Everything is exactly the opposite. Do you have lithology from cores - it can be considered true (u

Never worked with core data, and have to figure it out. Many questions, but no one to ask, decided to turn to you dear forum members for advice. what is nacho cheese made of I have a set of GIS to 10 wells, which was held in 70-80, the core data there, in the form of a table with intervals in which samples were taken, the description of lithology, (color, impurities, inclusion of certain minaralov etc.) as well as the density on selected samples. When I want to build a lithological column GIS based on the core material, as far as I understand, it is necessary on the basis of GIS data, ie the qualitative features what is nacho cheese made of of distributed data on core lithology along the borehole.)) Or ...
Everything is exactly the opposite. Do you have lithology from cores - it can be considered true (unless geologist who carried out the description, what is nacho cheese made of not kicked out of the Insta a sophomore) - because a geologist what is nacho cheese made of in the hands of the core holding. A GIS lithology you "nainterpretirovali" is the result of the interpretation what is nacho cheese made of on the basis of the measured parameters which are measured with errors, and may not always be uniquely characterized by lithology. It is therefore reasonable to adjust to the core of GIS, since the core is a fact, and coincidentally with core data usually check the results of the interpretation of GIS.
Everything is exactly the opposite. Do you have lithology from cores - it can be considered true (unless geologist who carried out the description, not kicked out of the Insta a sophomore) - because what is nacho cheese made of a geologist in the hands of the core holding. A GIS lithology you "nainterpretirovali" is the result of the interpretation on the basis of the measured parameters which are measured with errors, and may not always be uniquely characterized by lithology. It is therefore reasonable to adjust to the core of GIS, since the core is a fact, and coincidentally with core data usually check the results of the interpretation of GIS.
Of course. Choose complex lithological methods (most likely it will be GC and GGKp) delish entire trunk on a more or less homogeneous lithology intervals score mineral components in mineral solver and by adjusting the coefficients what is nacho cheese made of are building lithological model, more or less similar what is nacho cheese made of to the one column that has built geologist at the drilling hole.
Everything is exactly the opposite. Do you have lithology from cores - it can be considered true (unless geologist who carried out the description, not kicked out of the Insta a sophomore) - because a geologist in the hands of the core holding. A GIS lithology you "nainterpretirovali" is the result of the interpretation on the basis of the measured parameters which are measured with errors, and may not always be uniquely characterized by lithology. It is therefore reasonable to adjust to the core of GIS, since the core is a fact, and coincidentally with core data usually check the results what is nacho cheese made of of the interpretation of GIS.
Everything is exactly the opposite. Do you have lithology from cores - it can be considered true (unless geologist who carried out the description, not kicked out of the Insta a sophomore) - because a geologist in the hands of the core holding. A GIS lithology you "nainterpretirovali" is the result of the interpretation on the basis of the measured parameters which are measured with errors, and may not always be uniquely characterized by lithology. It is therefore reasonable to adjust to the core of GIS, since the core is a fact, and coincidentally with core data usually check the results of the interpretation of GIS.
Why do I ask this question may seem silly at the beginning of the opening of his theme, what is nacho cheese made of the fact is that for example in the range of depths ... ... m-core data that goes marl, then ask this question: what about the resistance will be against the formation marl (30 ohm-m can be?)
everything can be - marl - the concept is not too strict. The ratio of clay and carbonate material therein may vary. By geologist much depends. Seen as a core analysis data, where the same sample lithological description was named clayey limestone, and on the chemical. It was analyzed in 95% of the insoluble residue. But it's a rare occasion when we see immediately that someone is lying. And in case you can not prove that the core lies, we have to consider it true a priori information and build on this information for further what is nacho cheese made of interpretation.
Fri, 04/06/2010 - 08:59 # 10
csforfun wrote:
everything can be - marl - the concept is not too strict. The ratio of clay and carbonate material therein may vary. By geologist much depends. Seen as a core analysis data, where the same sample lithological description was named clayey limestone, and on the chemical. It was analyzed in 95% of the insoluble residue. But it's a rare occasion when we see immediately that someone is lying. And in case you can not prove that the core lies, we have to consider it true a priori what is nacho cheese made of information and build on this information for further interpretation.
What is the criterion of representativeness of the core? If the porosity is calculated by the GIS not coincide with porosity