MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999482923 · doi:10.1115/1.4030172

Breakdown of a Pressurized Fingerlike Crack in a Permeable Solid

2015· article· en· W1999482923 on OpenAlexafffund
Erfan Sarvaramini, Dmitry Garagash

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Mechanics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMechanicsHydraulic fracturingViscous fingeringCabin pressurizationViscous liquidFracture mechanicsViscosityFluid dynamicsMaterials sciencePressure dropHerschel–Bulkley fluidFracture (geology)Geotechnical engineeringGeologyPorous mediumComposite materialPorosityPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is concerned with the analysis of a low-viscosity fluid injection into a pre-existing, fingerlike crack within a linear elastic, permeable rock, and of the conditions leading to the onset of the fracture propagation (i.e., the breakdown). The problem is of interest in reservoir waterflooding, supercritical CO2 injection for geological storage, and other subsurface fluid injection applications. Fluid injection into a stationary crack leads to its elastic dilation and pressurization, buffered by the fluid leak-off into the surrounding rock. The solution of the problem, therefore, requires coupling of the crack deformation and the full-space pore-fluid pressure diffusion in the permeable rock. Contrary to the case of propagating hydraulic fractures, when significant part of the energy input is dissipated in the viscous fluid flow in the fracture, we find that the viscous fluid pressure drop inside a stationary fracture can be often neglected (we establish the conditions when one can do so). This, in turn, allows for a semi-analytical solution of the problem using the Green's function method, and, furthermore, for the full analytical treatment of the small/large injection time asymptotics. We apply the transient pressurization solution to predict the onset of the propagation based on the criteria derived from the energy considerations for a fingerlike crack.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied MechanicsSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207