Environmental Earth Sciences

, 75:1466 | Cite as

Injection-induced fracturing process in a tight sandstone under different saturation conditions

Thematic Issue
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Subsurface Energy Storage II

Abstract

To investigate the influence of local hydraulic condition on the water injection-induced fracture behavior in tight sandstone, injection tests under triaxial compression were conducted on samples collected from the Sichuan Basin, China. By means of acoustic emission (AE) monitoring, the fracturing behaviors of two samples of different water saturation patterns, partly saturated (the middle part was dry) and fully saturated, are investigated. Experiment results indicate that the local hydraulic condition plays a governing role in the mechanical properties, AE productivity, fracture nucleation and the geometry of the shear fracture zone. During axial loading stage, the partly saturated sample demonstrated ~35% higher elastic modulus than the fully saturated sample. During the injection-induced fracturing stage, progressively increasing AE activity and dilatancy, with increasing injected water volume, were observed preceding the dynamic fracture in the partly saturated sample, demonstrating a positive feedback between damage growing and fluid flow. More AEs were located in the dry or partially saturated regions at water front and thus produced dilatancy. However, the fully saturated sample shows very low AE activity (5% of that in partly saturated sample) which was initiated immediately before the dynamic fracture phase. Due to the very low permeability (~0.001 mD), volume of water injected into the fully saturated sample during the loading and creep stages is very limited, indicating the observed large dilatancy is governed by pore pressure increasing due to stress compaction. AE hypocenters demonstrated that an irregular shear fracture zone was created in the partly saturated sample, while a relatively flat shear plane was formed in the fully saturated sample.

Keywords

Hydraulic condition Tight sandstone Injection-induced fracture Acoustic emission 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 41274111) and the Hundred Talents Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Xinglin Lei acknowledges the recognition of International Review Expert of Chinese Academy of Sciences. Xiaying Li acknowledges the Grant of China Scholarship Council (201504910596). Additionally, the authors give special thanks to the responsible editor and anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on the manuscript of this article.

