地球科学进展

地球科学进展 ›› 2026, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (3): 261 -282. doi: 10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2026.022

综述与评述 上一篇    下一篇

超热岩岩石物理建模与地震波数值模拟研究进展
李元燮(), 曾昭发(), 刘财   
  1. 吉林大学 地球探测科学与技术学院，吉林 长春 130026
  • 收稿日期:2025-12-22 修回日期:2026-03-02 出版日期:2026-03-10
  • 通讯作者: 曾昭发 E-mail:liyuanxie@jlu.edu.cn;zengzf@jlu.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(42074119)

Petrophysical Modeling and Numerical Simulation of Seismic Wave Propagation in Superhot Rock: A Review

Yuanxie Li(), Zhaofa Zeng(), Cai Liu   

  1. College of Geo-Exploration Science and Technology, Jilin University, Changchun 130026, China
  • Received:2025-12-22 Revised:2026-03-02 Online:2026-03-10 Published:2026-05-06
  • Contact: Zhaofa Zeng E-mail:liyuanxie@jlu.edu.cn;zengzf@jlu.edu.cn
  • About author:Li Yuanxie, research areas include seismic wave forward modeling in supercritical geothermal reservoirs. E-mail: liyuanxie@jlu.edu.cn
  • Supported by:
    the National Natural Science Foundation of China(42074119)
全文 ( 6 ) 下载PDF ( 57 ) 补充材料 (1)

超热岩及其地热系统兼具高温、高压、强水—岩相互作用和部分熔融等特征，其复杂介质性质对地震波传播表现出显著的频散与衰减效应，给深部储层刻画与开发监测带来新的理论与方法挑战。为揭示上述条件下地震响应的主控机制，系统总结了超热岩岩石物理建模与地震波数值模拟的主要研究进展。以Burgers-Gassmann模型表征脆—韧性转换带黏弹效应、部分熔融效应和流体饱和效应，并结合Biot孔隙弹性理论与喷射流机制刻画地震频散与衰减。研究表明，深层地震响应主要受熔融相关黏弹损耗控制，表现为S波速度显著降低且品质因子Q出现弛豫峰；浅层P波速度主要受有效压力效应控制，而喷射流机制引起的局部波致流动可产生附加耗散，从而显著增强衰减；增强型超临界地热系统中冷水回注相较等温回注更具地震可监测性；时移地震剖面可为储层监测提供量化约束。针对现有模型的局限性，建议发展融合多场耦合、裂缝各向异性与非平衡过程的跨尺度理论，并结合高性能计算与多源观测数据，推动超热地热资源勘探开发的定量化与精细化。

关键词: 超热岩, 超临界地热系统, 地震波传播特性, Burgers-Gassmann模型, 岩石物理建模

Superhot rocks and related geothermal systems have attracted increasing attention as promising targets for next-generation high-enthalpy geothermal energy development. Their extremely high temperatures, strong water-rock interactions, pressure-dependent fluid properties, brittle-ductile transition behavior, and possible partial melting make seismic characterization far more complex than that of conventional geothermal reservoirs. Under such conditions, seismic-wave propagation is controlled not only by elastic contrasts, but also by viscoelastic relaxation, pore-fluid effects, local wave-induced fluid flow, and long-term thermo-hydro-mechanical-chemical evolution. A systematic understanding of these processes is therefore essential for reservoir imaging, monitoring, and development design. This paper reviews recent advances in petrophysical modeling and numerical simulation of seismic-wave propagation in superhot rocks and supercritical geothermal systems. The review is organized around an integrated framework that links governing physical mechanisms, rock-physics models, numerical methods, and monitoring applications. In this framework, the Burgers model is used to describe high-temperature viscoelastic deformation, steady-state creep, and partial-melt effects near the brittle-ductile transition, whereas the Gassmann equation and its extensions are used to quantify fluid-substitution effects on bulk modulus and seismic velocity. Biot poroelasticity and squirt-flow mechanisms are further incorporated to account for wave dispersion and attenuation caused by fluid-solid relative motion and local fluid flow in crack- and pore-bearing media. These physical descriptions are then embedded into full-wavefield modeling schemes for analyzing seismic responses in high-temperature geothermal environments. Existing studies indicate that deep seismic responses are mainly governed by melt-related viscoelastic losses. These effects lead to strong reductions in S-wave velocity, severe attenuation, and relaxation peaks in seismic quality factors. In shallower sections, by contrast, P-wave velocity is more sensitive to effective pressure and fluid substitution than to melt-related softening. When squirt-flow effects are included, attenuation may be significantly enhanced, particularly in fractured and fluid-saturated formations. Numerical simulations further show that seismic observability depends strongly on the thermal and hydraulic evolution of the reservoir. In enhanced supercritical geothermal systems, cold-water reinjection produces clearer time-lapse seismic signatures than isothermal reinjection, making it more favorable for reservoir monitoring. Synthetic VSP and time-lapse seismic responses can provide quantitative constraints on the geometry, migration, and expansion rate of cooled zones and other injection-induced anomalies. Despite these advances, current models remain largely phenomenological and still face limitations in describing fracture-induced anisotropy, multiphase and non-equilibrium fluid processes, and fully coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical-chemical feedbacks across scales. Future progress will require multiscale theoretical developments, better integration of laboratory measurements and field observations, and more efficient high-performance numerical simulations. These advances are expected to improve the quantitative exploration, monitoring, and sustainable development of superhot geothermal resources.

