1887
Volume 67 Number 4
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

In this work, an experimental study was carried out with the aim of reconciling static and dynamic stiffness of Opalinus Clay. The static and dynamic stiffness of core plugs from a shaly and a sandy facies of Opalinus Clay were characterized at two different stress states. The measurements included undrained quasi‐static loading–unloading cycles from which the static stiffness was derived, dynamic stiffness measurement at seismic frequencies (0.5–150 Hz) and ultrasonic velocity measurements (500 kHz) probing the dynamic stiffness at ultrasonic frequencies. The experiments were carried out in a special triaxial low‐frequency cell. The obtained results demonstrate that the difference between static and dynamic stiffness is due to both dispersion and non‐elastic effects: Both sandy and shaly facies of Opalinus Clay exhibit large dispersion, that is, a large frequency dependence of dynamic stiffness and acoustic velocities. Especially dynamic Young's moduli exhibit very high dispersion; between seismic and ultrasonic frequencies they may change by more than a factor 2. P‐wave velocities perpendicular to bedding are by more than 200 m/s higher at ultrasonic frequencies than at seismic frequencies. The static undrained stiffness of both sandy and shaly facies is strongly influenced by non‐elastic effects, resulting in significant softening during both loading and unloading with increasing stress amplitude. The zero‐stress extrapolated static undrained stiffness, however, reflects the purely elastic response and agrees well with the dynamic stiffness at seismic frequency.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12720
2018-12-11
2024-03-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BatzleM.L., HanD.‐H. and HofmannR.2006. Fluid mobility and frequency‐dependent seismic velocity – direct measurements. Geophysics71, N1–N9.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BatzleM.L., HofmannR., KumarG., DurantiL. and HanD.2005. Seismic attenuation: observations and mechanisms. SEG‐2005‐1565. Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
  3. BossartP.2011. Characteristics of the Opalinus Clay at Mont Terri. Mont Terri Project, Wabern Switzerland.
  4. BowerA.F.2010. Applied Mechanics of Solids. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Delle PianeC., SaroutJ., MadonnaC., SaengerE.H., DewhurstD.N. and RavenM.2014. Frequency‐dependent seismic attenuation in shales: experimental results and theoretical analysis. Geophysical Journal International198, 504–515.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. DetournayE. and ChengA.H.D.1993. Fundamentals of poroelasticity. In: Comprehensive Rock Engineering (eds J.T.Hudson), pp. 113–171. Pergamon Press, Oxford.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. DurantiL., EwyR. and HofmannR.2005. Dispersive and attenuative nature of shales: multiscale and multifrequency observations. 75th annual international meeting, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 1577–1580.
  8. EissaE.A. and KaziA.1988. Relation between static and dynamic Young's moduli of rocks. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts25, 479–482.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. EwyR.T.2015. Shale/claystone response to air and liquid exposure, and implications for handling, sampling and testing. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences80, 388–401.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. FjærE.2009. Static and dynamic moduli of a weak sandstone. Geophysics74, WA103–WA112.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. FjærE., HoltR.M., HorsrudP., RaaenA.M. and RisnesR.2008. Petroleum Related Rock Mechanics. Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. FjærE., HoltR.M., NesO.M., StenebratenJ.F., and others. 2011. The transition from elastic to non‐elastic behavior. 45th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium. American Rock Mechanics Association.
  13. FjærE., StroiszA.M. and HoltR.M.2012. Combining static and dynamic measurements for evaluation of elastic dispersion. 46th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium. American Rock Mechanics Association.
  14. FjærE., StroiszA.M. and HoltR.M.2013. Elastic dispersion derived from a combination of static and dynamic measurements. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering46, 611–618.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. HeerdenW.L.B.1987. General relations between static and dynamic moduli of rocks. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts24, 381–385.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. HofmannR.2006. Frequency Dependent Elastic and Anelastic Properties of Clastic Rocks. Colorado School of Mines.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. HoltR.2016. Bounds of elastic parameters characterizing transversely isotropic media: application to shales. Geophysics81, C243–C252.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. HoltR.M., BauerA. and BakkA.2017. Overburden pore‐pressure changes and their influence on 4D seismic. SEG Technical Program, Expanded Abstracts. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 3632–3636.
  19. HoltR.M., NesO.‐M., StenebratenJ.F. and FjærE.2012. Static vs. dynamic behavior of shale. 46th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium. American Rock Mechanics Association.
  20. KingM.S.1969. Static and dynamic elastic moduli of rocks under pressure. 11th U.S. Symposium on Rock Mechanics, Berkeley, CA, 16–19 June. American Rock Mechanics Association, 329–351.
  21. LozovyiS. and BauerA.2009. A new laboratory technique for measuring P‐wave modulus at seismic frequencies to study velocity dispersion. In: The Rock Physics Handbook, Tools for Seismic Analysis of Porous Media (eds G.Mavko, T.Mukerji and J.Dvorkin), p. 524. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. LozovyiS., BauerA., GigerS. and ChakrabortyS.2018. Static vs. dynamic stiffness of shales: frequency and stress effects. Proceedings of the 52th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium – ARMA. American Rock Mechanics Association.
