4.6 Article

Anisotropic damage mechanics as a novel approach to improve pre- and post-failure borehole stability analysis

Journal

GEOPHYSICAL JOURNAL INTERNATIONAL
Volume 193, Issue 3, Pages 1095-1109

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/gji/ggt045

Keywords

Geomechanics; Elasticity and anelasticity; Fracture and flow; Fault zone rheology; Dynamics and mechanics of faulting; Mechanics, theory, and modelling

Funding

  1. Western Australian Geothermal Centre of Excellence
  2. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Anisotropic damage distribution and evolution have a profound effect on borehole stress concentrations. Damage evolution is an irreversible process that is not adequately described within classical equilibrium thermodynamics Therefore, we propose a constitutive model, based on non-equilibrium thermodynamics, that accounts for anisotropic damage distribution, anisotropic damage threshold and anisotropic damage evolution. We implemented this constitutive model numerically, using the finite element method, to calculate stress strain curves and borehole stresses. The resulting stress strain curves are distinctively different from linear elastic-brittle and linear elastic-ideal plastic constitutive models and realistically model experimental responses of brittle rocks. We show that the onset of damage evolution leads to an inhomogeneous redistribution of material properties and stresses along the borehole wall. The classical linear elastic-brittle approach to borehole stability analysis systematically overestimates the stress concentrations on the borehole wall, because dissipative strain-softening is underestimated. The proposed damage mechanics approach explicitly models dissipative behaviour and leads to non-conservative mud window estimations. Furthermore, anisotropic rocks with preferential planes of failure, like shales, can be addressed with our model.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available