{"title":"Thomsen, L., 2023, A logical error in Gassmann poroelasticity: Geophysical Prospecting, 71, 649–663. by Leon Thomsen, University of Houston","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/1365-2478.13567","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Two figure captions in this paper were in error, confusing compressibility and incompressibility (the figures themselves were correct). The proper figure captions are</p><p>FIGURE 2. Comparison of Berea sandstone data from Hart and Wang (2010) for <i>K</i><sub>ud</sub> − <i>K</i><sub>fm</sub> (as functions of differential pressure, <i>p<sub>d</sub></i> = <i>p</i> − <i>p<sub>F</sub></i>) with predictions from Gassmann theory (Equation 1, using data for <i>K<sub>𝑆</sub></i> (from Equation 14; see also the unnumbered equation from B&K following Equation 17), or from VRH theory), and from B&K theory (Equation 19, using data for <i><span>K</span><sub>𝑆</sub></i> and for <i>κ<sub>M</sub></i> (from Equation 21)). The Fluid (water) incompressibility <i>K<sub>F</sub></i> is taken as 2.3 GPa.</p><p>FIGURE 4. Comparison of Indiana limestone data from Hart and Wang (2010) for <i>K</i><sub>ud</sub> − <i>K</i><sub>fm</sub> (as functions of differential pressure, <i>p<sub>d</sub></i> = <i>p</i> − <i>p<sub>F</sub></i>) with predictions from Gassmann theory (Equation 1, using data for <i>K<sub>S</sub></i> (from Equation 14; see also the unnumbered equation from B&K following Equation 17), or from VRH theory), and from B&K theory (Equation 19, using data for <i><span>K</span><sub>𝑆</sub></i> and <i>κ<sub>M</sub></i> (from Equation 21)). The Fluid (water) incompressibility <i>K<sub>F</sub></i> is taken as 2.3 GPa.</p>","PeriodicalId":12793,"journal":{"name":"Geophysical Prospecting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1365-2478.13567","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geophysical Prospecting","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2478.13567","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Two figure captions in this paper were in error, confusing compressibility and incompressibility (the figures themselves were correct). The proper figure captions are
FIGURE 2. Comparison of Berea sandstone data from Hart and Wang (2010) for Kud − Kfm (as functions of differential pressure, pd = p − pF) with predictions from Gassmann theory (Equation 1, using data for K𝑆 (from Equation 14; see also the unnumbered equation from B&K following Equation 17), or from VRH theory), and from B&K theory (Equation 19, using data for K𝑆 and for κM (from Equation 21)). The Fluid (water) incompressibility KF is taken as 2.3 GPa.
FIGURE 4. Comparison of Indiana limestone data from Hart and Wang (2010) for Kud − Kfm (as functions of differential pressure, pd = p − pF) with predictions from Gassmann theory (Equation 1, using data for KS (from Equation 14; see also the unnumbered equation from B&K following Equation 17), or from VRH theory), and from B&K theory (Equation 19, using data for K𝑆 and κM (from Equation 21)). The Fluid (water) incompressibility KF is taken as 2.3 GPa.
期刊介绍:
Geophysical Prospecting publishes the best in primary research on the science of geophysics as it applies to the exploration, evaluation and extraction of earth resources. Drawing heavily on contributions from researchers in the oil and mineral exploration industries, the journal has a very practical slant. Although the journal provides a valuable forum for communication among workers in these fields, it is also ideally suited to researchers in academic geophysics.