4.3 Article

Response of submarine hydrologic monitoring instruments to formation pressure changes: Theory and application to Nankai advanced CORKs

Journal

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-SOLID EARTH
Volume 113, Issue B1, Pages -

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2007JB005132

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [19GS0211] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We describe the response of a compressible submarine hydrologic monitoring instrument to formation pressure changes in low-diffusivity rock. The measured pressure depends on the frequency of the pressure signal, the hydraulic diffusivity, and the wellbore storage. The Nankai advanced circulation obviation retrofit kits (ACORKs) (offshore Japan) record tide-induced formation pressure changes with small amplitudes (< 10% of seafloor amplitudes) and large phase shifts (> 25 degrees). The pressure measurements occur in thick, homogeneous, compressible, low-permeability sediment, where in situ tidal pressure responses should approximate the seafloor tidal signal. A wellbore storage of 2 x 10(-8) m(3) Pa-1 can explain many of the observed tidal responses, given the hydraulic diffusivities of the monitored intervals. A reduced permeability around the wellbore of 1000-fold and a wellbore storage of 10(-11) m(3) Pa-1 can also reconcile the data. Our analysis suggests that ACORK screens in the Lower Shikoku Basin facies have a critical frequency on the order of 5 x 10(-8) Hz (equivalent to a period of 250 days); higher-frequency formation pressure signals will be distorted in the pressure record. Within the Lower Shikoku Basin facies the time for this monitoring system to record 90% of an instantaneous pressure change is on the order of 10 d. We suggest that the ACORK instrument compliance contributes to, but does not fully explain, the small tidal amplitudes and large phase shifts recorded at the least permeable monitoring intervals.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available