Está en la página 1de 52

Reservoir Geomechanics

In situ stress and rock mechanics applied to reservoir processes




Mark D.  Zoback
Professor of  Geophysics



Week 4 Lecture 8
Stress Concentrations/Vertical Wells Chapter 6
Outline

Section 1
Stress Concentration Around Vertical Wells

Section 2
Wellbore Breakouts (Compressive Wall Failures)

Section 3
Drilling Induced Tensile Failures (Tensile Wall
Failures)

Section 4
Other Factors Affecting Breakouts

2
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

After Kirsch (1898)

Local stress field


perturbed due to
the borehole

Figure 6.1 pg. 169

3
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Kirsch Eqns. Vertical Well, Stress Field (SHmax, Shmin)
Internal Pressure P0, measured from SHmax

1 R2 1 4 R 2 3R 4 P0 R 2
rr = ( SH ma x Sh min 2 P0 )(1 2 ) + ( SH ma x Sh min)(1 2 + 4 ) cos 2 + 2
2 r 2 r r r

1 R2 1 3R 4 P0 R 2
= ( SH ma x + Sh min 2 P0 )(1 + 2 ) ( SH ma x Sh min)(1 + 4 ) cos 2 2 T
2 r 2 r r

r2
zz = Sv 2 ( SH ma x Sh min) 2 cos 2
R
R Wellbore radius
1 2 R 2 3R 4 r radial distance from center
r = ( SH ma x Sh min)(1 + 2 4 ) sin 2
2 r r

Equations 6.1 - 6.3 pg. 170

4
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Parameters for Figures 6.2, 6.3, & 6.5

S H max = 90 MPa

S H max orientation is N90 E (east - west)
Sv = 88.2 MPa (depth 3213m)
Sh min = 51.5 MPa
Pp = Pmud = 31.5 MPa
Example Parameters pg. 170

5
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Concentration of Hoop Stress

Figure 6.2 a,b,c pg. 171 6


Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Stress Concentration at the Wall of a Vertical Well

Compressive and tensile wellbore failure is a direct result of the stress concentration around
the wellbore that results from drilling a well into an already-stressed rock mass. In a
homogeneous and isotropic elastic material in which one principal stress acts parallel to
the wellbore axis, the effective hoop stress and radial stress at the wall of a cylindrical,
vertical wellbore (overburden stress, Sv is a principal stress acting parallel to the
wellbore axis) is given by the following equation:
= Shmin + SHmax - 2(SHmax - Shmin) cos2 - 2P0 - P T
rr = P
where is an angle measured from the azimuth of the maximum horizontal stress, SHmax,
Shmin is the minimum horizontal stress, P0 is the pore pressure, P is the difference
between the wellbore pressure (mud weight) and the pore pressure, and T is the
thermal stress induced by the cooling of the wellbore by T.

The effective stress acting parallel to the wellbore axis is:


zz = SV - 2(SHmax - Shmin) cos2 P0 - T
where is Poisson's ratio.

Equations 6.4 - 6.6 pg. 174


7
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Outline

Section 1
Stress Concentration Around Vertical Wells

Section 2
Wellbore Breakouts (Compressive Wall Failures)

Section 3
Drilling Induced Tensile Failures (Tensile Wall
Failures)

Section 4
Other Factors Affecting Breakouts

8
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Stress Concentration Around a Vertical Well

9
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Wellbore Failures
SHmax

wBO

Figure 6.4 a,b,c pg. 176 10


Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Compressional Wellbore Failures

Stress-induced wellbore breakouts form due to compressive wellbore failure that occurs
within the region of maximum compressive stress around a wellbore. In a vertical well,
the zone of compressive failure is centered at the azimuth of minimum horizontal far-field
compression, as this is where the compressive hoop stress is greatest.

Wellbore breakouts were first identified using 4-arm magnetically-oriented caliper
logs associated with Schlumberger dip meters. Careful analysis yields reliable stress
orientations.
Clear identification of breakouts requires the use of acoustic televiewer data (UBI,
CBIL, CAST).
6-arm dip meter data (Baker Hughes and Halliburton) require especially careful
analysis to distinguish breakouts from tool eccentricity, key seating, etc.
The caliper data from 4- and 6- arm electrical image data (FMI, STAR, or EMI)
cannot be used to detect small wellbore breakouts because of the large pad widths of
these tools.
Breakouts can sometimes be seen as out-of-focus zones on the image data

11
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

A Simple View of Wellbore Stability

12
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Regional Stress Field in the Timor Sea

13
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Why Wellbore Failure So Effectively
Samples the Stress Field

At the point of minimum compression around the wellbore (i.e, at = 0,


parallel to SHmax), Equation (1) reduces to

min = 3Shmin - SHmax - 2P0 - P - T

Whereas, at the point of maximum stress concentration around the


wellbore (i.e, at = 90, parallel to Shmin),

max = 3SHmax - Shmin - 2P0 - P - T

max - min = 4 (SHmax- Shmin)

