Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 5

Prediction of Uniaxial Compressive Strength from well log data in Jharia Coalfield

Rima Chatterjee1*, Suman Paul 2and Vivek Kumar Mourya1


1
Department of Applied Geophysics, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad-826004, India
2
Department of Petroleum Engineering, Al Habeeb College of Engineering & Technology, Hyderabad-501503, India
E mail id: rima_c_99@yahoo.com

Keywords

Uniaxial Compressive Strength, Well Log, Jharia Coalfield

Summary sustained by a specimen, at the point of failure. So, it is


having applications in various fields. Rock engineers
The mechanical properties of rocks in Barakar Formation widely use the UCS of rocks in surface and underground
of Jharia coalfield may play an important role in structures. It can be used to design mine plan. Safety
engineering mechanics that will influence the development measures in mines like the supports system could be put at
of coal bed methane (CBM) project. Testing of rock proper places in the mines if UCS is known. It can also be
mechanical properties were performed on 84 samples from used to obtain a rough estimation about the rock strength or
10 wells in order to obtain uniaxial compressive strength to get a rough idea about suitable drilling fluid that will be
(UCS) of Lower Permian coals. The relationship derived used while drilling. If the minimum horizontal in-situ stress
between UCS from laboratory and density from well log magnitudes and UCS of different formations along with
showing linear regression relation with satisfactory other geological data are available then it may give an idea
goodness of fit. In absence of core samples from greater maximum horizontal stress magnitude at the breakout
depth, this relation may be useful to determine UCS with intervals which will eventually help to plan or design CBM
the help of density log. exploitation for any study area (Paul and Chatterjee, 2011).

Introduction Purpose of present study

The Uniaxial Compressive Strength (UCS) is an important Determination of UCS at laboratory is a costly affair
parameter in rock mechanics that plays a significant role in because drilled core samples are required to be collected
almost all geotechnical engineering designs to obtain a from well sites and then prepared for testing. Drilling for
rough estimation of the soil strength and viable core samples and testing of rock mechanical properties of
construction techniques. The UCS may give the in-situ those cores in the laboratory, hence obtaining UCS with
stress conditions prevailing in the area which may be an aid depth is not possible by direct testing in the laboratory. So,
in the extraction of Coal Bed Methane (CBM) if the the aim of present study is to obtain the UCS values
directions of the in-situ stresses are known. The UCS directly from the well logs instead of the laboratory testing.
values generally estimated in the laboratory from testing of This would reduce the cost a lot and would easily give out
rock/core samples. The research on the mechanical an estimation of rock strength parameter like UCS for any
properties of coal measure rocks specially mudstone/shale formations.
have theoretical as well as practical significance on the
development of shale gas in coal measures and the control Measurement of rock properties
and management of roof/floor rock in mining (Meng and
Xian, 2013). Sonic log has already been used for the Present study area, located in the central part of Jharia
estimation of UCS in coal mines to design roof support coalfield, consisting of 10 exploratory wells, such as S4,
(McNally, 1987 and McNally, 1990). The UCS values are S5, S9, S15, S21, K9, K10, K16, K19 and K24 of which
obtained through log measurements of the travel time of the wells S4, S5, S9, S15 and S21 are located in Singra block
compressional or P-wave by running sonic geophysical and wells K9, K10, K16, K19 and K24 are located in
logs in core holes and are then correlated with UCS Kapuria block. The total 84 core samples, including both
measurements made on core samples from the same holes. coal and non-coal litho-units, of 10 exploratory wells in
In our present study, due to non-availability of sonic travel Jharia coalfield (Figure 1) were collected from the depth
time for all wells, our aim is to correlate laboratory derived ranges from 500 m to 1250 m for the present study.
UCS with the well log derived density of coal and non-coal
samples of the Jharia coalfield. The testing of 84 core samples for UCS and density values
were carried out in the Rock Mechanics Laboratory of the
Importance of UCS measurements Department of Mining Engineering, Indian School of
Mines, Dhanbad. The density of coal and non-coal litho-
The UCS has a significant importance as a rock strength units have also been estimated from the density logs at the
parameter. It may be defined as maximum axial stress same core recovery depth interval to observe the deviation

