Printer Friendly

An Elastoplastic Softening Damage Model for Hydraulic Fracturing in Soft Coal Seams.

1. Introduction

Geological conditions of soft coal seams in China are extremely complex, which are frequently associated with low intensity, high gas content, and low permeability. Hence, conventional methods cannot effectively drain gas from those seams [1]. The parameters of permeability and porosity play an important role in the study of accumulation and development of coalbed methane [2-4]. To increase the permeability of those coal seams, underground hydraulic fracturing technology to transform the seam structure is an effective way to achieve this goal [5-11].

Extensive researches have been carried out on fracturing equipment, technical aspects, and fracturing mechanisms. Among them, numerical simulation has been proved as an important method to optimize fracturing operations and predict productivity. Yuan et al. conducted a borehole hydraulic fracturing by ANSYS software to predefine the crack propagation path and analyzed the influence of injection pressure and fracturing fluid viscosity on hydraulic fracture extension [12]. Yan et al. used the finite-element software realistic failure process analysis (RFPA) 2D-Flow to study the effects of slot, press hole horizontal distance, and the opposite horizontal angle on cracking guide fracturing [13]. Wang et al. studied the effects of mechanical parameters on crack propagation radius and different injection rates on crack propagation of coal seam hydraulic fracturing using the discrete element program particle flow code (PFC) 2D [14]. However, most existing models (such as the two-dimensional, pseudo-three-dimensional, and full three-dimensional models) can simulate hydraulic fracture initiation and propagation, but they could not adapt to any conditions due to the limitation of modelling assumptions [15-22]. For example, many three-dimensional models have been built based on based on linear elastic fracture mechanics, while the model may not be suitable on plastic failure in soft coal seams [23, 24]. Existing numerical modelling based on both continuous (RFPA2D and RFPA3D) [13, 25-28] and noncontinuous (PFC2D) [14] media can describe any expansion crack of small-scale two-dimensional modelling while having some limitation on a reflection of crack morphology.

Soft coal seams have characteristics with low elastic moduli, low tensile strength, high Poisson's ratios, and high pore compressibility. Moreover, they are prone to deform plastically [23, 24]. Field tests indicate that it is difficult to form single large-scale open fracture fissures during the underground fracturing of soft coal seams, which differs from the fracture propagation and yield criterion in sandstone, shale, or hard coal seam. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a mathematical model of hydraulic fracture that is applicable in soft coal seams.

Hydraulic fracturing in soft coal seams is a fluid-solid coupling process. The seepage field of the coal seam has a strong influence on stress field, and the variation on stress field will affect strain of the coal seam; thus, permeability and porosity will be simultaneously changed. Meanwhile, mechanical properties (e.g., adhesive strength and elastic modulus) will be changed due to the plastic failure of a soft coal seam. Therefore, it is necessary to consider strain-softening damage for the coal seam. In this paper, a mathematical model of elastoplastic softening damage for soft coal seams was established based on the effective stress principle of porous media and seepage deformation characteristics of hydraulic fracturing. Then, it was embedded by FISH language in Fast Lagrangian Analysis Code 3D (FLAC3D) [29]. A three-dimensional hydraulic fracturing numerical simulation and on-site experiment at the Number 2709 working face at a coal mine in Datong, China, were conducted to verify the model. These results can guide construction optimization and enable forecasting of the behavior of soft coal seams during hydraulic fracturing.

2. Mathematical Model and Numerical Implementation of the Elastoplastic Strain-Softening Damage Model for Simulation of Hydraulic Fracturing in Soft Coal Seams

FLAC3D 5.0 was adopted to simulate the novel numerical modelling model of hydraulic fracture in soft coal seams due to its superiority of complex geotechnical problem, such as plastic flow in soil, rock, and other material structures. However, hydraulic fracturing is a very complex fluid-solid coupling process, which means a direct solution is not possible, and thus, it can be achieved by FISH language. In this section, the governing equations and their implementation procedure will be introduced in detail.

2.1. Governing Equations for Mechanical Calculation and the Developed Constitutive Model to Describe the Coal Deformation. In FLAC3D 5.0, coal deformation in hydraulic fracturing can be given by the geometric and constitutive equation, which is determined by balance of momentum and the principle of effective stress in porous media:

[mathematical expression not reproducible], (1)

where [sigma] is the total stress, determined by the principle of effective stress in porous media. [sigma] = [sigma]' + [alpha]IP, where [sigma]' is the effective stress, [alpha] is the Biot factor, seen as a value of 1 in incompressible particulate solids, P is the pore pressure, I is the unit matrix, [rho] is the density of the coal matrix, [g.sub.i] is the gravity acceleration, and [v.sub.i] is the velocity component of deformation of the coal matrix, i, j [member of] (x, y, z).

