarnawski et al. [57]
simplified the structures of rock and soil porous media composed of
solid, liquid (water) and gas (air), such as mixtures of soil, coal, rock,
and concrete, for use in this model . However, because these models
consider only the volume fraction of the composite phase, they over­
estimate the effective thermal conductivity (ETC) range (that is, the λETC
range is larger than the λ range in other models). To improve the model’s
adaptability to temperature changes, this paper introduces two param­
eters: the ice content δ and the water–ice volume expansion coefficient ε.
In one dimension, the heat conducted through any object is simply
calculated using Fourier’s law [56], as shown below:

6
L. Tang et al. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 216 (2023) 124529

q′ = − λdT/dx (1) /
δf = αf − w αw (9)
Wherein, the heat flux density q′ is the heat transfer rate per unit area
perpendicular to the transmission direction, and the unit is (w /m2 ); λ is where αf− w is the thickness of the frozen water-phase component.
the thermal conductivity, the unit is (W⋅m− 1 ⋅k− 1 ); dT /dx is the tem­ A water-to-ice phase change alters not only the heat-transfer me­
perature gradient in the direction of heat flow propagation, the unit is . dium, but also the volumes of the components of each phase. When
(◦ C⋅m–1) water becomes ice, its volume expands because the network of hydrogen
bonds is not broken by movements of the water molecules. The
hydrogen bonds fix the water molecules within a regular spatial struc­
4.1. Establishment of the series and parallel models ture. In the water crystal lattice, the apices of each regular tetrahedron
are occupied by four hydrogen atoms, and the center of each tetrahedron
The heat flux densities in all sections of the series model (Fig. 9) are is occupied by an oxygen atom. The water volume expands because the
identical;, that is q = q1 = q2 = ⋯qn , which can be obtained from gap between the molecules is enlarged and remains constant. The mo­
Fourier’s law: lecular movements in liquid water can break the hydrogen bonds
without causing violent and frequent collisions between the molecules.
q = Aλes (Tl1 − Trn )/α (2) Instead, the molecules slide alongside each other and interlace to fill the
gaps separating them. When water freezes into ice, its volume expands
where q now defines the heat flow density through the entire unit in (w
by approximately 9%, so the volume expansion coefficient εi = 0.09. In
/m2 ), and λes is the ETC of the entire unit in (W⋅m− 1 ⋅k− 1 ). A and α are the
response to a temperature change, the thickness of the ice phase is
heat flows through the area and thickness of the model cube element,
determined as
respectively (A = α2 ), the units are (m) and (m2 ), respectively and Tl1
and Trn are the left and right boundary temperatures of the model cube αuf − w = αw − αf − w , αi = δf αw (1 + εi ) (10)
element, respectively.
The heat flux density in each phase component is given by Where αuf− w and αi are the thicknesses of the unfrozen water and ice-
phase components through which the heat flows, respectively, αw is
qi = Ai λi (Tli − Tri )/αi , i = 1, 2, 3, ..., n. (3) the thickness of the water-phase component through which the heat
Here, qi and λi denote the heat flux density (w/m ) and thermal 2 flows in the unfrozen state, and εi is the volume expansion coefficient.
conductivity (W⋅m− 1 ⋅k− 1 ) of the ith phase component, respectively, Ai The volume change caused by the water–ice phase change reduces
and αi respectively denote the area and thickness of the ith phase the volume of the gas phase in the pores. Therefore, in response to a
component through which the heat flows (Ai = A), and Tli and Tri are the temperature change, the thickness of the gas-phase component becomes
left and right boundary temperatures of the ith phase component, (
α′g = αg − αi + αuf − w − αw
)
(11)
respectively.
Rearranging Eq. (2), we get Among α′g , αg is the thickness of the gas component through which
Tl1 − Trn = qα/Aλes (4) the heat flow passes under the influence of temperature and without
considering the influence of temperature, respectively.
from which Therefore, under the influence of temperature, the one-dimensional
serial heat-conduction model of the frozen S-RM becomes
Tli − Tri = qi αi /Aλi , i = 1, 2, 3, ..., n. (5)
′ 1
Recall that q = q1 = q2 = ⋯qn . In the series model shown in Fig. 9, α λes(s− r) =(
αuf − α
′ )
= α1 + α2 + α3 + ⋯αn . We can thus write
αs
λs α
+ λw α
w
+ λαi αi + λggα + λαrrα
/ 1
∑n =( ) (12)
Tl1 − Trn = qi αi Aλi , i = 1, 2, 3, ..., n. (6) αs
+
αw − αf − w
+
δf αw (1+εi )
+
αg − (αi +αuf − w − αw )
+ λαrrα
i=1 λs α λw α λi α λg α

