1887
Volume 72, Issue 7
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

Abstract

Since many years ago, ultrasonic velocity has been used to investigate the physical and mechanical behaviour of rocks, thereby playing an important role in reservoir characterization and seismic interpretation. In order to develop the knowledge of ultrasonic tools, I performed a noble analysis on the ultrasonic behaviour of rocks under confining stress and evaluated a distinctive property of porous media that is measured as the area under the stress–velocity curve (here defined as ). I further investigated its relationship with elastic and mechanical behaviours of rock. To validate the theoretical framework developed in this work, 20 core plugs from various rock units with complex microstructures were subjected to triaxial compressional tests to calculate their area under the curve. Calculations were made for crack‐closing, elastic and post‐elastic stages (e.g. pore collapse) along the ultrasonic velocity–stress curve. Moreover, the selected samples had their microstructure investigated by thin‐section studies to quantify their porosity and pore type. The results were analysed to check for the effect of pore type on in different stages of the stress–velocity curve. Based on the outputs of the analysis of variance and Pearson's correlation coefficient analysis, the curve had its shape and underlying area closely related to the porosity and pore geometry. Indeed, the results showed that the shale and sandstone with micro cracks and carbonate with stiff pores correspond to smaller and larger areas under the curve in crack‐closing and inelastic stages, respectively. Cross‐correlating the results to compressibility (inverse of bulk modulus), it was figured out that the calculated area under curve was well consistent with the compressibility. In addition, represents both static and dynamic behaviours of the rock, and the results revealed that the shape and curvature of the stress–velocity curve give valuable information about the rock microstructure. Another finding was the fact that the type of fluid and wave velocity seemingly affect the . Our findings can help interpret wave velocity behaviour in reservoir rocks and other stressful porous media.

© 2024 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2024 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13525
2024-08-23
2025-12-08

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13525
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alassi, H. & Holt, R. (2010) Modeling fracturing in rock using a modified discrete element method with plasticity. Key Engineering Materials, 452–453, 861–864.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Anselmetti, F.S. & Eberli, G.P. (1999) The velocity‐deviation log: a tool to predict pore type and permeability trends in carbonate drill holes from sonic and porosity or density logs. AAPG Bulletin, 83(3), 450–466. https://doi.org/10.1306/00AA9BCE-1730-11D7-8645000102C1865D
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Avseth, P., Mukerji, T. & Mavko, G. (2005) Quantitative seismic interpretation: applying rock physics tools to reduce interpretation risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Ba, J., Xu, W., Fu, L.‐Y., Carcione, J.M. & Zhang, L. (2017) Rock anelasticity due to patchy saturation and fabric heterogeneity: a double double‐porosity model of wave propagation. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 122(3), 1949–1976. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/2016JB013882.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bakhorji, A. & Schmitt, D. (2022) Understanding carbonates from Saudi Arabia: laboratory measurements of elastic properties. Part I. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 206, 104820, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2022.104820.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bashah, N.S.I., & Pierson, B.J. (2012) The impact of pore geometry and microporosity on velocity‐porosity relationship in carbonates of Central Luconia, Sarawak. Paper presented at The Presentation at AAPG International Conference and Exhibition, Singapore. https://www.searchanddiscovery.com/documents/2012/41030bashah/ndx_bashah.pdf
  7. Berg, R. & Stork, D. (2004) The physics of sound, 3rd edition, London: Pearson.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Beer, F.P., Johnston, E.R. & DeWolf, J.T. (2006) Mechanics of materials, 4th edition, New York: McGraw Hill Education.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Birch, A.F. (1960) The velocity of compressional waves in rocks to 10 kilobars. Part 1. Journal of Geophysical Research, 65(4), 1083–1102.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Boresi, A.P., Schmidt, J.R. & Sidebottom, M.O. (1993) Advanced mechanics of materials, 5th edition, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Brady, B.H.G. & Brown, E.T. (2004) Rock mechanics for underground mining, 4st edition, London: Allen & Unwin.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Chai, J., Wu, S.‐C. & Maria, T. (2019) Correlation between seismic wave velocity, rock porosity and maximum principal stress based on the laboratory test data. Engineering Review, 39, 37.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Coussy, O. (2004) Poromechanics. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Dvorkin, J., Mavko, G. & Nur, A. (1995) Squirt flow in fully saturated rocks. Geophysics, 60(1), 97–107. Available from: https://library.seg.org/doi/abs/10.1190/1.1443767.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Dvorkin, J., Mavko, G. & Nur, A. (1999) Overpressure detection from compressional‐ and shear‐wave data. Geophysical Research Letters, 26(22), 3417–3420. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1029/1999GL008382.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. De Winter, J. (2013) Using the Student's t‐test with extremely small sample sizes. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 18, 10.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Fei, W., Huiyuan, B., Jun, Y. & Yonghao, Z. (2016) Correlation of dynamic and static elastic parameters of rock electronic. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 21(4), 1551–1560.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Fjær, E. (2019) Relations between static and dynamic moduli of sedimentary rocks. Geophysical Prospecting, 67(1), 128–139. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1365‐2478.12711.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Fortin, J., Guéguen, Y. & Schubnel, A. (2007) Effect of pore collapse and grain crushing on ultrasonic velocities and VP/VS. Journal of Geophysical Research, 112, B08207. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JB004005.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Goodman, R.E. (1989) Introduction to rock mechanics, 2nd edition, New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Hashiba, K. & Fukui, K. (2014) New multi‐stage triaxial compression test to investigate the loading‐rate dependence of rock strength. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 37(6), 1087–1091.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Hass, J., Heil, C. & Weir, M. (2017) Thomas' calculus, 14th edition, London: Pearson.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Hornby, B.E. (1998) Experimental laboratory determination of the dynamic elastic properties of wet, drained shales. Journal of Geophysical Research, Solid Earth and Planets, 103, 945–964.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Ide, J.M. (1936) Comparison of statically and dynamically determined Young's modulus of rocks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 22, 81–92.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Kim, M. & Ko, H. (1979) Multistage triaxial testing of rocks. Geotechnical Testing Journal, 2(2), 98–105.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. King, M.S. (1983) Static and dynamic elastic properties of rocks from the Canadian Shield. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics, 20, 237–241.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Lowrie, W. (2020) Fundamentals of geophysics, 3rd edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. LuciaF.J. (1999) Carbonate reservoir characterization. New York: Springer‐Verlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Ma, R., Ba, J., Carcione, J. & Lebedev, M. (2021) P‐wave scattering by randomly distributed aligned cracks in fractal media. Geophysical Journal International, 229(2), 900–914.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Martınez, J., Benavente, D. & Garcıa‐del‐Cura, M.A. (2012) Comparison of the static and dynamic elastic modulus in carbonate rocks. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 71, 263–268.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Mavko, G., Mukerji, T. & Dvorkin, J. (2009) The rock physics handbook: tools for seismic analysis of porous media. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Mena‐Negrete, J., Valdiviezo‐Mijangos, O.C., Coconi‐Morales, E. & Nicolás‐López, R. (2021) Micromechanical modeling of ultrasonic velocity for pore‐structure and porosity characterization considering anisotropy in carbonate samples. Geofísica Internacional, 60(40), 294–319. Available from: https://doi.org/10.22201/igeof.00167169p.2021.60.4.2118.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Molyneux, J.B. & Schmitt, D.R. (1999) First break timing: arrival onset times by direct correlation. Geophysics, 64, 1492–1501.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Mondol, N.H., Bjørlykke, K., Jahren, J. & Høeg, K. (2007) Experimental mechanical compaction of clay mineral aggregates—changes in physical properties of mudstones during burial. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 24, 289–311.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Motiei, H. (1993) Stratigraphy of Zagros. Tehran: Geological Survey of Iran.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Motra, H.B., Mager, J., Ismail, A., Wuttke, F., Rabbel, W., Köhn, D. et al. (2018) Determining the influence of pressure and temperature on the elastic constants of anisotropic rock samples using ultrasonic wave techniques. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 159, 715–730. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2018.10.016.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Muhammad, A, Ashraf, U., Zhu, P., Ma, H., Jiang, R., Lei, G. et al. (2023) Quantitative characterization of shallow marine sediments in tight gas fields of Middle Indus Basin: a rational approach of multiple rock physics diagnostic models. Processes, 11, 323. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11020323.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Mukerji, T., Berryman, J.G., Mavko, G. & Berge, P.A. (1995) Differential effective medium modeling of rock elastic moduli with critical porosity constraints. Geophysical Research Letters, 22, 555–558.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Myer, L. (2000) Fractures as collections of cracks. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 37, 231–243.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Nabavi, M.H. (1976) An introduction to geology of Iran (in Persian). Tehran: Geological Survey of Iran.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Najibi, A.R. & Asef, M.R. (2014) Prediction of seismic‐wave velocities in rock at various confining pressures based on unconfined data. Geophysics, 79(4), D235–D242.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Nur, A. & Wang, Z. (1989) Seismic and acoustic velocities in reservoir rocks. Houston: Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Omar, M. (2017) Empirical correlations for predicting strength properties of rocks—United Arab Emirates. International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 11(3), 248–261. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/19386362.2016.1214339.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Rawlings, J.O., Pantula, S.G. & Dickey, D.A. (1998) Applied regression analysis: a research tool, 2nd edition, New York: Springer‐Verlag New York, Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Sayers, C.M. (2008) The elastic properties of carbonates. The Leading Edge, 27(8), 1020–1024.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Serra, O. (2008) Well logging handbook. Paris: TECHNIP.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Sharifi, J., Saberi, M.R., Javaherian, A. & Hafezi Moghaddas, N. (2020) Investigation of static and dynamic bulk moduli in a carbonate field. Exploration Geophysics, 52(1), 16–41. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/08123985.2020.1756693.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Sharifi, J., Mirzakhanian, M., Saberi, M.R., Moradi, M. & Sharifi, M. (2018) Quantification of pore type system in carbonate rocks for rock physics modeling. 80th EAGE Conference & Exhibition, Copenhagen, Denmark. Utrecht, the Netherlands, EAGE. pp. 1–5. Tu A11 12, Available from: https://doi.org/10.3997/2214‐4609.201800674.
  49. Sharifi, J., Hafezi Moghaddas, N., Saberi, M.R. & Mondol, N.H. (2023) A novel approach for fracture porosity estimation of carbonate reservoirs. Geophysical Prospecting, 71(4), 664–681. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365‐2478.13321.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Sharifi, J, Hafezi Moghaddas, N., Khoshdel, H. & Khanehbad, M. (2023) Feasibility study of pore pressure prediction in carbonate rocks. Geophysics, 88(6), MR323–MR332. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2022‐0667.1.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Sharifi, J. (2022a) Intelligent pore type characterization: improved theory for rock physics modelling. Geophysical Prospecting, 70(5), 921–937. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/1365‐2478.13204.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Sharifi, J. (2022b) Multi‐pore rock physics model: an intelligent approach for carbonate rocks. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 218, 111002. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2022.111002.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Stovas, A., Alkhalifah, T. & Bin Waheed, U. (2020) Pure P and S wave equations in transversely isotropic media. Geophysical Prospecting, 68, 2762–2769, https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13026
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Tomas, B. Co (2013) Methods of applied mathematics for engineers and scientists, 1st edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Walpole, R.E., Myers, R.H., Myers, S.L. & Ye, K. (2012) Probability & statistics for engineers & scientists.London: Pearson Education, Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Walsh, J.B. (1965) The effect of cracks on the compressibility of rock. Journal of Geophysical Research, 70(2), 381–389.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Wang, Z., Hirsche, W.K. & Sedgwick, G. (1991) Seismic velocities in carbonate rocks. Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology, 30(2), Paper Number: PETSOC‐91‐02‐09. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2118/91‐02‐09.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Wang, Z., Schmitt, D.R., Zhou, W., Wang, R., Zang, Y. & Zeng, Y. (2019) The stress dependence of velocities and its influencing factors for carbonate rocks in Arab formation. Saudi Arabia. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 173, 1368–1381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2018.10.103.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Wang, J., Chu, X., Zhang, J. & Liu, H. (2019) The effects of microstructure on wave velocity and wavefront in granular assemblies with binary‐sized particles. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 159, 156–162.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Weger, R.J., Eberli, G.P., Baechle, G.T., Massaferro, J.L. & Sun, Y.F. (2009) Quantification of pore structure and its effect on sonic velocity and permeability in carbonates. AAPG Bulletin, 93(10), 1297–1317.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Wepfer, W.W. & Christensen, N.I. (1991) A seismic velocity‐confining pressure relation, with applications. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts, 28(5), 451–456.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Winkler, K.W. (1986) Estimates of velocity dispersion between seismic and ultrasonic frequencies. Geophysics, 51(1), 183–189.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Wyllie, M.R.J., Gregory, A.R. & Gardner, L.W. (1956) elastic wave velocities in heterogeneous and porous media. Geophysics, 21(1), 41–70. Available from: https://library.seg.org/doi/abs/10.1190/1.1438217.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Yin, H. (1992) Acoustic velocity and attenuation of rocks: isotropy, intrinsic anisotropy and stress induced anisotropy. Ph.D. thesis, Stanford, CA, United States: Stanford University.
  65. Xu, S. & Payne, M.A. (2009) Modeling elastic properties in carbonate rocks. The Leading Edge, 28, 66–74. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3064148.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Xu, S. & White, R.E. (1995), A new velocity model for clay–sand mixtures. Geophysical Prospecting, 43, 91–118.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Zaima, K. & Katayama, I. (2018) Evolution of elastic wave velocities and amplitudes during triaxial deformation of Aji granite under dry and water‐saturated conditions. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 123, 9601–9614. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JB016377.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Zhang, L., Zhang, Z., Zhang, R., Gao, M. & Xie, J. (2021) The ultrasonic P‐wave velocity‐stress relationship and energy evolution of sandstone under uniaxial loading‐unloading conditions. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering, 11, 9921716. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/9921716.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Zhao, L., Nasser, M. & Han, D. (2013) Quantitative geophysical pore‐type characterization and its geological implication in carbonate reservoirs. Geophysical Prospecting, 61, 827–841.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Zhukov, V., Kuzmin, Y., Tikhotsky, S., Egorov, N. & Fokin, I. (2022) Changes in the fracture and intergranular porosity in rock fracture preparation. Seismic Instruments, 58, 379–388.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Zimmerman, R.W. (2017) Pore volume and porosity changes under uniaxial strain conditions. Journal of Transport in Porous Media, 119(2), 481–498. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242‐017‐0894‐0.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13525
Loading
Introducing the area under stress–velocity curve: Theory, measurement and association with rock properties
Geophysical Prospecting 72, 2685 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13525
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13525
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13525
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Acoustics; Area under stress–velocity curve; hydrostatic stress; Pore type; Ultrasonic

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