The continuum and the constitutive equation are as follows:

[DELTA][[epsilon].sub.i,j] = 1/2 ([DELTA][u.sub.i,j] + [DELTA][u.sub.i,j]), [DELTA][sigma]' = D[DELTA][epsilon], (2)

where [DELTA][epsilon] is the strain increment, u is the displacement, [DELTA][sigma]' is the effective stress increment, and D is the physical matrix.

2.2. Developed Flow Model in FLAC3D. The mass conservation equation for fluid flow is

[mathematical expression not reproducible], (3)

where [V.sub.fx], [V.sub.fy], and [V.sub.fz] are the seepage velocities in the three dimensions and [Q.sub.s] is the source.

Fluid flow obeys Darcy's law:

[v.sub.fi] = [K.sub.m]/[mu] ([partial derivative]P/[partial derivative]i + [[rho].sub.f][g.sub.i]), (4)

where [K.sub.m] is the permeability of the coal, [v.sub.fi] is the flow rate in three dimensions, and [mu] is the fluid viscosity coefficient.

2.3. Coupled Seepage-Stress Equation

2.3.1. Dynamic Evolution Model for Porosity and Permeability. During the process of hydraulic fracturing in soft coal seams, flow properties of the coal seam, such as porosity and permeability, will be changed with the variation on stress field of the coal seam, so it is necessary to create a dynamic model of the fluid-solid coupling in hydraulic fracturing. In cases where the solid particles of the coal seam are incompressible, the relationship between porosity and volume strain can be expressed in the form of a differential equation:

d[[epsilon].sub.v] = d[phi]/1-[phi], (5)

where [[epsilon].sub.v] is the volumetric strain and [phi] is the porosity. After integrating (5), the following equation is obtained:

[[epsilon].sub.v] = -In(1 - [phi]) + C, (6)

where C is an arbitrary constant that can be obtained from the initial conditions:

C = -In(1 - [[phi].sub.0]), (7)

where [[phi].sub.0] is the initial porosity of the coal seam.

The relationship between porosity and volumetric strain can then be obtained:

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (8)

The volumetric strain can be expressed as

[[epsilon].sub.v] = [[epsilon].sup.e.sub.v] + [[epsilon].sup.p.sub.v], (9)

where [[epsilon].sup.e.sub.v] is the volumetric elastic strain, which can be expressed as [[epsilon].sup.e.sub.11] + [[epsilon].sup.e.sub.22] + [[epsilon].sup.e.sub.33]. [[epsilon].sup.p.sub.v] is the volumetric plastic strain.

Furthermore, both soft and hard coal seams exhibit a dilatancy phenomenon. However, the volume of the deformation of the soft coal seam was significantly higher than the hard coal seam before overall damage. According to Wang et al. [30], the two expansion mechanisms are different: the former mainly due to the shear effect and the latter is mainly caused by tensile stress. Considering that tensile and shear failures of the coal seam occur during hydraulic fracturing, the plastic strain can be expressed as [31]

[[epsilon].sup.p.sub.v] = [[epsilon].sup.tp.sub.v] + [[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.v] sin [psi], (10)

where [[epsilon].sup.tp.sub.v] is the volumetric plastic tensile strain, [[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.v] is the volumetric plastic shear strain, and [psi] is the dilatancy angle. The physical meaning of the term [[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.v] sin [psi] is the plastic deformation caused by dilatancy. Substituting (10) in (9), the volumetric strain can be expressed as

[[epsilon].sub.v] = [[epsilon].sup.e.sub.v] + [[epsilon].sup.tp.sub.v] + [[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.v] sin [psi] (11)

Dynamic evolution of porosity with plastic strain and plastic shear strain is then given by

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (12)

According to Wu [32], the permeability of the coal seam is obtained as follows:

K = [K.sub.0] [([phi]/[[phi].sub.0]).sup.3] (13)

where [K.sub.0] is the initial permeability of the coal seam.

Equation (12) can be substituted into (13). The permeability of the coal seam is established by the interaction with the plastic strain and plastic shear strain:

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (14)

2.3.2. Coupled Damage Model of Seepage Stress. Soft coal is a typical ductile rock, the deformation of which has a significant nonlinear characteristic. During hydraulic fracturing, the elastic moduli of the soft coal seam will be significantly changed. Zhang et al. [33] defined the evolution of ductile rock damage as

[D.sub.1] = [([[epsilon].sub.v] / 1 + [[epsilon].sub.v]).sup.2/3], (15)

where [D.sub.1] is the damage variable.