Transforming Formula 6 gives:

where λ′es(s− r) is the ETC of the one-dimensional series of frozen S-RM
q q 1
λes = = ∑ = ∑n αi , i = 1, 2, 3, ..., n. (7) under the influence of temperature (W⋅m− 1 ⋅k− 1 ), and λi is the thermal
α(Tl1 − Trn ) α ni=1 qAλi αii i=1 αλi conductivity of ice. The other variables have been defined above.
The one-dimensional serial heat-conduction model of the S-RM is In the parallel model, the temperature difference between the left
then obtained as: and right boundaries of the heat flow is constant, and the heat density
through the entire cube unit is the sum of the heat densities conducted
λes(s− r) =
1
(8) through each component, that is, q = q1 = q2 = ⋯qn . By Fourier’s law,
α
we obtain
αs
λs α
+ λαwwα + λggα + λαrrα

Tl1 − Trn Tl1 − Trn

where λes(s− r) is the ETC of the one-dimensional series of S-RM, αs , αw , αg , q = Aλep = α2 λep (13)
α α
and αr are the thicknesses of the soil (s), water (w), gas (g), and rock (r)
phases, respectively, through which the heat flows, and α is heat flow where λep is the ETC of the entire unit in the parallel model (W⋅m− 1 ⋅k− 1 ),
through the thickness of the model cube element. λs , λw , λg , and λr are the and the other variables are defined as for the series model.
thermal conductivities of the soil, water, gas, and rock components, The heat flux density in the ith phase component is given by
respectively.
The influence of temperature on the frozen S-RM is mainly mediated Tl1 − Trn Tl1 − Trn
qi = Ai λi = αi αλi , i = 1, 2, 3, ..., n. (14)
by the internal water-to-ice phase change. As the heat transfer is more αi αi
efficient in ice than in water, changing the ice content will greatly affect In this expression, qi , λi , Ai , and αi are defined as for the serial model,
the thermal conductivity of the frozen S-RM. This paper proposes the but Ai = αi α.
freezing rate coefficient δf which defines the ratio of the frozen moisture Rearranging Eq. (13), we get
content in the S-RM to the initial moisture content in the unfrozen state.
The δf is calculated as follows:

7
L. Tang et al. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 216 (2023) 124529

Fig. 11. Differentiation of different heat transfer modes in frozen S-RM.

Fig. 12. Composition diagram of equivalent thermal conductivity (ETC) prediction model of frozen earth rock mixture based on Series / parallel model.

