Poroelastic Effects in Reactivation of a Fingerlike Hydraulic Fracture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper studies the transient pressurization of a pre-existing, fingerlike crack in a poroelastic, permeable rock due to a fluid injection, the problem previously considered in the nonporoelastic reservoir context in the companion paper (Sarvaramini and Garagash, 2015, “Breakdown of a Pressurized Fingerlike Crack in a Permeable Solid,” J. Appl. Mech., 82(6), p. 061006). Large-scale fluid leak-off from the crack and the associated pore-fluid diffusion within the permeable rock formation lead to dilation of the pore volume, which acts to additionally confine/close the crack. The influence of this so-called “poroelastic backstress” on the evolution of the fluid pressure in the crack and the onset of the fracture propagation are investigated. We first revisit the existing solution to an auxiliary problem of a poroelastic crack subjected to a step pressure increase and generalize it to account for the full-space fluid leak-off diffusion. This solution is then used to formulate the solution to the transient pressurization of the crack due to a constant rate of fluid injection via the Green's function approach. Comparison to the reference solution for a fingerlike crack in a nonporoelastic reservoir shows that the poroelasticity has a minor effect on the fluid pressure evolution in the crack. However, the evolution of the fracture volume and the onset of the fracture propagation are shown to be significantly hindered by the poroelastic backstress at large enough injection time when fluid diffusion becomes fully two- or three-dimensional.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".