Substituting the values defined above in (15), it can be written as

[D.sub.1] = ([[epsilon].sup.e.sub.v] + [[epsilon].sup.tp.sub.v] + [[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.v] sin [psi]/1+[[epsilon].sup.e.sub.v] + [[epsilon].sup.tp.sub.v] + [[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.v] sin [psi]. (16)

From the principle of effective stress in porous media, the incremental elastoplastic damage constitutive relationship of soft coal can be given by

d[[sigma].sub.ij] = (1 - [D.sub.1])[E.sup.0.sub.ijkl] (d[[epsilon].sub.kl] - d[[epsilon].sup.p.sub.kl]) + [alpha]IdP, (17)

where [E.sup.0.sub.ijkl] is the lossless stiffness matrix of the soft coal seam, [[epsilon].sub.kl] is the total strain, and [[epsilon].sup.p.sub.kl] is the plastic strain.

Substituting (16) into (17), it can be rearranged as

[mathematical expression not reproducible]. (18)

2.4. Plastic Yield Criterion and Fracture Propagation Criterion of the Soft Coal Seam. The plastic yield criterion of the soft coal seam was obtained by the strain-softening Mohr-Coulomb criterion, which incorporates nonassociated shear and associated tension flow rules. This criterion can better reflect variation on mechanical properties of the soft coal after plastic yield with a significant decrease of cohesion, friction, and dilation and tensile strength. The yield, plastic flow rules, and stress corrections are identical to those of the Mohr-Coulomb model, as referred in FLAC 5.0 Manual [29]. The difference lies in possibility that the two softening parameters for strain-softening modelling are defined as the sum of some incremental measures of plastic shear and tensile strain, respectively. In the Mohr-Coulomb model, those properties are assumed to remain constant.

The increment of volumetric plastic shear strain of coal unit is defined by the second invariants of the plastic shear strain increment tensor [29, 34, 35]:

[mathematical expression not reproducible], (19)

where [DELTA] [[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.V] is the volumetric plastic shear strain increment; [DELTA] [[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.m] can be expressed as ([DELTA] [[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.1] + [DELTA] [[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.3])/3, where [DELTA] [[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.1] and [DELTA] [[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.3] are the plastic shear strain increments in the maximum and minimum principal stress directions.

The increment of volumetric plasticity tensile strain is defined as [29]

[DELTA] [[epsilon].sup.tp.sub.V] = [absolute value of [DELTA] [[epsilon].sup.tp.sub.3]], (20)

where [DELTA] [DELTA] [[epsilon].sup.tp.sub.v] is the volumetric plastic tensile strain increment and [DELTA] [DELTA] [[epsilon].sup.tp.sub.3] is the plastic tensile strain increment in the minimum principal stress direction.

Fracture propagation criteria are dominated by the composite criteria of volumetric plastic shear strain increment and volumetric plastic tensile strain increment, which indicates that if the volumetric plastic shear strain increment or the volumetric plastic tensile strain increment exceeds zero, then the fracture propagates.

2.5. Implementation Procedure. The computing schema shown in Figure 1 was embedded into the FLAC3D 5.0 to calculate the numerical solution. The modelling of hydraulic fracture for the soft coal seam starts with model generation and parameter input, such as initial condition, boundary condition, and physical parameters. The coupling process between each subprocess can be referred in Figure 1. For the hydraulic process, it starts with the water injection. The flow law obeys the seepage continuity equation and Darcy law, which needs fluid source and pore pressure. Then the mechanical process coupled with the hydraulic process is calculated. If the convergence was achieved, the parameters of plastic yielding zone would be assigned under the strain-softening damage model. Consequently, the dynamic porosity and permeability are determined. Then, it enters into a calculation loop coupled by the mechanical and the hydraulic process. Each loop indicates a hydromechanical calculation in a time interval. After calculation in some mechanical step, the effect of pressure change in the fracture is finally transferred to the far field. When the numerical time is achieved at the defined value, the coupled process will be terminated.

3. Model Verification

The assessment of a mathematical model is dependent on the successful numerical solution, which should be well corresponded to experimental or a field application results. In this study, an on-site experimental result was verified by the three-dimensional numerical models of hydraulic fracturing in soft coal seams adopted by embedding the suggested softening-damaging model in FLAC3D.

3.1. Field Experiment

3.1.1. Mine-Site Condition. The soft coal seam of Number 2709 west coalface of Tashan mine in Datong is characterized with low permeability of value 4 * [10.sup.-16]*[m.sup.2] and high gas content of average value 22.5 [m.sup.3]/t and burst-prone. It is proved difficult to extract gas from this coal seam. During the drilling drainage holes in Number 2709 west coalface, collapse of the hole and difficulty of gas prepumping often occurred, which posed a serious threat to mine safety. Due to the grim situation on mine gas control, it is necessary to carry out hydraulic fracturing by perforation drilling to Number 2709 working face from a specific roadway above the working face. The average thickness of the coal seam is 2.8 m, the average inclination is 15[degrees], the mining depth is 500 m, and the pore pressure is 2 MPa. There is no pseudoimmediate roof to the coal seam and the immediate roof was comprised of muddy siltstone. The rock layer was dense and hard with good integrity and stability and an average thickness of 2 m. The distribution of strata in the coal seam roof and floor is shown in Figure 2.

