Nicholas Izuchukwu Osuji, Chuanyin Jiang, Auli Niemi, Chin‐Fu Tsang, Qinghua Lei
{"title":"Impact of Geomechanics Model Simplifications on Assessing Flow and Transport in 3D Fracture Networks","authors":"Nicholas Izuchukwu Osuji, Chuanyin Jiang, Auli Niemi, Chin‐Fu Tsang, Qinghua Lei","doi":"10.1002/nag.70057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Changes in subsurface stress conditions induce fracture aperture changes, altering the hydraulic properties of fractured rocks. Due to the high computational cost of full 3D geomechanical modeling, simplified models are usually adopted, using two main simplifications, namely (i) calculating local stresses on a fracture by projecting far‐field stresses onto individual fracture planes without considering nearby fractures, and (ii) assuming a linear elastic fracture mechanics‐based constitutive law for fracture shearing. In this study, we investigate the consequences of using these geomechanical model simplifications on assessing flow and transport in 3D fractured media by comparing the simplified model against a full geomechanical model that integrates local stress heterogeneity and a Coulomb‐type shear behavior. We explore varying stress conditions to determine when the simplified model closely aligns with the full model, and when and why it starts to deviate. Our results indicate that, for an assumed typical friction coefficient of 0.6 and shear stiffness of 10 GPa/m, under stress ratios of 1 to 3, shear deformation is in the elastic stage, and local stress variability does not result in significant differences between simplified and full models. However, at a high stress ratio (e.g., 4), plastic shear slip prevails, and a significant difference between the two models emerges. The full model accommodates more intense shear displacements, resulting in increased aperture heterogeneity, enhanced flow channeling, and earlier solute breakthrough, while the simplified model underestimates these effects. Our results suggest that great caution is needed when applying simplified models in practice, especially when the stress ratio is high.","PeriodicalId":13786,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.70057","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Changes in subsurface stress conditions induce fracture aperture changes, altering the hydraulic properties of fractured rocks. Due to the high computational cost of full 3D geomechanical modeling, simplified models are usually adopted, using two main simplifications, namely (i) calculating local stresses on a fracture by projecting far‐field stresses onto individual fracture planes without considering nearby fractures, and (ii) assuming a linear elastic fracture mechanics‐based constitutive law for fracture shearing. In this study, we investigate the consequences of using these geomechanical model simplifications on assessing flow and transport in 3D fractured media by comparing the simplified model against a full geomechanical model that integrates local stress heterogeneity and a Coulomb‐type shear behavior. We explore varying stress conditions to determine when the simplified model closely aligns with the full model, and when and why it starts to deviate. Our results indicate that, for an assumed typical friction coefficient of 0.6 and shear stiffness of 10 GPa/m, under stress ratios of 1 to 3, shear deformation is in the elastic stage, and local stress variability does not result in significant differences between simplified and full models. However, at a high stress ratio (e.g., 4), plastic shear slip prevails, and a significant difference between the two models emerges. The full model accommodates more intense shear displacements, resulting in increased aperture heterogeneity, enhanced flow channeling, and earlier solute breakthrough, while the simplified model underestimates these effects. Our results suggest that great caution is needed when applying simplified models in practice, especially when the stress ratio is high.
期刊介绍:
The journal welcomes manuscripts that substantially contribute to the understanding of the complex mechanical behaviour of geomaterials (soils, rocks, concrete, ice, snow, and powders), through innovative experimental techniques, and/or through the development of novel numerical or hybrid experimental/numerical modelling concepts in geomechanics. Topics of interest include instabilities and localization, interface and surface phenomena, fracture and failure, multi-physics and other time-dependent phenomena, micromechanics and multi-scale methods, and inverse analysis and stochastic methods. Papers related to energy and environmental issues are particularly welcome. The illustration of the proposed methods and techniques to engineering problems is encouraged. However, manuscripts dealing with applications of existing methods, or proposing incremental improvements to existing methods – in particular marginal extensions of existing analytical solutions or numerical methods – will not be considered for review.