λep = −
q
(15) in the direction of heat flow transmission is not uniform, and the com­
A Tl1 −α Trn ponents are staggered and disorderly distributed. The internal heat
transfer mode is also not consistent. When the heat flow passes through,
From q = q1 = q2 = ⋯qn and the parallel model shown in Fig. 8, we
the heat transfer mode can be divided into two types, namely, the series
have α = α1 + α2 + α3 + ⋯αn , and thus
heat transfer of each component and the parallel heat transfer mode of
∑n ∑n
qi i=1 λi αi α
Tl1 − Trn ∑n
αi each component (as shown in Fig. 11). Therefore, in order to predict the
λep = Ti=1
l1 − Trn
= Tl1 − Trn
α
= λi , i = 1, 2, 3, ..., n. (16) thermal conductivity more accurately, the influence of different heat
A α α α
2
i=1
α
transfer modes on the frozen S-RM should be considered.
The one-dimensional parallel heat-conduction model of the S-RM is As mentioned above, the one-dimensional series and parallel thermal
then obtained as conductivity models predicted two extremes of the thermal conductivity
αs αw αg αr of the frozen S-RM, and λmeasured lay between these two extremes
λep(s− r) = λ + λ + λ + λ (17) (namely, λes ≤ λmeasured ≤ λep ). In special cases, the arithmetic average of
α s α w α g α r
λes and λep can reasonably estimate the ETC. To better reflect the thermal
Considering the influence of temperature in Eqs. (15)–(17), the one-
conductivity changes in frozen S-RM, Reference Engineering Geological
dimensional parallel heat-conduction model of the frozen S-RM becomes
Report and Actual Sampling, the ETC prediction model of the frozen S-
′ αs αuf − w αi αg
′
αr RM mixes the series and parallel models as shown in Fig. 12.
λep(s− r) =
α s
λ + λ + λ + λ + λ
α w α i α g α r To obtain the harmonic approximation between λes and λep , Chu et al.
αs αw − αf − w δf αw (1 + εi )
(
αg − αi + αuf − w − αw
) [39]proposed a series/parallel soil heat-conduction model with a weight
= λs + λw + λi + λg ratio. In the absence of thermal convection and radiation, the heat
α α α α
αr conduction and resistance modes are purely series or parallel. The
+ λr weight ratio indicates the proportion of heat flow transferred in series
α
(18) and parallel, and can more accurately reflect the transfer path of heat
flow. The weight ratios of the overall component in the series and par­
where λ′ep(s− r) is the ETC of the one-dimensional parallel connection in allel models are denoted by κ and (1 − κ), respectively. Under this
the frozen S-RM under the influence of temperature (W⋅m− 1 ⋅k− 1 ), and assumption, the effective thermal conductivity of a frozen S-RM
the other variables are defined as for the serial model. composed of four phases (solid, liquid, ice and gas) is computed as
1
λs− r = (1− κ)λes + κλep = (1− κ)
4.2. ETC model and weight ratio of frozen S-RM αs α − α
+ w λw αf − w δ α (1+ε )
+ f wλi α i +
αg − (αi +αuf − w − αw )
+ λαrrα
λs α λg α
[ ( ) ]
The composition of frozen S-RM is heterogeneous and disordered. In +κ
αs
λs +
αw − αf − w
λw +
δf αw (1 + εi )
λi +
αg − αi + αuf − w − αw αr
λg + λr
the previous model theory, it is assumed that there is a unified heat α α α α α
transfer mode in the soil for model prediction. However, in the actual (19)
heat conduction process, the component distribution of the frozen S-RM

8
L. Tang et al.
Based on the assumptions mentioned in this section, the thermal
conductivity of the solid skeleton of the selected material is determined,
and the weight ratio is calculated by considering the heat transfer rate of
the series and parallel models. The specific process is as follows:
Is the ratio of the thermal resistance to the corresponding trans­
mission rate, and the thermal conductivity is:
Ts,1 − Ts,2 L
Rt,cond ≡ = (20)
qx kA
Among them:Rt,cond —is thermal resistance;Ts,l − Ts,r —total tempera­
ture difference;qx —heat transfer rate; L—length of heat transfer path, m;
k—thermal conductivity; A—the area of the wall perpendicular to the
direction of heat flow, m2;
Heat transfer can be expressed as:
Ts,l − Ts,r
qx = ∑ (21)
Rt
Among them: Ts,l − Ts,r — total temperature difference; qx —heat
∑
transfer rate; Rt —total thermal resistance;
The total thermal resistance under the series model is:
(22)
Therefore, the heat transfer rate can be expressed as:
(23)
The heat transfer rate of the parallel model is:
The weight ratio is determined by the ratio of heat transfer rates.κ,
thenκExpressed as:
According to the calculation announcement of weight ratio, the
calculation results are shown in Table 2. The experimental and calcu­
lation results based on series and parallel models can be used to invert
the thermal conductivity of media, which proves the rationality of each
ratio of series and parallel.
The division of the weight ratio depends on the heat-transfer path in
the S-RM. The results of the series and parallel models differed from the
9
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 216 (2023) 124529
measured values for each rock content. As the rock content increased,
the value predicted by the parallel model increasingly deviated from the
measured value, and was always overestimated. In contrast, the value
predicted by the series model dropped rapidly as the rock contents
increased. The weight ratio κ slowly increased with rock contents, as
shown in Table 2.
In frozen S-RM, increasing the rock content increased the proportion
of high thermal conductivity components and directly enhanced the
overall thermal conductivity, but also facilitated overall freezing of the
S-RM. A large number of crushed rocks and fine soil particles altered the
skeleton system of the S-RM. Changing the weight ratio decreased the
percentage of heat transfer in parallel and increased the percentage of
heat transfer in series, meaning that soil and rock were mixed, and the
heat-transfer method through the body was changed. A temperature
change exerted little effect on the weight ratio. Decreasing the temper­
ature simultaneously increased the predicted results of the parallel and
series models (and also the measured thermal conductivity) but the
difference between experimental and predicted results does not change
significantly and the weight ratio remained relatively stable. It was
considered that although temperature changes affect the two-phase
(water/ice) composition of the frozen S-RM, they do not alter the
overall skeleton structure of the mixture. Therefore, as the temperature
decreased, the predicted values of the parallel and series models
changed but the overall weight ratio remained steady.
4.3. Verification of etc. heat conduction model of frozen S-RM
This subsection verifies the prediction accuracy of the ETC heat-
conduction model of the frozen S-RM. As analyzed in the previous sec­
tion, a temperature change altered the predicted values of the parallel
and series models, but did not affect the overall weight ratio. Referring
to Chu et al. [39], we analyzed the weight ratio by comparing the
measured and predicted thermal conductivities of the frozen S-RM at
different temperatures. The freezing rate coefficient δf was determined
from the unfrozen water content of the frozen S-RM, which was
measured in the NMR unfrozen water content test. The previously ob­
tained densities of soil skeleton, gravel, ice, and water in the frozen
(24)
S-RM, the thermal conductivities, and the weight ratios in samples with
different rock-content ratios, were substituted into the frozen S-RM ETC
heat-conduction model. The thermal conductivity predicted by the
model was compared with the experimentally measured value. The
(25)
L. Tang et al. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 216 (2023) 124529

