1887
Volume 23, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 1354-0793
  • E-ISSN:

Abstract

It is well established that the depositional architecture of dunes (cross-bed orientations and dune boundaries) controls the formation and orientation of compaction bands (CBs) in three dimensions, resulting in a compartmentalized distribution of low-angle bed-parallel CBs and high-angle CBs in the Jurassic aeolian Aztec Sandstone, exposed in the Valley of Fire State Park, Nevada, USA. In this study, we used two idealized configurations to represent the characteristic compartmentalization of CBs in three dimensions and performed flow computations to investigate the fluid-flow effects of these configurations. The results suggest that the upscaled permeability of the compartmentalized compaction-band arrays is influenced significantly by the permeability of the compaction-band sets and their orientations and distributions. In particular, in Configuration A, which represents a combination of both the high-angle and bed-parallel domains, upscaled permeability in the direction normal to the dune trend is controlled primarily by the high-angle CB domain. In contrast, in Configuration B, in which the high-angle CB domain is distributed within a limited portion, upscaled permeability in the direction normal to the dune trend is controlled by both the high-angle CB domain and the bed-parallel CB domain. The upscaled permeability in the direction parallel to the dune trend in Configuration A is controlled by both high-angle CBs and bed-parallel CBs, but in Configuration B it is controlled mainly by bed-parallel CBs. In comparison, in both configurations A and B, upscaled permeability in the vertical direction is controlled primarily by the bed-parallel CB domain.

The orientation of the major permeability component in both configurations A and B remains almost unaffected by the variation in permeability of CB sets, presumably because the preferred flow path crosses a minimum number of CBs. In contrast, the plunges of the minor permeability component changes significantly in Configuration A, but remains nearly the same in Configuration B. This suggests that the interplay between the spatial distributions of CB sets and their permeability exerts significant influence on the orientation of the minor permeability component in Configuration A, whereas the permeability of bed-parallel CBs has dominant control on the minor permeability component in Configuration B. The difference between the magnitudes of the major principal permeability component and the minor principal permeability component (permeability anisotropy) is about a factor of 2.5, 2.2 and 1.9 in Configuration A for cases 1, 2 and 3, respectively, and about a factor of 5.1, 3.4 and 1.3 in Configuration B for cases 1, 2 and 3, respectively. The parametric study implies that the range of potential variations in the permeability values in flow models would generally yield similar results for the major permeability component, but may yield different results for the minor permeability component.

The results presented in this study clearly demonstrate that the compartmentalized distribution of CBs exerts strong influences on fluid flow through aeolian sandstone.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2016-051
2016-11-01
2024-04-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Antonellini, M. & Aydin, A.
    1994. Effect of faulting on fluid flow in porous sandstones: petrophysical properties. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 78, 355–377.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. 1995. Effect of faulting on fluid flow in porous sandstones: geometry and spatial distribution. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 79, 642–670.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Antonellini, M., Cilona, A., Tondi, E., Zambrano, M. & Agosta, F.
    2014. Fluid flow numerical experiments of faulted porous carbonates, northwest Sicily (Italy). Marine and Petroleum Geology, 55, 186–201.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Aydin, A., Borja, R.I. & Eichhubl, P.
    2006. Geological and mathematical framework for failure modes in granular rock. Journal of Structural Geology, 28, 83–98, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2005.07.008
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bohannon, R.G.
    1983. Mesozoic and Cenozoic tectonic development of the Muddy, North Muddy, and northern Black Mountains, Clark County, Nevada: Boulder, Colorado. In: Miller, D.M., Todd, V.R. & Howard, K.A. (eds) Tectonic and Stratigraphic Studies in the Eastern Great Basin. Geological Society of America, Memoirs, 157, 125–148.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Deng, S. & Aydin, A.
    2012. Distribution of compaction bands in 3D in an aeolian sandstone: The role of cross-bed orientation. Tectonophysics, 574–545, 204–218.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 2015. The strength anisotropy of localized compaction in aeolian sandstone: A model for the role of the nature and orientation of cross-beds on the orientation and distribution of compaction bands in 3-D. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 120, 1523–1542.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Deng, S., Cilona, A. et al.
    2015a. Cross-bedding related anisotropy and its interplay with various boundary conditions in the formation and orientation of joints in an aeolian sandstone. Journal of Structural Geology, 77, 175–190.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Deng, S., Zuo, L., Aydin, A., Dvorkin, J. & Mukerji, T.
    2015b. Permeability characterization of natural compaction bands using core flooding experiments and 3D image-based analysis: Comparing and contrasting the results from two different methods. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 99, 27–49.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Eichhubl, P., Taylor, W.L., Pollard, D.D. & Aydin, A.
    2004. Paleo-fluid flow and deformation in the Aztec Sandstone at the Valley of Fire, Nevada—Evidence for the coupling of hydrogeologic, diagenetic, and tectonic processes. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 116, 1120–1136.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Eichhubl, P., Hooker, J.N. & Laubach, S.E.
    2010. Pure and shear-enhanced compaction bands in Aztec Sandstone. Journal of Structural Geology, 32, 1873–1886.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fossen, H. & Bale, A.
    2007. Deformation bands and their influence on fluid flow. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 91, 1685–1700.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Hill, R.
    1989. Analysis of Deformation Bands in the Aztec Sandstone, Valley of Fire State Park. Nevada. MS thesis, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Karimi-Fard, M., Durlofsky, L.J. & Aziz, K.
    2004. An efficient discrete fracture model applicable for general purpose reservoir simulators. SPE Journal, 9, 227–236.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Liu, C., Pollard, D.D. Deng, S. & Aydin, A.
    2015a. Mechanism of formation of wiggly compaction bands in porous sandstone: 1. Observations and conceptual model. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 120, 8138–8152, http://doi.org/10.1002/2015JB012372
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Liu, C., Pollard, D.D. Gu, K. & Shi, B.
    2015b. Mechanism of formation of wiggly compaction bands in porous sandstone: 2. Numerical simulation using discrete element method. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 120, 8153–8168, http://doi.org/10.1002/2015JB012374
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Marzolf, J.E.
    1983. Changing wind and hydrologic regimes during deposition of the Navajo and Aztec Sandstones, Jurassic (?), southern United States. Developments in Sedimentology, 38, 635–660.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. McKee, E.D. & Bigarella, J.J.
    1979. Ancient sandstones considered to be eolian. In: McKee, E.D. (ed.) A Study of Global Sand Seas. United States Geological Survey, Professional Papers, 1052, 187–238.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Porter, M.L.
    1987. Sedimentology of an ancient erg margin: the Lower Jurassic Aztec Sandstone, southern Nevada and southern California. Sedimentology, 34, 661–680.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Si, H.
    2004. TetGen: A Quality Tetrahedral Mesh Generator and Three-Dimensional Delaunay Triangulator, Version 1.3. Institute for Applied Analysis and Stochastics, Berlin.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Sternlof, K.R., Chapin, J.R., Pollard, D.D. & Durlofsky, L.J.
    2004. Permeability effects of deformation band arrays in sandstone. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 88, 1315–1329.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Sternlof, K.R., Karimi-Fard, M., Pollard, D.D. & Durlofsky, L.J.
    2006. Flow and transport effects of compaction bands in sandstone at scales relevant to aquifer and reservoir management. Water Resources Research, 42, W07425, http://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004464
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Taylor, W.L., Pollard, D.D. & Aydin, A.
    1999. Fluid flow in discrete joint sets: field observations and numerical simulations. Journal of Geophysical Research, 104, 28,983–29,006.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Torabi, A., Aydin, A., Cilona, A., Jarstø, B.E. & Deng, S.
    2015. The dynamics and interaction of compaction bands in Valley of Fire State Park, Nevada (USA): Implications for their growth, evolution, and geostatistical property. Tectonophysics, 657, 113–128.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Voskov, D.V. & Tchelepi, H.A.
    2012. Comparison of nonlinear formulations for two-phase multi-component EoS based simulation. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 82–83, 101–111.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Wen, X.H., Durlofsky, L.J. & Edwards, M.G.
    2003. Use of border regions for improved permeability upscaling. Mathematical Geology, 35, 521–547.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Zhou, X.X., Karimi-Fard, M., Durlofsky, L.J. & Aydin, A.
    2012. Fluid flow through porous sandstone with overprinting and intersecting geological structures of various types. In: Spence, G.H., Redfern, J., Aguilera, R., Bevan, T.G., Cosgrove, J.W., Couples, G.D. & Daniel, J.-M. (eds) Advances in the Study of Fractured Reservoirs. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 374, 101–111, http://doi.org/10.1144/SP374.11
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2016-051
Loading
/content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2016-051
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

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