Cold Regions Science and Technology 119 (2015) 75–83

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Cold Regions Science and Technology

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

A Model for the Electrical Resistivity of Frozen Soils and an Experimental

Verification of the Model
Wei Shan ⁎, Yao Liu, Zhaoguang Hu, Jitao Xiao
Institute of Cold Regions Science and Engineering, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A fraction of the pore water of a soil body undergoes a phase change during the freezing process. Therefore, the
Received 8 October 2014 electrical resistivity properties of frozen soils are different from those of unfrozen soils. To thoroughly investigate
Received in revised form 16 July 2015 the conductive properties of frozen soils, a theoretical model for the electrical resistivity of frozen soils was de-
Accepted 23 July 2015
duced and established, and the factors that affect the electrical resistivity of frozen soils were analyzed. Through
Available online 12 August 2015
experiments performed on frozen clay, the characteristics of the effects of the unfrozen water content, initial
Keywords:
water content, soil temperature and dry density on the electrical resistivity of a frozen soil were analyzed. The
Unsaturated cohesive soil model for the electrical resistivity of frozen soils indicates that the electrical resistivity exhibits a temperature-
Frozen soil dependent inverse proportionality with the unfrozen water content of the soil body; the electrical resistivity of
Electrical resistivity a frozen soil exhibits a complex temperature-related functional relationship with the initial water content; the
Electrical resistivity model electrical resistivity of a frozen soil is exponentially related to the soil temperature; and the electrical resistivity
of a frozen soil is inversely proportional to the dry density of the soil body. The results of the experiments per-
formed on frozen clay verify the reasonableness of the proposed model for the electrical resistivity of frozen soils.
© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Fortier et al. (1994) conducted a calorimetric experiment on an un-

Electrical resistivity is an innate attribute of a soil. The magnitude of
the electrical resistivity of a soil is determined by the dry density, water
content, temperature, mineral composition and structure of the soil
(Abu-Hassanein et al., 1996; Archie, 1942; McCarter and Desmazes,
1997). A previous experimental study demonstrated that the cementa-
tion factor is related to the shapes and cementation conditions of soil
particles (Wyllie and Gregory, 1953). Wu et al. (1985) conducted a pre-
liminary study of the factors that affected the variation in the electrical
resistivity of soils under in-situ conditions; they found that the electrical
resistivity of the soil varied with the soil type, mother rocks, soil texture
and soil salt content. The electrical resistivity of a cement–soil mixture is
well correlated with its water content, water–cement ratio and degree
of saturation (Liu et al., 2006). Li et al. (2012) conducted a study of the
relationship between the electrical resistivity of a saline soil and the
water content, salt content, porosity and degree of saturation. They ob-
served that the electrical resistivity of the saline soil decreased with the
increasing water content, salt content and degree of saturation, and it
increased with the increasing porosity. Zha et al. (2013) performed a
laboratory study of the effect of the particle composition of a soil on
the electrical resistivity of the soil and found that the electrical resistiv-
ity of the soil decreased with the increasing liquid limit or plastic limit of
the soil.
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 451 82191477; fax: +86 451 82191590.
E-mail address: shanwei456@163.com (W. Shan).
disturbed frozen soil sample and obtained the unfrozen water and ice
contents in the sample; in addition, Fortier et al. (2008) also determined
the electrical resistivity at the location near the sampling site and ob-
tained the relation between the electrical resistivity and the unfrozen
water and ice contents through linear regression. Delaney et al. (2001)
conducted a study of the electrical resistivity of frozen and petroleum-
polluted soils; they found that the freezing conditions and petroleum
pollution both could result in an increase in the electrical resistivity of
the soil. Fu et al. (2009) monitored the electrical resistivity of silty clay
that was obtained from the Beiluhe River on the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau
during an entire uniaxial compression test at different temperatures.
They found that the uniaxial compression strength of the frozen soil ex-
hibited a strong semi-logarithmic relationship with the initial electrical
resistivity. Angelopoulos et al. (2010) investigated frozen soil from Par-
sons Lake in the Northwest Territories of Canada using the electrical resis-
tivity method and obtained the relationship between the electrical
resistivity and ice content of the frozen soil. The electrical resistivity
method was used to investigate the spatial distribution of the island-
shaped permafrost layer along the Beian–Heihe highway (Hu and Shan,
2011). They observed discontinuities in the electrical resistivity at the
upper and lower interfaces of the island-shaped permafrost layer, and
the permafrost layer exhibited significantly high resistance. In areas with-
out permafrost, the variation in the electrical resistivity was relatively
gentle, and no discontinuity was observed.
To thoroughly study the electrical conductive properties of frozen
soils, the present study investigates the relationship between the

