ISRM Suggested Method for Step-Rate Injection Method for Fracture In-Situ Properties (SIMFIP): Using a 3-Components Borehole Deformation Sensor

Guglielmi, Yves; Cappa, F.; Lançon, H.; Janowczyk, Jean Bernard; Rutqvist, Jonny; Tsang, Chin‐Fu; Wang, J. S. Y.

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-07713-0_14

Cited by 27 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The injection borehole is 30 m long, dipping 20°E. The injection was done with a probe named step‐rate injection method for fracture in situ properties (SIMFIP), described in detail by Guglielmi et al []. This probe allows characterizing the hydromechanical response of specific narrow zones or individual fractures alone.…”

Section: Methods: Experiments and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From the hydromechanical data, we will infer the failures determined by (1) an increase of flow rate without an increase of pressure and (2) a change in the deformation direction. We refer the reader to Guglielmi et al [] for a detailled description of the probe and the injection method.…”

Section: Methods: Experiments and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five different series of injections at pressures up to 4.6 MPa were performed on different locations within the fault zone, following the protocol defined by Guglielmi et al []. Inside each series, named tests 1 to 5 (see Figure and Table ), several cycles of injection, with different lengths and pressure, were used.…”

Section: Methods: Experiments and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Fault structure, stress, or pressure control of the seismicity in shale? Insights from a controlled experiment of fluid‐induced fault reactivation

Barros

Daniel²,

Guglielmi

et al. 2016

JGR Solid Earth

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clay formations are present in reservoirs and earthquake faults, but questions remain on their mechanical behavior, as they can vary from ductile (aseismic) to brittle (seismic). An experiment, at a scale of 10 m, aims to reactivate a natural fault by fluid pressure in shale materials. The injection area was surrounded by a dense monitoring network comprising pressure, deformation, and seismicity sensors, in a well‐characterized geological setting. Thirty‐two microseismic events were recorded during several injection phases in five different locations within the fault zone. Their computed magnitude ranged between −4.3 and −3.7. Their spatiotemporal distribution, compared with the measured displacement at the injection points, shows that most of the deformation induced by the injection is aseismic. Whether the seismicity is controlled by the fault architecture, mineralogy of fracture filling, fluid, and/or stress state is then discussed. The fault damage zone architecture and mineralogy are of crucial importance, as seismic slip mainly localizes on the sealed‐with‐calcite fractures which predominate in the fault damage zone. As no seismicity is observed in the close vicinity of the injection areas, the presence of fluid seems to prevent seismic slips. The fault core acts as an impermeable hydraulic barrier that favors fluid confinement and pressurization. Therefore, the seismic behavior seems to be strongly sensitive to the structural heterogeneity (including permeability) of the fault zone, which leads to a heterogeneous stress response to the pressurized volume.

show abstract

Section: Methods: Experiments and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methods: Experiments and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fault structure, stress, or pressure control of the seismicity in shale? Insights from a controlled experiment of fluid‐induced fault reactivation

Barros

Daniel²,

Guglielmi

et al. 2016

JGR Solid Earth

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Water was injected into a 2.4 m long chamber between two inflatable packers spanning four fractures (with strike N110° to N140° and dipping 25° to 45°SW) and 10 fault planes (nine with strike N035° to N068° and dipping 31° to 40°SE; and one with strike N110° and dipping 24°SW; Figures b and c). While pressurizing the interval, we used a High Pulse Poroelasticity Probe (HPPP; Guglielmi et al, ; Figure c) to simultaneously monitor the three‐dimensional displacement of the injection chamber wall, the fluid pressure variation, and the flow rate at a 500 Hz sampling rate. The accuracy on the measured displacements and pressure are ±5 μm and ±0.001 MPa, respectively.…”

Section: Field Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Permeability Variations Associated With Fault Reactivation in a Claystone Formation Investigated by Field Experiments and Numerical Simulations

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We studied the relation between rupture and changes in permeability within a fault zone intersecting the Opalinus Clay formation at 300 m depth in the Mont Terri Underground Research Laboratory (Switzerland). A series of water injection experiments were performed in a borehole straddle interval set within the damage zone of the main fault. A three‐component displacement sensor allowed an estimation of the displacement of a minor fault plane reactivated during a succession of step rate pressure tests. The experiment reveals that the fault hydromechanical (HM) behavior is different from one test to the other with varying pressure levels needed to trigger rupture and different slip behavior under similar pressure conditions. Numerical simulations were performed to better understand the reason for such different behavior and to investigate the relation between rupture nucleation, permeability change, pressure diffusion, and rupture propagation. Our main findings are as follows: (i) a rate frictional law and a rate‐and‐state permeability law can reproduce the first test, but it appears that the rate constitutive parameters must be pressure dependent to reproduce the complex HM behavior observed during the successive injection tests; (ii) almost similar ruptures can create or destroy the fluid diffusion pathways; (iii) a too high or too low diffusivity created by the main rupture prevents secondary rupture events from occurring whereas “intermediate” diffusivity favors the nucleation of a secondary rupture associated with the fluid diffusion. However, because rupture may in certain cases destroy permeability, this succession of ruptures may not necessarily create a continuous hydraulic pathway.

show abstract

“…1a). The studied test was performed in the west damage zone using the mHPP probe according to the step-rate injection method for fracture in situ properties (SIMFIP) [28]. A 2.4-m injection chamber was isolated by the dualpacker system of the probe (Fig.…”

Section: In Situ Experimental Setting and Injection Test Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hydromechanical reactivation of natural discontinuities: mesoscale experimental observations and DEM modeling

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fracture interaction mechanisms and reactivation of natural discontinuities under fluid pressurization conditions can represent critical issues in risk assessment of caprock integrity. A field injection test, carried out in a damage fault zone at the decameter scale, i.e., mesoscale, has been studied using a distinct element model. Given the complex structural nature of the damage fault zone hydraulically loaded, the contribution of fracture sets on the bulk permeability has been investigated. It has been shown that their orientation for a given in situ stress field plays a major role. Based on these results, a simpler model with a fluid-driven fracture intersecting a second fracture has been set up to perform a sensitivity analysis. It is in presence of a minimum differential stress value with a minimum angle with the maximum principal stress that the second fracture could be both, hydraulically and mechanically reactivated. Results also showed that in the vicinity of the fluid-driven fracture, a natural fracture will offer contrasted hydromechanical responses on each side of the intersection depending on the stress conditions and its orientation with respect to the stress field. In this case, we show that a hydromechanical decoupling can occur along the same plane. These results provide insights into fracture-controlled permeability of fault zones depending on the properties of the fractures and their hydromechanical interactions for a given in situ stress field.

show abstract

ISRM Suggested Method for Step-Rate Injection Method for Fracture In-Situ Properties (SIMFIP): Using a 3-Components Borehole Deformation Sensor

Cited by 27 publications

References 14 publications

Fault structure, stress, or pressure control of the seismicity in shale? Insights from a controlled experiment of fluid‐induced fault reactivation

Fault structure, stress, or pressure control of the seismicity in shale? Insights from a controlled experiment of fluid‐induced fault reactivation

Permeability Variations Associated With Fault Reactivation in a Claystone Formation Investigated by Field Experiments and Numerical Simulations

Hydromechanical reactivation of natural discontinuities: mesoscale experimental observations and DEM modeling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About