Key words: Superhot rock, Supercritical geothermal system, Seismic wave propagation characteristics, Burgers-Gassmann model, Petrophysical modeling

中图分类号: 

图1 超热岩（SHR）地震响应研究的总体框架示意图
Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of the general framework for seismic-response studies of Superhot Rock （SHR）
图2 脆—韧性转换带（BDT）地壳结构与Burgers黏弹模型示意图
（a） 脆—韧性转换带地壳结构示意图（据参考文献［32］修改）；（b） Burgers黏弹性模型示意图（据参考文献［35］修改）。
Fig. 2 Schematic illustrations of the crustal structure around the Brittle-Ductile Transition （BDT） and the Burgers viscoelastic model
（a） Schematic diagram of the crustal structure around the Brittle-Ductile Transition （modified after reference ［32］）； （b） Schematic diagram of the Burgers viscoelastic model （modified after reference ［35］）.
图3 喷射流模型示意图
Fig. 3 Schematic diagram of the squirt-flow model
图4 不同模型与参数条件下地震速度、品质因子及其灵敏度对温度和频率的响应特征（据参考文献［35］修改）
（a）P波速度VP随温度变化的曲线图［Gassmann-Burgers模型，不考虑喷射流机制（简称为GB）］；（b）S波速度VS随温度的变化曲线图（GB）；（c）P波速度VP随温度变化的曲线图［单独Burgers模型与考虑喷射流机制的Gassmann-Burgers模型对比（简称为B-GBS）］；（d）S波速度VS随温度变化的曲线图（B-GBS）；（e）P波品质因子QP随温度的变化曲线图（B-GBS）；（f）S波品质因子QS随温度的变化曲线图（B-GBS）；（g）VP的灵敏度曲线（GB）；（h）VS的灵敏度曲线（GB）；（i）QP的灵敏度曲线（GB）；（j）QS的灵敏度曲线（GB）；（k）QS随温度的变化曲线（无渗透率、可变渗透率、恒定渗透率，简称为κ）；（l）衰减随频率的变化（M 1~M 4四种流体迁移率，依次递减）；（m）柔性孔隙度随温度的变化（B-GBS）；（n）QS的灵敏度曲线（κ）。
Fig. 4 Temperature- and frequency-dependent responses of seismic velocities， quality factors， and their sensitivities under different modeling and parameter conditions （modified after reference ［35］）
（a） P-wave velocity VP versus temperature （Gassmann-Burgers model without the squirt-flow mechanism， denoted as GB）； （b） S-wave velocity VS versus temperature （GB）； （c） VP versus temperature （comparison between the Burgers-only model and the Gassmann-Burgers model with the squirt-flow mechanism， denoted as B-GBS）； （d） VS versus temperature （B-GBS）； （e） P-wave quality factor QP versus temperature （B-GBS）； （f） S-wave quality factor QS versus temperature （B-GBS）； （g） Sensitivity of VP （GB）； （h） Sensitivity of VS （GB）； （i） Sensitivity of QP （GB）； （j） Sensitivity of QS （GB）； （k） QS versus temperature for three permeability scenarios （no permeability， depth-dependent permeability， and constant permeability， κ）； （l） attenuation versus frequency for four fluid-mobility cases （M 1~M 4， decreasing in order）； （m） Compliant porosity versus temperature （B-GBS）； （n） Sensitivity of QS （κ）.
