Influence of random parameter joint length on rock electrical conductivity

Rock joint hollowness coefficient is an important parameter when resolving practical mining problems. Geophysical methods used to resolve this problem are indirect. Thus the interpretation of their results may cause certain difficulties as a result of the uncertainty of the physical relationships between the parameters of joints and the measurement results. One of the ways to resolve this problem is to combine experimental research methods with analytical and numerical simulation. The studies were aimed at investigating the electrical conductivity of a two-dimensional medium in the presence of thin insulating (non-conducting) joints. This paper proposes an analytical method for assessing the dependence of the specific conductivity of a medium with inclusions in the form of elliptical joints on their half-length. This dependence is show to have the form of an exponent depending on the square of the length of the maximum semi-axis as an argument. The simulation method is based on the assumption of the elliptical shape of a joint when the length of the minor semi-axis of the ellipses tends to zero. A review of publications and their results presented in this paper showed that this method for determining the specific conductivity of the medium with thin joints is one of the best in terms of compliance with experimental data. Its predictions are close to those of the Effective Media Approximation (EMA). However, the proposed method is distinguished by the simplicity of the formulas and their physical visibility essential for the use in interpreting the data of a physical experiment. In two-dimensional formulation, numerical simulation of the specific electrical conductivity of a sample of a medium measuring 1×1 m with elliptical joints of conductivity less than that of the matrix was carried out in the COMSOL Multiphysics environment. A square sample of unit sizes with unit conductivity was considered in which 25 joints with uniform distribution along the length occurred. 40 models were built wherein the maximum length of the joints varied from 0.01 to 0.4 sample size in increments of 0.01 m. The satisfactory concordance of the results of numerical and analytical models, both visual and confirmed by statistical estimates, has been shown. It was noted that when the size of the joints changes to achieve the value of the maximum semi-axis α = 0.15 m, the influence of single joints that do not extend beyond the boundaries of the sample prevails. Above this value, at α > of 0.15 m, the influence of joint coalescence, as well as their extension to and beyond the sample boundaries begins to affect. Comparison   of the proposed theoretical model of electrical conductivity, depending on the square of the length of the maximum semi-axis of a joint, with a similar model in the form of an exponent with a linear dependence showed a better concordance of the proposed model with observations at the stage of the lack of joint coalescence and their extension to the sample boundaries at α < 0.15 m. At α > 0.15 m. The proposed model has a lower coefficient of determination compared to the full range including both intervals, but higher than that of the model with a linear dependence in the exponent argument. This indicates the universal nature of the proposed model.

1. Feng P., Zhao J., Dai F. et al. Mechanical behaviors of conjugate-flawed rocks subjected to coupled static– dynamic compression. Acta Geotechnica. 2022;17(5):1765–1784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-021-01322-6

2. Feng P., Dai F., Shuai K. et al. Dynamic mechanical behaviors of pre-fractured sandstone with noncoplanar and unparallel flaws. Mechanics of Materials. 2022;166:104219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmat.2022.104219

3. Yan Z., Dai F., Liu Y. et al. Experimental investigation of pre-flawed rocks under combined staticdynamic loading: Mechanical responses and fracturing characteristics. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences. 2021;211:106755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.106755

4. Qi C., Xia C., Dyskin A. et al. Effect of crack interaction and friction on the dynamic strength of rocklike materials with many cracks. Engineering Fracture Mechanics. 2021;257:108006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2021.108006

5. Gao M., Xie J., Gao Y. et al. Mechanical behavior of coal under different mining rates: A case study from laboratory experiments to field testing. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology. 2021;31(5):825–841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2021.06.007

6. Lu J., Jiang C., Jin Z. et al. Three-dimensional physical model experiment of mining-induced deformation and failure characteristics of roof and floor in deep underground coal seams. Process Safety and Environmental Protection. 2021;150:400–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2021.04.029