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.coldregions.2015.07.010
0165-232X/© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
76 W. Shan et al. / Cold Regions Science and Technology 119 (2015) 75–83
electrical resistivity of a soil body and the water content, temperature
and dry density of the soil body by establishing a model for the electrical
conductivity of frozen soils, using mathematical deduction and a the-
oretical model for the electrical resistivity of frozen soils. Moreover,
experiments on soil bodies with different water contents and dry den-
sities at different temperatures are conducted. The present study also
verifies the reasonableness of the theoretical model for the electrical
resistivity of frozen soils and provides a theoretical basis for exploring
the distribution of underground shallow frozen soils using the electrical
resistivity method.
2. Establishing a model for the electrical resistivity of frozen soils
2.1. Models for the electrical resistivity of soils
An electrical resistivity model that is applicable to saturated non-
cohesive soils and pure sandstones, assuming that the conductivity
of solid particles is not considered, has been proposed (Archie,
1942):
ρ ¼ aρw n−m
where ρ is the electrical resistivity, ρw is the electrical resistivity of
pore water, n is the porosity, a is an experimental parameter, and
m is the cementation factor.
The electrical resistivity model proposed by Archie (1942) relates
the electrical resistivity of a soil to the structure of the soil and expands
approaches for studying the microstructures of soils. However, the
electrical resistivity model proposed by Archie (1942) only considers
the effect of the electrical resistivity and porosity of the pore water
on the electrical resistivity of the soil; therefore, the potential appli-
cations of the electrical resistivity model proposed by Archie (1942)
are limited.
In later work, the electrical resistivity model proposed by Archie
(1942) was expanded to the following:
ρ ¼ aρw n−m sr −p
where sr is the degree of saturation and p is the saturation exponent.
The expanded electrical resistivity model considers the degree of
saturation of the pore water; therefore, the expanded model is applica-
ble to non-saturated pure sandstones and non-cohesive sand. However,
the expanded model ignores the effects of other factors on the electrical
resistivity of a soil.
Considering the effect of the electrical double layers on the surfaces
of soil particles on the electrical resistivity of the entire soil body, and on
the basis of experimental studies, an electrical resistivity model that is
applicable to non-saturated cohesive soils was proposed (Waxman
and Smits, 1968):
aρw n−m sr 1−p
ρ¼
sr þ ρw BQ
where B represents the electrical resistivity of the charge whose electrical
property is opposite to that of the surface of the soil particle in the electri-
cal double layer, Q is the cation exchange capacity per unit soil pore, and
BQ is the electrical resistivity of the electrical double layer on the surface
of the soil particle.
The electrical resistivity model proposed by Waxman and Smits
(1968) considers the effect of the electrical conductivity of soil particles
on the electrical resistivity of the soil; thus, the electrical resistivity
model proposed by Waxman and Smits (1968) is applicable to non-
saturated cohesive soils.
In addition to soil particles and pore water, there is a third conduc-
tive propagation path for cohesive soils, i.e., the series-coupled soil–
water propagation path (Rhoades and Schilfgaarde, 1976). Based on
the aforementioned 3 conductive propagation paths for cohesive soils,
the following equation for the model for the electrical resistivity of
non-saturated cohesive soils has been deduced (Zha et al., 2006):
2 0

0
 3−1
0
nsr − F
0 θ F
0
1 þ θ BQ
θ 0
ρ ¼ 4nsr −F 5
0 1þθ
0 BQ þ þ 0 ð4Þ
1þθ ρw 1 þ BQ ρw θ
where F' is the conductive structure coefficient (the ratio of the width of
the series-coupled soil–water path to the side length of the entire soil
body) and θ' is the volumetric water content of the parallel-coupled
soil–water part.
The electrical resistivity model proposed by Zha et al. (2006) con-
siders the effect of conductive paths and organically combines the elec-
trical resistivity of a soil with factors such as the degree of saturation,
porosity, electrical resistivity of the pore water, soil particle composi-
tion, soil structure and electrical double layers on the surfaces of soil
particles, thereby rendering this model for the electrical resistivity of
non-saturated cohesive soils more reasonable.
The equations that describe the relation between the electrical resis-
tivity of a soil sample and the unfrozen water content and that between
ð1Þ the electrical resistivity of a soil sample and the ice content are as follows
(Fortier et al., 1994, 2008):
ρ
¼ e−wuw =wuwo ð5Þ
ρuwo
 a
ρ wi
¼ ð6Þ
ρio wio
where ρ is the electrical resistivity (Ω·m), ρ is the unfrozen water con-
tent (%), wi is the ice content (%), ρuw0 = 12,820 Ω·m is the reference
electrical resistivity for a reference unfrozen water content wuw0 of 5%,
ρio = 1316 Ω·m is the reference electrical resistivity for a reference
ice content wi0 of 10%, and a = 1.73 is the exponent of the power law
between the electrical resistivity and the ice content.
The electrical resistivity model proposed by Fortier et al. (2008) first
ð2Þ
considers the effect of the ice content of a soil on the electrical resistivity
of the soil. Thus, the electrical resistivity model proposed by Fortier et al.
(2008) is applicable not only to unfrozen soils but also to frozen soils.
However, a frozen soil is a complex multiphase body, and there are
many factors that affect a frozen soil. The electrical resistivity model
proposed by Fortier et al. (2008) only considers the effect of the ice con-
tent of a soil on the electrical resistivity of the soil; in addition, the preset
reference electrical resistivity value has no generality.
Angelopoulos et al. (2010) investigated frozen soil from Parsons
Lake in the Northwest Territories of Canada using the electrical resistiv-
ity method and obtained the relationship between the electrical resis-
tivity of the frozen soil and the ice content of the frozen soil. In this
study, the electrical resistivity method was very usefully applied for fro-
zen soil exploration. However, the data obtained using the electrical re-
ð3Þ
sistivity method were quite discrete and poorly correlated. In addition,
the electrical resistivity method only considers the effect of the ice con-
tent on the electrical resistivity of the frozen soil and thus is limited.
2.2. Establishing a model for the electrical resistivity of frozen soils
During the freezing process, a fraction of the pore water of a soil un-
dergoes a phase change; thus, the electrical resistivity characteristics of
a frozen soil are different from those of an unfrozen soil. Based on the
three-element electrical conduction model (Rhoades and Schilfgaarde,
1976) and the model for the electrical resistivity of unsaturated cohesive
soils (Zha et al. 2006), the present study also assumes that there are 3
conductive paths (soil particles, ice–water mixtures and soil–ice–water
mixtures, i.e., the gas propagation path is ignored) for a frozen soil and
deduces the equation for the model for the electrical resistivity of frozen
soils. Fig. 1 shows the conduction model for ice–water mixtures; it is
 W. Shan et al. / Cold Regions Science and Technology 119 (2015) 75–83 77

ignored in the model for the electrical resistivity of frozen soils, i.e., the
density of the ice–water mixture, ρwi, equals that of water, ρw. The
unfrozen water content of the frozen soil is wwu = aθ−b. Based on the
definition of unfrozen water, the following holds:


0
mwu ρwi lwi þ lwi0 F ðlwu þ lwu0 F Þ
wwu ¼ aθ−b ¼ ¼ : ð9Þ
ms ms

Based on the definition of the water content of the frozen soil, the
following holds:



mwi ρwi lwi þ lwi0 F ρw lwi þ lwi0 F
w¼ ¼ ¼ : ð10Þ
ms ms ms

Fig. 1. Schematic of the electrical conduction model for ice–water mixtures (li and li0 Eqs. (9)–(10) imply:
represent the widths of the parallel and series paths, respectively, that are composed of
ice; lwu and lwu0 represent the widths of the parallel and series paths, respectively, that wwu aθ−b
are composed of unfrozen water; Ri and Ri0 represent the resistivity values of the ice in ¼ ¼ lwu þ lwu0 F 0 ð11Þ
the parallel and series paths, respectively; and Rwu and Rwu0 represent the resistivity values
w w
of the ice in the parallel and series paths, respectively).
where θ is the absolute value of the temperature and a and b are two
soil-related constants.
assumed that the ice–water mixture is a cube with a side length of 1 and By simultaneously solving Eqs. (7), (8) and (11), we obtain the
the current direction is vertical. The conductive structure coefficient of following:
the ice–water mixture, i.e., the ratio of the width of the path that is com-
posed of the series-coupled ice–unfrozen water mixture to the side 1
li0 ¼ ð12Þ
length of the entire ice–water mixture, is denoted by F′ (Lwu − i/L = F ′ 1 þ T0
in Fig. 1). The volumetric water content of the parallel-coupled ice–
unfrozen water part is defined as T, i.e., lwu/li = T. The volumetric T0
lwu0 ¼ ð13Þ
water content of the series-coupled ice–water part is defined as T ′, 1 þ T0
i.e., lwu0 =li0 ¼ T 0 . Similarly, it is assumed that the soil body is a cube
with a side length of 1 and the current direction is vertical. The con- aθ−b T0 F0
li ¼ −  ð14Þ
ductive structure coefficient of the soil, i.e., the ratio of the width of wT 1 þ F0 T
the path that is composed of the series-coupled soil–ice–water mix-
ture in the soil to the side length of the entire soil body, is denoted by aθ−b T0 F0
lwu ¼ − : ð15Þ
F (Lwi − s/L = F in Fig. 2). w 1 þ F0
Then, we have:
Fig. 1 shows the resistivity of each part of the ice–water mixture con-
li þ lwu þ Lwu−i ¼ 1 ð7Þ duction system. The density of ice is ρi ′ , and the density of unfrozen
water is ρwu0 . Let the total resistivity of the circuit diagram shown in
li0 þ lwu0 ¼ 1: ð8Þ Fig. 1 be Rwi. Then,

The total water content of the frozen soil is w; the water content of 1 1 1 1
¼ þ þ ð16Þ
the frozen soil includes ice and unfrozen water. The increase in the vol- Rwi Ri Rwu Ri 0 þ Rwu0
ume due to the transformation from the water phase to the ice phase is
where:

ρi
Ri ¼ ð17Þ
li

ρwu0
Rwu ¼ ð18Þ
lwu

li0
Ri0 ¼ ρi ð19Þ
F0

lwu0
Rwu0 ¼ ρwu0 : ð20Þ
F0

From Eqs. (16)–(20), we can obtain the resistivity of the ice–water

mixture:
"  !   #−1
1 1 aθ−b T0 F0 1 þ T0 F0
Fig. 2. Schematic of the conduction model for frozen soils (ls and ls0 represent the widths of ρwi0 ¼ þ − þ : ð21Þ
the parallel and series paths, respectively, that are composed of soil particles; lwi and lwi0 ρi0 T ρwu0 w 1 þ F0 ρi0 þ ρwu0 T 0
represent the widths of the parallel and series paths, respectively, that are composed of
the ice–water mixture; lg represents the width of the gas path; Rs and Rs0 represent the
resistivity values of the soil particles in the parallel and series paths, respectively; and
Fig. 2 shows the conduction model for frozen soils. The volumetric
Rwi and Rwi0 represent the resistivity values of the ice–water mixtures in the parallel and water content of the parallel-coupled soil–ice–water part is M,
series paths, respectively). i.e., lwi/ls = M. The volumetric water content of the series-coupled
78 W. Shan et al. / Cold Regions Science and Technology 119 (2015) 75–83

soil–ice–water part is M′, i.e., lwi 0 =ls 0 ¼ M 0. The degree of saturation of Eqs. (36) and (37) yield the following model for the electrical resis-
the frozen soil is Sr. The porosity of the frozen soil is n. The density of tivity of frozen soils:
soil particles is ρs.
     −1
The above equations imply: 1 1 F F 1 þ M0
ρ¼ þ ρd − þ : ð38Þ
BQ ρs ρwi0 ρs 1 þ M0 BQ þ ρwi0 M 0
ls þ lwi þ lg þ Lwi−s ¼ 1 ð22Þ