Table 2 from its original value, the phase change had ended, and the soil had
Wt ratio of ETC prediction model of frozen S-RM under different rock contents. become frozen. At this time, the unfrozen water content in the S-RM
Rock contents/% 0 10 20 30 40 50 changed in a stable manner, but when the freezing rate coefficient δf
increased, the unfrozen water content decreased before stabilizing. The
κ 0.016 0.049 0.088 0.124 0.143 0.187
predicted thermal conductivity increased at a slower rate between − 10
and − 25 ◦ C, and the overall predicted value was stable at − 25 ◦ C. The
Table 3 predicted value was almost consistent with the measured value.
Comparison between predicted value and measured value of thermal conduc­ The thermal conductivities predicted by the ETC model of the frozen
tivity of ETC prediction model of frozen S-RM (excluding rock, weight ratio A = S-RM at different temperatures did not obviously differ from the
0.016). measured values, and the change law of the predicted values conformed
Temperature/ Predictive value of thermal Measured value of thermal to that of the measured values. The correlation coefficient between the
℃ conductivity/Wm− 1 k− 1 conductivity/Wm− 1 k− 1 predicted and measured thermal conductivities of the frozen S-RM at
10 1.62 1.60 different temperatures exceeded 0.97, confirming the high prediction
0 1.62 1.63 performance of the thermal conductivity model. Because the heat-
-1 1.71 1.67 transfer path inside the frozen S-RM is non-uniform, treating the heat-
-5 2.02 1.98
transfer mode as purely series or purely parallel will inevitably lead to
-10 2.16 2.16
-15 2.18 2.17 deviations from the actual values. Comparing the predicted values in the
-25 2.20 2.20 series and parallel models, we find that the weight ratio distributed the
two extremes of the one-dimensional series and parallel heat-conduction
models, thereby greatly improving the accuracy of the model.
Table 4
Comparison between predicted value and measured value of thermal conduc­ 5. Conclusion
tivity of ETC prediction model of frozen S-RM (rock contents 20%, weight ratio
A = 0.088).
The thermal conductivity of frozen S-RM in cold regions is prone to
Temperature/ Predictive value of thermal Measured value of thermal change under the influences of climate warming and human activities.
℃ conductivity/Wm− 1 k− 1 conductivity/Wm− 1 k− 1 The Test Protocol Hot Disk TPS 2500S thermal constant analyzer is used
10 1.72 1.68 to test the thermal conductivity of S-RM in the frozen state to ensure the
0 1.72 1.75 safe operation of buildings. Meanwhile, influences of temperature and
-1 1.78 1.75
rock content on the thermal conductivity of S-RM are also analyzed. And
-5 2.10 2.05
-10 2.24 2.26 a new frozen soil-rock mixture ETC prediction model was established
-15 2.28 2.27 based on the test data and heat transfer theory. Conclusions are as
-25 2.29 2.30 follows:

(1) The thermal conductivity of frozen S-RM are affected by tem­

Table 5 perature and rock content. The thermal conductivity increases
Comparison between predicted value and measured value of thermal conduc­ with the decreases of temperature and the influence of temper­
tivity of ETC prediction model of frozen S-RM (rock contents 50%, weight ratio ature on the thermal conductivity of frozen soil-rock mixture can
A = 0.187).
be divided into three stages: stable-drastic-stable. The influence
Temperature/ Predictive value of thermal Measured value of thermal of rock content on the thermal conductivity of the frozen soil-rock
℃ conductivity/Wm− 1 k− 1 conductivity/Wm− 1 k− 1 mixture is lesser compared with the temperature, and the thermal
10 1.81 1.75 conductivity increases with the increase of rock content.
0 1.81 1.83 (2) The essential reason for the change of thermal conductivity of
-1 1.91 1.87
frozen S-RM is the change of internal unfrozen water content and
-5 2.38 2.38
-10 2.58 2.63 crushed stone composition. On the one hand, the ice affects
-15 2.64 2.64 temperatures and undergoes a phase changes, and the thermal
-25 2.65 2.66 conductivity changes by about 28% when the phase transition
interval is between -10 and 0 ℃. On the other hand, the increase
of rock content changes the overall skeleton (e.g., heat transfer
prediction accuracy of the model was determined and the deviation from
path) of the frozen S-RM, which directly improves the overall
the measured value was discussed.
thermal conductivity.
Recall that when the temperature of the S-RM decreased from 10 to
(3) According to the solid heat transfer theory and the serial-parallel
0 ◦ C, the thermal conductivity slowly increased (Tables 3–5). However,
model, the frozen soil-rock mixture ETC model is put forward,
because the unfrozen water content remained relatively stable, the in­
which considers the ice-water phase transformation and the high
crease rate was low and the overall predicted value was close to the
thermal conductivity and inhomogeneity of rock. This ETC model
measured value. From 0 to − 10℃, the predicted conductivity increased
measures the internal parallel heat transfer proportion through
dramatically, consistent with the changes in the measured values.
weighting ratio, introducing freezing rate coefficient and volume
The freezing rate coefficient δf was calculated from the modeled
expansion coefficient. The correlation of the predicted results is
change in the unfrozen water content of the frozen S-RM. The ETC
all above 0.97 through the correlation calculation of predicted
prediction model of the frozen S-RM well reflected the real situation.
and measured values under models of different temperatures and
During the temperature decrease, the thermal conductivity of the frozen
rock contents. Therefore, the thermal conductivity of frozen soil-
S-RM was increased by sudden shrinkage of the unfrozen water. Ac­
rock mixture can be well predicted by this ETC model.
counting for this mechanism greatly increased the accuracy of the model
prediction.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
From − 10 to − 25 ◦ C, when the S-RM was in the frozen state, its
thermal conductivity was almost stable. When the temperature dropped
Liyun Tang: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Fund­
to − 10 ◦ C, the unfrozen water content in the S-RM was greatly reduced
ing acquisition. Shiyuan Sun: Data curation, Conceptualization,

