American International Petroleum Corp Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : American International Petroleum Corp

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: OILRX who wrote (7502)	2/21/1998 5:08:00 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (2) of 11888

OILREX, excuse my ignorance, but a measurement of water contents come in at 52% (and it is not clear to me if that is just a percentage of the porosity or a percentage of the whole mass) and you tell me they are all wrong by a FACTOR of 5? Gee, I am just a simple physicist, and any measurement that cannot come to within 10% of the real value are often deemed worthless in my profession, and those that come within a factor of 5 are not even worth quoting in the "Journal of Irreproducible Results". If you are right and the inaccuracy is that large, could it be 50% on the other side, like 78% water instead of 52%? When you do a measurement of water electrically, I presume you probably make a measurement of the dielectric loss and AC impedance (at let say 1 Mhz?), and if your geometry is constant, I just cannot see inaccuracies as you quote and certainly not much larger than 10% of the real value. Can you enlighten us, the less proficient in the art of oil logging? By the way, if indeed these are the type of results received in the oil industry, I have got few very simple down well devices ready to improve the industry measurements' accuracy <VBG>. Zeev

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next