2017
DOI: 10.1093/gji/ggx080
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

2.5-D discrete-dual-porosity model for simulating geoelectrical experiments in fractured rock

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

3
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These methods are used to infer rock porosity from in-situ measurements relying on laboratory-scale petrophysical relationships (e.g., [13][14][15]), but also to obtain vertically distributed information on reservoir content and heterogeneities along boreholes (e.g., [16][17][18]). As demonstrated by several studies, when electrical measurements are acquired along the Earth's surface with various electrode spacing, they also provide information on the presence and properties of fractures at several depths (e.g., [19][20][21]). …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These methods are used to infer rock porosity from in-situ measurements relying on laboratory-scale petrophysical relationships (e.g., [13][14][15]), but also to obtain vertically distributed information on reservoir content and heterogeneities along boreholes (e.g., [16][17][18]). As demonstrated by several studies, when electrical measurements are acquired along the Earth's surface with various electrode spacing, they also provide information on the presence and properties of fractures at several depths (e.g., [19][20][21]). …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, all of the studies cited above have focused on either the impact of multiple fractures or fracture networks on the bulk resistivity characteristics of the subsurface, or the influence of fracture zones on ERT data. Recent numerical modeling results, however, suggest that, despite the well-known limits in resolution of ERT methods from a tomographic inverse standpoint [42][43][44], even a single millimeter-scale fracture in the near-surface can significantly influence the distribution of subsurface electric potential [45], which in some cases can produce a strong anomaly in ER profiling data [46]. A systematic study of the magnitude of changes in such data, corresponding to different fracture configurations, is therefore necessary to evaluate whether, and under what conditions, ER data might be used to characterize individual fractures.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this work, we explore whether surface-based ER measurements may be used to recover information about fractures in near-surface bedrock aquifers. To this end, we conduct a detailed numerical analysis using a highly efficient and accurate 2.5D modeling approach that is based on an explicit representation of the fractures, with no limit to the complexity of the considered fracture distribution [45,46]. After presenting the methodological background for our study, we show the results of ER profiling over a single buried fracture considering various values for the fracture length, dip angle, aperture, and electrical resistivity, as well as different values for the overburden thickness and resistivity.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The primary reason for this has been the absence of tools for numerically modelling electric current flow in fractured media. Whereas fluid flow can be rather easily examined because the rock matrix is often ignored on the basis that it is effectively impervious (Neuman 2005;Maillot et al 2016;Cvetkovic 2017), this is not the case for the electrical conductivity where the matrix typically plays an important role in the conduction of electric current (Roubinet & Irving 2014;Roubinet et al 2016;Caballero Sanz et al 2017;Beskardes & Weiss 2018). As a result, modelling approaches that explicitly account for both the fractures and matrix, as well as interactions between these domains, are required.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%