By simultaneously solving Eqs. (21) and (38) and simplifying the

ls0 þ lwi0 ¼ 1 ð23Þ
result, we obtain the following model for the electrical resistivity of frozen
soils:
lwi þ lwi0 F þ lg ¼ n ð24Þ
" ! #−1
lwi þ lwi0 F ¼ Sr ð25Þ aθ−b aθ−b
ρ¼ A þ ρd B  þC þD ð39Þ
w w
mwi ρwi ðlwi þ lwi0 F Þ ρw ðlwi þ lwi0 F Þ
w¼ ¼ ¼ : ð26Þ
ms ρs ðls þ ls0 F Þ ρs ðls þ ls0 F Þ where A, B, C and D represent coefficients that are related to the structural
characteristics of the frozen soil and electrical resistivity of each compo-
From Eqs. (22)–(26), the following can be obtained: nent of the frozen soil, w is the water content of the frozen soil, aθ−b is
the unfrozen water content of the frozen soil, θ is the absolute value of
1 the temperature of the frozen soil, and ρd is the dry density of the frozen
ls0 ¼ ð27Þ
1 þ M0 soil.

M0 2.3. Main factors influencing the electrical resistivity of a frozen soil

lwi0 ¼ ð28Þ
1 þ M0
There are 4 primary factors that affect the electrical resistivity of a
 
1 ρw S r F frozen soil:
ls ¼ − ð29Þ
ρs w 1 þ M0 1. The soil type. There is a large difference between the solid particles of
  different soil types in terms of the particle size, shape, and mineral
M ρw Sr F composition. The mineral composition plays a key role in the conduc-
lwi ¼ − : ð30Þ
ρs w 1 þ M0 tive path of soil particles, thereby resulting in differences in the elec-
trical resistivity for different soil types (Fu, 2009).
Fig. 2 shows the resistivity of each part of the soil–ice–water mixture 2. Factors that are related to the structural characteristics of the soil,
conduction system. Soil particles conduct electricity through their electri- such as the structural characteristics of the ice–water mixture and
cal double layers. The conductivity of soil particles is Rs = BQ; thus, the the shapes and orientations of soil particles.
electrical resistivity of soil particles is ρs0 ¼ BQ
1
. The electrical resistivity 3. Pore water. Pore water affects the electrical resistivity of a frozen soil
of the ice–water mixture is ρwi0 . The total resistivity of the circuit diagram mainly through the water content and the types and number of ions
shown in Fig. 2 is R; thus, the electrical resistivity of the frozen soil is ρ. in the pore water. The water content affects the electrical resistivity
Then, it follows that: of a frozen soil primarily through the initial water content and the
unfrozen water content; the unfrozen water content depends on
1 1 1 1 the temperature and initial water content (Xu et al., 2010). The
¼ þ þ ð31Þ types and number of ions in the pore water affect the conductive
R Rs Rwi Rs0 þ Rwi0
properties of a soil body. The types and number of ions are primarily
where: determined by the salt content (for soils that contain salt). When a
soil body contains salt, soluble minerals are dissolved in the pore
ρs0 water and exist in the form of ions; under the effect of an external
Rs ¼ ð32Þ
ls electrical field, migration of positive and negative ions occurs. The
conductive properties of pore water are related to the concentrations
ρwi0 of the ions in the pore water and the charge number that each ion
Rw ¼ ð33Þ
lwi carries (Li, 2012).

ls0
R s0 ¼ ρs0 ð34Þ
F

lwi0
Rwi0 ¼ ρwi0 : ð35Þ
F

From Eqs. (31)–(35), we can obtain the following:

    
1 1 1 ρw Sr F F 1 þ M0
¼ þ − þ : ð36Þ
ρ BQ ρs ρwi0 ρs w 1 þ M0 BQ þ ρwi0 M0

The relationship between the saturation (Sr) and the dry density (ρd)
of the frozen soil is:

ρd w
Sr ¼ : ð37Þ
ρw Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of the electrical resistivity measurement circuit.
 W. Shan et al. / Cold Regions Science and Technology 119 (2015) 75–83
Fig. 4. Particle size distribution curve of the soil sample.
4. Temperature. Temperature affects the activity of ions and the unfro-
zen water content. When the temperature is less than 0 °C, the water
in a soil body solidifies and forms ice; therefore, the unfrozen water
content of the soil body will decrease. There is a relatively large
change in the electrical resistivity when water (liquid state) trans-
forms into ice (solid state), thus resulting in a change in the electrical
resistivity of the frozen soil.
A frozen soil is a compound system that consists of soil particles, ice–
water mixtures and gas. From Eq. (39), we know that factors that affect
the electrical resistivity of a frozen soil include the electrical resistivity
and content of each component, structure coefficient, dry density,
water content and temperature. From Eq. (39), we can observe that
when the initial water content of the same frozen sample is fixed, the
electrical resistivity of the frozen soil is inversely proportional to the un-
frozen water content of the soil body. For frozen samples with different
initial water contents, the unfrozen water content varies with the vary-
ing initial water content, and the electrical resistivity of the frozen soil
exhibits a complex temperature-related functional relationship with
the initial water content. The electrical resistivity of a frozen soil is expo-
nentially related to the temperature of the soil body, and it is inversely
proportional to the dry density of the soil body.
3. Experimental verification of the model for the electrical
resistivity of frozen soils
3.1. Electrical resistivity measurement principle
Fig. 3 shows the principle diagram of the electrical circuit of the de-
vice used to measure the electrical resistivity. To reduce the disturbance
of the frozen soil samples, a two-electrode electrical resistivity measure-
ment system was used for electrical resistivity measurements. The elec-
trical resistivity of a soil body is calculated using the following equation:
πUD2
ρ¼
4IL
Table 1
Basic physical property indexes of the experimental soil sample.
Name of the soil sample Natural water content Optimum water content
(w/%) (wop/%)
Silty clay 28.3 13.4
79
where ρ is the electrical resistivity (Ω·m), U is the voltage between the
two ends of the soil sample (V), I is the current that passes through the
soil sample (A), and L is the length of the soil sample (m).
3.2. Experimental materials
Silty clay was used as the experimental soil sample. During the exper-
iment, the original soil sample was sieved, air-dried and ground. The orig-
inal soil sample was sieved through a 2-mm sieve, and the soil particles
with sizes of less than 2 mm were retained as the experimental soil
sample. Fig. 4 shows the cumulative particle size distribution curve of
the experimental soil sample. Table 1 lists the basic physical properties
of the experimental soil sample. Under light compaction testing con-
ditions, the experimental soil sample had a maximum dry density of
1.89 g·cm−3 and a corresponding optimum water content of 13.4%.
3.3. Experimental scheme and steps
To study the variations of the unfrozen water content and the elec-
trical resistivity of the soil body with temperature during the freezing
process, the experimental soil was fabricated into a cylindrical specimen
with a dry density of 1.52 g·cm−3, an initial volumetric water content of
13.68% and dimensions (h × φ) of 300 mm × 158 mm at 24 °C. In addi-
tion, the specimen was sealed and placed in an insulating sleeve with an
internal diameter of 160 mm. A temperature sensor and a water content
sensor were embedded in the specimen (the temperature sensor had a
measurement range of − 40 to 50 °C and a measurement accuracy of
0.01 °C; the water content sensor had a measurement accuracy of
0.01). Copper electrodes (thickness: 0.5 mm; purity: 99.5%) were placed
at each of the two ends of the specimen. Afterwards, the specimen was
moved outside and allowed to gradually solidify at −24 to −32 °C. A
LOGGER3.0 experimental system (Beijing Huizenong Tech. Co., Limited
is located in Haidian District, Beijing City, China) was used to automat-
ically acquire the volumetric water content and temperature of the
soil body at 5-minute intervals during the freezing process and simulta-
neously measure the electrical resistivity of the specimen (Fig. 5). After
calculating and processing the acquired data, the variation curves of the
electrical resistivity of the soil body and unfrozen water content of the
soil body with temperature were obtained (Fig. 7). The working princi-
ple of the soil water content sensor is as follows: the sanding wave ratio
principle is used to measure the volumetric water content (Sun et al.,
1999), i.e., the variation of the dielectric constant (ε) of the soil body is
measured and then transformed to the volumetric water content (θv)
using the Topp equation (Topp et al., 1980):
θv ¼ −5:3  10−2 þ 2:92  10−2 ε−5:5  10−4 ε2 þ 4:3  10−6 ε3 ð41Þ
where θv is the volumetric water content and ε is the dielectric constant.
To study the relationships between the electrical resistivity of the
frozen soil and the initial water content, the temperature, dry density,
and required soil and water masses were calculated according to the
water content and dry density during the experiment. Soil and water
were mixed homogeneously and sealed in a double-layer plastic bag
for 12 h to allow the soil sample and water to mix homogeneously.
According to the different dry density requirements, the soil–water
mixture was compacted layer by layer into specimens with dimensions
(h × φ) of 80 mm × 39.1 mm. To prevent the water content of each
ð40Þ
soil specimen from changing during the freezing process, each soil
Maximum dry density Plastic limit Liquid limit Plasticity index Specific weight
(ρd/g.cm−3) (WP) (WL) (IP) (Gs)
1.89 17.93 33.06 15.13 2.71
80 W. Shan et al. / Cold Regions Science and Technology 119 (2015) 75–83
Fig. 5. The LOGGER 3.0 system and the electrical resistivity measurement device.
specimen was sealed in a rubber membrane. The experimental environ-
ment was a closed system. The experimental soil specimens were
placed in a DX-200 low-temperature test chamber. During the experi-
ment, the temperature of the low-temperature test chamber was set
to the preset temperature and maintained for 24 h. Afterwards, the
experimental soil specimens were placed in the low-temperature test
chamber for 72 h. Considering the discreteness of the soil specimens,
3 parallel soil specimens were controlled under each set of conditions.
After the freezing process was completed, a copper electrode was placed
at each end of each specimen. Then, each specimen was placed in the
device shown in Fig. 6 to measure its electrical resistivity. The voltage
