Abutaha S.M., Geiger J., Gulyás S. & Fedor F., 2022: Calculating the representative elementary volume of porosity using X-ray computed tomography: Boda Claystone Formation core sample/Hungary. Acta Geologica Slovaca, 14, 1, 25–36.
Calculating the representative elementary volume of porosity using X-ray computed tomography: Boda Claystone Formation core sample/Hungary
Saja M. Abutaha1, János Geiger1, Sándor Gulyás1 & Ferenc Fedor2
1University of Szeged, Department of Geology and Paleontology, Egyetem utca 2-6, 6722 Szeged, Hungary; sajaabutaha@geo.u-szeged.hu, matska@geo.u-szeged.hu,gulyas.sandor@geo.u-szeged.hu
2GEOCHEM Ltd, 55/1 Viola Str, 7761 Kozármisleny, Hungary; fedor.ferenc@geochem-ltd.eu
Abstract
The main objective of this study is to calculate the representative elementary volume (REV) according to voxels’ porosity. Physical properties of rock-forming components of a 5 m-long core sample of the Boda Claystone Formation (BCF) were acquired using 3D X-ray computed tomography images. The REV calculation was established using the Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average, Statistical Process Control (ARIMA SPC) technique. This method (ARIMA SPC) was five times iterated by varying positions of starting voxel volume in the core sample: upper left, upper right, lower left, lower right, and middle. The general average range of REV values was from 16.56 cm 3 to 46.26 cm-3 . Monte Carlo simulation with 1,000 runs was used to simulate the long-run properties of REV and the normalized REV of voxel-porosity. The simulated REV values were 64.80 cm-3 in the upper left position, 61.44 cm-3 for the upper right, 55.59 cm-3 for the lower right, 53.77 cm-3 for the lower left, and 42.23 cm-3 for the middle. According to the simulation of the normalised REVs, their volume percentages were as follows: 40% for the upper left, 41.34% in the lower right, 23.86% for the lower left. Lastly, the upper right and the central (middle) positions had almost the same percentage volumes around 15.5%. As the initial volume started from any core sample’s corners, the REV porosity range would be between 2.47% and 2.58%, which is close to the average voxel porosity of BCF (2.55%). However, a deviant (higher) REV porosity value was attained from the centre initiated volume (~2.8%). Therefore, the middle part of the studied core sample might not be adequate to be considered as an initial voxel volume of the REV calculation.
Key words: Hounsfield unit (HU), voxel porosity, Autoregressive Integrated Moving Averages (ARIMA), Statistical Process Control (SPC), representative elementary volume (REV)
Manuscript received: 2021-12-16
Revised version accepted: 2022-05-05
Information
Forthcoming articles
AGEOS 2024, Vol. 16, Issue 1
- Hoppanová E., Ferenc Š, Mikuš T., Dolníček Z., Kopáčik R., Vlasáč J. & Šimonová V.: Hydrothermal quartz-baryte veins containing Pb-Cu-Sb-(Bi) mineralization at Brusno-Brzáčka occurrence (Veporic Unit, Central Slovakia) and their supergene alteration
- Vojtko R. & Kriváňová K.: Cretaceous collision and thrusting of the Veporic Unit onto Tatric Unit in the Nízke Tatry Mts. revealed from structural analysis
- Aherwar K., Šujan M., Chyba A., Rózsová B. & Aster Team: Authigenic 10Be/9Be dating of the Horná Štubňa river terrace points to the inception of the terrace staircase formation in the Turiec Basin (Slovakia) from the Middle Pleistocene transition
- Krčmář D., Hodasová K., Ondrejková I. & Fľaková R.: Impact of clogging layer disruption on riverbed sediment permeability: An experimental study on the Torysa River, eastern Slovakia
- Aubrecht R. & Bačík P.: Palaeokarst with bauxite filling near Čoltovo (Slovak Karst)
Archive
- AGEOS 2023, Vol. 15, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2023, Vol. 15, Issue 1
- AGEOS 2022, Vol. 14, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2022, Vol. 14, Issue 1
- AGEOS 2021, Vol. 13, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2021, Vol. 13, Issue 1
- AGEOS 2020, Vol. 12, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2020, Vol. 12, Issue 1
- AGEOS 2019, Vol. 11, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2019, Vol. 11, Issue 1
- AGEOS 2018, Vol. 10, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2018, Vol. 10, Issue 1
- AGEOS 2017, Vol. 9, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2017, Vol. 9, Issue 1
- AGEOS 2016, Vol. 8, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2016, Vol. 8, Issue 1
- AGEOS 2015, Vol. 7, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2015, Vol. 7, Issue 1
- AGEOS 2014, Vol. 6, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2014, Vol. 6, Issue 1
- AGEOS 2013, Vol. 5, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2013, Vol. 5, Issue 1
- AGEOS 2012, monograph
- AGEOS 2012, Vol. 4, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2012, Vol. 4, Issue 1
- AGEOS 2011, Vol. 3, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2011, Vol. 3, Issue 1
- AGEOS 2010, Vol. 2, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2010, Vol. 2, Issue 1
- AGEOS 2009, Vol. 1, Issue 2
- AGEOS 2009, Vol. 1, Issue 1