Chapter I, Introduction to the theory of

poro-elasticity
and two applications.

Lecture 1

24 March 2009
Introduction

Poro-elasticity theory

Application to post-seismic rebound

References
Part I : Introduction
Objectives

• Introduction of the theory of poro-elasticity

Application 1 : post-seismic rebond in a region of ”en échelon” faults,

following an earthquake (Landers, California 1992).

Application 2 : compaction of an oil reservoir following pressure drop

during production.
Example and complexity of the Ekofisk field, North Sea.

• Computing subsidence by application of the reciprocity theorem.

Part I : Introduction
Fluid and rock rheology

A porous medium.
Pression solution : a deformation mechanism (Houseknecht and
Hathon, 1987).
Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Introduction

• Starting point : Terzaghi (1923)

• Modern development : Biot (1941)

• Reference : Guéguen and Boutéca (2003)

• Our approach : Rice and Cleary (1976).

• Hypothesis : small strain and rotation, small displacement

compared to structure length (small pertubation assumption).

• Hypothesis : isotropy.
Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Recall Hooke’s law

• Initial stress σ 0 • Stress changes ∆σ

• Reversible deformation 
Symmetric part of the displacement gradient, measured from the
reference state under initial stress.
• Hooke’s law (classical expression)

1
∆σ = (3K − 2G) δ tr() + 2G , (1)
3
K : compressibility and G : shear modulus
• The French notation !
a is a vector of coordinate ai ,
A is a second-order tensor of coordinate Aij
δ second-order identity tensor δij (Kronecker delta 1 if i = j, zero
otherwise)
tr() the trace operator ii
Repeated indices imply summation : ii = 11 + 22 + 33
Note : δii = δ11 + δ22 + δ33 = 3
Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Recall Hooke’s law

1
∆σ = (3K − 2G) δ tr() + 2G ,
3
• Interpreting the compressibility modulus K

tr(∆σ) = 3K tr() . (2)

The trace tr() is the relative volume change ∆V /V .

The shear modulus G does not change the compressibility.

3
2

1
1 1 +ε
33
1 + ε 11
1

1 1 + ε 22
Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Recall Hooke’s law

• Hooke’s law : a linear relation between two second-order tensors

∆σ = C
I: (3)
... there exists a fourth-order tensor : C
I = 3KJI + 2GIK
• Expressed in terms of two fundamental tensors

1
JI = δ⊗δ , IK = 1IIIS − JI (4)
3

1IIIS symmetric, fourth-order identity tensor, 1IIIS : A = 12 (A + t A)

having the remarkable properties :

JI : JI = JI , IK : IK = IK et IK : JI = O
I , (5)

• Notation : A : B equivalent to tr(A · B) or Aij Bji (two sums)

also IK : JI equivalent to IKijkl : JIlkpq = O
I ijpq
1IIIS symmetric, fourth-order identity tensor, 1IIIS : A = 12 (A + t A
Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Recall Hooke’s law

• In terms of the elasticity modulus E and Poisson’s coefficient ν

E E
K = G= . (6)
3(1 − 2ν) 2(1 + ν)

• Inversion of Hooke’s law :

1 1
CI−1 = (3KJI + 2GIK)−1 = JI + IK (7)
3K 2G
thus
1 1 1
=( − )δtr(∆σ) + ∆σ . (8)
9K 6G G
Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Extension of Hooke’s law to saturated media
• Laboratory test : specimen in a stiff machine
Change the fluid pressure ∆pf and measure the change in the forces
on the boundary to deduce the stress change. Since material
isotropic, the stress change must also be isotropic.
• The relation between these two changes can only be through a
second-order tensor

∆σ = −αδ∆pf , (9)
α : Biot’s constant
The sign convention.

∆ pf


























































































































































































































































Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Extension of Hooke’s law to saturated media

• Material response is linear, superpose the results in (9) and (3)

∆σ = (3K JI + 2GIK) :  − αδ∆pf , (10)

to combine change in pore pressure and deformation of the
specimen.

• Compressibility modulus K at constant pressure.

The fluid mass in the specimen has to change.
K Compressibility modulus for drained conditions .

• Analogy with thermo-elasticity (Darcy’s law for diffusion)

• Inversion of constitutive response for drained conditions

1 1 1 1 α
=( − ) δtr(∆σ) + ∆σ + δ∆pf . (11)
3K 2G 3 2G 3K
Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Extension of Hooke’s law to saturated media

• Complementary case : the fluid mass in the specimen does not

have time to migrate (eg wave traveling).
The deformation is said to be undrained.

• The stress change

∆σ = (3Ku JI + 2GIK) :  , (12)

Ku is the compressibility modulus, undrained (Ku > K )

G remains identical for the two descriptions

Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Interpretation of Biot’s constant α

a) b)
−∆ pf n −∆ pf n
∆p
∆p f



























f

































































































































































=





























































































































































Ks









































































































• Consider a porous solid which skeleton is composed of an elastic,
compressible material Ks .
Pore network is connected and fluid saturated.
• Apply fluid pressure change ∆pf and a density of external forces
T d = −∆pf n
• Two analyses of the same test :
(1) at the level of the micro-structure
(2) from a macroscopic level (ignore pore level description)
Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Interpretation of Biot’s coefficient α

(1) At the level of the micro-structure

• The elastic skeleton has a purely hydrostatic loading on its

boundary. Its change of stress has to be also hydrostatic !

∆σ = −∆pf δ , (13)
• The solid phase local deformation is purely spherical

1
=− ∆pf δ , (14)
3Ks
• The fluid phase sustains the same deformation, thus homogeneous
deformation for the whole.
Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Interpretation of Biot’s coefficient

(2) Macroscopic level analysis

• The observer measures an average response

1 α
= δtr(∆σ) + ∆pf δ . (15)
9K 3K

• Approaches (1), eq. (14) and (2), eq. (15) are identical :

K
α=1− . (16)
Ks

Biot’s coefficient is between O and 1.

For soils, K  Ks et α ' 1, as proposed by Terzaghi (1923).

Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Change in fluid pressure for undrained tests
• Two laboratory tests.

a) b)
−P n −P n
∆p
f














• First test is drained, force density on boundary T d = −Pn and
change in fluid pressure ∆pf .

• Second test : undrained material response for same external

loading.
Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Change in fluid pressure for undrained tests

• Firs test : stress change is hydrostatic and leads to the deformation

1 α
=− Pδ + ∆pf δ . (17)
3K 3K
• Second test :
1
=− Pδ . (18)
3Ku
• Adjust the pressure change of first test so that the deformations
(17) and (18) are identical :

Ku − K
∆pf = P . (19)
αKu
Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Change in fluid pressure for undrained tests

• Need to generalize

B Ku − K
∆pf = −tr(∆σ) with B = , (20)
3 αKu
Skempton’s coefficient B.
Between 0 et 1.
Tends to 0 for very compressible fluids, tends to 1 if solid and fluid
have the same compressibility.
Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Reciprocity or Maxwell-Betti theorem extended to poro-elasticity

T 1d T d2

b b2
∆ pf 1
1
∆ pf
2

• Consider a porous solid, saturated, occupying the domain Ω of

boundary ∂Ω.

• The first problem : T d1 on ∂ΩT , body forces b1 , change in fluid

pressure : the field ∆pf 1 .

• The second problem : T d2 on same ∂ΩT , body forces b2 and change

in fluid pressure : ∆pf 2 .

• The solution sets (u 1 , ∆σ 1 ) and (u 2 , ∆σ 2 ) are unique.

Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Reciprocity or Maxwell-Betti theorem extended to poro-elasticity

• Theorem

T d1 · u 2 dS +
R R
∂ΩT Ω
b1 · u 2 + α∆p1 tr(2 )dV =
T d2
R R
∂ΩT
· u 1 dS + Ω
b2 · u 1 + α∆p2 tr(1 )dV . (21)

The work of external forces of first problem on the displacement of

thesecond problem = the work of the external forces ofsecond
problem on the displacement of the first problem.

• Assume this theorem is extended to media of infinite extend and for

forces corresponding to generalized functions (eg Dirac or point
forces).

• The proof of this theorem is centered on the theorem of virtual

work.
Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Reciprocity or Maxwell-Betti theorem extended to poro-elasticity

• Theorem of virtual work (TVW)

Z Z Z
T d · ûdS + b · û = ∆σ : (û)dV . (22)
∂ΩT Ω Ω

û : kinematically admissible displacement field.

Hypothesis on material response : ∆σ + α∆pf δ = C

I:
Part II : Poro-elasticity theory
Reciprocity or Maxwell-Betti theorem extended to poro-elasticity

• TVW for pb no 1 with solution of pb no 2 for the virtual field

Z Z Z
d
T 1 · u 2 dS + b1 · u 2 = ∆σ 1 : 2 dV .
∂ΩT Ω Ω

I : 1 − α´p1 tr(2 )
Material response : ∆σ 1 : 2 = 2 : C

• TVW for pb no 2 with solution of pb no 1 for the virtual field

Z Z Z
T d2 · u 1 dS + b2 · u 1 = ∆σ 2 : 1 dV .
∂ΩT Ω Ω

Material response : ∆σ 2 : 1 = 1 : C I : 2 − α´p2 tr(1 )

• Conclude happily :

T d1 · u 2 dS + Ω b1 · u 2 + α∆p1 tr(2 )dV =

R R
∂ΩT

T d2 · u 1 dS + Ω b2 · u 1 + α∆p2 tr(1 )dV .

R R
∂ΩT
Part III : Application to post-seismic rebound
The earthquake of Landers, 1992

The position of the shear zone in California with respect to the San
Andreas fault (Yeats et al., 1997).
Part III : Application to post-seismic rebound
The earthquake of Landers, 1992

Relation between the Joshua Tree earthquake and Landers (Yeats et

al., 1997).
Part III : Application to post-seismic rebound
The earthquake of Landers, 1992

• Interaction of faults en ”échellon” (Yeats et al., 1997).

• Progressive rupture of five major faults with dextral slip : Johnson
Valley, Landers, Homestead Valley, Emerson and Camp Rock faults.
• This progression lasted approximately 25 s.
Part III : Application to post-seismic rebound
The earthquake of Landers, 1992

En échelon faults and failure mode in the region of interaction (Yeats

et al., 1997, after Segall and Pollard, 1980)
Part III : Application to post-seismic rebound
Introduction to Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR)

Interferogram with two SAR images before and after the Landers
earthquake , June 1992 (Yeats, Sieh and Allen 1997, after Massonet
et al. 1993)
Part III : Application to post-seismic rebound
Following Peltzer et al. (1996)

F IG .:

Three sets of SAR images are used corresponding to (1) 7/08/92 and
24/09/95 (red on Figure 29), (2) 27/09/92 and 23/01/96 (green) and
(3) 10/01/93 and 23/05/95 (blue).
Part III : Application to post-seismic rebound
Following Peltzer et al., (1996)

The cross-section 1, 2 and 3 are corresponding to the interaction

zones of (1) Emerson and Camp Rock faults, (2) Homestead Valley
and Emerson, (3) Homestead Valley and Johnson Valley.
Part III : Application to post-seismic rebound
Following Peltzer et al., (1996)

• The difficulties include getting satellite images shot at the same

position, with similar atmospheric conditions to obtain the best
accuracy in terms of length (order of mm).
• Measures on cross-section no 3 lead to the conclusion that vertical
displacement is of the order of 4.9 cm, 3.9 cm and 2.8 cm (error of
0.5 cm) with a relaxation time of 237 days (error of 44 days). This
characteristic time is defined by
h i
w(t) = w0 1 − exp(−t/τ )

where w0 is the displacement after an infinite time.

• This characteristic time is typical for the interaction of fluids at the
upper-crustal scale. Does not need to involve mantle or lower crust
creep. Different from GPS results.
Part III : Application to post-seismic rebound
Following Peltzer et al. (1996)

• Assumed poro-elasticity applies at the crustal scale.

• Two faults interacting over the length l and sustaining a discontinuity
(slip by δl) after the earthquake.
The deformation is in extension of the order of 1 = δl/l.
Assume plane-strain in the direction parallel to the faults.
The vertical deformation is 2 = νu 1 .
Assume the fault to extend to the depth of h, so that the surface
displacement is νu 1 h.
• Same solution after relaxation of fluids : ν1 h.
• Estimate of the evolution of vertical displacement after the rebound :

w = (νu − ν)1 h .
l =5 km, h = 4 km, δl = 3 m, the two Poisson’s ratios differ by 0.03, so
delayed displacement by as much as 7 cm !
Part V : References

• Guéguen Y. and Boutéca M., Mechanics of fluid saturated rocks,

Elsevier, 2004.
• Peltzer G., Rosen P., Rogez F. and K. Hudnut, Postseismic rebound
in fault-step-overs caused by fluid flow, Science, 273, 1996.
• Rice J.R and Cleary M.P. Some basic stress-diffusion solutions for
fluid-saturated elastic porous media with compressible constituents,
Review of Geophysics and Space Physics, 14, 227-241, 1976.
• Yeats R.S., Sieh K. and Allen C.R., The geology of earthquakes,
Oxford University Press, 1997.
• Mandl G., Faulting in brittle rocks, Springer 2000.