of each specimen was measured using a DY2101 digital multi-meter;
the measurement accuracy for the direct current voltage was ± 0.5%.
The current was measured using a MS8265 digital multi-meter; the
basic measurement accuracy for the current was ±0.5%. The electrical re-
sistivity of each specimen was measured in a DX-200 low-temperature
test chamber that had the same temperature as the specimen.
Through manipulating the 3 factors – the water content (including
the unfrozen and initial water content), the temperature and the dry
density – the values of electrical resistivity of the frozen soil for different
water contents, temperatures and dry density conditions were obtained.
The curves of the relationships between the electrical resistivity of the
frozen soil and different factors are plotted in Figs. 7–15.
4. Analysis of the experimental results
4.1. Effects of the water content
Fig. 7 shows the curve of the relationship between the electrical
resistivity of the soil body and the water content, along with the curve
of the relationship between the temperature and the water content.
Fig. 6. Photograph of the electrical resistivity measurement device.
Fig. 7. Variation curves of the electrical resistivity of the soil body and unfrozen water con-
tent of the soil body with temperature during the freezing process (ρd = 1.52 g·cm−3; the
initial water content was 13.68%).
The volumetric water content of the soil body and electrical resistivity
of the soil body when T = 0 °C are marked by dotted lines.
When the temperature was less than 0 °C, the soil body started solid-
ifying as the temperature was decreased, and part of the water in the
soil body underwent a phase change. The volumetric water content
measured by the sensor approximated the unfrozen water content of
the frozen soil. The curve of the relationship between the electrical
resistivity of the frozen soil and the water content on the left side of
the vertical dotted line approximates the relationship between the elec-
trical resistivity of the frozen soil and the unfrozen water content. The ex-
perimental curves shown in Fig. 7 indicate that the electrical resistivity of
the frozen soil decreased with the increasing unfrozen water content of
the frozen soil. The relation between the electrical resistivity of the frozen
soil and the unfrozen water content obtained through fitting is as follows:
6172
ρ¼ −739; R2 ¼ 0:910: ð42Þ
θv
From Eq. (39), we know that in the model, the electrical resistivity of
the frozen soil is inversely proportional to the unfrozen water content,
which depends on the temperature; this relationship is consistent
with the experiment results, thus verifying the reasonableness of the re-
lationship between the unfrozen water content and electrical resistivity
in the proposed model for the electrical resistivity of frozen soils.
Figs. 8–11 show the curves of the relationship between the electrical
resistivity of each frozen soil specimen and the initial water content
under different dry density conditions (the unfrozen soil (T = 3 °C,
Fig. 8. Curves of the relationship between the electrical resistivity of the frozen soil and
water content under different dry density conditions (T = −17 °C).
 W. Shan et al. / Cold Regions Science and Technology 119 (2015) 75–83
Fig. 9. Curves of the relationship between the electrical resistivity of the frozen soil and
water content under different dry density conditions (T = −3 °C).
T = 17 °C) is used as the reference); the volumetric water contents
shown in Figs. 8–11 were converted from the mass water contents. It
can be observed from the experimental curves that the electrical resis-
tivity of the frozen soil first rapidly decreased and then slowly decreased
with increasing initial water content of the soil body, and the electrical
resistivity of the frozen soil reached its minimum value near the opti-
mum water content. When the initial water content was greater than
the optimum water content, the effect of the dry density on the electri-
cal resistivity of the frozen soil gradually decreased. The effect of the
variation of the water content on the electrical resistivity of the frozen
soil increased with decreasing temperature because of the following
reasons: the effect of the variation of the water content on the electrical
resistivity of the frozen soil decreased with the decreasing temperature,
with increasing water content (i.e., increasing ice content of the frozen
soil), the electrical resistivity of ice was greater than that of unfrozen
water, thereby resulting in more rapid changes in the electrical resistivity
of the frozen soil.
4.2. Effects of the temperature
Figs. 12 and 13 show the variation curves of the electrical resistivity
of the frozen soil with temperature under different water content
Fig. 10. Curves of the relationship between the electrical resistivity of the frozen soil and
water content under different dry density conditions (T = 3 °C).
81
Fig. 11. Curves of the relationship between the electrical resistivity of the frozen soil and
water content under different dry density conditions (T = 17 °C).
conditions (ρd = 1.42 g·cm−3) and the variation curves of the electrical
resistivity of the frozen soil with temperature under different dry den-
sity conditions (w = 6%), respectively (the unfrozen soil (T = 3 °C,
T = 17 °C) is used for comparison). It can be observed from the exper-
imental curves that the electrical resistivity of the frozen soil increased
with decreasing temperature. Table 2 lists the relations between the
electrical resistivity of the frozen soil and the temperature that were ob-
tained from fitting the data. From Eq. (39), we know that in the pro-
posed model, when there is a change in the dry density of the frozen
soil or water content of the frozen soil, the electrical resistivity of the
frozen soil (ρ) is exponentially related to the temperature of the frozen
soil (θ) (the related parameters in the relations are different). This
dependence is completely consistent with the experimental results
shown in Table 2, thus verifying the reasonableness of the relation be-
tween the temperature and the electrical resistivity in the model for
the electrical resistivity of frozen soils. The decrease in the temperature
resulted in a decrease in the unfrozen water content of the frozen soil,
which in turn resulted in an increase in the electrical resistivity of the
frozen soil. There was no significant change in the electrical resistivity
of the frozen soil when the temperature of the soil decreased from
17 °C to −3 °C because the soil sample still contained a large amount
of unfrozen water at − 3 °C. However, the electrical resistivity of the
soil sample decreased rapidly when the temperature of the soil sample
Fig. 12. Curves of the relationship between the electrical resistivity and temperature under
different water content conditions (ρd = 1.42 g·cm−3).
82 W. Shan et al. / Cold Regions Science and Technology 119 (2015) 75–83