Department of Applied Geophysics, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad 826 004, India / e-mail: rima_c_99@yahoo.com
Prediction of Uniaxial Compressive Strength from well log data

between laboratory derived and well log derived density medium grained sandstone, 3 coarse grained (gritty)
values. It is not always possible to get sufficient core sandstone, 21 intercalation and 2 jhama samples.
samples from greater depths as drilling for core samples is
very costly affair. For this reason, the present study aims to Determination of UCS
find out relations between laboratory derived density and
UCS values, laboratory derived density and well log Core analysis is required to define petrophysics for
derived density values and well log derived density and handling reservoir heterogeneity and anisotropy
laboratory derived UCS values, so that in absence of core (Worthington, 1991). The mechanical properties of rocks
samples, UCS values can be estimated from density log, if depend primarily on its mineral composition and
available. constitution, i.e., its structural and textural features (Bell et
al., 1999). The numerous factors, which influence the
In the present study, out of 84 testing data, the empirical strength and deformability behavior of sedimentary rocks,
relations between (1) laboratory derived density and UCS can be divided into two categories. Firstly; the nature and
values, (2) laboratory derived density and well log derived condition of the rock, such as mineralogy, texture, porosity,
density and (3) well log derived density and laboratory density, in-situ stresses and moisture content; secondly, the
derived UCS have been found out using 71 testing data and factors related to sample preparation and testing methods.
then (4) empirical relation between well log derived density In laboratory rock strength (UCS) as well as dry density of
and laboratory derived UCS have been validated using the core samples has been measured to establish the relation
remaining 13 testing data. among them.

The UCS of total 84 coal and non-coal core samples have


been determined in the Rock Mechanics Laboratory of the
Department of Mining Engineering, Indian School of
Mines, Dhanbad following the specification outlined in
Suggested Methods for Determining the Uniaxial
Compressive Strength and Deformability of Rock
Materials: Part 1 Suggested Methods for Determining the
Uniaxial Compressive of Rock Materials by the
International Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM). Figure 2
displaying the equipment and core samples used for
determining UCS of core samples in laboratory.

Figure 1: Structural and Stratigraphic map showing


locations of 10 wells in Jharia coalfield (after Chandra,
1992).

Identification of different litho-units

Coal and non-coal litho-units are identified both from core


samples from their physical properties as well as from the
analysis of different well logs, such as gamma ray, long
normal resistivity, short normal resistivity and caliper
corrected density logs. Geological litho-log data for same Figure 2: (a) Showing equipment used for uniaxial
wells have been used for nomenclature and depth to depth compressive strength determination. (b), (c) and (d)
correlation of different litho-units. The majority of the core Showing different stages of determination of uniaxial
samples from the Jharia coalfield are sandstones, although compressive strength of non-coal core sample in laboratory.
some other core samples like coal, shale, intercalation
(alternate bands of sandstone and shale) and jhama have As specified by ISRM the cylindrical core samples having
also been collected for present study. The 84 core samples, smooth, flat ends and having a length (L) to diameter (D)
more precisely, can further be divided into 19 coal, 17 ratio (L/D) of 2.5 to 3.0 are selected for this laboratory
shale, 3 araneceous shale, 4 fine grained sandstone, 15 testing. Where appropriate, test samples are oven dried at
Prediction of Uniaxial Compressive Strength from well log data