图5 基于参数集ALH1和ALH2计算的对应于传导型地热系统和对流型地热系统的地震特性随深度的变化曲线（据参考文献［36］修改）
Fig. 5 Depth-dependent seismic properties calculated using parameter sets ALH1 and ALH2 for a conductive geothermal system and a convective geothermal system （modifield after reference ［36］）
图6 增强型超临界地热系统的流体饱和岩层的相速度分布、流体密度与饱和岩石 VP 随温度变化的交会图以及水平方向上 VP 和ρf的关系（据参考文献［37］修改）
（a）VP分布（冷流体回注，每隔5年）；（b）VS分布（冷流体回注，每隔5年）；（c）VP分布（等温回注，每隔5年）；（d）VP随温度变化的交会图，VP和ρf关系图（冷流体回注）；（e） VP随温度变化的交会图，VP和ρf关系图（等温回注）。
Fig. 6 Spatial distributions of phase velocities in fluid-saturated rocks for an enhanced supercritical geothermal system， cross-plots of fluid density and saturated-rock VP versus temperature， and the horizontal relationship between VP andρf （modified after reference ［37］）
（a） VP distribution （cold-fluid reinjection， every 5 years）； （b） VS distribution （cold-fluid reinjection， every 5 years）； （c） VP distribution （isothermal reinjection， every 5 years）； （d） Cross-plot of VP versus temperature and VP-ρf relationship （cold-fluid reinjection）； （e） Cross-plot of VP versus temperature and VP-ρf relationship （isothermal reinjection）.
图7 不同深度介质条件下的二维波场快照及井间地震记录特征（据参考文献［33］修改）
0.5 s时刻的快照，分别对应（a）8 km、（b）11 km、（c）13 km深度处的性质；（d）井间地震记录，对应于间距600 m的两口垂直井。
Fig. 7 Two-dimensional wavefield snapshots and interwell seismic-record characteristics under different depth-dependent medium conditions （modified after reference ［33］）
Snapshots at t=0.5 s for media properties corresponding to depths of （a） 8 km， （b） 11 km， and （c） 13 km； （d） Interwell seismic record for two vertical wells spaced 600 m apart.
图8 增强型超临界地热系统长期监测中不同回注方案下的波场快照、单井VSP记录及时移地震响应（据参考文献［37］修改）
（a）冷流体回注条件下t=100 ms（第一行）和t=140 ms（第二行）时水平质点速度分量vx快照（0年、10年、20年）；（b）等温回注条件下t=100 ms（第一行）和t=140 ms（第二行）时水平质点速度分量vx快照（0年、20年）；（c）单井采集布局下模拟的单井VSP记录，显示冷流体回注0年（左）和冷流体回注20年（右）的质点速度垂直分量vz；（d）冷流体回注（左）和等温回注（右）0~20年的时移地震记录。图中快照色标表示相应时刻质点速度分量的瞬时振幅。
Fig. 8 Wavefield snapshots， single-well VSP records， and time-lapse seismic responses for long-term monitoring of an enhanced supercritical geothermal system under different reinjection schemes （modified after reference ［37］）
（a） Snapshots of the horizontal particle-velocity component vx for cold-fluid reinjection at t = 100 ms （first row） and t = 140 ms （second row）， shown for 0， 10， and 20 years； （b） Snapshots of the horizontal particle-velocity component vx for isothermal reinjection at t = 100 ms （first row） and t= 140 ms （second row）， shown for 0 and 20 years； （c） Simulated single-well VSP records acquired with a single-well geometry， showing the vertical particle-velocity component vz for 0 years （left） and 20 years （right） of cold-fluid reinjection； （d） Time-lapse seismic records over 0~20 years for cold-fluid reinjection （left） and isothermal reinjection （right）. The color scale in the snapshots denotes the instantaneous amplitude of the corresponding particle-velocity component.
[1] Friðleifsson G Ó， Elders W A. The Iceland Deep Drilling Project： a search for deep unconventional geothermal resources ［J］. Geothermics， 2005， 34（3）： 269-285.
[2] Cladouhos T T， Petty S， Bonneville A， et al. Super hot EGS and the Newberry deep drilling project［C］// Proceedings of the 43rd workshop on geothermal reservoir engineering. Standford： Standford University， 2018.
[3] Park J G， Han W S， Han G， et al. Characterization of choked conditions under subsonic to supersonic flow in single‐phase （supercritical to gaseous CO2 or liquid H2O） and multiphase （CO2 and H2O） transport ［J］. Journal of Geophysical Research： Solid Earth， 2019， 124（4）： 3 570-3 587.
[4] Xu Tianfu， Wang Yu， Feng Guanhong. Research progress and development prospect of deep supercritical geothermal resources［J］. Natural Gas Industry， 2021， 41（3）： 155-167.
