Rw Formation Grouping Check
Does grouping by formation actually matter for Rw, or would one shared number work almost as well? Fits Rw separately for every single well (not pooled with other wells), then checks whether wells in the same formation land close together and clearly apart from other formations -- or whether the numbers look about equally scattered no matter which formation a well belongs to.
What "accuracy" means here: This card doesn't compute a usable Rw for any stage downstream -- it exists purely to test the assumption the main Rw Calibration card is built on (that Rw genuinely varies by formation). Many individual wells won't have enough sand-filtered samples on their own to produce a number at all -- those are simply left out, not counted as evidence either way.
Last run: 2026-07-31 10:02:52 UTC
Well-Level Rw, Grouped by Formation
Each small dot is one well's own Rw, fitted independently (not pooled with other wells) -- dots are nudged sideways slightly only so overlapping wells stay visible, the formation each dot sits under is what matters, not its exact left/right position. The larger diamond is that formation's average. Wells clustering tightly under their own formation and clearly apart from other formations means formation is a meaningful grouping; similar scatter everywhere means it isn't.
How this result was generated
the Rw Calibration Card"] perwell["Fit Rw for Each Well
on Its Own (Not Pooled)"] multi["A Well in Several Formations
Gets One Number Per Formation"] spread["Compare the Spread of Those
Numbers Within vs. Across Formations"] verdict["Does Formation
Explain the Difference?"] wells --> perwell --> multi --> spread --> verdict
Hover a step for a plain-language explanation.