4.7 Article

Anisotropic Wellbore Stability Analysis: Impact on Failure Prediction

Journal

ROCK MECHANICS AND ROCK ENGINEERING
Volume 54, Issue 2, Pages 583-605

Publisher

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s00603-020-02283-0

Keywords

Wellbore stability; Mud weight; Shale; Anisotropy; Poroelasticity

Funding

  1. NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology (St. Olavs Hospital -Trondheim University Hospital)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The traditional wellbore stability analysis neglects the anisotropic properties of shales, while these seemingly more reasonable anisotropic wellbore stability analyses have shown effective predictions of wellbore failure.
Shale formations are the main source of borehole stability problems during drilling operations. Suboptimal predictions of borehole failure may partly be caused by neglecting the anisotropic nature of shales: Conventional wellbore stability analysis is based on borehole stresses computed from isotropic linear elasticity (Kirsch solution) with the assumption of no induced pore pressure. This is very convenient for a practical implementation but does not always work for shales. Here, anisotropic wellbore stability analysis was performed targeting an offshore gas field to investigate in particular the impact of elastic anisotropy on borehole failure predictions. Stress concentration around a circular borehole in anisotropic shale was calculated by the Amadei solutions, and induced pore pressure was obtained from the Skempton parameters based on anisotropic poroelasticity. Borehole failure regions and modes were then predicted using the effective stresses and those are apparently consistent with observations. A comparison with the conventional approach suggests the importance of accounting for elastic anisotropy: Predicted failure regions, modes, and also the associated mud weight limits can be completely different. This observation may have significant implications for other fields since shale often show strong elastic anisotropy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available