Equations 6.7 - 6.9 pg. 174


14
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Raising Mud Weight Increases Wellbore Stability

15
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Breakout Width

Figure 6.3 a,b,c pg. 173


16
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Raising Mud Weight

Figure 6.5 a,b pg. 177


17
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Wellbore Stress Concentration
Same Depth, Different Stress States

18
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Regional Stress Fields

19
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Figure 6.8 a,b pg. 182
Complex Stress Field

Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Figure 6.10 pg. 184 20
4-Arm Dipmeter Tool Schematic

21
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Analyzing 4-Arm Caliper Log

Figure 6.9 a,b,c pg. 183 22


Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Elongation Directions in the Visund Field

23
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Keyseats in Bore Hole Televiewer (BHTV)

tan 2 x 1000ft = 35 ft
24
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

6-Arm Caliper Data

25
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Figure 6.11a,b,c pg. 185
Comparison of Analysis Techniques

Figure 6.12a,b,c pg. 186

26
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Quality Ranking System (Zoback and Zoback)

A B C D

Earthquake Focal Average P-axis or formal inversion of Well-constrained single-event Single-event solution Single composite solution
Mechanisms four or more single-event solutions in solution (M 4.5) or average of (constrained by first motions
close geographic proximity two well-constrained only, often based on author's Poorly constrained single-event
(at least one event M 4.0, single-event solutions (M 3.5) quality assignment) (M 2.5) solution
other events M 3.0) determined from first motions
and other methods (e.g., Average of several well-constrained Single-event solution for M < 2.5
moment tensor wave-form modeling, composites (M 2.0) event
or inversion)

Wellbore Breakouts Ten or more distinct At least six distinct breakout At least four distinct breakouts Less than four consistently
breakout zones in a single zones in a single well with with S.D. < 25o and/or oriented breakout or > 30 m
well with S.D. 12o and/or combined S.D. 20o and/or combined combined length > 30 m combined length in a single
length > 300 m length > 100 m well
Average of breakouts in
two or more wells in close Breakouts in a single well
geographic proximity with combined with S.D. 25o
length > 300 m
and S.D. 12o

Drilling-Induced Ten or more distinct tensile fractures At least six distinct tensile At least four distinct tensile Less than four consistently
Tensile Fractures in a single well fractures in a single well with fractures with S.D. < 25o and oriented tensile fractures with < 30
with S.D. 12o and S.D. 20o and encompassing a encompassing a combined m combined length in a single
encompassing a vertical combined length > 100 m length > 30 m well
depth of 300m, or more .
Tensile fracture orientations in a
single well with S.D. 25o

Hydraulic Fractures Four or more hydrostatic orientations Three or more hydrofrac orientations Hydrofac orientations in a Single hydrofrac measurements
in a single well with S.D. 12o depth in a single well with S.D. <20o. single well with at < 100 m depth
> 300 m 20o < S.D. <25o
Hydrofrac orientations in a single
Average of hydrofrac orientations for well with 20o.< S.D. <25o Distinct hydrofrac orientation
two or more wells in close geographic change with depth, deepest
proximity, measurements assumed valid
S.D. 12o
One or two hydrofrac orientations
in a single well

27
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Table 6.1 pg. 189
Statistics of Azimuthal Data
n n

l i m i
li = cosi and mi = sin i ; l= i =1
and m = i =1
R R

n n
2 m
1
R = li + mi ; m= tan
i =1 i =1 l

N 1 81
k= ; sd =
N R k

Equations 6.10 - 6.15 pg. 190


28
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Drilling Induced Tensile Fractures
A drilling-induced tensile wall fracture will be induced when
min = 3Shmin SHmax 2Pp P T

Ignoring T (for the moment) and assuming To ~ 0, a tensile fracture will
from at the wellbore wall when:

Pmud = 3Shmin SHmax Pp 0

This is the same equation for inducing a hydraulic fracture. What
distinguishes a drilling-induced tensile fracture from a hydraulic fracture
are:
Drilling-induced tensile fractures form when the mud weight is
comparable, or slightly greater than the pore pressure (but is not
comparable to S3). This only occurs for certain stress states and well
orientations.
Drilling-induced tensile fractures are limited to the wellbore wal.l
Because the fracture does not propagate into the formation, drilling-
induced tensile fractures are not associated with lost circulation or
drilling problems.
29
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Outline

Section 1
Stress Concentration Around Vertical Wells

Section 2
Wellbore Breakouts (Compressive Wall Failures)

Section 3
Drilling Induced Tensile Failures (Tensile Wall
Failures)

Section 4
Other Factors Affecting Breakouts

30
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Drilling-Induced Tensile Fractures

Figure 6.5 a,b pg. 177


31
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Wellbore Failures
SHmax

wBO

Figure 6.4 a,b,c pg. 176 32


Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Drilling-Induced Tensile Fractures

Figure 6.6 a,b,c pg. 179


33
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Visund Field Orientations

34
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Figure 6.7 a,b pg. 180
Drilling Induced Tensile Fractures Visund Field

35
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Tensile Fractures in Vertical Wells Generally
Imply a Strike-Slip Faulting Environment

Earth (Strike-Slip Faulting)



S H max Pp
S h min Pp
= ( 2
)
2
+ 1 + = 3.1 for = 0.6

SHmax = 3.1 Shmin 2.1 Pp


SHmax = 3Shmin 2Pp + 0.1 (Shmin Pp)

Vertical Wellbore (Tensile Fractures)


= 3Shmin SHmax 2Pp = -T for T = 0


SHmax = 3Shmin 2Pp

Equations 6.16 - 6.19 pg. 191 36


Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Tensile Fractures in Vertical Wells

Figure 6.13 pg. 193


37
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Outline

Section 1
Stress Concentration Around Vertical Wells

Section 2
Wellbore Breakouts (Compressive Wall Failures)

Section 3
Drilling Induced Tensile Failures (Tensile Wall
Failures)

Section 4
Other Factors Affecting Breakouts

38
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Thermoelastic Effects on Wellbore Stresses

The effect at the wellbore wall of a temperature difference T


between the wellbore fluid and the rock surrounding well is
given by the equation:
T = ( E T)/(1-)
where is the linear coefficient of thermal expansion and E is
Young's modulus.

For drilling-induced tensile fractures in the Visund field in the North


Sea, a cooling of ~30 C at a depth of ~2750 m resulted in T
= 1.7 MPa based on the following: = 2.4x10-6 C-1
(corresponding to a rock composed of 50% quartz), E = 1.9x104
MPa (from the measured P-wave velocity) and = 0.2 (based
on the P to S-wave velocity ratio).

Equation 6.22 pg. 193


39
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Thermal Stresses and Breakout Formation

a)
c)




Cooling does reduce

breakout size (but not

very practical) -The effect on
tensile fractures is more
important (but still not as
important as mud weight).

b)



Figure 6.14 a,b,c pg. 194 40
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Tensile Fractures in Vertical Wells

Figure 6.13 a,b,c pg. 193

41
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

More on Compressional Wellbore Failure

Fixed Breakout Width After Initiation


42
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Breakout Shapes Under Successive Episodes
of Failure wBO is constant

43
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu
Figure 6.15 a,b pg. 197
Breakouts > 90 ?

a)

wBO

b)
c)

44
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Weak Bedding Planes Can Be a Source
of Wellbore Instability

45
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Breakouts in Sands (Isotropic Strength)
Deviated Well

46
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Anisotropic Strength Causes Unusual
Breakouts in Shale

47
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Weak Bedding Planes Can Be a Source of
Wellbore Instability

48
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Impact of Chemical Effects on Wellbore Stability

Mody & Hale (1993) model for chemical osmosis:


(Non time-dependent)

P = Pp + RT/V ln(Am/Ap)

P:
Near-wellbore pore pressure [MPa]

Pp:
Far-field pore pressure [MPa]

:
Membrane efficiency [ ], 0 1 (OBM has a membrane efficiency of 1)

R:
Gas constant, = 8.3 [J/(mol x degree Kelvin)]

T:
Absolute temperature [degree Kelvin]

V:
Partial molar volume of water [m3/mol]

Am:
Water activity in drilling fluid [ ]

Ap:
Water activity in pore fluid (an activity of 1 corresponds to fresh water) [ ]

Pore pressure in the near wellbore zone is affected by fluid transport due
to differences in water molar free energies of the drilling and pore fluids
(chemical osmosis).
Poroelasticity equations are explicitly correct only for zero time, just after
drilling.

49
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Illustration of Mody & Hale Model

Mud Activity < Formation Fluid Activity Mud Activity > Formation Fluid Activity
(High Salinity Mud)
(Low Salinity Mud)

Wellbore
Formation
Wellbore
Formation

High PMud
High PMud

rr

rr

RT/V ln(Am/Ap)

Pp
Pp

RT/V ln(Am/Ap)

According to the Mody & Hale model, high salinity muds stabilize the formation,
because chemical osmosis causes a drop in formation pressure (increase in rr)
near the wellbore wall.
Conversely, a low salinity mud destabilizes the formation because chemical
osmosis charges the formation and rr increases near the wellbore wall.
50
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

A Simple View of Maintaining Wellbore Stability

51
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Drilling-Induced Tensile Fractures

Figure 6.5 a,b pg. 177


52
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

También podría gustarte