3.1.2. Field Experimental Design. Some on-site experiments indicate the shape of hydraulic fracturing is a circle [8, 14, 36]; thus, the guide holes and fracturing holes were designed as a circle shown in Figure 3, which was carried out in a specific extraction roadway above the Number 2709 working face of the Number 8 coal seam in Tashan coal mine. After fracturing, guide holes were arranged around the fracture hole to measure fracture-influenced area, gas purity, extraction concentration, and other parameters. The observation area was 70 m along the inclination direction and strike direction of the coal seam. The guide hole spacing was 10 m.

The initiation fracture pressure could be determined by the classical fracturing theory, which is influenced by in situ stress, rock strength; thus, it could be calculated by [37]

[P.sub.ini] = [[sigma].sub.t] + 3[[bar.[sigma]].sub.3] - [[bar.[sigma]].sub.1] (21)

where [[sigma].sub.t] is the tension strength of the coal seam and [[bar.[sigma]].sub.3] and [[bar.[sigma]].sub.1] are the maximum and minimum effective principal stress, respectively. [[bar.[sigma]].sub.1] = [[sigma].sub.i] - [zeta][P.sub.p], where [[sigma].sub.i] and [P.sub.p] are the principle stress and pore pressure, respectively. [zeta] is the pore pressure coefficient ranging from 0.8 to 1.

The on-site stress measurement data indicate that the maximum principle stress and minimum principle stress are 12 and 7.4 MPa, respectively. The pore pressure and tensile strength of the coal seam are 2 MPa and 2.5 MPa, respectively. Thus, based on (21), the initiation fracture pressure was approximately determined as 25 MPa.

The fracturing pumps have the ability with a maximum injection rate of 9 * [10.sup.-3][m.sup.3]/s and a maximum working pressure of 60 MPa. In this test, the pumps are used in the pressure control mode which means the pump kept pressure as 25 MPa. Then the fracture time was set as 120 minutes.

3.1.3. Test Results and Analysis. Figure 4 shows the instantaneous pressure and instantaneous injection rate monitoring curves of the hydraulic hole. Initially, the pressure and injection rate sharply increase with the time from 0 to 20 minutes. In this period, the stress accumulation of the coal seam from water injection results in the sharp increase of pressure. When the pressure reaches 25 MPa, the pressure starts to decrease to 20 MPa initially. Consequently, the injection rate decreases to 2 * [10.sup.-3][m.sup.3]/s. This phenomenon indicates the initial fracture begin to generate. The fracture pressure fluctuations indicate the fracture propagation.

During construction of the guide holes, water seepage in the inclination direction was detected in hole numbers 5 to 8; no water was measured in hole numbers 4 and 9, but the water content of the coal seam was obviously increased after the core was measured, and no abnormal phenomenon was detected in hole numbers 3 and 10. The variation on water content of the coal seam indicates the fracture-influenced distance was 40~50 m in the inclination direction. Using the same method, the fracture-influenced distance in the strike direction was determined to be 42~50 m. Thus, the shape of fracture-influenced area can be seen as a circle, and the radius of fracture-influenced area was about 40~50 m according to the results of water content test. Numerical simulation in the next section would be applied to verify the on-site results.

Figure 5 shows the fracture hole and the curves for pure gas cumulative pumping from the number 3 to number 6 inspection holes. The single-hole cumulative gas extraction increased by factors of 6 to 61, indicating the remarkable effect of hydraulic pressure cracking. The closer the test hole was to the fracture hole, the greater the cumulative amount of gas, indicating that the fissure was more developed.

3.2. Numerical Modelling

3.2.1. Modelling Description. The strata distribution and main mechanical parameters of the numerical model are shown in Table 1 based on geological data. Due to the inclination of the coal bed, an auxiliary rock layer with the same inclination angle was added above and below the coal layer to apply the load and facilitate definition of the model boundaries. After analyzing the actual site situation and eliminating the water-injected induced boundary influence, a model with dimensions of 200 m (x) x 200 m (y) x 112 m (z) is established, where the y-direction was the direction of travel and the z-direction was the vertical. Due to the symmetry of structure, material properties, and load of the model in the x-direction, a half model of dimensions 200 m (x) x 100 m (y) x 112 m (z) was established. According to the in situ tests and reports obtained from nearby coal mines, the initial stress as well as stress boundary conditions was determined. The vertical stress applied in the top surface of the overlying strata was 12 MPa, and the initial pore pressure was 2 MPa. The lateral stress coefficients in the x-direction and y-direction were 0.8 and 0.6, respectively. The self-weight stress is applied in the vertical direction. The boundary conditions were as follows: the horizontal direction in the x-direction and y-direction were free and the bottom of the model was constrained in all directions.

