...
首页> 外文期刊>Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology >Reply to discussion on 'Measurement of total core recovery; dealing with core loss and gain' by S. Valentine & D. Norbury Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 44, 397-403
【24h】

Reply to discussion on 'Measurement of total core recovery; dealing with core loss and gain' by S. Valentine & D. Norbury Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 44, 397-403

机译:答复有关“核心总回收量的测量; S. Valentine&D. Norbury《工程地质与水文地质季刊》,第44期,第397-403页,

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The Authors thank the Discusser for providing discussion on a matter that seems so straightforward, and therefore possibly banal, but that yet causes considerable difficulties in practice. We note that we are in agreement on all aspects except the concept of the 'shuffling' of the core extending to the records of Total and Solid Core Recovery (TCR and SCR) and Rock Quality Designation (RQD) presented on the borehole log; the treatment of Fracture Spacing is not mentioned in either the paper or the discussion, but this argument would extend to that index also. The Discusser cites BS5930:1999 (BSI 2010), where the definitions of these indices are given as 'core recovered to length of core run'. We would go further and cite Clause 47.2.6.1 (BSI 2010), where a requirement is given that 'the log should be a record that is as objective as possible of the ground conditions at the borehole position before the ground was subjected to disturbance and loss by the boring process'.
机译:作者感谢讨论者就此问题提供了讨论,该问题看似如此简单,因此可能很平庸,但在实践中却造成相当大的困难。我们注意到,我们在所有方面都达成了共识,但岩心“改组”的概念扩展到了钻孔测井中提出的总岩心回收率(TCR和SCR)和岩石质量指定(RQD)记录;本文或讨论中均未提及断裂间距的处理方法,但该论点也将扩展至该指标。讨论者引用了BS5930:1999(BSI 2010),其中这些索引的定义为“恢复到核心运行时间的核心”。我们将进一步引用第47.2.6.1条(BSI 2010),其中给出了一个要求,即“测井记录应尽可能地客观地反映在地面受到扰动和破坏之前井眼位置的地面状况。无聊的过程所造成的损失”。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号