10
L. Tang et al.
Writing – original draft. Juanjuan Zheng: Writing – review & editing,
Visualization. Peiyong Qiu: Writing – review & editing, Conceptuali­
zation. Ting Guo: Resources.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare the following financial interests/personal re­
lationships which may be considered as potential competing interests:
Liyun Tang reports financial support was provided by National Natural
Science Foundation of China.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foun­
dation of China (No. 42071100, 42271144), and the Shaanxi Qin
Chuangyuan "Scientists+Engineers" Team Construction Project (No.
2022KXJ- 086).
References
[1] X.H. Dong, W.J. Ye, G.S. Yang, et al., Experimental study of influence of
temperature on thermal properties of loess, Rock Soil Mech. 38 (10) (2017)
2888–2894, https://doi.org/10.16285/j.rsm.2017.10.015, 2900.
[2] J. Bi, M.Y. Zhang, Y.M. Lai, et al., A generalized model for calculating the thermal
conductivity of freezing soils based on soil components and frost heave, Int. J. Heat
Mass Transf. 150 (2020), 119166, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijheatmasstransfer.2019.119166.
[3] Y.J. He, S.H. Yi, X.L Guo, Experimental study on thermal conductivity of soil with
gravel on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, J. Glaciol. Geocryol. 39 (2) (2017) 343–350.
[4] J.Y. Wang, W.G. Cao, Y.C. Zhai, et al., Horizontal push-shear test of soil-rock
mixture filled foundation under different water environments, J. Cent. South Univ.
47 (2) (2016) 615–620, https://doi.org/10.11817/j.issn.1672-7207.2016.02.035
(Science and Technology).
[5] L.Y. Tang, G. Li, T. Luo, et al., Mechanism of shear strength deterioration of soil-
rock mixture after freeze–thaw cycles, Cold Reg. Sci. Technol. (2022), 103585,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coldregions.2022.103585.
[6] H. Yang, Z. Zhou, X.G. Wang, et al., Elastic modulus calculation model of a soil-
rock mixture at normal or freezing temperature based on micromechanics
approach, Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. (4) (2015) 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/
576080.
[7] L.Y. Tang, L.J. Yang, P.Y. Qiu, et al., Degradation characteristics and bearing
capacity model of pile in degraded permafrost, in: Proceedings of the Institution of
Civil Engineers-Geotechnical Engineering 175, 2022, pp. 414–425, https://doi.
org/10.1680/jgeen.20.00014.
[8] D.J Quan, Cause analysis of bridge pile foundation settlement in permafrost region
of Qinghai-Tibet Railway, Railw. Archit. (01) (2017) 76–79. +83.
[9] S.R. Sun, D.X. Yang, N.R Sun, Experimental Study on Deformation Mechanism of
Soil-Rock Mixture Slope with "Overhead" Structure Under Freeze-Thaw Cycle, 35,
Henan Science, 2017, pp. 798–805, https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1004-
3918.2019.12.014.
[10] S.Q. Li, X.X. Wang, J.H. Xia, et al., Test methods for specific heat capacity of frozen
soil based on principles of mixing calorimetry, Chin. J. Geotech. Eng. 40 (9) (2018)
1684–1689, https://doi.org/10.11779/CJGE201809015.
[11] S.X Chen, Thermal conductivity of sands, Heat Mass Transf. 44 (10) (2008)
1241–1246, https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.11.P.043.
[12] V.R. Tarnawski, T. Momose, W.H Leong, Thermal conductivity of standard sands II.
Saturated conditions, Int. J. Thermophys. 32 (2011) 984–1005, https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10765-011-0975-1.
[13] D. Barry-Macaulay, A. Bouazza, R.M. Singh, et al., Thermal conductivity of soils
and rocks from the Melbourne (Australia) region, Eng. Geol. 164 (2013) 131–138,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2013.06.014.
[14] Q.H. Vu, J.M. Pereira, A.M. Tang, Effect of clay content on the thermal
conductivity of unfrozen and frozen sandy soils, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 206
(2023), 123923, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2023.123923.
[15] X.T. Xu, W.D. Zhang, C.X. Fan, et al., Effects of temperature, dry density and water
content on the thermal conductivity of Genhe silty clay, Results Phys. 16 (2020),
102830, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2019.102830.
[16] I.H Tavman, Effective thermal conductivity of granular porous materials, Int.
Commun. Heat Mass Transf. 23 (2) (1996) 169–176, https://doi.org/10.1016/
0735-1933(96)00003-6.
[17] Z. Wen, Y. Sheng, W. Ma, et al., Experimental study on thermal conductivity of
undisturbed permafrost in Beiluhe area of Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, Glacier Frozen
11
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 216 (2023) 124529
