Effect of Reservoir Compressive Stress on Rock Apparent Fracture Toughness in Hydraulic Fracturing
Source abstract
Abstract
Hydraulic fracturing is the primary technology for extracting unconventional oil and gas resources. Rock apparent fracture toughness is the most critical parameter in hydraulic fracturing processes. Rock apparent fracture toughness exhibits characteristics distinct from those of metallic materials, particularly as field-estimated values of rock apparent fracture toughness in hydraulic fracturing exceed laboratory-measured values by 1–2 orders of magnitude. Existing interpretation models assume a constant stress distribution in the fracture process zone (FPZ), which contradicts the softening behavior of rock. To address this gap, and based on the assumption of a power-law softening stress distribution in the FPZ of quasi-brittle rock, we develop a mode I apparent fracture toughness model for rock under far-field tensile and compressive stress configurations. This model considers both the softening characteristics of rock and the fluid lag effect. A comparative analysis was conducted on the differences in rock apparent fracture toughness between far-field compressive stress and tensile stress configurations. The results reveal that the difference in configuration between far-field compressive stress and tensile stress constitutes the fundamental reason for the order-of-magnitude discrepancy between the rock apparent fracture toughness estimated from hydraulic fracturing field tests and that measured in laboratory experiments. The influence of the ratio of in situ stress to tensile strength, the ratio of FPZ length to fracture length, the ratio of fluid lag zone length to fracture length, and stress distribution within the FPZ on rock apparent fracture toughness was analyzed, and these factors are found to have decisive effects on the rock apparent fracture toughness. Additionally, the size effect on rock apparent fracture toughness was discussed. This research contributes to more precise hydraulic fracturing parameter design.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Hydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis · Rock Mechanics and Modeling · Drilling and Well Engineering
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
State Key Laboratory of Shale Oil and Gas Enrichment Mechanisms and Effective Development, Beijing 102206, China
State Energy Center for Shale Oil Research and Development, Beijing 102206, China
Institute of Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China
Funding
Open Fund Project of the State Energy Center for Shale Oil Research and Development
References (46)
Show source-provided references
1. Anderson, T.L. (2017). Fracture Mechanics: Fundamentals and Applications, CRC Press. [4th ed.].10.1201/9781315370293 ↗
2. Miskimins, J.L. (2019). Hydraulic Fracturing: Fundamentals and Advancements, Society of Petroleum Engineers.10.2118/9781613997192 ↗
3. Size effect, material ductility and shape of fracture process zone in quasi-brittle materials10.1016/j.compgeo.2014.12.010 ↗
4. Size effect in the fracture toughness of Ogina Tuff10.1016/0148-9062(86)91662-1 ↗
5. Schmidt, R.A. (1980, January 27). A microcrack model and its significance to hydraulic fracturing and fracture toughness testing. Proceedings of the 21st U.S. Symposium on Rock Mechanics (USRMS), Rolla, MO, USA.
6. Experimental and numerical study on the fracture process zone and fracture toughness determination for ISRM-suggested semicircular bend rock specimen10.1016/j.engfracmech.2016.01.002 ↗
7. KIc and J-resistance-curve measurements on Nevada Tuff10.1007/BF02321037 ↗
8. A review of mechanical models of dike propagation: Schools of thought, results and future directions10.1016/j.tecto.2014.10.003 ↗
9. A note on the scaling relations for opening mode fractures in rock10.1016/j.jsg.2010.09.007 ↗
10. Johnson, D.E., Wright, C.A., Stachel, A., Schmidt, H., and Cleary, M.P. (1993, January 21–23). On-site real-time analysis enables optimal propped fracture stimulation of a complex gas reservoir. Proceedings of the SPE Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, OK, USA.10.2118/25414-MS ↗
11. Chudnovsky, A., Fan, F., Shulkin, Y., Zhang, H., Dudley, J.W., and Wong, G.K. (July, January 29). Hydraulic fracture simulation revisited. Proceedings of the 42nd US Rock Mechanics Symposium and 2nd U.S.-Canada Rock Mechanics Symposium, San Francisco, CA, USA.
12. Shlyapobersky, J., and Chudnovsky, A. (1994, January 29–31). Review of recent developments in fracture mechanics with petroleum engineering applications. Proceedings of the SPE/ISRM Rock Mechanics in Petroleum Engineering Conference, Delft, The Netherlands.10.2118/28074-MS ↗
13. The effective fracture toughness in hydraulic fracturing10.1023/A:1018676212444 ↗
14. Zhu, D., Han, G., Zou, H., Liu, C., Zhang, X., and Huang, Y. (2022). A review of hydraulic fracturing in ductile reservoirs: Theory, simulation, and experiment. Processes, 10.10.3390/pr10102022 ↗
15. Shlyapobersky, J., Wong, G.K., and Walhaug, W.W. (1988, January 2–5). Overpressure calibrated design of hydraulic fracture stimulations. Proceedings of the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, TX, USA.10.2118/18194-MS ↗
16. Fracture toughness interpretation from breakdown pressure10.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.107518 ↗
17. Gao, Y., Eve, R., Heller, R., Ispas, I., McLennan, J., and Detournay, E. (2021, January 21–25). A reinterpretation of fracture toughness from fluid injection testing. Proceedings of the 55th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium, Houston, TX, USA.
18. Mechanics of hydraulic fractures10.1146/annurev-fluid-010814-014736 ↗
19. Numerical simulation with experimental verification of the fracture behavior in granite under confining pressures based on the tension-softening model10.1007/BF00012363 ↗
20. The influence of plasticity in hydraulic fracturing10.1023/A:1007336003057 ↗
21. Tensile fracture of rock at high confining pressure: Implications for dike propagation10.1029/93JB01391 ↗
22. Apparent fracture toughness for LEFM applications in hydraulic fracture modeling10.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.106984 ↗
23. Bažant, Z.P., and Planas, J. (1998). Fracture and Size Effect in Concrete and Other Quasibrittle Materials, CRC Press.
24. Linear elastic and cohesive fracture analysis to model hydraulic fracture in brittle and ductile rocks10.1007/s00603-011-0211-0 ↗
25. A nonlinear hydraulic fracture propagation criterion considering the fracture process zone10.1016/j.ijmst.2025.09.007 ↗
26. Yang, W. (1995). Macroscopic and Microscopic Fracture Mechanics, National Defense Industry Press.
27. Shlyapobersky, J. (1985, January 26–28). Energy Analysis of Hydraulic Fracturing. Proceedings of the American Rock Mechanics Association, Rapid City, SD, USA.
28. Sublinear Scaling of Fracture Aperture versus Length: An Exception or the Rule?10.1029/2001JB000419 ↗
29. Size and geometry effects on rock fracture toughness: Mode I fracture10.1007/s00603-013-0430-7 ↗
30. Discrete element modeling of the process zone shape in mode I fracture at peak load and in post-peak regime10.1016/j.ijrmms.2016.03.014 ↗
31. Wan, F., and Fakhimi, A. (2016, January 26–29). Numerical three-point bending test of fracture process zone in post-peak deformation of rock. Proceedings of the 50th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium, Houston, TX, USA.
32. Scaling of the fracture process zone in rock10.1007/s10704-016-0172-0 ↗
33. Bahrami, V., and Mortazavi, A. (2008, January 24–26). A numerical investigation of hydraulic fracturing process in oil reservoirs using non-linear fracture mechanics. Proceedings of the 5th Asian Rock Mechanics Symposium (ARMS5), Tehran, Iran.
34. Magma-driven hydraulic fracturing and infiltration of fluids into the damaged host rock, an example from Dronning Maud Land, Antarctica10.1016/j.jsg.2005.01.009 ↗
35. Chen, L., Zhang, G., Zou, Z., and Wang, S. (July, January 28). Experimental observation of fracture process zone in sandstone from digital imaging. Proceedings of the 54th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium, Golden, CO, USA.
36. Scaling of fatigue crack growth in rock10.1016/j.ijrmms.2014.08.015 ↗
37. A relationship between tensile strength and mode I fracture toughness of rocks using the critical distance10.1007/s40948-023-00694-1 ↗
38. Active and passive seismic imaging of a hydraulic fracture in diatomite10.2118/22756-PA ↗
39. Seismic detection of a hydraulic fracture from shear-wave VSP data at Lost Hills Field, California10.1190/1.1443523 ↗
40. Passive imaging of hydrofractures in the south Belridge Diatomite10.2118/28383-PA ↗
41. Seismic imaging using microearthquakes induced by hydraulic fracturing10.1190/geo1992-0156 ↗
42. Passive characterization of hydrofracture properties using signals from hydraulic pumps10.1016/S0920-4105(00)00046-2 ↗
43. Unconventional gas reservoir evaluation: What do we have to consider?10.1016/j.jngse.2012.01.001 ↗
44. Probabilistic estimation of hydraulic fracture half-lengths: Validating the Gaussian pressure-transient method with the traditional rate transient analysis-method (Wolfcamp case study)10.1007/s13202-023-01680-9 ↗
45. Sun, S., Wang, W., Su, Y., Deng, Y., and Li, H. (2024, January 12–14). A microseismic events cluster analysis-based method for modelling complex fractures in geothermal reservoir. Proceedings of the 49th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
46. Barree, R.D., Duenckel, R.J., and Hlidek, B.T. (2019, January 5–7). The limits of fluid flow in propped fractures—The disparity between effective flowing and created fracture lengths. Proceedings of the SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference and Exhibition, The Woodlands, TX, USA.10.2118/194355-MS ↗