许天福， 汪禹， 封官宏. 深部超临界地热资源研究进展及开发前景展望 ［J］. 天然气工业， 2021， 41（3）： 155-167.
[5] Watanabe N， Saito K， Okamoto A， et al. Stabilizing and enhancing permeability for sustainable and profitable energy extraction from superhot geothermal environments ［J］. Applied Energy， 2020， 260： 114306.
[6] Cladouhos T T， Callahan O A. Heat extraction from superhot rock： a survey of methods， challenges， and pathways forward［C］// Geothermal rising conference. Reno， Nevada， 2023： 2 804-2 851.
[7] Meyer G G， Shahin G， Cordonnier B， et al. Permeability partitioning through the brittle-to-ductile transition and its implications for supercritical geothermal reservoirs ［J］. Nature Communications， 2024， 15（1）： 7753.
[8] Jaya M S， Shapiro S A， Kristinsdóttir L H， et al. Temperature dependence of seismic properties in geothermal rocks at reservoir conditions ［J］. Geothermics， 2010， 39（1）： 115-123.
[9] Motra H， Wuttke F. Temperature dependence of elastic P-and S-wave properties of rocks： applications to geothermal reservoir evaluation［C］// Proceedings of the 1st international conference on energy geotechnics ICEGT 2016. Kiel， Germany， 2016.
[10] Motra H， Mager J， Ismail A， et al. Determining the influence of pressure and temperature on the elastic constants of anisotropic rock samples using ultrasonic wave techniques ［J］. Journal of Applied Geophysics， 2018， 159： 715-730.
[11] Motra H B， Stutz H H. Geomechanical rock properties using pressure and temperature dependence of elastic P-and S-wave velocities ［J］. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering， 2018， 36（6）： 3 751-3 766.
[12] Wang Q， Wang D， Fu W， et al. Effects of saturated fluids on petrophysical properties of hot dry rock at high temperatures： an experimental study ［J］. Geothermics， 2024， 121： 103048.
[13] Watanabe K， Watanabe N， Watanabe N， et al. A numerical study on the creation of artificial supercritical geothermal reservoirs by hydraulic fracturing ［J］. Geothermics， 2022， 105： 102500.
[14] Carbillet L， Griffiths L， Heap M J， et al. The influence of micro-and macrocracks on the permeability of granite ［J］. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering， 2025， 58： 1-18.
[15] Meyer G， Shahin G， Cordonnier B， et al. Permeability of experimentally deformed ductile granite derived from in-situ measurements and post-mortem X-ray tomography： perspectives for superhot rock reservoirs ［C］// EGU general assembly 2024. Vienna Austria， 2024.
[16] Rendel P M， Mountain B W. Solubility of quartz in supercritical water from 375 °C to 600 °C and 200-270 bar ［J］. The Journal of Supercritical Fluids， 2023， 196： 105883.
[17] Zhong C， Xu T， Yuan Y， et al. An experimental study on quartz solubility in water under supercritical geothermal conditions ［J］. Journal of Hydrology， 2024， 630： 130663.
[18] Piana A N， Licciardi A， Piccinini D， et al. Discovering geothermal supercritical fluids： a new frontier for seismic exploration ［J］. Scientific Reports， 2017， 7（1）： 14592.
[19] Rial J A， Elkibbi M， Yang M. Shear-wave splitting as a tool for the characterization of geothermal fractured reservoirs： lessons learned ［J］. Geothermics， 2005， 34（3）： 365-385.
[20] De Franco R， Petracchini L， Scrocca D， et al. Synthetic seismic reflection modelling in a supercritical geothermal system： an image of the K-horizon in the Larderello Field （Italy） ［J］. Geofluids， 2019， 2019（1）： 8492453.
[21] Jusri T， Bertani R， Buske S. Advanced three-dimensional seismic imaging of deep supercritical geothermal rocks in Southern Tuscany ［J］. Geophysical Prospecting， 2019， 67（2）： 298-316.
[22] Tognarelli A， Stucchi E， Mazzotti A. Velocity model estimation by means of full waveform inversion of transmitted waves： an example from a seismic profile in the geothermal areas of Southern Tuscany， Italy ［J］. Geothermics， 2020， 88： 101894.
[23] Zheng Y， Wang Y. High-resolution reflection seismic imaging to reveal subsurface geologic structures of a deep geothermal reservoir ［J］. Geophysics， 2023， 88（5）： WB37-WB43.
