Stress Perturbation From Aseismic Slip Drives the Seismic Front During Fluid Injection in a Permeable Fault

Wynants‐Morel, Nicolas; Cappa, Frédéric; Barros, Louis De; Ampuero, Jean‐Paul

doi:10.1029/2019jb019179

Cited by 52 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 106 publications

(189 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Excited aseismic slip in turn triggers the failure of asperities (earthquakes) far beyond the pressurized area (Figure 2 and supplementary material). The faster expansion of slow slip front has already been reported in many modeling studies (Bhattacharya & Viesca, 2019;Cappa et al, 2018;Dublanchet, 2019;Wynants-Morel et al, 2020). Here, we show that this is even the case in the presence of seismogenic asperities.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…Some simulations are characterized by diffusive expansion, where seismic activity is confined within the pressurized region, in particular for high diffusivities (see Figure ). The transition between diffusive and linear expansion could be interpreted as differences in prestress conditions (Bhattacharya & Viesca, 2019; Wynants‐Morel et al., 2020). We also observe that large understress ( S 0 ) results in a proximity between the seismicity fronts and the pressure fronts.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent modeling efforts have shown that fluid‐induced aseismic slip fronts propagate faster that pore pressure diffusion on frictional faults (Cappa et al., 2019; Bhattacharya & Viesca, 2019; Dublanchet, 2019; Wynants‐Morel et al., 2020) and that earthquake location tracks the stress perturbation associated with the aseismic slip front. These studies have also demonstrated the importance of permeability enhancement related to slip in this triggering process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Dual Seismic Migration Velocities in Seismic Swarms

Dublanchet

Barros

2021

Geophysical Research Letters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dual Seismic Migration Velocities in Seismic Swarms

Dublanchet

Barros

2021

Geophysical Research Letters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The competition between rupture propagation and fluid pressure migration is complex depending on many factors, such as hydraulic conductivity (Cappa et al, 2018), spatially varied frictional properties (Cappa et al, 2019), initial stress state of fault zones (Wynants‐Morel et al, 2020), and fault roughness (Maurer et al, 2020). In our experiments, the fluid pressure front propagates very fast along the highly permeable fault zone and rock matrix outpacing the front of slow fault slip.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Injection‐Induced Seismic Moment Release and Laboratory Fault Slip: Implications for Fluid‐Induced Seismicity

Wang

Kwiatek

Rybacki

et al. 2020

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding the relation between injection-induced seismic moment release and operational parameters is crucial for early identification of possible seismic hazards associated with fluid-injection projects. We conducted laboratory fluid-injection experiments on permeable sandstone samples containing a critically stressed fault at different fluid pressurization rates. The observed fluid-induced fault deformation is dominantly aseismic. Fluid-induced stick-slip and fault creep reveal that total seismic moment release of acoustic emission (AE) events is related to total injected volume, independent of respective fault slip behavior. Seismic moment release rate of AE scales with measured fault slip velocity. For injection-induced fault slip in a homogeneous pressurized region, released moment shows a linear scaling with injected volume for stable slip (steady slip and fault creep), while we find a cubic relation for dynamic slip. Our results highlight that monitoring evolution of seismic moment release with injected volume in some cases may assist in discriminating between stable slip and unstable runaway ruptures. Plain Language Summary Anthropogenic earthquakes caused by fluid injection have been reported worldwide to occur in the frame of waste-water disposal, CO 2 sequestration, and stimulation of hydrocarbon or deep geothermal reservoirs. To study the dynamics of injection-induced seismic energy release in a controlled environment, we performed laboratory fluid injection experiments on critically stressed high-permeability sandstone samples with a prefabricated fault. We monitored acoustic emission occurring during injection-induced fault sliding. We find that the total seismic deformation (expressed as total seismic moment) is related to total injected volume, independent of fault slip modes (i.e., dynamic slip, steady slip, and fault creep). Seismic moment release rate roughly scales with fault slip velocity. In our experiments, the fluid pressure front migrates faster than the rupture front by about 5 orders of magnitude, resulting in fault slip within a zone of homogeneous fluid overpressure. We find that cumulative seismic moment scales linearly with the injected volume for stable slip (steady slip and fault creep), while it follows a cubic relation for dynamic slip. Our experimental results suggest that the deviation of cumulative moment release with injected volume from a linear trend in practice might be a sign for potential seismic risk. This may be considered in modifying current injection strategies.

show abstract

“…As a consequence, the monitoring of microseismicity has become the most common geophysical method for estimating the properties of a macroscopic hydrofracture (Eaton, 2018). However, it has been pointed out that aseismic strain may account for much of the deformation associated with faults or fractures stimulated by fluid injection (Guglielmi, Elsworth, et al, 2015; Wynants‐Morel et al, 2020). This implies that most of the deformation associated with the opening of the fracture will be missed if one simply considers the associated microseismicity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismicity and Stress Associated With a Fluid‐Driven Fracture: Estimating the Evolving Geometry

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A coupled approach, combining the theory of rate-and state-dependent friction and methods from poroelasticity, forms the basis for a quantitative relationship between displacements and fluid leak-off from a growing fracture and changes in the rate of seismic events in the region surrounding the fracture. Poroelastic Green's functions link fracture aperture changes and fluid flow from the fracture to changes in the stress field and pore pressure in the adjacent formation. The theory of rate-and state-dependent friction provides a connection between Coulomb stress changes and variations in the rate of seismic events. Numerical modeling indicates that the Coulomb stress changes can vary significantly between formations with differing properties. The relationship between the seismicity rate changes and the changes in the formation stresses and fluid pressure is nonlinear, but a transformation produces a quantity that is linearly related to the aperture changes and fluid leak-off from the fracture. The methodology provides a means for mapping changes in seismicity into fracture aperture changes and to image an evolving fracture. An application to observed microseismicity associated with a hydrofracture reveals asymmetric fracture propagation within two main zones, with extended propagation in the upper zone. The time-varying volume of the fracture agrees with the injected volume, given by the integration of rate changes at the injection well, providing validation of the estimated aperture changes. These measurements are essentially point observations obtained during fracture movement (Guglielmi, Cappa, et al., 2015). Thus, there is a need for imaging fracture evolution at the field scale. Imaging the opening of a fracture is a difficult task due to the limited width of the feature, the rapid changes in properties, the significant depth of the event, and the complexity of the process, though there have been improvements in seismic imaging (Grechka et al., 2017). Much of the deformation within the fracture, and directly on the fracture surface, is aseismic or at frequencies that require broadband sensors (Guglielmi, Cappa, et al., 2015; Tary et al., 2014). One common feature of an opening fracture is an increase in the number of microseismic events in the surrounding region due to fluid flow and changes in the local stress field. This leads to changes in the rate of microseismicity around the fracture. Such fracture-related microseismicity is illustrated in Figure 1, where we plot events associated with the injection of fluid into a newly created hydrofracture that was monitored using microseismicity. The events detected during the monitoring are from a field experiment that we will analyze in section 3. The microseismic events resulting from the injection of fluid into the fracture were identified and located using 80 seismometers in four boreholes

show abstract

Stress Perturbation From Aseismic Slip Drives the Seismic Front During Fluid Injection in a Permeable Fault

Cited by 52 publications

References 106 publications

Dual Seismic Migration Velocities in Seismic Swarms

Dual Seismic Migration Velocities in Seismic Swarms

Injection‐Induced Seismic Moment Release and Laboratory Fault Slip: Implications for Fluid‐Induced Seismicity

Seismicity and Stress Associated With a Fluid‐Driven Fracture: Estimating the Evolving Geometry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About