We present paired measurements of the water content and electrical conductivity collected in a laboratory column packed with a homogeneous, clean sand over a wide range of water content and pore water electrical conductivity (EC) conditions. The EC was determined using the method of Nadler et al. [1991] from waveforms collected with two‐rod time domain reflectometry (TDR) probes with and without baluns and with three‐rod probes without baluns. Following Heimovaara et al. [1995], we calibrated the probes in saline solutions to account for the series resistance of the cable and connectors. The calibrated EC shows a nonlinear dependence on the water content that is well described by a simple power relationship [Archie, 1942]. Recognizing that calibration in saline solutions is impractical for some TDR probes, we demonstrate that the EC response can be calibrated directly using the results of drainage events, incorporating only a separate calibration of the cable resistance. None of the probe designs shows any clear advantage for EC measurement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ferré et al. (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: