4.7 Article

Compaction localization and fluid flow

期刊

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2001JB000813

关键词

permeability; compaction; localization; Castlegate

向作者/读者索取更多资源

[1] When subjected to nonhydrostatic, compressive stresses, some porous sandstones exhibit nonuniform compaction. The compaction occurs as a localization process, analogous to shear localization, but results in a thickening, tabular zone of compaction as opposed to culminating in a shear fracture. We report the results of several triaxial compression experiments done at a confining pressure of 45 MPa on Castlegate sandstone, measuring simultaneously, stress, strain, acoustic emission locations, and permeability. A major result is that compaction localization produces up to a 2 order-of-magnitude decrease in permeability. Correlation of local strain measurements and acoustic emission locations made on the same specimen show that the compaction process proceeds as a propagating front approximately 20 mm thick. A model of the compaction process was developed that incorporates the moving boundary between compacted, low-permeability regions and uncompacted, higher-permeability regions, and compaction-induced fluid injection at the boundaries. Because of the inhomogeneous nature of compaction produced by compaction localization, and its temporal evolution, a number of phenomena related to fluid flow are predicted by the model: locally increased pore pressures and spatial changes in the effective permeability. Experimental results are reported that show the evolution of effective permeability to be linear with respect to the distance the compaction fronts propagated as predicted by the model. Implications of the results for future experimentation and for reservoirs are briefly discussed; in particular, the interaction between compaction-induced fluid pressure and compaction localization should lead to a phenomenon analogous to dilatancy hardening, impeding the propagation of compaction bands.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据