4.8 Article

Branching of hydraulic cracks enabling permeability of gas or oil shale with closed natural fractures

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1818529116

关键词

fracking; poromechanics; Biot coefficient; seepage forces; damage

资金

  1. Los Alamos National Laboratory [DOE LDRD 20170103DR, OBES DE-AC52-06NA25396]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

While hydraulic fracturing technology, aka fracking (or fraccing, frac), has become highly developed and astonishingly successful, a consistent formulation of the associated fracture mechanics that would not conflict with some observations is still unavailable. It is attempted here. Classical fracture mechanics, as well as current commercial software, predict vertical cracks to propagate without branching from the perforations of the horizontal well casing, which are typically spaced at 10 m or more. However, to explain the gas production rate at the wellhead, the crack spacing would have to be only about 0.1 m, which would increase the overall gas permeability of shale mass about 10,000 x. This permeability increase has generally been attributed to a preexisting system of orthogonal natural cracks, whose spacing is about 0.1 m. However, their average age is about 100 million years, and a recent analysis indicated that these cracks must have been completely closed by secondary creep of shale in less than a million years. Here it is considered that the tectonic events that produced the natural cracks in shale must have also created weak layers with nanocracking or microcracking damage. It is numerically demonstrated that seepage forces and a greatly enhanced permeability along the weak layers, with a greatly increased transverse Biot coefficient, must cause the fracking to engender lateral branching and the opening of hydraulic cracks along the weak layers, even if these cracks are initially almost closed. A finite element crack band model, based on a recently developed anisotropic spherocylindrical microplane constitutive law, demonstrates these findings.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据