Previous   |    Next

doi:10.2204/iodp.proc.314315316.205.2011

Results

Permeability measurements were performed on samples referenced in Table T1 using the procedure described above. A complete series of measurements on one sample, including equilibration times between permeability measurements, lasted ~2 months. In Figure F6, we plotted permeability data at the initial pressure conditions (P_C = 3 MPa and P_P = 2 MPa) as a function of depth for both sites. This diagram gives us a good insight into the permeability versus depth trend, permeability decreases as depth increases and the trend is similar for both sites. Moreover, the permeability at Site C0006 is lower than the permeability at Site C0001 for equivalent depths. This point is easily explained by the lower porosity encountered at Site C0006. Figure F7 illustrates the good correlation between porosity (unstressed state) and permeability at the initial pressure conditions for all samples. The permeability trend with depth observed at Site C0001 is consistent with data obtained by Likos et al. (submitted). Our measurements are, however, lower than their data, a difference that can be explained by the lower effective stress (0.55 MPa) applied to the samples by Likos et al. (submitted).

Indeed, our measurements indicate a permeability decrease more than 1.5 orders of magnitude when an increasing effective confining pressure up to 30 MPa is applied. Figure F8 summarizes the obtained data for Sites C0001 and C0006. As one can see, the decrease of permeability is apparent for all samples, but the shape of the curve differs from one sample to the other, reflecting variability in their microstructural content.

Top of page   |    Previous   |    Next