1990
DOI: 10.1016/0040-1951(90)90057-f
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Response of fractured rock subject to fluid injection Part II. Characteristic behaviour

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

1990
1990
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The bedding plane slip model also explains commonly observed repeated events (multiplets) in a similar location in the vicinity of the opened fracture with very similar source mechanisms. Although the horizontal fault plane is less likely to slip using a simple geomechanical model (Zoback, ), the weak bedding planes can explain why this plane can slip, as has been shown in many geomechanical models: Chuprakov and Prioul (), Gu et al (), and Harper and Last ().…”
Section: Interpretation—the Bedding Plane Slip Modelmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…The bedding plane slip model also explains commonly observed repeated events (multiplets) in a similar location in the vicinity of the opened fracture with very similar source mechanisms. Although the horizontal fault plane is less likely to slip using a simple geomechanical model (Zoback, ), the weak bedding planes can explain why this plane can slip, as has been shown in many geomechanical models: Chuprakov and Prioul (), Gu et al (), and Harper and Last ().…”
Section: Interpretation—the Bedding Plane Slip Modelmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…The simulation results also showed that the diffusion in the matrix may have a significant effect on the overall transport behavior. Last and Harper (1990a,b) and Harper and Last (1990) developed a numerical model to investigate the response of fractured rocks to fluid injection. Discrete element method, similar to that of Cundall and Strack (1979), was used to study the mechanics of naturally fractured reservoirs subject to a constant rate of fluid injection.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hydraulic fracture stimulation treatments were simulated here simply by imposing an approximately steady-state (elliptical) region of pore pressure change around each injection point, which results in similar stress changes around the injection points (perforations). This aids the efficiency of the simulations and simplifies the interpretation of results by removing the inevitable uncertainty associated with the pressure distribution that develops around an injection location (Harper & Last 1990) in real situations. Ten sequential stages spaced by 100 m along a hypothetical lateral aligned with the azimuth of the minimum stress were simulated.…”
Section: Summary Of the Numerical Testsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Otherwise, simulation of stress transmission is either confined to the seismogenic source structure and greatly simplified using a Burridge-Knopoff model (Baisch et al 2009) or omitted (e.g. Hummel & Shapiro 2010) with few exceptions (Pine & Batchelor 1984;Harper & Last 1989;Last & Harper 1990). Some processes that might occur are not normally taken into account, such as small stress changes induced in the reservoir at locations remote from the pressure disturbance or a time-dependence brought about by low rates of fluid flow into dilating fractures in low-permeability rocks such as shales.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%