The Fractured Prediction for Narrow-Azimuth Seismic Data of Carbonate

Liu, Zhong Liang; Zeng, Yi Pei; Liu, Ju Jia

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.675-677.1336

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, prediction of tectonic fractures in reservoirs is based on static (or dynamic) geometric and kinematic models (Pearce et al, 2011;Ferreroa et al, 2013) or seismic technology (Du et al, 2012;Liu et al, 2014), the predictive accuracy of which is much lower than when using geomechanical models (Ju et al, 2014b(Ju et al, , 2015Ju and Sun, 2016). The finite element method (FEM), based on geomechanical modeling can predict not only the distribution of the paleotectonic stress fields (Ju et al, 2014b), but also the development of tectonic fractures based on rock rupture (Ju et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulation of Paleotectonic Stress Fields and Distribution Prediction of Tectonic Fractures at the Hudi Coal Mine, Qinshui Basin

Fang

Sang

Wang

et al. 2017

Acta Geologica Sinica (Eng)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study on tectonic fractures based on the inversion of tectonic stress fields is an effective method. In this study, a geological model was set up based on geological data from the Hudi Coal Mine, Qinshui Basin, a mechanical model was established under the condition of rock mechanics and geostress, and the finite element method was used to simulate the paleotectonic stress field. Based on the Griffith and Mohr‐Coulomb criterion, the distribution of tectonic fractures in the Shanxi Formation during the Indosinian, Yanshanian, and Himalayan period can be predicted with the index of comprehensive rupture rate. The results show that the acting force of the Pacific Plate and the India Plate to the North China Plate formed the direction of principal stress is N‐S, NW ‐ SE, and NE ‐ SW, respectively, in different periods in the study area. Changes in the direction and strength of the acting force led to the regional gradients of tectonic stress magnitude, which resulted in an asymmetrical distribution state of the stress conditions in different periods. It is suggested that the low‐stress areas are mainly located in the fault zones and extend along the direction of the fault zones. Furthermore, the high‐stress areas are located in the junction of fold belts and the binding site of multiple folds. The development of tectonic fractures was affected by the distribution of stress intensity and the tectonic position of folds and faults, which resulted in some developed areas with level I and II. There are obvious differences in the development of tectonic fractures in the fold and fault zones and the anticline and syncline structure at the same fold zones. The tectonic fractures of the Shanxi Formation during the Himalayan period are more developed than those during the Indosinian and Yanshanian period due to the superposition of the late tectonic movement to the early tectonic movement and the differences in the magnitude and direction of stress intensity.

show abstract