You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I have a sandstone sample that I obtained MICP data and I am trying to match the data with a pore network model so that I can predict relative permeability on that constructed model. The problem is that the MICP algorithm always gives me a sharp increase in saturation, unlike the experimental data. Do you guys have any advice as to how to play around with the distribution to try to have a better match?
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
I have a sandstone sample that I obtained MICP data and I am trying to match the data with a pore network model so that I can predict relative permeability on that constructed model. The problem is that the MICP algorithm always gives me a sharp increase in saturation, unlike the experimental data. Do you guys have any advice as to how to play around with the distribution to try to have a better match?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions