The role of the interbed thickness on the step-over fracture under overburden pressure

Multilayer jointing in tight oil and gas reservoirs is a useful indicator for the prediction of fluid mobility. Since pore pressure balances the principal minor horizontal stress at depth, joint nucleations, considered as sub-vertical, are mainly driven by the overburden pressure. We demonstrate, with a mixed criterion combining necessary conditions of stress and energy, how heterogeneity such as an interbed promotes initiation of a fracture by a step-over mechanism, referring to critical characteristics such as the interbed thickness. A specific initiation criterion emerges, giving rise to a size effect due to the interbed thickness, and is compared to a typical homogeneous rock failure criterion. Jointing over an interbed is enhanced by large interbed thicknesses, even for moderate effective confining stresses. Size effect is reversed according to the relative importance of singular effects (effective minor stress normal to the fracture plane) and structural effect (parallel loading effective conditions).

[1]  William G. Pariseau,et al.  Fitting failure criteria to laboratory strength tests , 2007 .

[2]  N. Price,et al.  Relationship between fracture spacing and bed thickness , 1981 .

[3]  R. A. Bearman,et al.  The use of the point load test for the rapid estimation of Mode I fracture toughness , 1999 .

[4]  B. Derby,et al.  Fracture of metal/ceramic laminates-I. Transition from single to multiple cracking , 1999 .

[5]  Eric Martin,et al.  Prediction of crack initiation at blunt notches and cavities – size effects , 2007 .

[6]  T. Engelder.  Loading paths to joint propagation during a tectonic cycle: an example from the Appalachian Plateau, U.S.A. , 1985 .

[7]  Peter K. Kaiser,et al.  Stress, instability and design of underground excavations , 2003 .

[8]  R. Weinberger,et al.  Joint nucleation in layered rocks with non-uniform distribution of cavities , 2001 .

[9]  Robert W. Zimmerman,et al.  Relation between the Mogi and the Coulomb failure criteria , 2005 .

[10]  S. Ji,et al.  A revised model for the relationship between joint spacing and layer thickness , 1998 .

[11]  P. Segall.  Formation and growth of extensional fracture sets , 1984 .

[12]  R. E. Hill,et al.  Subsurface Fracture Spacing: Comparison of Inferences From Slant/Horizontal Core and Vertical Core in Mesaverde Reservoirs , 1994 .

[13]  N. Fleck,et al.  Failure mechanisms in brittle laminates , 2005 .

[14]  Michele L. Cooke,et al.  Fracture termination and step-over at bedding interfaces due to frictional slip and interface opening , 2001 .

[15]  Michele L. Cooke,et al.  Role of shale thickness on vertical connectivity of fractures: application of crack-bridging theory to the Austin Chalk, Texas , 2001 .

[16]  K. Nihei,et al.  The role of compressive stresses in jointing on Vancouver Island, British Columbia , 2003 .

[17]  Z. Bažant,et al.  Fracture and Size Effect in Concrete and Other Quasibrittle Materials , 1997 .

[18]  N. Warpinski,et al.  Regional Fractures I: A Mechanism for the Formation of Regional Fractures at Depth in Flat-Lying Reservoirs (1) , 1991 .

[19]  Dominique Leguillon,et al.  Strength or toughness? A criterion for crack onset at a notch , 2002 .

[20]  D. C. Drucker,et al.  Soil mechanics and plastic analysis or limit design , 1952 .

[21]  A. Aydin,et al.  Characteristics of joint propagation across layer interfaces in sedimentary rocks , 1991 .

[22]  E. T. Brown,et al.  Underground excavations in rock , 1980 .

[23]  D. Pollard,et al.  Progress in understanding jointing over the past century , 1988 .