The Mohr-Coulomb model was used as the yield criteria of the roof and the floor due to the most used yield criterion for rock style material. The Mohr-Coulomb strain-softening model was used for the yield criteria of the coal due to its stress-strain soften characteristic. When the tensile strain reached [10.sup.-4], the tensile strengths of the soft coal seam were reduced to zero. The relationships between the postpeak cohesion [c.sub.p], friction angle [[theta].sub.p], and the dilatancy angle [[psi].sub.p] and the original [c.sub.i], [[theta].sub.i], and [[psi].sub.i], were determined by the uniaxial test of the soft coal sample, and they were defined as [c.sub.p] = [w.sub.c][c.sub.i], [[theta].sub.p] = [[theta].sub.i] - [w.sub.[theta]], and [[psi].sub.p] = [[psi].sub.i] - [W.sub.[psi]], respectively. The relationships between [w.sub.c], [w.sub.[theta]], [w.sub.[psi]], and volumetric plastic shear strain [[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.v] are shown in Table 2.

In order to verify the on-site test results, the injection rate was set at 2 * [10.sup.-3] [m.sup.3]/s, and the water injection volume was fixed at 150 [m.sup.3] and was applied directly at the fracture hole. The water injection point was at the central of the drainage roadway, and the numerical model established is shown in Figure 6.

3.2.2. Results and Analysis. The porosity is the parameter directly to measure the fluid flow ability in porous medium [11]. Thus, the porosity distribution is adopted as the evaluation of fracture-induced area. Figure 7 shows a front view of the porosity contours in the positive direction of the y-direction after fracturing. It can be seen a fracture zone in the coal seam caused by the large amount of water to flow in the coal seam due to the small elastic modulus of the coal seam and the high porosity. Figure 8 shows a cross-sectional view of the porosity contours along the middle of the coal seam after fracturing, which can be specifically measured as a circle with 43 m in inclination direction and 22.5 m in half strike direction corresponding to the on-site test value of about 40 m to 50 m. The distance of fracture-influenced area in the inclination direction was approximately equal to the distance along the strike direction. This is due to the permeability less affected by volumetric elastic strain while largely depended on the minimum principal strain (named "body plastic tensile strain") when water flowed mainly in the coal seam. In addition, the gravity of the fluid could be negligible compared with the larger pore pressure in the coal seam. Thus, the novel softening-damaging model was verified.

Figure 9 shows the front view of the volumetric plastic tensile strain in the positive y-direction of the model after fracturing. It is clearly shown that a large amount of tensile damage volume occurred in the coal seam after fracturing while a small volume in roof and floor. The tensile damage occurred due to the increase of effective stress with the positive relationship of the pore pressure overwhelming the tensile strength in the coal seam or in roof and floor. The reason for small tensile damage volume in roof and floor is the larger tension strength and lower permeability than those in the coal seam, which could result in much flow of water in the coal seam than in roof and floor. Consequently, the pore pressure and effective stress in the coal seam are much larger than in roof and floor. Figure 10 shows the front view of the volumetric plastic shear strain after fracturing. A large amount of shear failure occurred in the coal seam and roof and floor because the fluid flowed to the top and bottom of the coal seam without flowing perpendicular to the direction of minimum principal stress. More specifically, there is an angle between the direction of plastic failure of the coal seam and rock mass with horizontal direction, thus resulting in a large number of shear failure volume.

3.3. Sensitivity Study. Numerical modelling can be particularly useful for undertaking parametric and sensitivity analyzes conveniently to better understand the parameter variation on the hydraulic fracturing property. Many factors influence the propagation of cracks, such as the in situ stress, initial permeability, initial porosity, and mechanical properties of the rock mass (e.g., the elastic modulus and tensile strength). This study undertakes quantitative analysis of only two major factors: the injection rate and injection time to simulate the impact on crack growth. Therefore, the water injection volume was fixed at 150 m3 and was applied directly at the fracture hole. The injection rate and injection time varied from 1 * [10.sup.-3] [m.sup.3]/s to 1 * [10.sup.-2] [m.sup.3]/s and 0 hour to 10 hours, respectively.

Figure 11 shows the variation on fracture-influenced radius with the water injection rate from 0 to 10 * [10.sup.-3][m.sup.3]/s. The fracture-influenced radius increases rapidly with an increased injection rate, reaching a maximum of 2 * [10.sup.-3][m.sup.3]/s. This is largely due to much fluid leak off with the longer fracturing time at a small water injection rate when the injection volume is constant. As the water injection rate increased, the fracturing time gradually reduced with the decrease of filtration loss. Then the fracture-influenced radius begins to decrease slowly with further increase of the injection rate and finally remains constant. When the water injection rate increased to a certain value, a higher fluid pressure was created. Therefore, the deformation of soft coal gradually increased and the fractures of the coal seam propagated, thus making the radius of fracture-influenced decrease and keep stable in the end.

