Experimental Investigation of Hydraulic Fracturing Damage Mechanisms in the Chang 7 Member Shale Reservoirs, Ordos Basin, China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Chang 7 member of the Ordos Basin hosts abundant shale oil and gas resources and plays a vital role in the development of unconventional energy. This study investigates differences in damage evolution and underlying mechanisms between representative shale oil and shale gas reservoir cores from the Chang 7 member under fracturing fluid hydration. A combination of high-temperature expansion tests, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), and micro-computed tomography (Micro-CT) was used to systematically characterize macroscopic expansion behavior and microscopic pore structure evolution. Results indicate that shale gas cores undergo faster expansion and higher imbibition rates during hydration (reaching stability in 10 h vs. 23 h for shale oil cores), making them more vulnerable to water-lock damage, while shale oil cores exhibit slower hydration but more pronounced pore structure reconstruction. After 72 h of immersion in fracturing fluid, both core types experienced reduced pore volumes and structural reorganization; however, shale oil cores demonstrated greater capacity for pore reconstruction, with a newly formed pore volume fraction of 34.5% compared to 24.6% for shale gas cores. NMR and Micro-CT analyses reveal that hydration is not merely a destructive process but a dynamic “damage–reconstruction” evolution. Furthermore, the addition of clay stabilizers effectively mitigates water sensitivity and preserves pore structure, with 0.7% identified as the optimal concentration. The research results not only reveal the differential response law of fracturing fluid damage in the Chang 7 shale reservoir but also provide a theoretical basis and technical support for optimizing fracturing fluid systems and achieving differential production increases.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".