  23. LozovyiS., SirevaagT., SzewczykD., BauerA. and FjærE.2017. Non‐elastic effects in static and dynamic rock stiffness. Proceedings of the 51th US Rock Mechanics Symposium – ARMA. American Rock Mechanics Association.
  24. MavkoG., MukerjiT. and DvorkinJ.2009. The rock physics handbook. Tools for seismic analysis of porous media, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK; New York.
  25. MikhaltsevitchV., LebedevM. and GurevichB.2014. Measurements of the elastic and anelastic properties of sandstone flooded with supercritical CO2. Geophysical Prospecting62, 1266–1277.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. MinardiA., CrisciE., FerrariA. and LalouiL.2017. The role of anisotropy on the volumetric behaviour of opalinus clay upon suction change. In: Advances in Laboratory Testing and Modelling of Soils and Shales (ATMSS), pp. 315–321. Springer, Cham.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. MüllerT.M., GurevichB. and LebedevM.2010. Seismic wave attenuation and dispersion resulting from wave‐induced flow in porous rocks – A review. Geophysics75, 75A147–75A164.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Nagra . 2002. Projekt Opalinuston: Synthese der geowissenschaftlichen. Nagra Technical Report NTB 02‐23. Nagra, Wettingen.
  29. NyeJ.F.1984. Physical Properties of Crystals: Their Representation by Tensors and Matrices. Clarendon Press, New York.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. PearsonF.J. and WaberH.N.2006. Diffusion and retention (DR) experiment: experimental water chemistry. Mont Terri Project. Technical Note 2006–26.
  31. PimientaL., FortinJ. and GuéguenY.2015. Bulk modulus dispersion and attenuation in sandstones. Geophysics80, D111–D127.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. SarkerR. and BatzleM.L.2010. AnisotropicElastic moduli of the Mancos B Shale – an experimental study. 2010 SEG annual meeting, Denver, CO.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. SchusterK., AmannF., YongS., BossartP. and ConnollyP.2017. High‐resolution mini‐seismic methods applied in the Mont Terri rock laboratory (Switzerland). Swiss Journal of Geosciences110, 213–231.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. SkemptonA.W.1954. The pore‐pressure coefficients A and B. Géotechnique4, 143–147.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. SpencerJ.W.1981. Stress relaxations at low frequencies in fluid‐saturated rocks: attenuation and modulus dispersion. Journal of Geophysical Research86, 1803–1812.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. SpencerJ.W. and ShineJ.2016. Seismic wave attenuation and modulus dispersion in sandstones. Geophysics81, D211–D231.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Suarez‐RiveraR., WillsonS.M., NakagawaS. and Magnar‐NessO.2001. Frequency scaling for evaluation of shale and mudstone properties from acoustic velocities. AGU fall meeting abstracts, Vol. 32.
  38. SubramaniyanS., QuintalB., TisatoN., SaengerE.H. and MadonnaC.2014. An overview of laboratory apparatuses to measure seismic attenuation in reservoir rocks: apparatuses to measure seismic attenuation. Geophysical Prospecting62, 1211–1223.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. SzewczykD., BauerA. and HoltR.M.2016. A new laboratory apparatus for the measurement of seismic dispersion under deviatoric stress conditions. Geophysical Prospecting64, 789–798.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. SzewczykD., HoltR.M. and BauerA.2018. The impact of saturation on seismic dispersion in shales – laboratory measurements. Geophysics83, MR15–MR34.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. ThomsenL.1986. Weak elastic anisotropy. Geophysics51, 1954–1966.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. TisatoN. and MadonnaC.2012. Attenuation at low seismic frequencies in partially saturated rocks: measurements and description of a new apparatus. Journal of Applied Geophysics86, 44–53.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. TutuncuA.N.2010. Anisotropy, compaction and dispersion characteristics of reservoir and seal shales. 44th U.S. Rock Mechanics Symposium and 5th U.S.‐Canada Rock Mechanics Symposium, 27–30 June, Salt Lake City, Utah.
  44. TutuncuA.N., PodioA.L., GregoryA.R. and SharmaM.M.1998. Nonlinear viscoelastic behavior of sedimentary rocks, Part I: effect of frequency and strain amplitude. Geophysics63, 184–194.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. WalshJ.B.1966. Seismic wave attenuation in rock due to friction. Journal of Geophysical Research71, 2591–2599.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. WangH.F.2000. Theory of Linear Poroelasticity with Applications to Geomechanics and Hydrogeology. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. WinklerK., NurA. and GladwinM.1979. Friction and seismic attenuation in rocks. Nature277, 528–531.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. YaleD.P. and SwamiV.2017. Conversion of dynamic mechanical property calculations to static values for geomechanical modeling. 51st US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium, American Rock Mechanics Association.
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12720
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12720
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Anisotropy; Elastics; Rock physics; Seismics

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error