Understanding hydraulic fracture mechanisms: From the laboratory to numerical modelling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of fracture networks associated with hydraulic fracturing operations are extremely complex multiphysics processes and there is still no accepted methodology for mapping or realistic recreating such fracture networks. This is an issue especially for modeling purposes, as, ideally, an accurate numerical representation, and subsequent numerical model, should be able to honor the trajectory, type, connectivity, and geometric properties of the complex fracture network generated. This research proposes a novel framework capable of conducting fluid flow numerical simulations based on mapped fracture networks induced during hydraulic fracturing laboratory experiments where a shale sample, under true triaxial reservoir stress conditions, is subjected to fluid injection to mimic a single stage open-hole in-situ hydraulic fracture operation. The resulting post-test fracture network of the shale sample is filled with fluorescent dyed epoxy and subsequently imaged. The images are segmented, and individual fractures are classified based on their geometrical characteristics, as parted bedding planes, opened natural fractures, and newly generated hydraulic fractures. The digital fracture network is numerically represented for fluid flow simulation using a dual-porosity model within the finite volume method. In the numerical reconstruction, fractures are implicitly represented in a set of cells with virtual fracture aperture. The properties of each grid cell are assigned based on fracture classification, and flow between grid cells is explicitly assigned based on the connectivity of the grid cells. Findings show faster fluid drainage parallel to bedding planes (horizontal) than in the vertical direction, indicating strong fluid flow anisotropy. Cited as: Abdelaziz, A., Ha, J., Li, M., Magsipoc, E., Sun, L., Grasselli, G. Understanding hydraulic fracture mechanisms: From the laboratory to numerical modelling. Advances in Geo-Energy Research, 2023, 7(1): 66-68. https://doi.org/10.46690/ager.2023.01.07
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".