Laboratory Experiments Contrasting Growth of Uniformly and Nonuniformly Spaced Hydraulic Fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hydraulic fractures that grow in close proximity to one an other interact and compete for fluid that is injected to the wellbore, leading to dominance of some fractures and suppression of others. This phenomenon is ubiquitously encountered in stimulation of horizontal wells in the petroleum industry and it also bears possible relevance to emplacement of multiple laterally propagating swarms of magma‐driven dykes. Motivated by a need to validate mechanical models, this paper focuses on laboratory experiments and their comparison to simulation results for the behavior of multiple, simultaneously growing hydraulic fractures. The experiments entail the propagation of both uniformly and nonuniformly spaced hydraulic fractures by injection of glucose or glycerin‐based solutions into transparent (polymethyl methacrylate) blocks. Observed fracture growth is then compared to predictions of a fully coupled, parallel‐planar 3D hydraulic fracturing simulator. Results from experiments and simulations confirm the suppression of inner fractures when the spacing between the fractures is uniform. For certain non‐uniform spacing, both experiments and simulations show mitigated suppression of the central fractures. Specifically, the middle fracture in a 5‐fracture array grows nearly equally to the outer fractures from the beginning of injection. Furthermore, with some delay, the other two fractures that are suppressed with uniformly spaced configurations grow, and eventually achieve a velocity exceeding the other three fractures in the array. Hence, these experiments give the first laboratory evidence of a model‐predicted behavior wherein certain nonuniform fracture spacings result in drastic increases in the growth of all fractures within the array.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".