2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.tecto.2006.02.019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Determination of three-dimensional in situ stresses from anelastic strain recovery measurement of cores at great depth

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

2
27
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
2
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The direct measurement of maximum horizontal stress magnitude is more difficult, and few tools for this exist (e.g., Moran et al 1993). As a result, indirect approaches have been widely used to estimate in situ horizontal stress orientation and magnitude from wellbore failures and from fault or fracture orientations measured in borehole logging data (e.g., Moos and Zoback 1990;Zoback and Healy 1992;Brudy et al 1997;Zoback 2007;Chang et al 2010;Ito et al 2013;Lin et al 2015) or from anelastic strain recovery measurements on core samples (e.g., Amadei and Stephansson 1997; Lin et al 2006;Byrne et al 2009). Similarly, in situ strength must be inferred indirectly from downhole drilling parameters (e.g., Kerkar et al 2014) or defined from laboratory measurements (e.g., Horsrud 2001; Song et al 2011;Chang et al 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The direct measurement of maximum horizontal stress magnitude is more difficult, and few tools for this exist (e.g., Moran et al 1993). As a result, indirect approaches have been widely used to estimate in situ horizontal stress orientation and magnitude from wellbore failures and from fault or fracture orientations measured in borehole logging data (e.g., Moos and Zoback 1990;Zoback and Healy 1992;Brudy et al 1997;Zoback 2007;Chang et al 2010;Ito et al 2013;Lin et al 2015) or from anelastic strain recovery measurements on core samples (e.g., Amadei and Stephansson 1997; Lin et al 2006;Byrne et al 2009). Similarly, in situ strength must be inferred indirectly from downhole drilling parameters (e.g., Kerkar et al 2014) or defined from laboratory measurements (e.g., Horsrud 2001; Song et al 2011;Chang et al 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to determine in situ stress orientations and to orientations and to s and to estimate magnitudes, we did anelastic strain recovery (ASR) measurement using a few cores by the same method as Lin et al (2006). Because the anelastic strain recovers immediately immediately from the in situ stress released by drilling, the measurements have to be conducted as quickly as possible after retrieving the core sample.…”
Section: Core Handling On the Drilling Sitementioning
confidence: 99%
“…These values are very heterogeneous along the fault plane and can be regarded as a lower bound because of the 10 limited spatial resolution of the kinematic models, which is at best a few kilometers. If the shear stress drop may be evaluated, the pre-earthquake and the residual stress levels need to be measured in-situ in deep wells and boreholes by hydraulic fracturing technique and analysis of stress-induced well bore breakouts (Zoback and Healy, 1992) or by anelastic strain recovery measurements on cores retrieved from boreholes (Lin et al, 2006). For example, differential stress measured in the SAFOD pilot hole are ≈60 MPa at 1671m depth (Hickman and Zoback, 2004).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%