Fig. 13. Curves of the relationship between the electrical resistivity and temperature under
Fig. 15. Curves of the relationship between the electrical resistivity and dry density of the
different dry density conditions (w = 6%).
frozen soil under different temperature conditions (w = 12%).

decreased from −3 °C to −17 °C because the unfrozen water content of

the frozen soil decreased rapidly with decreasing temperature, thereby
resulting in a significant decrease in the electrical resistivity of the soil
sample. The effect of the temperature on the electrical resistivity of
the frozen soil decreased with increasing water content.
4.3. Effects of the dry density
Figs. 14–15 show the variation curves of the electrical resistivity of
the frozen soil with the dry density under different initial water content
conditions (T = −17 °C) and the variation curves of the electrical resis-
tivity of the frozen soil with the dry density under different temperature
conditions (w = 12%). It can be observed from the experimental curves
that the electrical resistivity of the frozen soil decreased with increasing
dry density in all cases. Table 3 lists the relations between the electrical
resistivity and dry density of the frozen soil obtained from fitting the ex-
perimental data. From Eq. (39), we know that in the proposed model,
when there is a change in the initial water content of the frozen soil or
the temperature of the frozen soil, the electrical resistivity of the frozen
soil (ρ) is inversely proportional to the dry density of the frozen soil (ρd)
(the related parameters in the relations are different). This dependence
is consistent with the experimental results presented in Table 3, which
verifies the reasonableness of the relationship between the dry density
and electrical resistivity of the frozen soil in the proposed model for the
electrical resistivity of frozen soils. When the dry density of the soil
sample increased, the porosity of the soil sample decreased. Under
the same initial water content and temperature conditions, the un-
frozen water content of the frozen soil was the same. The increase
in the dry density of the frozen soil resulted in a decrease in the elec-
trical resistivity because of the increase in the number of connections
between soil particles. The effect of the variation of the dry density
on the electrical resistivity of the frozen soil decreased with increasing
water content.
4.4. Effects of the freezing mode and salt content
Water migration always occurs during the freezing process of a soil
body. The formation of ice lenses, various cryogenic structures, and dif-
ferent freezing temperatures and modes result in different freezing
rates and ice nucleation modes of the water in a soil (Song, 2007;
Zheng et al., 2010). Different ice nucleation modes have different
impacts on the electrical resistivity of the frozen soil. However, in the
present study, the specimens were only frozen unidirectionally in a
closed system.
Salt content of the soil body are also primary factors that affect
the electrical resistivity of frozen soil (Li, 2012). However, salt con-
tent of the soil body were not considered in the present study.
Further studies are necessary to investigate the relationship between
the electrical resistivity of a frozen soil and the salt content of the
frozen soil.

Table 2
Relations between the electrical resistivity and temperature of the frozen soil.

Fitting equations R2
0.601
w = 6% ρ = 207.3θ 0.989
w = 8% ρ = 89.72θ0.753 0.938
w = 10% ρ = 44.42θ0.943 0.992
w = 12% ρ = 22.09θ1.175 0.999
w = 14% ρ = 22.78θ1.117 0.999
w = 16% ρ = 24.08θ1.138 0.999
w = 18% ρ = 32.18θ1.054 1
ρd = 1.42 g·cm−3 ρ = 207.3θ0.601 0.989
ρd = 1.52 g·cm−3 ρ = 192θ0.616 0.983
ρd = 1.61 g·cm−3 ρ = 181.1θ0.6 0.968
ρd = 1.70 g·cm−3 ρ = 167.5θ0.603 0.958
Fig. 14. Curves of the relationship between the electrical resistivity and dry density of the
ρd = 1.80 g·cm−3 ρ = 145.9θ0.638 0.970
frozen soil under different water content conditions (T = −17 °C).
 W. Shan et al. / Cold Regions Science and Technology 119 (2015) 75–83 83

Table 3 the experiments, which verifies the reasonableness of the model

Relations between the electrical resistivity and dry density of the frozen soil. for the electrical resistivity of frozen soils. Further studies are neces-
Fitting equations R2 sary to investigate the related parameters in the model for the elec-
trical resistivity of frozen soils.
w = 6% ρ þ 110:5
ρ ¼ 1532 0.998
d

w = 8% ρ −214:8
ρ ¼ 1522 0.981
d
Acknowledgment
w = 10% ρ −319:3
ρ ¼ 1417 0.999
d

w = 12% ρ −214:3
ρ ¼ 1244 0.982
d This work was supported in part by the Science and Technology Pro-
w = 14% ρ −33:69
ρ ¼ 838:5 0.973
d ject of Chinese Ministry of Transport (No. 2011318223630) and the Fun-
w = 16% ρ ¼ 775:7
ρ þ 68:97 0.991
damental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No. 2572014AB07)
d

