Study on <i>in situ</i> stress testing method based on Kaiser effect of acoustic emission and COMSOL simulation

doi:10.1007/s11707-022-1034-x

Front. Earth Sci.

2023, Vol. 17

Issue (3) : 818-831 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-022-1034-x

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Study on in situ stress testing method based on Kaiser effect of acoustic emission and COMSOL simulation

Chenyu WANG^1,², Dongming ZHANG^1,²(

), Shujian LI^3,⁴, Yu CHEN^1,², Chongyang WANG^1,², Kangde REN^1,²

¹. State Key Laboratory of Coal Mine Disaster Dynamics and Control, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China
². School of Resources and Safety Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400044, China
³. Yunnan Phosphate Chemical Group Co., Ltd., Kunming 650600, China
⁴. National Engineering and Technology Research Center for Development and Utilization of Phosphate Resources, Kunming 650600, China

Download: PDF(7565 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

In situ stress testing can improve the safety and efficiency of coal mining. Identifying the Kaiser effect point is vital for in situ stress calculations; however, the in situ stress calculation is limited by the rock sampling angle. Here, the Kaiser effect point identification theory is established and applied to the Xuyong Coal Mine. Uniaxial compression and acoustic emission experiments were carried out on sandstone with 6 sampling directions. Furthermore, COMSOL simulation is applied to study the in situ stress distribution in the coal mine to verify the calculation accuracy. The results are as follows. 1) The failure mode of non-bedded and vertical-bedded rocks is primarily tensile shear failure with obvious brittleness in mechanical and acoustic emission characteristics. Shear slip along the bedding plane is the primary failure mode of inclined-bedded rock. Additional take-off points exist in the AE count curve. 2) The Kaiser point identification method based on the variation of AE count curve parameters $Δ t i$ and $τ i$ can effectively calculate the in situ stress. According to the numerical value of Kaiser point and sampling direction, the in situ stress of the conveyor roadway in the Xuyong Coal Mine was calculated as $σ 1 = 22.81 M P a$ , $σ 2 = 10.87 M P a$ and $σ 3 = 6.14 M P a$ . 3) By the COMSOL simulation study, it was found that a stress concentration zone of 16.13 MPa exists near the two sides roadway. Compared with the Kaiser effect method, the deviation rates of the three-direction principal stress calculated by COMSOL were all less than 5%. This verifies that the in situ stress calculation by Kaiser effect in this study can be applied to the Xuyong Coal Mine.

Keywords Kaiser effect point in-situ stress calculation Xuyong Coal Mine uniaxial compression acoustic emission COMSOL simulation

Corresponding Author(s): Dongming ZHANG

Online First Date: 03 August 2023 Issue Date: 12 December 2023

Cite this article:

Chenyu WANG,Dongming ZHANG,Shujian LI, et al. Study on in situ stress testing method based on Kaiser effect of acoustic emission and COMSOL simulation[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2023, 17(3): 818-831.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fesci/EN/10.1007/s11707-022-1034-x
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fesci/EN/Y2023/V17/I3/818

Fig.1 Acoustic emission AE counts with take-off points (referring to rock sample with an angle

Y ∠ 55 ∘ Z

Fig.2 Stress distribution of tetrahedron.

Fig.3 Stress distribution of plane OXY.

Fig.4 Sampling and processing of rock specimens. (a) Rock specimens sampling site; (b) schematic diagram of field sampling; (c) specimens sampling directions; (d) Sample preparation process.

Fig.5 Experimental equipment and principle. (a) Overall view of the equipment; (b) schematic diagram of the equipment.

Fig.6 Strain-stress curves of rock in 6 directions.

Fig.7 Kaiser point discrimination based on curves of time, stress, and cumulative AE count. (a) Axis X; (b) Axis Y; (c) Axis Z; (d)

X ∠ 40 ∘ Y

; (e)

Y ∠ 55 ∘ Z

; (f)

X ∠ 30 ∘ Z

Fig.8 Kaiser point discrimination basis based on curves of time, stress,

Δ t i

and

τ i

of rock specimens. (a) Axis X; (b) Axis Y; (c) Axis Z; (d)

X ∠ 40 ∘ Y

; (e)

Y ∠ 55 ∘ Z

; (f)

X ∠ 30 ∘ Z

Fig.9 Geometric physical model construction. (a) Meshing; (b) boundary condition.

Fig.10 Three principal stress distribution nephogram. (a) Maximum principal stress (

σ 1

); (b) Intermediate principal stress (

σ 2

); (c) Minimum principal stress (

σ 3

); (d) Principal stress difference (

σ 1 − σ 3

Fig.11 Three principal stresses at the monitoring line. (a) X monitoring line; (b) Z monitoring line.