110C for 24 hours. All the samples are subjected to load at From the plot between DensityWL and DensityLab values
a constant stress rate (0.5 MPa/sec) such that failure will (Figure 3), the following best fit regression equation has
occur within 5 to 10 minutes of loading. The UCS of the been obtained,
sample is then calculated by dividing the maximum load
carried by the sample during the test, by the original cross- DensityLab = 0.85 x DensityWL + 0.39 (1)
sectional area.
The equation (1) showing excellent relation between
The laboratory tested UCS (UCSLab) values ranges from DensityWL and DensityLab and the values of goodness of fit
0.0096 GPa to 0.0195 GPa for 19 coal; from 0.0259 GPa to (R2) and correlation co-efficient (r) for the above equation
0.0535 GPa for 17 shale; from 0.0437 GPa to 0.0538 GPa are 0.97 and 0.98 respectively. The clustering of points
for 3 araneceous shale; from 0.0283 GPa to 0.0499 GPa for indicating density values of different litho-units of this
4 fine grained sandstone; from 0.0279 GPa to 0.0512 GPa area.
for 15 medium grained sandstone; from 0.0330 GPa to
0.0354 GPa for 3 coarse grained (gritty) sandstone; from
0.0268 GPa to 0.0572 GPa for 21 intercalation and from
0.0192 GPa to 0.0273 GPa for 2 jhama core samples.

Measurement of Density

The total of 84 right cylindrical coal and non-coal core


samples are selected to measure dry density in the Rock
Mechanics Laboratory of the Department of Mining
Engineering, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad following
the specification outlined in Rock Characterization
Testing and Monitoring ISRM Suggested Methods by
International Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM).

At first total volume of core samples are determined from


the following expression,
Vt = r2h
where Vt = total volume of core sample,
= 3.141 (constant),
r = radius of core sample,
and h = length of core sample.
Figure 3: Plot between well log derived density
All the core samples are oven dried at 110C for 24 hours
(DensityWL) and laboratory derived density (DensityLab).
to remove inherent moisture before using them for the
testing of dry density measurements. The dry density of
Relation between UCS and Density
core samples were determined by the following expression,
d = m1 / Vt
Out of total 84 core samples laboratory derived results of
where d = dry density of core sample,
71 core samples have been used to determine relation
m1 = weight of dry core sample,
between DensityLab and UCSLab (Figure 4) and results of
and Vt = total volume of core sample.
remaining 13 core samples have been used to validate the
results derived from the relation between DensityLab and
The laboratory tested dry density (DensityLab) values ranges
UCSLab (Table 1). The plot below showing the relation
from 1.48 gm/cc to 1.72 gm/cc for 19 coal; from 1.96
between DensityLab and UCSLab values (Figure 4).
gm/cc to 2.55 gm/cc for 17 shale; from 2.33 gm/cc to 2.47
gm/cc for 3 araneceous shale; from 2.55 gm/cc to 2.59
From the plot between Density Lab and UCSLab values
gm/cc for 4 fine grained sandstone; from 2.42 gm/cc to
(Figure 4), the following best fit regression relation has
2.60 gm/cc for 15 medium grained sandstone; from 2.45
been obtained,
gm/cc to 2.52 gm/cc for 3 coarse grained (gritty) sandstone;
from 2.26 gm/cc to 2.59 gm/cc for 21 intercalation and
UCSLab = 0.004 x DensityLab2.4 (2)
from 1.85 gm/cc to 1.89 gm/cc for 2 jhama core samples.
The density (DensityWL) of coal and non-coal litho units
The equation (2) showing good relation DensityLab and
have also been estimated from the density logs at the same
UCSLab and the values of goodness of fit (R2) and
core recovery depth interval. An attempt has been made to
correlation co-efficient (r) for the above equation are 0.79
find out relation from the plot between DensityWL and
and 0.82 respectively. Therefore, equation (2) represents
DensityLab (Figure 3).
the relation to obtain UCS from density values for the
Singra and Kapuria blocks of Jharia coalfield. The
Prediction of Uniaxial Compressive Strength from well log data

clustering of points indicating density values of different From Table 1, it is found that the correlation co-efficient
litho-units of this area. between UCSLab and UCS predicted using DensityLab is
0.80 whereas the correlation co-efficient between UCSLab
and UCS predicted using DensityWL is 0.78. So, it can be
concluded that in absence of core samples the UCS values
can be predicted from DensityWL (instead of DensityLab) to
get an idea of probable UCS values of different litho-units
with greater degree of accuracy.

