Petrophysical characterization, BIB-SEM imaging, and permeability models of tight carbonates from the Upper Jurassic (Malm ß), SE Germany

Geothermal Energy

Science – Society – Technology

Table 1 For determining the best permeability estimation model, the mean residual square error (MRSE) in relation to the corresponding air K_Air and argon K_Ar permeabilities and standard deviations (σ) for each model and applied porosity method (Archimedes porosity: Φ_Ar; He pycnometry: Φ_He; MICP porosity: Φ_Hg) were calculated

Model	Φ_Ar						Φ_He						Φ_Hg						Overall rank
	K_Air			K_Ar			K_Air			K_Ar			K_Air			K_Ar			Overall rank
	MRSE	σ	Rank	MRSE	σ	Rank	MRSE	σ	Rank	MRSE	σ	Rank	MRSE	σ	Rank	MRSE	σ	Rank	K_Air	K_Ar
K-T Model	0.15	0.15	2	0.23	0.26	3	0.13	0.11	1	0.33	0.18	3	0.19	0.18	2	0.20	0.29	3	1	3
Winland Model	0.36	0.33	4	0.20	0.15	2	0.65	0.44	4	0.42	0.27	4	0.28	0.33	4	0.20	0.16	3	4	3
Dastidar Model	0.56	0.23	6	0.26	0.14	4	0.89	0.33	6	0.58	0.30	6	0.55	0.36	6	0.35	0.34	4	6	5
K–C Model	0.44	0.70	5	0.92	1.53	7	0.23	0.25	3	0.32	0.51	2	0.42	0.40	5	0.53	0.73	6	5	6
Bohnsack Model	0.13	0.21	1	0.29	0.41	5	0.78	0.44	5	0.44	0.28	5	0.21	0.19	3	0.14	0.23	2	3	4
GPPT Model	0.72	0.32	7	0.30	0.17	6	1.26	0.58	7	0.73	0.20	7	0.69	0.41	7	0.40	0.19	5	7	7
Saki Model	0.17	0.10	3	0.03	0.02	1	0.20	0.12	2	0.04	0.03	1	0.17	0.11	1	0.03	0.02	1	2	1