Physical parameters	X-axis	Y-axis	Z-axis	$X ∠ 40 ∘ Y$	$Y ∠ 55 ∘ Z$	$X ∠ 30 ∘ Z$
Length/mm	100.1	100.0	99.9	100.0	99.8	100.1
Diameter/mm	49.9	50.0	50.0	49.9	50.1	49.9
Quality/g	495.47	488.32	495.09	487.74	493.03	402.09
Density/(g·cm⁻³)	2.531	2.487	2.524	2.494	2.506	2.054

The physical parameters of rock samples

Drilling direction of rock specimen	Time/s	$Δ t i$ /s	$τ i$ /(° )	Stress/MPa
X-axis	164.27	0.16	87.41	17.0
Y-axis	246.25	0.21	89.93	20.0
Z-axis	345.53	0.19	88.42	24.0
X∠40°Y	311.45	0.10	88.76	6.7
Y∠55°Z	286.84	0.15	87.94	17.2
X∠30°Z	318.93	0.10	89.69	14.5

Kaiser effect point parameters

In situ stress	Values/MPa	Azimuth angle/(° )	Inclination angle/(° )
Maximum principal stress ( $σ 1$ )	22.81	162.35	−7.52
Intermediate principal stress ( $σ 2$ )	10.87	61.25	−81.65
Minimum principal stress ( $σ 3$ )	6.14	257.68	−13.56