[24] Barison E， Poletto F， Böhm G， et al. Processing and interpretation of seismic reflection data from the Los Humeros super-hot geothermal system ［J］. Geothermics， 2023， 113： 102771.
[25] Kasahara J， Hasada Y， Kuzume H， et al. Seismic feasibility study to identify supercritical geothermal reservoirs in a geothermal borehole using DTS and DAS ［C］// 81st EAGE conference and exhibition 2019. European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers， 2019： 1-5.
[26] Reiser F， Schmelzbach C， Sollberger D， et al. Imaging the high-temperature geothermal field at Krafla using vertical seismic profiling ［J］. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research， 2020， 391： 106474.
[27] Obermann A， Sánchez-Pastor P， Wu S M， et al. Combined large‐N seismic arrays and DAS fiber optic cables across the Hengill Geothermal Field， Iceland ［J］. Seismological Society of America， 2022， 93（5）： 2 498-2 514.
[28] Kasahara J， Hasada Y， Mikada H. Geothermal reservoir characterization using distributed acoustic sensing from vertical seismic profiling in six geothermal fields in Japan ［M］// Li Y， Mellors R， Zhan G. Distributed acoustic sensing in borehole geophysics. Hoboken， NJ， USA： John Wiley & Sons， Inc. 2024： 205-223.
[29] Kasahara J， Hasada Y， Kuzume H， et al. A field experiment of a temperature-tolerant distributed acoustic sensor in deep geothermal reservoir prospecting ［J］. The Leading Edge， 2022， 41（5）： 331-337.
[30] Zhang N， Luo Z， Zhao L， et al. Innovative thermo-responsive in-situ generated proppant： laboratory tests and field application ［J］. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering， 2022， 208： 109514.
[31] Carcione J M， Poletto F， Farina B， et al. Simulation of seismic waves at the Earth’s crust （brittle-ductile transition） based on the Burgers model ［J］. Solid Earth， 2014， 5（2）： 1 001-1 010.
[32] Carcione J M， Poletto F. Seismic rheological model and reflection coefficients of the brittle-ductile transition ［J］. Pure and Applied Geophysics， 2013， 170： 2 021-2 035.
[33] Carcione J M， Poletto F， Farina B， et al. The Gassmann-Burgers model to simulate seismic waves at the Earth crust and mantle ［J］. Pure and Applied Geophysics， 2017， 174： 849-863.
[34] Carcione J M， Poletto F， Farina B. The Burgers/squirt-flow seismic model of the crust and mantle ［J］. Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors， 2018， 274： 14-22.
[35] Poletto F， Farina B， Carcione J M. Sensitivity of seismic properties to temperature variations in a geothermal reservoir ［J］. Geothermics， 2018， 76： 149-163.
[36] Farina B， Poletto F， Mendrinos D， et al. Seismic properties in conductive and convective hot and super-hot geothermal systems ［J］. Geothermics， 2019， 82： 16-33.
[37] Farina B， Parisio F， Poletto F. A seismic-properties and wave-propagation analysis for the long-term monitoring of supercritical geothermal systems ［J］. Geothermics， 2022， 104： 102451.
[38] Mendrinos D， Karytsas C， Karytsas S， et al. Correlations of seismic velocities and elastic moduli with temperature in superhot and enhanced geothermal systems ［J］. Clean Technologies， 2022， 4（2）： 440-457.
[39] Gassmann F. Über mechanische Empfänger von Seismographen und Schwingungsmessern ［J］. Archiv für Meteorologie， Geophysik und Bioklimatologie， Serie A， 1951， 3（5）： 408-422.
[40] Biot M A， Willis D G. The elastic coefficients of the theory of consolidation ［J］. Journal of Applied Mechanics， 1957， 24（4）： 594-601.
[41] Garg S. Formation compaction associated with thermal cooling in geothermal reservoirs ［J］. Advances in Water Resources， 1984， 7（4）： 188-191.
[42] Kern H， Popp T， Gorbatsevich F， et al. Pressure and temperature dependence of VP and VS in rocks from the superdeep well and from surface analogues at Kola and the nature of velocity anisotropy ［J］. Tectonophysics， 2001， 338（2）： 113-134.
[43] Punturo R， Kern H， Cirrincione R， et al. P-and S-wave velocities and densities in silicate and calcite rocks from the Peloritani Mountains， Sicily （Italy）： the effect of pressure， temperature and the direction of wave propagation ［J］. Tectonophysics， 2005， 409（1/4）： 55-72.
[44] Wang Z， Batzle M， Nur A. Effect of different pore fluids on seismic velocities in rocks［J］. Canadian Journal of Exploration Geophysics， 1990， 26： 104-112.
[45] Batzle M， Wang Z. Seismic properties of pore fluids ［J］. Geophysics， 1992， 57（11）： 1 396-1 408.
[46] Biot M A. Theory of elastic waves in a fluid-saturated porous solid. I. low frequency range ［J］. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America， 1956， 28： 168-178.
[47] Biot M A. Theory of propagation of elastic waves in a fluid‐saturated porous solid. II. higher frequency range ［J］. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America， 1956， 28（2）： 179-191.
[48] Mavko G， Jizba D. Estimating grain-scale fluid effects on velocity dispersion in rocks ［J］. Geophysics， 1991， 56（12）： 1 940-1 949.
[49] Boitnott G. Laboratory measurements on reservoir rocks from the Geysers geothermal field ［C］// Proceedings twentieth workhop on geothermal reservoir engineering. Stanford， California： Stanford University， 1995.
[50] Brown R J， Korringa J. On the dependence of the elastic properties of a porous rock on the compressibility of the pore fluid ［J］. Geophysics， 1975， 40（4）： 608-616.
[51] Thomsen L. Elastic anisotropy due to aligned cracks in porous rock1 ［J］. Geophysical Prospecting， 1995， 43（6）： 805-829.
[52] Gurevich B， Galvin R J， Brajanovski M， et al. Fluid substitution， dispersion， and attenuation in fractured and porous reservoirs—insights from new rock physics models ［J］. The Leading Edge， 2007， 26（9）： 1 162-1 168.
[53] Kristinsdóttir L H， Flóvenz Ó G， Árnason K， et al. Electrical conductivity and P-wave velocity in rock samples from high-temperature Icelandic geothermal fields ［J］. Geothermics， 2010， 39（1）： 94-105.
[54] Boitnott G， Bonner B. Characterization of rock for constraining reservoir scale tomography at the Geysers geothermal field［C］// Proceedings nineteenth workhop on geothermal reservoir engineering. Stanford， California： Stanford University， 1994.
[55] Mavko G， Nur A. Melt squirt in the asthenosphere ［J］. Journal of Geophysical Research， 1975， 80（11）： 1 444-1 448.
[56] Mavko G M， Nur A. Wave attenuation in partially saturated rocks ［J］. Geophysics， 1979， 44（2）： 161-178.
[57] Budiansky B， O’Connell R J. Elastic moduli of a cracked solid ［J］. International Journal of Solids and Structures， 1976， 12（2）： 81-97.
[58] O’Connell R J， Budiansky B. Viscoelastic properties of fluid‐saturated cracked solids ［J］. Journal of Geophysical Research， 1977， 82（36）： 5 719-5 735.
[59] Dvorkin J， Mavko G， Nur A. Squirt flow in fully saturated rocks ［J］. Geophysics， 1995， 60（1）： 97-107.
[60] Williams K L， Jackson D R， Thorsos E I， et al. Comparison of sound speed and attenuation measured in a sandy sediment to predictions based on the Biot theory of porous media ［J］. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering， 2002， 27（3）： 413-428.
[61] White J. Computed seismic speeds and attenuation in rocks with partial gas saturation ［J］. Geophysics， 1975， 40（2）： 224-232.
[62] White J E， Mihailova N， Lyakhovitsky F. Low‐frequency seismic waves in fluid‐saturated layered rocks ［J］. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America， 1975， 57（）： S30.
[63] Dutta N， Odé H. Attenuation and dispersion of compressional waves in fluid-filled porous rocks with partial gas saturation （White model）： part I， biot theory ［J］. Geophysics， 1979， 44（11）： 1 777-1 788.
[64] Dutta N C， Odé H. Attenuation and dispersion of compressional waves in fluid‐filled porous rocks with partial gas saturation （White model）—part II： results ［J］. Geophysics， 1979， 44（11）： 1 789-1 805.
[65] Dutta N， Seriff A. On White’s model of attenuation in rocks with partial gas saturation ［J］. Geophysics， 1979， 44（11）： 1 806-1 812.
[66] Murphy III W F. Effects of partial water saturation on attenuation in Massilon sandstone and Vycor porous glass ［J］. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America， 1982， 71（6）： 1 458-1 468.
[67] Murphy III W F. Acoustic measures of partial gas saturation in tight sandstones ［J］. Journal of Geophysical Research： Solid Earth， 1984， 89（B13）： 11 549-11 559.
[68] Norris A N. Low‐frequency dispersion and attenuation in partially saturated rocks ［J］. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America， 1993， 94（1）： 359-370.
[69] Gurevich B， Lopatnikov S. Velocity and attenuation of elastic waves in finely layered porous rocks ［J］. Geophysical Journal International， 1995， 121（3）： 933-947.
[70] Gelinsky S， Shapiro S. Dynamic-equivalent medium approach for thinly layered saturated sediments ［J］. Geophysical Journal International， 1997， 128（1）： F1-F4.
[71] Cadoret T， Mavko G， Zinszner B. Fluid distribution effect on sonic attenuation in partially saturated limestones ［J］. Geophysics， 1998， 63（1）： 154-160.
[72] Johnson D L. Theory of frequency dependent acoustics in patchy-saturated porous media ［J］. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America， 2001， 110（2）： 682-694.
[73] Pride S R， Berryman J G. Linear dynamics of double-porosity dual-permeability materials. I. governing equations and acoustic attenuation ［J］. Physical Review E， 2003， 68（3）： 036603.
[74] Pride S R， Berryman J G. Linear dynamics of double-porosity dual-permeability materials. II. fluid transport equations ［J］. Physical Review E， 2003， 68（3）： 036604.
[75] Pride S R， Berryman J G， Harris J M. Seismic attenuation due to wave-induced flow ［J］. Journal of Geophysical Research： Solid Earth， 2004， 109（B1）： 201.
[76] Carcione J M. Wave fields in real media： wave propagation in anisotropic， anelastic， porous and electromagnetic media ［M］. Amsterdam： Elsevier Science， 2014.
[77] Gurevich B， Makarynska D， Pervukhina M. Ultrasonic moduli for fluid-saturated rocks： mavko-Jizba relations rederived and generalized ［J］. Geophysics， 2009， 74（4）： N25-N30.
[78] Gurevich B， Makarynska D， De Paula O B， et al. A simple model for squirt-flow dispersion and attenuation in fluid-saturated granular rocks ［J］. Geophysics， 2010， 75（6）： N109-N120.
[79] Carcione J M， Picotti S， Gei D， et al. Physics and seismic modeling for monitoring CO2 storage ［J］. Pure and Applied Geophysics， 2006， 163（1）： 175-207.
[80] Carcione J M， Gurevich B. Differential form and numerical implementation of Biot’s poroelasticity equations with squirt dissipation ［J］. Geophysics， 2011， 76（6）： N55-N64.
[81] Sarkar D， Bakulin A， Kranz R L. Anisotropic inversion of seismic data for stressed media： theory and a physical modeling study on Berea Sandstone ［J］. Geophysics， 2003， 68（2）： 690-704.
[82] Johnson P， Rasolofosaon P. Nonlinear elasticity and stress-induced anisotropy in rock ［J］. Journal of Geophysical Research： Solid Earth， 1996， 101（B2）： 3 113-3 124.
[83] Winkler K W， Liu X. Measurements of third‐order elastic constants in rocks ［J］. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America， 1996， 100（3）： 1 392-1 398.
[84] Rasolofosaon P. Stress-induced seismic anisotropy revisited ［J］. Revue de l’Institut Français du Pétrole， 1998， 53（5）： 679-692.
[85] Duffy J， Mindlin R D. Stress-strain relations and vibrations of a granular medium ［J］. Journal of Applied Mechanics， 1957， 24（4）： 585-593.
[86] Gangi A F， Carlson R L. An asperity-deformation model for effective pressure ［J］. Tectonophysics， 1996， 256（1/2/3/4）： 241-251.
[87] Mavko G， Mukerji T， Godfrey N. Predicting stress-induced velocity anisotropy in rocks ［J］. Geophysics， 1995， 60（4）： 1 081-1 087.
[88] Merkel R， Barree R， Towle G. Seismic response of Gulf of Mexico reservoir rocks with variations in pressure and water saturation ［J］. The Leading Edge， 2001， 20（3）： 290-299.
[89] Carcione J M， Tinivella U. The seismic response to overpressure： a modelling study based on laboratory， well and seismic data ［J］. Geophysical Prospecting， 2001， 49（5）： 523-539.
[90] Zimmerman R W， Somerton W H， King M S. Compressibility of porous rocks ［J］. Journal of Geophysical Research： Solid Earth， 1986， 91（B12）： 12 765-12 777.
[91] Eberhart-Phillips D， Han D， Zoback M. Empirical relationships among seismic velocity， effective pressure， porosity， and clay content in sandstone ［J］. Geophysics， 1989， 54（1）： 82-89.
[92] Freund D. Ultrasonic compressional and shear velocities in dry clastic rocks as a function of porosity， clay content， and confining pressure ［J］. Geophysical Journal International， 1992， 108（1）： 125-135.
[93] Jones S M. Velocities and quality factors of sedimentary rocks at low and high effective pressures ［J］. Geophysical Journal International， 1995， 123（3）： 774-780.
[94] Prasad M， Manghnani M H. Effects of pore and differential pressure on compressional wave velocity and quality factor in Berea and Michigan sandstones ［J］. Geophysics， 1997， 62（4）： 1 163-1 176.
[95] Khaksar A， Griffiths C M， Mccann C. Compressional- and shear-wave velocities as a function of confining stress in dry sandstones ［J］. Geophysical Prospecting， 1999， 47（4）： 487-508.
[96] Kirstetter O， Macbeth C. Compliance-based interpretation of dry frame pressure sensitivity in shallow marine sandstone［C］// Proceedings of the 2001 SEG Annual Meeting， 2001： 2 001-2 132.
[97] Popp T， Kern H. The influence of dry and water saturated cracks on seismic velocities of crustal rocks—a comparison of experimental data with theoretical model ［J］. Surveys in Geophysics， 1994， 15： 443-465.
[98] Mavko G， Mukerji T， Dvorkin J. The rock physics handbook： tools for seismic analysis of porous media ［M］. 2nd. Cambridge： Cambridge University Press， 2009.
[99] Manning C E， Ingebritsen S E. Permeability of the continental crust： implications of geothermal data and metamorphic systems ［J］. Reviews of Geophysics， 1999， 37（1）： 127-150.
[100] Carcione J M， Morency C， Santos J E. Computational poroelasticity—a review ［J］. Geophysics， 2010， 75（5）： 75A229-75A243.
[101] Griffiths L， Heap M J， Lengliné O， et al. Thermal stressing of volcanic rock： microcracking and crack closure monitored through acoustic emission， ultrasonic velocity， and thermal expansion ［J］. Journal of Geophysical Research： Solid Earth， 2024， 129（3）： e2023JB027766.
[102] Batzle M L， Han D， Hofmann R. Fluid mobility and frequency-dependent seismic velocity—direct measurements ［J］. Geophysics， 2006， 71（1）： N1-N9.
[103] Zhubayev A， Jihai Y， Jun C， et al. Fluid mobility in reservoir rocks from integrated VSP and openhole data ［C］// Proceedings of the SEG international exposition and annual meeting. Houston， Tcxa， 2013.
[104] Lorenzo-Pulido C D. Borehole geophysics and geology of well H-43， Los Humeros geothermal field， Puebla， México ［R］. Reykjavik Icdand： Orkustofnun， 2008： 40.
[105] Parisio F， Vilarrasa V， Wang W， et al. The risks of long-term re-injection in supercritical geothermal systems ［J］. Nature Communications， 2019， 10（1）： 4391.
[106] Carrillo J， Pérez-Flores M A， Calò M. Three-dimensional joint inversion of surface wave dispersion and gravity data using a petrophysical approach： an application to Los Humeros geothermal field ［J］. Geophysical Journal International， 2024， 239（2）： 1 217-1 235.
[1] 黄文星, 朱本铎, 刘丽强, 张金鹏. 国际海底命名争端案例研究及其启示[J]. 地球科学进展, 2016, 31(1): 78-85.
[2] 张志禹，樊婷，王喜乐. 孔隙结构参数对地震各类波传播的影响研究[J]. 地球科学进展, 2015, 30(12): 1306-.
[3] 杨扬, 马劲风, 李琳. CO2地质封存四维多分量地震监测技术进展[J]. 地球科学进展, 2015, 30(10): 1119-1126.
[4] 郭恺, 王鹏燕, 娄婷婷. 基于P-SV波分离的VTI介质射线追踪方法[J]. 地球科学进展, 2015, 30(9): 1028-1033.
[5] 冯斌，赵峰华，王淑华. 地震分频解释技术在河道砂预测中的应用[J]. 地球科学进展, 2012, 27(5): 510-514.
[6] 高建虎,刘全新,雍学善,刘洪. 双相介质叠前储层参数反演方法研究[J]. 地球科学进展, 2007, 22(10): 1048-1053.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

地址：甘肃省兰州市天水中路8号
QQ：114723517
电话：0931-8762293　E-mail：adearth@lzb.ac.cn
陇ICP备2021001824号-5　 甘公网安备62010202000687