References

  1. Atkinson GM et al (2016) Hydraulic fracturing and seismicity in the Western Canada sedimentary basin. Seismol Res Lett 87(3):631–647. doi: 10.1785/0220150263 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baud P, Zhu W, Wong T-F (2000) Failure mode and weakening effect of water on sandstone. J Geophys Res 105(B7):16371. doi: 10.1029/2000jb900087 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dai J, Ni Y, Wu X (2012) Tight gas in China and its significance in exploration and exploitation. Petrol Explor Dev 39(3):277–284. doi: 10.1016/s1876-3804(12)60043-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Duda M, Renner J (2012) The weakening effect of water on the brittle failure strength of sandstone. Geophys J Int 192(3):1091–1108. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggs090 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fortin J, Stanchits S, Dresen G, Guéguen Y (2006) Acoustic emission and velocities associated with the formation of compaction bands in sandstone. J Geophys Res 111(B10):B10203. doi: 10.1029/2005jb003854 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ishida T (2001) Acoustic emission monitoring of hydraulic fracturing in laboratory and field. Constr Build Mater 15(5–6):283–295. doi: 10.1016/s0950-0618(00)00077-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ishida T, Aoyagi K, Niwa T, Chen Y, Murata S, Chen Q, Nakayama Y (2012) Acoustic emission monitoring of hydraulic fracturing laboratory experiment with supercritical and liquid CO2. Geophys Res Lett 39(16):L16309. doi: 10.1029/2012GL052788 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kraft T, Mai PM, Wiemer S, Deichmann N, Ripperger J, Kästli P, Bachmann C, Fäh D, Wössner J, Giardini D (2009) Enhanced geothermal systems: mitigating risk in urban areas. Eos, Trans. Am Geophys Union 90(32):273. doi: 10.1029/2009eo320001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lei XL, Ma SL (2014) Laboratory acoustic emission study for earthquake generation process. Earthq Sci 27(6):627–646. doi: 10.1007/s11589-014-0103-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lei XL, Nishizawa O, Kusunose K, Satoh T (1992) Fractal structure of the hypocenter distributions and focal mechanism solutions of acoustic emission in two granites of different grain sizes. J Phys Earth 40(6):617–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lei XL, Kusunose K, Rao MVMS, Nishizawa O, Satoh T (2000) Quasi-static fault growth and cracking in homogeneous brittle rock under triaxial compression using acoustic emission monitoring. J Geophys Res 105(B3):6127. doi: 10.1029/1999jb900385 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lei XL, Yu GZ, Ma SL, Wen XZ, Wang Q (2008) Earthquakes induced by water injection at ∼3 km depth within the Rongchang gas field, Chongqing, China. J Geophys Res 113:B10310. doi: 10.1029/2008jb005604 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lei XL, Tamagawa T, Tezuka K, Takahashi M (2011) Role of drainage conditions in deformation and fracture of porous rocks under triaxial compression in the laboratory. Geophys Res Lett 38:L24310. doi: 10.1029/2011gl049888 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lei XL, Ma SL, Chen WK, Pang CM, Zeng J, Jiang B (2013) A detailed view of the injection-induced seismicity in a natural gas reservoir in Zigong, southwestern Sichuan Basin, China. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 118(8):4296–4311. doi: 10.1002/jgrb.50310 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lockner DA (1993) The role of acoustic emission in the study of rock fracture. Int J Rock Mech Mining Sci Geomech Abstracts 30(7):883–899. doi: 10.1016/0148-9062(93)90041-B CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lockner DA, Byerlee JD (1977) Hydrofracture in Weber Sandstone at high confining pressure and differential stress. J Geophys Res 82(14):2018–2026. doi: 10.1029/JB082i014p02018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lockner DA, Byerlee JD, Kuksenko V, Ponomarev A, Sidorin A (1991) Quasi-static fault growth and shear fracture energy in granite. Nature 350(6313):39–42. doi: 10.1038/350039a0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Makhnenko RY, Labuz JF (2015) Dilatant hardening of fluid-saturated sandstone. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 120(2):909–922. doi: 10.1002/2014jb011287 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Masuda K, Nishizawa O, Kusunose K, Satoh T, Takahashi M, Kranz RL (1990) Positive feedback fracture process induced by nonuniform high-pressure water flow in dilatant granite. J Geophys Res 95(B13):21583. doi: 10.1029/JB095iB13p21583 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mayr SI, Stanchits S, Langenbruch C, Dresen G, Shapiro SA (2011) Acoustic emission induced by pore-pressure changes in sandstone samples. Geophysics 76(3):MA21–MA32. doi: 10.1190/1.3569579 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McGarr A (2014) Maximum magnitude earthquakes induced by fluid injection. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 119(2):1008–1019. doi: 10.1002/2013jb010597 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ostojic J, Rezaee R, Bahrami H (2012) Production performance of hydraulic fractures in tight gas sands, a numerical simulation approach. J Petrol Sci Eng 88–89:75–81. doi: 10.1016/j.petrol.2011.11.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rozhko AY (2010) Role of seepage forces on seismicity triggering. J Geophys Res. doi: 10.1029/2009jb007182 Google Scholar
  24. Stanchits S, Fortin J, Gueguen Y, Dresen G (2009) Initiation and propagation of compaction bands in dry and wet Bentheim Sandstone. Pure Appl Geophys 166(5–7):843–868. doi: 10.1007/s00024-009-0478-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stanchits S, Mayr S, Shapiro S, Dresen G (2011) Fracturing of porous rock induced by fluid injection. Tectonophysics 503(1–2):129–145. doi: 10.1016/j.tecto.2010.09.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Stanchits S, Burghardt J, Surdi A (2015) Hydraulic fracturing of heterogeneous rock monitored by acoustic emission. Rock Mech Rock Eng 48(6):2513–2527. doi: 10.1007/s00603-015-0848-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sumy DF, Cochran ES, Keranen KM, Wei M, Abers GA (2014) Observations of static Coulomb stress triggering of the November 2011 M5.7 Oklahoma earthquake sequence. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 119(3):1904–1923. doi: 10.1002/2013jb010612 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vásárhelyi B, Ván P (2006) Influence of water content on the strength of rock. Eng Geol 84(1–2):70–74. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2005.11.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wasantha PLP, Ranjith PG (2014) Water-weakening behavior of Hawkesbury sandstone in brittle regime. Eng Geol 178:91–101. doi: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2014.05.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zoback MD, Gorelick SM (2012) Earthquake triggering and large-scale geologic storage of carbon dioxide. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(26):10164–10168. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1202473109 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zou C, Zhu R, Liu K, Su L, Bai B, Zhang X, Yuan X, Wang J (2012) Tight gas sandstone reservoirs in China: characteristics and recognition criteria. J Petrol Sci Eng 88–89:82–91. doi: 10.1016/j.petrol.2012.02.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Geomechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics (IRSM)Chinese Academy of SciencesWuchang, WuhanChina
  2. 2.University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina
  3. 3.National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST)TsukubaJapan

Personalised recommendations