In situ stress results by the Kaiser effect

Rock physical and mechanical parameters

1	H, Alkan Y, Cinar G Pusch (2007). Rock salt dilatancy boundary from combined acoustic emission and triaxial compression tests.Int J Rock Mech Min Sci, 44(1): 108–119 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2006.05.003
2	X, Bai D M, Zhang H, Wang S J, Li Z Rao (2018). A novel in situ stress measurement method based on acoustic emission Kaiser effect: a theoretical and experimental study.R Soc Open Sci, 5(10): 181263 https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.181263
3	F, Basirat C F, Tsang A, Tatomir Y, Guglielmi P, Dobson P, Cook B, Dessirier C, Juhlin A Niemi (2021). Hydraulic modeling of induced and propagated fractures: analysis of flow and pressure data from hydromechanical experiments in the COSC-1 deep borehole in crystalline rock near Åre, Sweden.Water Resour Res, 57(11): e2020WR029484 https://doi.org/10.1029/2020WR029484
4	Z Z, Cao Y, Wang H X, Lin Q, Sun X G, Wu X S Yang (2022). Hydraulic fracturing mechanism of rock mass under stress-damage-seepage coupling effect.Geofluids, 2022: 5241708 https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5241708
5	Y L, Chen Q B, Meng Y C, Li H, Pu K Zhang (2020). Assessment of appropriate experimental parameters for studying the Kaiser effect of rock.Appl Sci (Basel), 10(20): 7324–7338 https://doi.org/10.3390/app10207324
6	Y L, Chen J, Ni W, Shao R Azzam (2012). Experimental study on the influence of temperature on the mechanical properties of granite under uniaxial compression and fatigue loading.Int J Rock Mech Min Sci, 56: 62–66 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2012.07.026
7	A, Damani C H, Sondergeld C S Rai (2018). Experimental investigation of in situ and injection fluid effect on hydraulic fracture mechanism using acoustic emission in Tennessee sandstone.J Petrol Sci Eng, 171(7): 315–324 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2018.07.027
8	P, Ganne A, Vervoort M Wevers (2007). Quantification of pre-peak brittle damage: correlation between acoustic emission and observed micro-fracturing.Int J Rock Mech Min Sci, 44(5): 720–729 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2006.11.003
9	Q Y, He Y C, Li S She (2019). Mechanical properties of basalt specimens under combined compression and shear loading at low strain rates.Rock Mech Rock Eng, 52(10): 4101–4112 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-019-01806-8
10	E R, Heimisson P, Einarsson F, Sigmundsson B Brandsdottir (2015). Kilometer-scale Kaiser effect identified in Krafla volcano, Iceland.Geophys Res Lett, 42(19): 7958–7965 https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL065680
11	Q A, Jiang X T, Feng T B, Xiang G S Su (2010). Rock burst characteristics and numerical simulation based on a new energy index: a case study of a tunnel at 2500 m depth.Bull Eng Geol Environ, 69(3): 381–388 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-010-0275-1
12	Y, Jin Z L, Qi M A, Chen G Q, Zhang G Q Xu (2009). Time-sensitivity of the Kaiser effect of acoustic emission in limestone and its application to measurements of in-situ stress.Petrol Sci, 6(2): 176–180 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12182-009-0028-6
13	H, Krietsch V, Gischig K, Evans J, Doetsch N O, Dutler B, Valley F Amann (2019). Stress measurements for an in situ stimulation experiment in crystalline rock: integration of induced seismicity, stress relief and hydraulic methods.Rock Mech Rock Eng, 52(2): 517–542 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-018-1597-8
14	C Y, Lai L, Wong M Wallace (2019). Review and assessment of in-situ rock stress in Hong Kong for territory-wide geological domains and depth profiling.Eng Geol, 248: 267–282 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2018.11.008
15	A Lavrov (2003). The Kaiser effect in rocks: principles and stress estimation techniques.Int J Rock Mech Min Sci, 40(2): 151–171 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1365-1609(02)00138-7
16	D X, Li E Y, Wang X G, Kong H S, Jia D M, Wang A Muhammad (2019a). Damage precursor of construction rocks under uniaxial cyclic loading tests analyzed by acoustic emission.Constr Build Mater, 206(10): 169–178
17	X B, Li J Z, Chen C D, Ma L Q, Huang C J, Li J, Zhang Y Z Zhao (2022). A novel in-situ stress measurement method incorporating non-oriented core ground re-orientation and acoustic emission: a case study of a deep borehole.Int J Rock Mech Min Sci, 152(5): 105079 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2022.105079
18	Y C, Li S Y, Sun C A Tang (2019b). Analytical prediction of the shear behaviour of rock joints with quantified waviness and unevenness through wavelet analysis.Rock Mech Rock Eng, 52(10): 3645–3657 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-019-01817-5
19	Y H, Li Y J, Yang J P, Liu X D Zhao (2010). Experimental and theoretical analysis on the procedure for estimating geo-stresses by the Kaiser effect.Int J Miner Metall Mater, 17(5): 514–518 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12613-010-0351-3
20	D, Liu J C, Fan S N Wu (2018). Acoustic wave-based method of locating tubing leakage for offshore gas wells.Energies, 11(12): 3454–3474 https://doi.org/10.3390/en11123454
21	G F, Liu X T, Feng Q, Jiang Z B, Yao S J Li (2017). In situ observation of spalling process of intact rock mass at large cavern excavation.Eng Geol, 226: 52–69 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2017.05.012
22	X H, Liu F, Dai R, Zhang J F Liu (2015). Static and dynamic uniaxial compression tests on coal rock considering the bedding directivity.Environ Earth Sci, 73(10): 5933–5949 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-4106-3
23	J, Lu G Z, Yin D M, Zhang H, Gao C B, Li M H Li (2020). True triaxial strength and failure characteristics of cubic coal and sandstone under different loading paths.Int J Rock Mech Min Sci, 135(11): 104439 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2020.104439
24	Q B, Meng Y L, Chen M W, Zhang L J, Han H, Pu J F Liu (2019). On the Kaiser effect of rock under cyclic loading and unloading conditions: insights from acoustic emission monitoring.Energies, 12(17): 3255–3272 https://doi.org/10.3390/en12173255
25	S J, Miao M F, Cai Q F, Guo Z J Huang (2016). Rock burst prediction based on in-situ stress and energy accumulation theory.Int J Rock Mech Min Sci, 83: 86–94 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2016.01.001
26	T, Nian G W, Wang C W, Xiao L, Zhou L, Deng R J Li (2016). The in situ stress determination from borehole image logs in the Kuqa depression.J Nat Gas Sci Eng, 34(2): 1077–1084 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2016.08.005
27	I A, Panteleev V A, Mubassarova A V, Zaitsev N I, Shevtsov Y F, Kovalenko V I Karev (2020). Kaiser effect in sandstone in polyaxial compression with multistage rotation of an assigned stress ellipsoid.J Min Sci, 56(3): 370–377 https://doi.org/10.1134/S1062739120036653
28	A E, Radwan W K, Abdelghany M A Elkhawaga (2021). Present-day in-situ stresses in Southern Gulf of Suez, Egypt: insights for stress rotation in an extensional rift basin.J Struct Geol, 147: 104334 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2021.104334
29	S Sabanov (2018). Comparison of unconfined compressive strengths and acoustic emissions of Estonian oil shale and brittle rocks.Oil Shale, 35(1): 26–38 https://doi.org/10.3176/oil.2018.1.02
30	M, Sause S, Schmitt B, Hoeck A Monden (2019). Acoustic emission based prediction of local stress exposure.Compos Sci Technol, 173: 90–98 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2019.02.004
31	A, Schubnel B D, Thompson J, Fortin Y, Gueguen R P Young (2007). Fluid‐induced rupture experiment on Fontainebleau sandstone: premonitory activity, rupture propagation, and aftershocks.Geophys Res Lett, 34(19): L19307 https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL031076
32	D S Subrahmanyam (2019). Evaluation of hydraulic fracturing and overcoring methods to determine and compare the in situ stress parameters in porous rock mass.Geotech Geol Eng, 37(6): 4777–4787 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-019-00937-7
33	L G, Tham H, Liu C A, Tang P, Lee Y Tsui (2005). On tension failure of 2-d rock specimens and associated acoustic emission.Rock Mech Rock Eng, 38(1): 1–19 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-004-0031-6
34	Y Q, Wu S L, Li D W, Wang G H Zhao (2019). Damage monitoring of masonry structure under in-situ uniaxial compression test using acoustic emission parameters.Constr Build Mater, 215: 812–822 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.04.192
35	W J, Xiao G, Yu H T, Li W Y, Zhan D M Zhang (2021). Experimental study on the failure process of sandstone subjected to cyclic loading and unloading after high temperature treatment.Eng Geol, 293: 106305 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2021.106305
36	H P, Xie Y, Ju S H, Ren F, Gao J Z, Liu Y Zhu (2019). Theoretical and technological exploration of deep in situ fluidized coal mining.Front Energy, 13(4): 603–611 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-019-0643-x
37	C, Ye D M, Zhang X, Zhou X L, Wang H Yang (2021). Reconstruction and sampling analysis of parent fracture group in underground mining.Rock Mech Rock Eng, 54(12): 6155–6172 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-021-02596-8
38	G Z, Yin C B, Jiang J G, Wang J Xu (2015). Geomechanical and flow properties of coal from loading axial stress and unloading confining pressure tests.Int J Rock Mech Min Sci, 76: 155–161 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2015.03.019
39	G Z, Yin C B, Jiang J, Xu L S, Guo S J, Peng W P Li (2012). An experimental study on the effects of water content on coalbed gas permeability in ground stress fields.Transp Porous Media, 94(1): 87–99 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242-012-9990-3
40	T, Yokoyama O, Sano A, Hirata K, Ogawa Y, Nakayama T, Ishida Y Mizuta (2014). Development of borehole-jack fracturing technique for in situ stress measurement.Int J Rock Mech Min Sci, 67: 9–19 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2013.12.008
41	X Y, Yu X W Mao (2020). A preliminary discrimination model of a deep mining landslide and its application in the Guanwen coal mine.Bull Eng Geol Environ, 79(1): 485–493 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-019-01565-4
42	D, Zhang Y, Yang H, Wang X, Bai C, Ye S Li (2018). Experimental study on permeability characteristics of gas-containing raw coal under different stress conditions.R Soc Open Sci, 5(7): 180558 https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180558
43	G Q, Zhang M Chen (2010). Study of influence of Kaiser sampling deviation on underground stress measurements.Energy Sources A Recovery Util Environ Effects, 32(10): 886–893 https://doi.org/10.1080/15567030802606319
44	H H, Zhang J X, Wang C J, Fan H J, Bi L, Chen C Y Xu (2022). An improved coupled modeling method for coalbed methane extraction after hydraulic fracturing.Geofluids, 2022: 8895347 https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8995347
45	S K, Zhang S D Yin (2014). Determination of in situ stresses and elastic parameters from hydraulic fracturing tests by geomechanics modeling and soft computing.J Petrol Sci Eng, 124: 484–492 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2014.09.002
46	K, Zhao S J, Gu Y J, Yan K P, Zhou Q, Li S T Zhu (2018). A simple and accurate interpretation method of in situ stress measurement based on rock kaiser effect and its application.Geofluids, 2018: 9463439 https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/9463439
47	X G, Zhao J, Wang X H, Qin M, Cai R, Su J G, He Z H, Zong L K, Ma R L, Ji M, Zhang S, Zhang L, Yun Q C, Chen L, Niu Q M An (2015). In-situ stress measurements and regional stress field assessment in the Xinjiang candidate area for China’s HLW disposal.Eng Geol, 197: 42–56 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2015.08.015
48	J B, Zhu T, Zhou Z Y, Liao L, Sun X B, Li R Chen (2018). Replication of internal defects and investigation of mechanical and fracture behaviour of rock using 3D printing and 3D numerical methods in combination with X-ray computerized tomography.Int J Rock Mech Min Sci, 106: 198–212 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2018.04.022

[1]	Juan TENG, Zhigang WEN, Chen LI, Lingye MENG. Geophysical characteristics of anthracites with various structures: a case study on the southern Qinshui Basin, north China[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2022, 16(3): 696-710.
[2]	Huijun LU, Ru ZHANG, Li REN, Anlin ZHANG, Yiming YANG, Xiaopeng LI. Damage characterization of shale under uniaxial compression by acoustic emission monitoring[J]. Front. Earth Sci., 2021, 15(4): 817-830.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed