|
SAFOD: 2004 sample analysis workshop Report to NSF; November 2004
James P. Evans, Dept. of Geology,
Utah State Univ.,
Teng-fong Wong, Department of
Geosciences, State University of New York at Stony Brook Stony Brook, NY
11794-2100, Teng-fong.Wong@stonybrook.edu
|
The NSF-sponsored workshop on sample
analysis from the SAFOD core, cuttings, and fluids was held Oct. 8-9, 2004 in
The
scientific objective of the San Andreas Fault Observatory at Depth (SAFOD)
portion of EarthScope is to directly study the physical and chemical processes
that control deformation and earthquake generation within an active
plate-bounding fault zone. The SAFOD
drill site is located on a segment of the
The
workshop on analysis of rocks and fluids from SAFOD was held in
We
thank the National Science Foundation for support for this workshop, and we
thank
The workshop achieved its original
objectives, and planned for the future.
We visited the SAFOD drill site [Figure 1] and had the opportunity to
examine effects from the 28 Sept. M 6.0 Parkfield
earthquake. We developed a list of
research topics critical to addressing the scientific questions outlined above,
we discussed in detail operational aspects of drilling, coring, and fluid
sampling, and we helped foster communication among researchers who have been
funded or are seeking funding to examine rocks and fluids from SAFOD.
The workshop
broke out into two research interest groups to define specific objectives and
operational suggestions for the handling and analyses of the core, cuttings and
fluids from SAFOD. These groups were
loosely categorized as the geochemistry/fluids group and the physical
properties group, and we met in plenary session to discuss the outcomes and suggestions
for activities. Below is an unranked
list of topics that the group felt should be examined with the core, cuttings
and fluids. The analyses that workshop participants felt would help answer the
questions enumerated above include:
Characterization
on Site or Near Real-time Off-site
·
Mineralogy (XRD) and petrography (optical) of cuttings and core
·
Downhole petrophysical measurements (e.g.,
Logging While Drilling)
·
In-situ
measurements of fluid pressure and permeability
·
Mesostructural core description (e.g., basic lithology, core condition,
fluid content, fracture orientation, density, distribution, cross-cutting
relationships; surface markings; veins and vein fillings; foliations)
·
Multi-sensor
track physical property logging (natural gamma logs)
·
Bulk magnetic
susceptibility
·
Stress relaxation
measurements
·
Continuous
sampling for fluid chemistry (major ions)
Characterization
in Laboratory
·
Core
reorientation (from magnetic remanence methods and/or FMI
logs)
·
Microstructural
properties (including particle- and pore-size distribution, and textural
analyses, microstructures, nature of mineral distribution); possibly CT scan on
selected cores
·
Density and
porosity properties
·
Thermal and
electrical properties
·
Magnetic
properties (anisotropy of susceptibility, magnetic mineralogy)
·
Frictional
strength and rheological properties
·
Permeability
and poromechanical properties
·
Seismic
velocities and anisotropy; anelastic and attenuation
behavior
·
Detailed core
description (building on on-site description)
·
Elemental
analysis (ICP) of bulk rock and minerals
·
Fluid
chemistry (minors, stable isotopes); fluid inclusion in vein minerals (microthermometry, chemical analysis and structural control)
·
CO2,
CH4, noble gas analyses (from pressurized fluid samples)
·
Microbial
activity and organic-C analysis
·
Vein and fluid
inclusion chemistry (major and minor elements, stable isotopes)
·
Dating of host
minerals and fault rock (U/Pb. Ar, ESR, TL dating) –
these might be experimental
The participants felt very strongly that a number of observations
of core and sampling of fluids should be made at or near the drill site, and
that close communication should occur between scientists responsible for sample
characterization and those responsible for operations of SAFOD. Ideally, portions of a science team should be
available at the drill site to make real-time observations. This will establish a baseline database
regarding the condition of core in the state nearest to in situ conditions,
make the critical observations regarding the nature of the sampled rocks, and
will provide data to the drilling and coring operators that might be critical
for operational decisions. An informal review of other drilling
projects through fault zones shows that this might be an optimal plan for
managing the samples and drilling operations.
We feel this is critical for the success of the analytical portion of
the SAFOD effort, and brings the geological and geochemical communities
directly into the SAFOD project.
The workshop participants also provided feedback on the core and
sample handling and subsequent analysis to
The workshop participants, its organizers,
and SAFOD co-chief scientists
Conveners
University of
Michigan Teng-fong
Wong SUNY Stony Brook SAFOD Co-Chief Scientists
Mark
Zoback Participants
Ann
Blythe Anne-Marie
Boullier Roland
Burgmann Fred
Chester Judith
Chester Nick
Christensen David
Goldsby Laurel
Goodwin |
Miriam
Kastner David
Kirschner David
Lockner Diane
Moore Tullis
Onstott Ze’ev Reches Ernest
Rutter Toshi Shimamoto John
Solum ShengRong Song (TCDP) Hidemi Tanaka Harold
Tobin Tom
Torgersen Peter
Vrolijk ExxonMobil
Upstream Research |
Figure 1. SAFOD core, cuttings and fluids workshop
participants at the SAFOD site (October 8, 2004).
Last
update: November 30, 2004