About This Item
- Full TextFull Text(subscription required)
- Pay-Per-View PurchasePay-Per-View
Purchase Options Explain
Share This Item
The AAPG/Datapages Combined Publications Database
AAPG Bulletin
Abstract
AAPG Bulletin, V.
DOI:10.1306/04111110144
Geomechanical modeling of stresses adjacent to salt bodies: Part 1—Uncoupled models
Gang Luo,1 Maria A. Nikolinakou,2 Peter B. Flemings,3 Michael R. Hudec4
1Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78713; [email protected]
2Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78713; [email protected]
3Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78713; [email protected]
4Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78713; [email protected]
ABSTRACT
We compare four approaches to geomechanical modeling of stresses adjacent to salt bodies. These approaches are distinguished by their use of elastic or elastoplastic constitutive laws for sediments surrounding the salt, as well as their treatment of fluid pressures in modeling. We simulate total stress in an elastic medium and then subtract an assumed pore pressure after calculations are complete; simulate effective stress in an elastic medium and use assumed pore pressure during calculations; simulate total stress in an elastoplastic medium, either ignoring pore pressure or approximating its effects by decreasing the internal friction angle; and simulate effective stress in an elastoplastic medium and use assumed pore pressure during calculations. To evaluate these approaches, we compare stresses generated by viscoelastic stress relaxation of a salt sphere. In all cases, relaxation causes the salt sphere to shorten vertically and expand laterally, producing extensional strains above and below the sphere and shortening against the sphere flanks. Deviatoric stresses are highest when sediments are assumed to be elastic, whereas plastic yielding in elastoplastic models places an upper limit on deviatoric stresses that the rocks can support, so stress perturbations are smaller. These comparisons provide insights into stresses around salt bodies and give geoscientists a basis for evaluating and comparing stress predictions.
Pay-Per-View Purchase Options
The article is available through a document delivery service. Explain these Purchase Options.
Watermarked PDF Document: $14 | |
Open PDF Document: $24 |
AAPG Member?
Please login with your Member username and password.
Members of AAPG receive access to the full AAPG Bulletin Archives as part of their membership. For more information, contact the AAPG Membership Department at [email protected].