w = 18% ρ ¼ 800:6
ρ þ 75:16 1
d

T = −3 °C ρ −98:98
ρ ¼ 253:7 0.996 References
d

T = −10 °C ρ ¼ 350:9
ρ þ 81:77
d
T = −17 °C ρ −244:6
ρ ¼ 1247
d clays. J. Geotech. Eng. 122 (5), 397–406.
5. Conclusions
Based on the three-element conduction model proposed by Mitchell
and the model for the electrical resistivity of unsaturated cohesive soils
proposed by Zha, the present study presents a model for the electrical
resistivity of frozen soils and discusses the factors that affect the electrical
resistivity of frozen soils through theoretical analysis and related experi-
ments. The main conclusions of the present study are as follows:
1. The electrical resistivity of the frozen soil was inversely proportional
to the unfrozen water content of the soil body; the exact proportion-
ality depended on the temperature. The electrical resistivity of the
frozen soil decreased with increasing unfrozen water content of the
soil body. The electrical resistivity of the frozen soil exhibited a com-
plex temperature-related functional relationship with the initial
water content. The electrical resistivity of the frozen soil first rapidly
decreased and then gradually increased with increasing initial water
content of the soil body. The electrical resistivity of the frozen soil
tended to the minimum value near the optimum water content.
When the initial water content was greater than the optimum
water content, the effect of the dry density on the electrical resistivity
of the frozen soil gradually decreased; the effect of the variation of
the water content on the electrical resistivity of the frozen soil in-
creased with decreasing temperature.
2. The electrical resistivity of the frozen soil was exponentially related
to the temperature of the soil body. The electrical resistivity of the
frozen soil increased with decreasing temperature. The effect of the
temperature of the frozen soil on the electrical resistivity of the fro-
zen soil decreased with increasing water content. When there was
a change in the dry density of the frozen soil, the effect of the temper-
ature on the electrical resistivity of the frozen soil was effectively
unchanged.
3. The electrical resistivity of the frozen soil was inversely proportional to
the dry density of the soil body. The electrical resistivity of the frozen
soil decreased with increasing dry density. The effect of the dry density
of the frozen soil on the electrical resistivity gradually decreased with
increasing water content. The effect of the dry density on the electrical
resistivity of the frozen soil increased with decreasing temperature.
4. The relationships between the electrical resistivity of a frozen soil
based on the model of the electrical resistivity of frozen soils and
the various influencing factors are basically consistent with the
relationships described by the fitting equations obtained from
0.997
Abu-Hassanein, Z.S., Benson, C.H., Blotz, L.R., 1996. Electrical resistivity of compacted
0.989
Angelopoulos, M., Pollard, W.H., Couture, N., 2010. Integrated Geophysical Approach for
the Detection and Assessment of Ground Ice at Parsons Lake, Northwest Territories,
Northwest Territories (MSc Thesis) McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Archie, G.E., 1942. The electrical resistivity log as an aid in determining some reservoir
characteristics. Trans. Am. Inst. Min. Eng. 146 (1), 54–61.
Delaney, A.J., Peapples, P.R., Arcone, S.A., 2001. Electrical resistivity of frozen and
petroleum-contaminated fine-grained soil. Cold Reg. Sci. Technol. 32 (2), 107–119.
Fortier, R., Allard, M., Seguin, M.K., 1994. Effect of physical properties of frozen ground on
electrical resistivity logging. Cold Reg. Sci. Technol. 22 (4), 361–384.
Fortier, R., LeBlanc, A.M., Allard, M., Buteau, S., Calmels, F., 2008. Internal structure and
conditions of permafrost mounds at Umiujaq in Nunavik, Canada, inferred from
field investigation and electrical resistivity tomography. Can. J. Earth Sci. 45 (3),
367–387.
Fu, W., 2009. Experimental Study on Electrical Resistivity Characteristics of Silty Clay
Under Uniaxial Compression and Frozen–Thaw Cycles (PhD thesis) Graduate School
of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics), WuHan,
China.
Fu, W., Wang, R., Hu, M.J., Xiang, Y.H., 2009. Study of relationship between uniaxial com-
pressive strength and electrical resistivity of frozen soil under different temperatures.
Rock Soil Mech. 30 (1), 73–78 (In Chinese with English abstract).
Hu, Z.G., Shan, W., 2011. Application of geological drilling combined with high-density
resistance in Island structure permafrost survey. Electronics, Communications and
Control (ICECC), 2011 International Conference on IEEE, pp. 1898–1904.
Li, L., 2012. Study on the Characteristics of the Electrical Resistivity of Saline Soils (Master's
Thesis). Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Li, L., Zhou, Z.H., Zhang, H.Y., 2012. Experimental study on the electrical resistivity of
saline soils. Environ. Eng. 30, 498–503 (In Chinese with English abstract).
Liu, S.Y., Han, L.H., Du, Y.J., 2006. Experimental study on electrical resistivity of soil–ce-
ment. Chin. J. Geotech. Eng. 28 (11), 1921–1926 (In Chinese with English abstract).
McCarter, W.J., Desmazes, P., 1997. Soil characterization using electrical measurements.
Geotechnique 47 (1), 179–183.
Rhoades, J.D., Schilfgaarde, J.V., 1976. An electrical conductivity probe for determining soil
salinity. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. (5), 647–651.
Song, C.X., 2007. Experimental Study on the Freeze–Thaw Effects on the Physical and Me-
chanical Properties of Soils (Master's thesis) Xi'an University of Technology, Xi'an,
China.
Sun, Y.R., Wang, M.H., Zhao, Y.D., 1999. A kind of determinations of soil dielectric constant
using the principle of standing-wave ratio. China Agricultural University. Trans. CSAE
15 (2), 37–41 (In Chinese with English abstract).
Topp, G.C., Davis, J.L., Annan, A.P., 1980. Electromagnetic determination of soil water
content: measurements in coaxial transmission lines. Water Resour. Res. 16 (3),
574–582.
Waxman, M.H., Smits, L.J.M., 1968. Electrical conductivities in oil-bearing shaly sands. Soc.
Petrol. Eng. J. 8 (2), 107–122.
Wu, J., Li, C.B., Sun, H.Z., 1985. Preliminary observations of the variation of the electrical
resistivity of a soil under in-situ conditions. Chin. J. Soil Sci. 2, 13 (In Chinese).
Wyllie, M.R.J., Gregory, A.R., 1953. Formation factors of unconsolidated porous media: in-
fluence of particle shape and effect of cementation. J. Pet. Technol. 5 (4), 103–110.
Xu, X.Z., Wang, J.C., Zhang, L.X., 2010. Frozen Soil Physics. second ed. Beijing Publishing
House, Beijing.
Zha, F.S., Liu, S.Y., Du, Y.J., 2006. Study on the electrical resistivity characterization of un-
saturated clay. Geotech. Investig. Surv. 7, 1–4 (In Chinese with English abstract).
Zha, F.S., Liu, S.Y., Du, Y.J., Cui, K.R., 2013. Effect of soil grain composition on soil electrical
resistivity. Ind. Constr. 43 (3), 71–74 (In Chinese With English abstract).
Zheng, J.F., Ma, W., Zhao, S.P., Pu, Y.B., 2010. Impact of freezing on water content and dry
density distribution by CT technology. J. China Univ. Min. Technol. 01, 80–86 (In
Chinese with English abstract).