Orientation Uncertainty of Structures Measured in Cored Boreholes: Methodology and Case Study of Swedish Crystalline Rock

Abstract

Many engineering applications in fractured crystalline rocks use measured orientations of structures such as rock contact and fractures, and lineated objects such as foliation and rock stress, mapped in boreholes as their foundation. Despite that these measurements are afflicted with uncertainties, very few attempts to quantify their magnitudes and effects on the inferred orientations have been reported. Only relying on the specification of tool imprecision may considerably underestimate the actual uncertainty space. The present work identifies nine sources of uncertainties, develops inference models of their magnitudes, and points out possible implications for the inference on orientation models and thereby effects on downstream models. The uncertainty analysis in this work builds on a unique data set from site investigations, performed by the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co. (SKB). During these investigations, more than 70 boreholes with a maximum depth of 1 km were drilled in crystalline rock with a cumulative length of more than 34 km including almost 200,000 single fracture intercepts. The work presented, hence, relies on orientation of fractures. However, the techniques to infer the magnitude of orientation uncertainty may be applied to all types of structures and lineated objects in boreholes. The uncertainties are not solely detrimental, but can be valuable, provided that the reason for their presence is properly understood and the magnitudes correctly inferred. The main findings of this work are as follows: (1) knowledge of the orientation uncertainty is crucial in order to be able to infer correct orientation model and parameters coupled to the fracture sets; (2) it is important to perform multiple measurements to be able to infer the actual uncertainty instead of relying on the theoretical uncertainty provided by the manufacturers; (3) it is important to use the most appropriate tool for the prevailing circumstances; and (4) the single most important parameter to decrease the uncertainty space is to avoid drilling steeper than about −80°.