7. Li T., Chen G., Li Y. et al. Study on Progressive Instability Characteristics of Coal-Rock Composite Structure with the Different Height Ratios. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering. 2022;40(3):1135–1148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-021-01947-0

8. Serdyukov S., Patutin A., Rybalkin S. L. et al. Directional hydraulic fracturing based on tensile loading. In: International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management – SGEM. International Multidisciplinary Scientific Geoconference. 2017;17(13):269–274. https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2017/13/S03.034

9. Ingles J., Lamouroux C., Soula J. C. et al. Nucleation of ductile shear zones in a granodiorite under greenschist facies conditions, Neouvielle massif, Pyrenees, France. Journal of Structural Geology. 1999;21(5):555–576. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8141(99)00042-5

10. Economides M.J., Mikhailov D.N., Nikolaevskiy V.N. On the problem of fluid leakoff during hydraulic fracturing. Transport in Porous Media. 2007;67(3):487–499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242-006-9038-7

11. Khramchenkov M. G., Korolev E.A. Dynamics of fractures growth in oil saturated carbonate beds of the Republic of Tatarstan. Neftyanoe Khozyaistvo. 2017;(4):54–57. https://doi.org/10.24887/0028-2448-2017-4-54-57

12. Petrov V.A., Lespinasse M., Poluektov V. V.et al. Rescaling of fluid-conducting fault structures. Doklady Earth Sciences. 2017;472(2):130–133. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1028334X17020027

13. Matray J. M., Savoye S., Cabrera J. Desaturation and structure relationships around drifts excavated in the well-compacted Tournemire’s argillite (Aveyron, France). Engineering Geology. 2007;90(1–2):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2006.09.021

14. Andrievskij A. P. Design procedure of optimal parameters of drilling and blasting operations certificate under drilling with straight slot tier cut. Fiziko-Tekhnicheskie Problemy Razrabotki Poleznykh Iskopaemykh. 1992;(5):71–76.

15. Kononenko M., Khomenko O., Savchenko M. et al. Method for calculation of drilling-and-blasting operations parameters for emulsion explosives. Mining of Mineral Deposits. 2019;13(3):22–30. https://doi.org/10.33271/mining13.03.022

16. Krstic S., Ljubojev M., Ljubojev V. et al. Monitoring the stability of the rock mass excavating of underground premises in the ore body t1, jama bor. In: International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management – SGEM. International Multidisciplinary Scientific Geoconference. 2014;2(1):613–619. https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2014/b12/s2.078

17. Sudarikov A. E., Merkulova V.A. Specifics of calculating the stability of mine workings when applying drilling and blasting. ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences. 2017;12(21):6192–6196. URL: https://arpnjournals.org/jeas/research_papers/rp_2017/jeas_1117_6471.pdf

18. Abaturova I., Savintsev I., Korchak S. Assessment of risk of development of contingency situations on railway tracks. In: Engineering and Mining Geophysics 2018 – 14th Conference and Exhibition. European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers. 2018. P. 137600. https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.201800545

19. Nurpeisova M. B., Kirgizbayeva D.M., Kopzhasaruly K. Innovative methods of the rock massif fractures survey and treatment of its results. Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu. 2016;(2):11–18.

20. Levytskyi V., Sobolevskyi R., Zawieska D. et al. The accuracy of determination of natural stone cracks parameters based on terrestrial laser scanning and dense image matching data. In: International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM. 2017;17(23):255–262. https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2017/23/S10.031

21. Golik V., Stas G., Morkun V. et al. Study of rock structure properties during combined stopping and development headings. In: The International Conference on Sustainable Futures: Environmental, Technological, Social and Economic Matters (ICSF 2020). 2020;166:03006. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202016603006

22. Tian W.L., Yang S. Q., Dong J. P. et al. An experimental study on triaxial failure mechanical behavior of jointed specimens with different JRC. Geomechanics and Engineering. 2022;28(2):181–195. https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2022.28.2.181

