For a pore pressure prediction using Eaton's empirical equation, does anyone actually use Katahara's correction of subtracting the velocity at the mud line (Katahara, 2003)? I have found that term adds too much uncertainty if you want to invert for the exponent n, as per Sayers, 2002.
Has tried Eaton exponent equal to 1.5 or 2 (for PPP from compressional sonic wave velocity)
It has been said that if you "break" Eaton's NCT line (forming a total of two lines), the lines must be parallel to each other. Is there an exception to this rule? If so, what is it based upon?
If there are any references or articles on this, please do not hesitate to mention them.
Hello world.
Word cloud for Things Found Online
Word cloud for Related Reading
EXCEPT WHERE OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL CONTENT IS LICENSED UNDER A CREATIVE COMMONS ATTRIBUTION 4.0 INTERNATIONAL LICENSE.