Soil 27 (2) (2005) 183–187, https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-
0240.2005.02.005.
[18] T. Zhang, P. Yang, Effect of different factors on the heat conduction coefficient of
shallow top soil, Chin. J. Underg. Sp. Eng. 8 (6) (2012) 1233–1238.
[19] Y.Z. Du, R. Li, T.H. Wu, et al., Study of soil thermal conductivity: research status
and advances, J. Glaciol. Geocryol. 37 (4) (2015) 1067–1074, https://doi.org/
10.7522/j.issn.1000-0240.2015.0119.
[20] R.X. He, H.J. Jin, S.P. Zhao, et al., Research status and progress of thermal
conductivity of frozen soil, Glacier Frozen Soil 40 (01) (2018) 116–126, https://
doi.org/10.7522/j.issn.1000-0240.2017.0314.
[21] W.J. Cho, J.O. Lee, S. Kwon, An empirical model for the thermal conductivity of
compacted bentonite and a bentonite-sand mixture, Heat Mass Transf. 47 (2011)
1385–1393, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-011-0800-1.
[22] A.V. Zakharov, S.E Makhover, The effect grain-size composition on thermal
conductivity of sandy soils, Constr. Geotech. 11 (2) (2020) 19–27, https://doi.org/
10.15593/2224-9826/2020.2.02.
[23] Y.J. Shen, H.W. Yang, J.M. Xi, et al., A novel shearing fracture morphology method
to assess the influence of freeze-thaw actions on concrete-granite interface, Cold
Reg. Sci. Technol. 169 (2020), 102900, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coldregions.
2019.102900.
[24] S.H. Yang, R. Li, T.H. Wu, et al., Evaluation of reanalysis soil temperature and soil
moisture products in permafrost regions on the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau,
Geoderma (2020), 114583, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2020.114583,
377:.
[25] F. Zhang, S.Q. Li, J.H. Xia, et al., Study on freezing potential of frozen soil based on
thermal parameters and soil water potential changes, Ind. Archit. 49 (07) (2019)
97–101, https://doi.org/10.13204/j.gyjz201907015. +82.
[26] P.Y. Guo, M.H. Bu, Q.B. Li, et al., Research progress of accurate measurement and
characterization model of effective thermal conductivity of rock, J. Rock Mech.
Eng. 39 (10) (2020) 1983–2013, https://doi.org/10.13722/j.cnki.jrme.2020.0337.
[27] Y.Y. Shen, Y.Z. Wang, X.D. Zhao, et al., The influence of temperature and moisture
content on sandstone thermal conductivity from a case using the artificial ground
freezing (AGF) method, Cold Reg. Sci. Technol. 155 (2018) 149–160, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.coldregions.2018.08.004.
[28] Y. Shen, Y. Yang, G. Yang, et al., Damage Characteristics and Thermo-Physical
Properties Changes of Limestone and Sandstone During Thermal Treatment from-
30 C to 1000 C, 54, Heat and Mass Transfer, 2018, pp. 3389–3407, https://doi.org/
10.1007/s00231-018-2376-5.
[29] D.D. Blackwell, J.L. Steele, Heat Flow and Geothermal Potential of Kansas,
Southern Methodist Univ., Dallas, TX (USA), 1981, https://doi.org/10.2172/
6760835. Dept. of Geological Sciences.
[30] Q.Z. Hu, X. Liu, H.C. Pan, et al., Meso-mechanism of thermal conductivity of clay
based on Matlab and IamgeJ, Sci. Technol. Eng. 18 (26) (2018) 188–193, https://
doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1671-1815.2018.26.029.
[31] S. Li, C. Wang, L. Shi, et al., Statistical characteristics of the thermal conductivity of
frozen clay at different water contents, Results Phys. 13 (2019), 102179, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2019.102179.
[32] W.B. Fei, G.A. Narsilio, M.M Disfani, Predicting effective thermal conductivity in
sands using an artificial neural network with multiscale microstructural
parameters, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 170 (2021), 120997, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2021.120997.
[33] J.W. Li, X.G. Zuo, X.G. Zhao, et al., Insight into the effect of crystallographic
structure on thermal conductivity of kaolinite nanoclay, Appl. Clay Sci. 173 (2019)
12–18, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clay.2019.03.011.
[34] S.S. Zeng, H.Y. Mo, J.X. Gu, et al., Thermal conductivity and microstructure
analysis of cemented calcareous sand with different cement content, J. Civ.
Environ. Eng. (2023) 1–9 (Chinese and English).
[35] O. Wiener, Abhandl math-phys[M], Leipizig Klasse. Sachs Akad. Wiss (1912) 509.
[36] D.A. De Vries, Thermal Properties of Soils[M]//VAN WIJK W R. Physics of the
Plant Environment, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1963, pp. 210–235.
[37] S.K. Haigh, Thermal conductivity of sands, Géotechnique 62 (7) (2012) 617–625,
https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.11.P.043.
[38] Z. Abdulagatova, I.M. Abdulagatov, V.N Emirov, Effect of temperature and
pressure on the thermal conductivity of sandrock, Int. J. Rock Mech. Mining Sci. 46
(6) (2009) 1055–1071, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2009.04.011.
[39] Z.X. Chu, G.Q. Zhou, Y.J. Wang, et al., Thermal-physical properties of selected
geomaterials: coal, sandrock and concrete based on basic series and parallel
models, Environ. Earth Sci. 77 (5) (2018) 181, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-
018-7337-2.
[40] F.G. Tong, L.R. Jing, R.W Zimmerman, An effective thermal conductivity model of
geological porous media for coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical systems with
multiphase flow, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 46 (8) (2009) 1358–1369, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2009.04.010.
[41] Z.H. Rizvi, H.H. Zaidi, S.J. Akhtar, et al., Soft and hard computation methods for
estimation of the effective thermal conductivity of sands, Heat Mass Transf. 56 (6)
(2020) 1947–1959, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-020-02833-w.
[42] J. Côté, J.M Konrad, A generalized thermal conductivity model for soils and
construction materials, Can. Geotech. J. 42 (2) (2005) 443–458, https://doi.org/
10.1139/t04-106.
[43] J. Côté, J.M. Konrad, Assessment of structure effects on the thermal conductivity of
two-phase porous geomaterials, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 52 (3–4) (2009) 796–804,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2008.07.037.
[44] J. Côté, J.M. Konrad, Estimating thermal conductivity of pavement granular
materials and subgrade soils, Transp. Res. Rec. 1967 (1) (2006) 10–19, https://doi.
org/10.3141/1967-02.
L. Tang et al.
[45] J. Côté, J.M. Konrad, Indirect methods to assess the solid particle thermal
conductivity of Quebec marine clays, Can. Geotech. J. 44 (9) (2007) 1117–1127,
https://doi.org/10.1139/T07-049.
[46] J.X. Wen, X. Qiang, L.H. Rui, Study on the shear strength of soil-rock mixture by
large scale direct shear test, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 48 (8) (2011) 1235–1247,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2011.09.018, 2011.
[47] D.Y. Wang, Y.L. Zhu, W. Ma, et al., Application of ultrasonic technology for
physical–mechanical properties of frozen soils, Cold Reg. Sci. Technol. 44 (1)
(2006) 12–19, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coldregions.2005.06.003.
[48] J.P. Cao, J. Zhao, X. Zhao, et al., High thermal conductivity and high electrical
resistivity of poly (vinylidene fluoride)/polystyrene blends by controlling the
localization of hybrid fillers, Compos. Sci. Technol. 89 (2013) 142–148, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2013.09.024.
[49] J.L. Xie, L.K. Ma, Y.F. Gao, et al., Thermal conductivity of mixtures of Beishan
bentonite and crushed granite, Rock Soil Mech. 39 (8) (2018) 2823–2828, https://
doi.org/10.16285/j.rsm.2017.2419, 2843.
[50] W. Yu, X.Y. Li, S.J. Wang, et al., Laboratory thermal conductivity measurement of
pyroxene powder under low temperature and atmospheric pressure conditions:
implication for the studies on lunar and Martian surface thermal environment, Acta
Petrol. Sin. 32 (1) (2016) 99–106.
12
International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 216 (2023) 124529
[51] B. Cowan, B.P. Cowan, Nuclear Magnetic Resonance and Relaxation, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 1997.
[52] K.Q. Li, Z. Miao, D.Q. Li, et al., Effect of mesoscale internal structure on effective
thermal conductivity of anisotropic geomaterials, Acta Geotech. 17 (8) (2022)
3553–3566, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-022-01458-z.
[53] Y.J. Shen, Y.Z. Wang, X. Wei, et al., Investigation on meso-debonding process of
the sandstone-concrete interface induced by freeze-thaw cycles using NMR
technology, Constr. Build. Mater. 252 (2020), 118962, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
conbuildmat.2020.118962.
[54] L. Tang, Y. Du, L. Liu, et al., Experimental study of the frozen soil - structure
interface shear strength deterioration mechanism during thawing, Arab. J. Geosci.
14 (2021) 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-021-08673-0.
[55] Y. Dong, J.S. McCartney, N. Lu, Critical review of thermal conductivity models for
unsaturated soils, Geotech. Geol. Eng. 33 (2015) 207–221, https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10706-015-9843-2.
[56] J.E. Mark, Physical Properties of Polymers Handbook, Springer, New York, 2007,
https://doi.org/10.1524/zpch.1997.199.Part_1.128.
[57] V.R. Tarnawski, B. Wagner, W.H. Leong, et al., Soil thermal conductivity model by
de Vries: re-examination and validation analysis, Eur. J. Soil Sci. 72 (5) (2021)
1940–1953, https://doi.org/10.1111/ejss.13117.