23. Fan X., Yu H., Deng Z. et al. Cracking and deformation of cuboidal sandstone with a single nonpenetrating flaw under uniaxial compression. Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics. 2022;119:103284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2022.103284

24. Ren S., Han T., Fu L. et al. Pressure effects on the anisotropic velocities of rocks with aligned fractures. Acta Geophysica Sinica. 2021;64(7):2504–2514. (In Chinese) https://doi.org/10.6038/cjg2021O0318

25. Anderson I., Ma J., Wu X. et al. Determining reservoir intervals in the Bowland Shale using petrophysics and rock physics models. Geophysical Journal International. 2022;228(1):39–65. https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggab334

26. Wu J., Goto T., Koike K. Estimating fractured rock effective permeability using discrete fracture networks constrained by electrical resistivity data. Engineering Geology. 2021;289:166–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2021.106178

27. Attya M., Hachay O., Khachay O. New method of defining the geotechnical parameters from CSEM (controlled source electromagnetic method) monitoring data at the 15th May City, Egypt. Methods and Applications in Petroleum and Mineral Exploration and Engineering Geology. 2021;371–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-323-85617-1.00022-9

28. Grib N. N., Uzbekov A. N., Imaev V.S. et al. Variations in the geoelectric properties of the rock masses as a result of the seismic effects of industrial explosions. In: IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. World Multidisciplinary Earth Sciences Symposium (WMESS 2019). 9–13 September 2019, Prague, Czech Republic. 2019;362(1):012120. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/362/1/012120

29. Sizin P. E., Shkuratnik V. L. Theoretical estimation of microcracks influence on rocks conductivity with maxwell approximation. Mining Informational and Analytical Bulletin. 2015;(3):212–218.

30. Landau L. D., Lifshits E. M. Theoretical physics: At 10 parts. T. VIII. Electrodynamics of continuous media. Moscow: Fizmatlit; 2005. 656 p. (In Russ.)

31. Bruggeman D.A. G. Berechnung verschiedener physikalischer Konstanten von heterogenen Substanzen. I. Dielektrizitätskonstanten und Leitfähigkeiten der Mischkörper aus isotropen Substanzen. Annalen der Physik. 1935;416(8):665–679. (In German) https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.19354160802

32. Landauer R. Conductivity of cold-worked metals. Physical Review. 1951;82(4):520–521. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.82.520

33. Landauer R. High-field magnetoresistance of point defects. Journal of Physics F: Metal Physics. 1978;8(11):L245–L250. https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4608/8/11/001

34. Balagurov B. Ya. Electrophysical properties of composites: Macroscopic theory. Moscow: LENAND; 2015. 752 p. (In Russ.)

35. Kasakhara K. Earthquake Mechanics. Moscow: Mir; 1985. 264 p. (In Russ.)

36. Shklovskiĭ B. I., Éfros A. L. Percolation theory and conductivity of strongly inhomogeneous media. Soviet Physics Uspekhi. 1975;18(11):845–862. https://doi.org/10.1070/PU1975v018n11ABEH005233

37. Pride S. R., Berryman J. G., Commer M. et al. Changes in geophysical properties caused by fluid injection into porous rocks: analytical models. Geophysical Prospecting. 2017;65(3):766–790. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12435

38. Tan X., Konietzky H. Numerical simulation of permeability evolution during progressive failure of Aue granite at the grain scale level. Computers and Geotechnics. 2019;112:185–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2019.04.016

39. Voznesensky A. S., Kidima-Mbombi L. K. Formation of synthetic structures and textures of rocks when simulating in COMSOL Multiphysics. Mining Science and Technology (Russia). 2021;6(2):65–72. https://doi.org/10.17073/2500-0632-2021-2-65-72

40. Zhukov V.S. Influence of intergranular and fractured porosity on the electrical resistivity of reservoirs of the Chayandinsky field (Eastern Siberia). Geophysical Research. 2022;23(2):5–17. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21455/gr2022.2-1