In order to evaluate the variation on radius of fracture-influenced area with the injection time, the water injection rate is specifically fixed at 4 * [10.sup.-3][m.sup.3]/s, and the effect of water injection time from 0h to 10 h on the fracture radius was evaluated. Figure 12 shows the variation on fracture radius with water injection time in the y-direction for the fracture model. The fracture-influenced radius initially increased rapidly with an increase of water injection time due to sharp increase of the water pressure. One hour later, the rate of increase of the fracture-influenced radius gradually slowed down, because the water pressure in the fissure is gradually stabilized. The growth rate on the radius of the fracture-influenced area gradually slowed down due to the slower linear increase of fissure volume.

4. Conclusions

(1) Based on the principle of effective stress in porous media, an elastoplastic softening damage constitutive model for the soft coal seam was proposed. The dynamic evolution relationship between porosity and permeability with volumetric plastic tensile strain and volumetric plastic shear strain was established based on the theory of porosity of multiphase media. The yield criterion of the soft coal seam was defined by the Mohr-Coulomb strain-softening model.

(2) The numerical results of radius of fracture-influenced area at the Number 2709 coalface in Datong coal mine, China, shows good consistency with the on-site results, which verify the correctness and the rationality of the proposed model. The numerical results of volumetric plastic tensile strain show a large amount of tensile damage volume occurred in the coal seam after fracturing while a small volume in roof and floor. The volumetric plastic shear strain results of numerical modelling illustrated a large number of shear failure volume occurred to form a fissure zone due to an angle between the direction of plastic failure of the coal seam and rock mass with horizontal direction

(3) The sensitivity analysis on water injection rate indicated that the fracture-influenced radius initially rapidly increased with increase of water injection rate, then decreased slowly to a final stable state. The water injection time indicates that the fracture-influenced radius initially increases rapidly with the increase in water injection time but gradually slows down.

These results can guide construction optimization and enable forecasting of the dynamic evolution of soft coal seams during hydraulic fracturing.

https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/2548217

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2018BSCXB23) and the Postgraduate Research and Practice Innovation Program of Jiangsu Province (KYCX18_1971).

References

[1] Y. Lu, L. Cheng, Z. Ge, B. Xia, Q. Li, and J. Chen, "Analysis on the initial cracking parameters of cross-measure hydraulic fracture in underground coal mines," Energies, vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 6977-6994, 2015.

[2] Y. Peng, J. Liu, M. Wei, Z. Pan, and L. D. Connell, "Why coal permeability changes under free swellings: new insights," International Journal of Coal Geology, vol. 133, pp. 35-46, 2014.

[3] Y. Peng, J. Liu, Z. Pan, L. D Connell, Z. Chen, and H. Qu, "Impact of coal matrix strains on the evolution of permeability," Fuel, vol. 189, pp. 270-283, 2016.

[4] D. Ma, X. Cai, Z. Zhou, and X. Li, "Experimental investigation on hydraulic properties of granular sandstone and mudstone mixtures," Geofluids, vol. 2018, article 9216578, 2018.

[5] C. Zhai, X. Yu, X. Xiang, Q. Li, S. Wu, and J. Xu, "Experimental study ofpulsating water pressure propagation in CBM reservoirs during pulse hydraulic fracturing," Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, vol. 25, pp. 15-22, 2015.

[6] W. Wang, X. Li, B. Lin, and Z. Cheng, "Pulsating hydraulic fracturing technology in low permeability coal seams," International Journal of Mining Science and Technology, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 681-685, 2015.

[7] D. Song, Z. Liu, E. Wang, L. Qiu, Q. Gao, and Z. Xu, "Evaluation of coal seam hydraulic fracturing using the direct current method," International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, vol. 78, pp. 230-239, 2015.

[8] Z. Cheng, L. Min, S. Chen, J. Zhang, Y. Wei, and Q. Li, "Guiding-controlling technology of coal seam hydraulic fracturing fractures extension," International Journal of Mining Science and Technology, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 831-836, 2012.

[9] Y. F. Wang, H. E. Xue-Qiu, E. Y. Wang, and L. I. Yan-Zeng, "Research progress and development tendency of the hydraulic technology for increasing the permeability of coal seams," Journal of China Coal Society, vol. 39, pp. 1945-1955, 2014.

[10] Z. Zhou, X. Cai, D. Ma, W. Cao, L. Chen, and J. Zhou, "Effects of water content on fracture and mechanical behavior of sandstone with a low clay mineral content," Engineering Fracture Mechanics, vol. 193, pp. 47-65, 2018.

[11] D. Ma, M. Rezania, H. S. Yu, and H. B. Bai, "Variations of hydraulic properties of granular sandstones during water inrush: effect of small particle migration," Engineering Geology, vol. 217, pp. 61-70, 2016.

