MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Influence of Increasing Mean Stress on Fatigue Properties of Shale during Pulsating Hydraulic Fracturing

2022· article· en· W4309628759 on OpenAlexaff
Yanan Hou, Peng Yan, Yishan Liu, Zhangxin Chen, Baitao Fan, Zhiming Yin, Guangqing Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Beijing MunicipalityChina National Petroleum CorporationChina University of Petroleum, BeijingNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsOil shaleAmplitudeMaterials scienceCyclic stressHydraulic fracturingCompressive strengthStress (linguistics)Fatigue limitComposite materialStructural engineeringGeotechnical engineeringGeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During pulsating hydraulic fracturing (PHF), reservoir rock can be subjected to constant amplitude, constant mean stress (CACMS) cyclic loading or constant amplitude, increasing mean stress (CAIMS) cyclic loading. The influence of increasing mean stress on rock fatigue strength, fatigue lifetime, fatigue damage, and energy evolution of shale is rarely investigated, and which type of cyclic loading is more efficient for PHF has not been determined and demonstrated. In this Article, a series of uniaxial compression tests under these two types of cyclic loading are first conducted. A fatigue lifetime model for CAIMS is established. The shale strength and fatigue lifetime for CACMS and CAIMS are then compared. Their differences are explained by their dissipated energy density evolution and damage evolution. Finally, a nonlinear damage accumulation model to predict damage evolution for CAIMS cyclic loading is proposed. It is suggested that CAIMS is a better cyclic loading type when its amplitude is higher than 30% UCS (uniaxial compressive strength) of rock. This provides a meaningful amplitude threshold for CAIMS parameter optimization in the PHF construction. In this case, compared with CACMS cyclic loading, CAIMS cyclic loading significantly decreases the shale strength by up to 20% UCS and the fatigue lifetime from over 500 to 9. Different from an inverted-S-shaped damage evolution for CACMS cyclic loading, damage evolution for CAIMS cyclic loading exhibits a monotonic increasing trend. The damage variable growth rates of CACMS and CAIMS both show a three-stage trend: (1) their growth rates both decrease; (2) the growth rate for CACMS remains stable, while for CAIMS its growth rate slowly increases; and (3) their growth rates both increase sharply. Correspondingly, the dissipated energy density evolutions for CACMS and CAIMS show a similar three-stage trend. It can be concluded that during the second stage, for CAIMS microfractures and plastic deformation inside specimens are developed and accumulated more and faster than those for CACMS cyclic loading. This explains the phenomenon that the fatigue lifetime and strength of CAIMS cyclic loading are less than those of CACMS. The nonlinear damage accumulation model proposed in this Article can well fit experimental results. This model can be used for accurately describing reservoir rock mechanical property degradation during hydraulic fracture simulation induced by PHF.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & FuelsSame topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207