Wyllie time-average equation vs Gardner's equation vs RHG Equation for porosity

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the preferred method for estimating porosity from seismic velocity, comparing the Wyllie time-average equation, Gardner's equation, and the RHG equation. The RHG equation is favored for its accuracy in unconsolidated sands and when dealing with brine-saturated conditions, while the Wyllie equation is noted for its limitations in these scenarios. Gardner's equation primarily correlates density with porosity and does not incorporate velocity, making it less suitable for this analysis. The conversation also touches on whether these equations differ from other porosity estimation methods, such as the imbibition method, ideal gas laws, or mercury displacement. The context of the discussion is focused on the application of these equations to water-saturated porous rocks and the advantages of the RHG equation over the others in various rock types. Links to the equations and relevant papers were provided for further reference.
getsrawal
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
TL;DR Summary
Wyllie time-average equation vs Gardner's equation vs RHG Equation and what these equation are different from any other approach for calculating imbition method, ideal gas laws or mercury displacement method
If you were estimating porosity from velocity, which approach would you prefer to use among Wyllie time-average equation, Gardner's equation Or RHG Equation, when and why?

My answer is RHG equation as wylllie equation don't work for unconsolidate sand and give accurate results when it is saturated with brine solution. Garnder's equation mainly relates density with porosity not accounting with velocity and RHG equation is improved one. CAn you please help me with anything i'm missing here.

Are these three equation are different from any other approach like imbition method, ideal gas laws or mercury displacement method for calculating porosity?
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF.

Would I be right in guessing that this question is about seismic velocity, in porous rocks, that are water saturated ?
 
Baluncore said:
Welcome to PF.

Would I be right in guessing that this question is about seismic velocity, in porous rocks, that are water saturated ?
yes it is about comparing results given by three equations. It is to discuss mainley what RPG equation have advantages over wyllie and Gardner's equation and what is appropriate method among three to measure porosity from velocity in different types of rocks.
 
I am interested in the subject, but it is more than 40 years since I shot my last seismic survey.
Can you please post links to the equations.
 

Thread 'Landslide, tsunami, seiche in Tracy Arm fjord, Alaska - 10 August 2025'

On August 10, 2025, there was a massive landslide on the eastern side of Tracy Arm fjord. Although some sources mention 1000 ft tsunami, that height represents the run-up on the sides of the fjord. Technically it was a seiche. Early View of Tracy Arm Landslide Features Tsunami-causing slide was largest in decade, earthquake center finds https://www.gi.alaska.edu/news/tsunami-causing-slide-was-largest-decade-earthquake-center-finds...
View full post »

Thread 'Could an external cosmic body have influenced Earth’s geology?'

Hello, I’m currently writing a series of essays on Pangaea, continental drift, and Earth’s geological cycles. While working on my research, I’ve come across some inconsistencies in the existing theories — for example, why the main pressure seems to have been concentrated in the northern polar regions. So I’m curious: is there any data or evidence suggesting that an external cosmic body (an asteroid, comet, or another massive object) could have influenced Earth’s geology in the distant...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Progress In Calculating The HLbL Contribution To Muon g-2
Replies
0
Views
2K
A review of dowsing: Evidence for and against
Replies
11
Views
27K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top