Mechanical and Hydraulic Characterization of 3D Printed Rock Analogues of Poorly Cemented Sandstone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: This study presents a mechanical characterization of multiple 3D printed rock samples with silica sand grains that were aimed to emulate the behavior of poorly cemented sandstones. The printing process consisted of spraying a liquid binder onto a bed of sand grains, layer by layer, followed by a curing process. To assess the quality of cementation through binder distribution, we employed Computed Tomography (CT) to get high-resolution images of the printed rock specimen. Subsequently, we conducted porosity measurements using both water and canola oil. To complete the work, intact samples at low binder saturation (i.e. cementation) underwent several UCS and triaxial tests, along with permeability measurements. Our results indicated an average porosity of 46% for poorly consolidated 3D printed rock analogues. The average UCS was 1.45 MPa, with a Young's modulus of 175.18 MPa; our experimental data from 3D printed rock samples align closely with actual core measurements of poorly cemented sandstones, as reported in literature for locations such as Cold Lake and McMurray heavy oil reservoirs. Following UCS testing, we observed diagonal shearing failure planes in all samples. Triaxial testing indicated low cohesion (350 kPa) and frictional angle akin to dense sands (56°), leading to a loose sand structure upon shearing. Regarding their hydraulic properties, we also conducted permeability tests at an effective confining stress of 0.5 MPa which revealed an average permeability of 1.8 Darcies, again consistent with poorly cemented sandstones. 1. INTRODUCTION Implementation of engineering solutions in geomaterials often necessitates a comprehensive hydromechanical characterization, which involves destructive tests using multiple samples, such as uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) and triaxial tests. In response to this demand, additive manufacturing (i.e. 3D printing) technology has emerged as a cost-effective means of obtaining a substantial number of identical rock samples. This capability allows researchers and engineers to carry out multiple tests (Including destructive ones – e.g. triaxial tests) without the limitation in number and price of samples that come from actual reservoirs. This advantage is useful if the 3D printed rock is partially representative of the rocks in the reservoirs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".