Conclusions

The study demonstrated that density logs can be used to


predict the UCS of coal measure rocks. From laboratory
testing UCS and density values are obtained for 84 coal and
non-coal samples from 10 wells in Jharia Coalfield.
Laboratory derived density (DensityLab) values have been
showing an excellent relation with the well log derived
density (DensityWL) at the same core recovery depths. The
regression plot between laboratory derived UCS (UCSLab)
values of 71 sample and DensityLab values for same
samples provides the best fit power relationship with
goodness of fit (R2) value of 0.79 and correlation co-
efficient (r) value of 0.82. The relationship derived between
DensityLab and UCSLab for 71 samples have been used to
predict UCS values for remaining 13 samples. The UCS
Figure 4: Plot between laboratory derived UCS (UCSLab) values for remaining 13 samples have been predicted with
and laboratory derived density (DensityLab) of 71 core greater degree of accuracy using both DensityLab values as
samples well as using DensityWL values. As the core samples from
greater depth are not easily available, so this derived
Validation of predicted UCS equation can be an aid to get probable UCS values for
different litho-units in the regions of Jharia coalfield where
To check the equation (2), DensityLab values for remaining core samples are not available. These predicted values may
13 core samples have been used to predict UCS. Table 1 further be modified with the travel time data.
compares UCSLab values with the predicted UCS values
(using DensityLab) from equation (2). As the equation (1) Acknowledgement
showing excellent relation between DensityWL and
DensityLab, the UCS values have also been predicted using The authors express their sincere gratitude to Coal India
DensityWL values in place of DensityLab values. The Limited (CIL) and Central Mine Planning and Design
predicted values of UCS for 13 core samples and their Institute Limited (CMPDIL), Ranchi for the financial
UCSLab values are shown in Table 1. assistance under its R&D scheme.
Table 1: Validation of UCS values from Core samples. References
UCSLab Predicted UCS (GPa)
ASTM D2938-71a, 1979, Standard Test Method for
(GPa) Using DensityLab Using DensityWL Unconfined Compressive Strength of Intact Rock Core
0.0135 0.0125 0.0106 Specimens; American Society for Testing Materials
0.0437 0.0350 0.0368 (ASTM), ASTM Book of Standards, Part 19, 440-442.
0.0278 0.0361 0.0350
0.0349 0.0382 0.0337 Bell, F.G., Culshaw, M.G., Cripps, J.C., 1999. A review of
0.0393 0.0344 0.0375 selected engineering geological charateristics of English
0.0408 0.0354 0.0340 Chalk. Engineering Geology, 54, 237-269.
0.0477 0.0334 0.0347
0.0119 0.0102 0.0108 Chandra, D., 1992, Jharia Coalfield. Mineral Resources of
0.0346 0.0340 0.0330 India; Geological Society of India, Bangalore, 1-149.
0.0517 0.0321 0.0271
0.0464 0.0354 0.0378 McNally, G.H., 1987, Estimation of coal measures rock
0.0476 0.0368 0.0354 strength using sonic and neutron logs. Geoexploration,
0.0511 0.0350 0.0337 Amsterdam, 24 (4-5), 381395.
Prediction of Uniaxial Compressive Strength from well log data

McNally, G.H., 1990, The prediction of geotechnical rock


properties from sonic and neutron log. Exploration
Geophysics, 21, 6571.

Meng, Z. and Xian, X., 2013, Analysis of the mechanical


property of mudstone/shale in paralic coal measures and its
influence factors, Journal of Coal Science & Engineering,
19 (1), 1-7.

Paul, S. and Chatterjee, R., 2011, Determination of in-situ


stress direction from cleat orientation mapping for coal bed
methane exploration in south-eastern part of Jharia
coalfield, India, International Journal of Coal Geology, 87
(2), 87-96.

Worthington, P.F., 1991. The direction of Petrophysics: A


five-year perspective. The Log Analyst, March-April, 57-
62.

Вам также может понравиться