[12] Z. G. Yuan, H. T. Wang, G. Z. Hu, X. G. Fan, and N. P. Liu, "Numerical simulation of hydraulic fracturing of crossing borehole and its engineering application," Journal of China Coal Society, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 109-114, 2012.

[13] F. Z. Yan, C. J. Zhu, C. Guo, Q. L. Zou, and S. H. Qiao, "Numerical simulation parameters and test of cutting and fracturing collaboration permeability-increasing technology," Meitan Xuebao/Journal of the China Coal Society, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 823-829, 2015.

[14] T. Wang, W. Zhou, J. Chen, X. Xiao, Y. Li, and X. Zhao, "Simulation of hydraulic fracturing using particle flow method and application in a coal mine," International Journal of Coal Geology, vol. 121, pp. 1-13, 2014.

[15] L. Zhou, Y. Gou, Z. Hou, and P. Were, "Numerical modeling and investigation of fracture propagation with arbitrary orientation through fluid injection in tight gas reservoirs with combined XFEM and FVM," Environmental Earth Sciences, vol. 73, no. 10, pp. 5801-5813, 2015.

[16] G. Zhang, "Simulation of hydraulic fracturing of oil well based on fluid-solid coupling equation and non-linear finite element," Acta Petrolei Sinica, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 113-116, 2009.

[17] B. Zhang, W. Yu, W. Yanfang et al., "Current status and prospect of computer simulation techniques of hydraulic fracturing in oil and gas field," Journal of Engineering Geology, vol. 2, pp. 301-310, 2015.

[18] B. Xue, G. M. Zhang, W. U. Heng-An, and X. X. Wang, "Three-dimensional numerical simulation of hydraulic fracture in oil wells," Journal of University of Science and Technology of China, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1322-1325, 2008.

[19] Z. L. Lian, J. Zhang, H. A. Wu, X. X. Wang, and B. Xue, "A simulation study of hydraulic fracturing propagation with a solid-fluid coupling model," Rock and Soil Mechanics, vol. 11, pp. 3021-3026, 2008.

[20] Z. L. Lian, J. Zhang, X. X. Wang, H. A. Wu, and B. Xue, "Simulation study of characteristics of hydraulic fracturing propagation," Rock and Soil Mechanics, vol. 30, pp. 169-174, 2009.

[21] P. Dong and X. Xu, "The fully coupled mathematical model of the fluid reservoir and its finite element equations," Acta Petrolei Sinica, vol. 1, 1998.

[22] L. Zhou, M. Z. Hou, Y. Gou, and M. Li, "Numerical investigation of a low-efficient hydraulic fracturing operation in a tight gas reservoir in the North German Basin," Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, vol. 120, pp. 119-129, 2014.

[23] S. P. Meng, B. Y. Wang, X. T. Xie, Y. D. Xue, and X. Y. Du, "Mechanical properties of coal deformation and its influence on permeability," Journal of China Coal Society, vol. 37, no. 8, pp. 1342-1347, 2012.

[24] F. Cai and Z. G. Liu, "Simulation and experimental research on upward cross-seams hydraulic fracturing in deep and low-permeability coal seam," Journal of China Coal Society, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 113-119, 2016.

[25] C. Song, Y. Lu, H. Tang, and Y. Jia, "A method for hydrofracture propagation control based on non-uniform pore pressure field," Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, vol. 33, pp. 287-295, 2016.

[26] Q. He, F. T. Suorineni, and J. Oh, "Review of hydraulic fracturing for preconditioning in cave mining," Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, vol. 49, no. 12, pp. 1-18, 2016.

[27] Q. He, F. T. Suorineni, and J. Oh, "Strategies for creating prescribed hydraulic fractures in cave mining," Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 1-27, 2016.

[28] Q. He, F. T. Suorineni, T. Ma, and J. Oh, "Effect of discontinuity stress shadows on hydraulic fracture re-orientation," International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, vol. 91, pp. 179-194, 2017.

[29] Itasca, FLAC3D, Fast Lagrangian Analysis of Continua in 3 Dimensions, User's Guide Itasca Consulting Group, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2013.

[30] J. C. Wang, Z. H. Wang, and D. Z. Kong, "Failure and prevention mechanism of coal wall in hard coal seam," Journal of China Coal Society, vol. 10, pp. 2243-2250, 2015.

[31] T. Schanz, P. Vermeer, and P. Bonnier, "The hardening soil model: formulation and verification," in Proceedings of Plaxis Symposium "Beyond 2000 in Computational Geotechnics," pp. 281-296, Balkema, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1999.

[32] Y. Wu, J. Liu, D. Elsworth, Z. Chen, L. Connell, and Z. Pan, "Dual poroelastic response of a coal seam to CO2 injection," International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 668-678, 2010.

[33] Z. Zhang, W. Xu, W. Wang, and R. Wang, "Investigation on conventional triaxial compression tests of ductile rock and law of deformation and damage evolution," Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, vol. 30, pp. 3857-3862,2011.

[34] X. G. Zhao and M. Cai, "A mobilized dilation angle model for rocks," International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 368-384, 2010.

[35] L. R. Alejano and E. Alonso, "Considerations of the dilatancy angle in rocks and rock masses," International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 481-507, 2005.

[36] J. Xu, C. Zhai, and L. Qin, "Mechanism and application of pulse hydraulic fracturing in improving drainage of coalbed methane," Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, vol. 40, pp. 79-90, 2017.

[37] M. K. Hubbert, "Mechanics of hydraulic fracturing," Developments in Petroleum Science, vol. 210, pp. 369-390, 1972.

Yang Hao [ID], (1) Yu Wu [ID], (1,2) Xianbiao Mao [ID], (1,2) Pan Li, (1) Liqiang Zhang [ID], (1) and Jing Tao (1)

(1) State Key Laboratory for Geomechanics and Deep Underground Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China

(2) School of Mechanics and Civil Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Yu Wu; wuyu@cumt.edu.cn

Received 23 February 2018; Revised 6 May 2018; Accepted 30 May 2018; Published 1 August 2018

Academic Editor: Yan Peng

Caption: FIGURE 1: Flowchart of mathematical model of soft coal seams embedded into FLAC3D.

Caption: FIGURE 2: Distribution histogram of coal seam roof and floor strata.

Caption: FIGURE 3: Drilling arrangements for hydraulic fracturing test: (a) on-site drilling hole; (b) diagram of arrangements for hydraulic fracturing test.

Caption: FIGURE 4: The instantaneous pressure and instantaneous flow monitoring curves.

Caption: FIGURE 5: Variation of cumulative gas extraction from different holes with time.

Caption: FIGURE 6: Diagram of the numerical model.

Caption: FIGURE 7: Front view of porosity contours after fracturing.

Caption: FIGURE 8: Cross-sectional view of the porosity contours along the middle of the coal seam after fracturing.

Caption: FIGURE 9: Front view of contours of volumetric plastic tensile strain after fracturing.

Caption: FIGURE 10: Front view of contours of volumetric plastic shear strain after fracturing.

Caption: FIGURE 11: Variation on radius of fracture with the injection rate.

Caption: FIGURE 12: Relationship between injection time and fracture radius.
TABLE 1: Main stratigraphic and lithological parameters of the model.

Rock type        K (GPa)   G (GPa)      [K.sub.0]       [[phi].sub.o]
                                       ([m.sup.2])

Silty mudstone     48        9.6       [10.sup.-17]         0.003
Fine sand         34.5      6.85       [10.sup.-17]         0.003
Mudstone          19.7      11.4       [10.sup.-17]         0.003
Medium sand       16.5      12.5       [10.sup.-17]         0.003
Siltstone         26.6      12.2       [10.sup.-17]         0.003
Coal               1.5       1.2     4 * [10.sup.-16]       0.0125

Rock type        [[rho].sub.d]    [[sigma].sub.t]    [c.sub.0]
                 (kg/[m.sup.3])        (MPa)           (MPa)

Silty mudstone        2400               6               5
Fine sand             2500               5               5
Mudstone              2400               4               4
Medium sand           2600              5.7              8
Siltstone             2560              9.4              6
Coal                  1400              1.0             1.0

Rock type        [[phi].sub.0]   [[psi].sub.0]
                  ([degrees])     ([degrees])

Silty mudstone        29               9
Fine sand            24.4             13
Mudstone             20.9              7
Medium sand          30.5             11
Siltstone            25.6             14
Coal                  18              10

TABLE 2: Relationships between [w.sub.c], [w.sub.[theta]],
[w.sub.[psi]], and [[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.v].

[[epsilon].sup.sp.sub.v]  [w.sub.c]  [w.sub.[theta]]   [w.sub.[psi]]
([10.sup.-4])                          ([degrees])      ([degrees])

0                            1.0           0.0              0.0
0.05                        0.50           3.0              4.0
0.1                         0.50           3.0              3.0
1.0                         1.00           0.0              0.0
COPYRIGHT 2018 Hindawi Limited
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2018 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Research Article
Author:Hao, Yang; Wu, Yu; Mao, Xianbiao; Li, Pan; Zhang, Liqiang; Tao, Jing
Publication:Advances in Civil Engineering
Date:Jan 1, 2018
Words:6562
Previous Article:Static and Dynamic Load Tests of Shaft and Base Grouted Concrete Piles.
Next Article:Dynamic Fracture Toughness and Dynamic Tensile Strength of the Rock from Different Depths of Beijing Datai Well.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters