This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Uploaded by deepak

0.0 (0)

=

By

ERSPE2557

**STRESS AROUND A WELLBORE
**

F. H. Deily and T. C. Owens, Members AIME, Esso Production Research Company, Houston, Texas

© Copyright 1969 American Institute of ~Iining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc.

This paper was prepared for the 44th Annual Fall Meeting of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME, to be held in Denver, Colo., Sept. 28-0ct. 1,1969. Permission to copy is restricted to a1 abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper is presented. Publication elsewhere afte: publication in the JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY or the SOCIETY OF PETROLEUM ENGINEERS JOURNAL is usually granted upon request to the Editor of the appropriate journal provided agreement to give proper credit is made. Discussion of this paper is invited. Three copies of any discussion should be sent to the Society of Petroleum Engineers office. Such discussion may be presented at the above meeting and, with the paper, may be considered for publication in one of the two SPE magazines. ABSTRACT A study was made of the stress state in a ~orous elastic body, with particular emphasis on variations in selected failure criteria. The objective was to relate predicted changes in stress and failure criteria with fracture initiation experienced in certain forms of lost Circulation, as opposed to hydraulic fracture extension. The three principal stresses at the wellbore were expressed as functions of wellbore pressure; in addition, values of eight additional parameters were varied over realistically expected ranges to determine their possible importance on the principal stresses. These eight parameters were the three tectonic stresses, formation fluid pressure, pore pressure at the wall, Poisson's ratio, the ratio of unjacketed to jacketed rock compressibilities, and position around the wellbore. Two failure criteria, the maximum principal stress and Von Mises number, were determined for the well stress condition chosen. Calculated results show that small changes (5%) in tectonic stresses can cause larger changes in wellbore stress (and potential failure) than very large (100%) changes in Poisson's or compressibility ratios. INTRODUCTION A theoretical investigation of the state of stress around a wellbore was made to study the problem of fracture initiation in a porous elastic body. This work was undertaken to determine the effects of rock properties, tectonic stresses, wellbore pressure, formation pressure, and mud filter cake on lost circulation in a drilling well. The mathematical model chosen for this investigation is a large porous body containing fluid at a particular pressure, P. The body has a cylindrical hole which contains fluid at a pressure, Pw' In addition, the porous body is acted upon by external stresses, Sx. Sy, and Sz (see Fig. 1). The quantities Sx, Syand Sz are the tectonic stresses and are considered positive when tensile. In reality, these stresses are compressive (negative). The verti' cal tectonic stress, Sz, is due to the weight of all of the overburden. It is generally accepted that the principal horizontal tectonic stresses are not equal because of the preferred fracture orientation that is noted in a specific area. The wellbore pressure, Pw, is equal to the sum of the hydrostatic pressure of the column of drilling fluid and the annular pressure drop due to the circulating fluid. The formation fluid pressure, P, is the pressure of the fluid contained in

References and illustrations at end of paper.

stress is understood to be the force per unit area as the area decreases to a point. Thus. the pressure will act not only on the outer surface of the specimen. consider an element of the porous body which contains a fluid at pressure. (6) where E Young's modulus = v Poisson's ratio The equations for E2 and E3 are analogous. For a nonporous body. 0. 02. depending upon the method used in applying pressure. The tectonic stresses Sx.. DEFINITION OF STRESS FOR POROUS BODY There is some difficulty in defining the term stress as applied to a porous body. then . the equivalence requires that the stress to be considered is that related to the total area. but which is impermeable. respectively. but also on the surfaces of the pores. If 01 = 02 = 03 = -p. Studying the compressibility of a porous body makes the definition of stress in a porous body somewhat easier. the bulk compressibility. £. and 03 is given by Equation 6. the area of the pores plus the area of the interpore material. o'''-VI:.V (4) . can be written as shown in Equation 7. so the quantity 0' can be written in terms of elastic constants used to describe an elastic nonporous body. 0'. in a porous body there is more than one area that must be considered. and the definition of stress is difficult. 01. the pressure distribution around the hole can be determined. C where V P = The pressure applied in the latter case is similar to the normal definition of stress. The physical system being considered can also be represented by superposing the following two bodies: (1) a porous body which contains a fluid at pressure p and which is subjected to an external hydrostatic stress also equal to p (see Figure 3) and (2) a porous body which contains no fluid.P 1 I:.l. 0' = 3(l-2v) E (l-2v) E P -V 1 dV dP or the quantity.l CONSTITUTIVE EQUATIONS The constitutive equations for the porous elastic body can now be derived. and Sz also act on the porous body (see Figure 2). of a face on which the force is distributed. but which is subjected to external stresses equal to Sx + p. and the linear strain. Sy + p. E. If a specimen of porous material is tested by the application of fluid pressure. the expressions for the linear strain are obtained as shown in Equation 8. 0'. Considering an element of a porous body. is given in Equation 3. This stress has been called macros tress by Lubinski.2 First. the area of a face through the element will consist of both solid interpore material and pore fluid. The formation fluid pressure is a function of radial position and time provided the wellbore fluid flows into the formation or the formation fluid flows into the wellbore. of an elastic body subjected to the principal stresses. while the linear strain.2 STRESS AROUND A WELLBORE SPE 2557 (5) the porous body.2 The compressibility is defined by Equation 1. E=-O[~pJ (3) If the specimen is enclosed in a jacket which has no strength. This compressibility. Assuming that the fluid flows according to Darcy's Law. El. however. (7) (1) volume pressure For porous bodies there are two types of compressibilities that can be measured. and Sz + P (see Figure 4). will be given by Equations 4 and 5. there are two areas to be considered. and is tested under hydrostatic pressure. From Figure 3. The strain. as has been done by Merwin. (2) Since the analogy was developed by comparing a jacketed specimen to a nonporous specimen. is defined by Equation 2. p. Sy.

the we11bore. Sx and Sy. S > S x x y x y For the case of plane strain the vertical Stl is given by Equation 15.[(Sy+P) . o.SPE 2557 STRESS AROUND A WELLBORE where l1P=P-P o (8) From Figure 4 and on the basis of the definitions of the elastic constants of the porous body.[ (Sz+P) . E 1 [~J [ .v(S +P+S +p)] E x z Y2 22 1 = .rOy E 1 = -E [0z +06) 1 (15: . The resulting effective stress distribution in terms of the effective far-field stresses. Po.[(Sx+P) E - v(S Y +p+S z +p)] (9) = far-field pore pressure MODEL 1 = . c x e: y (10) [~ J ( 1 . the strains on the body shown in Figure 2 are the sums of the strains on the bodies of Figures 3 and 4 (Equation 10)._ 4 r 4 42 ~ cos 26 r ) 1 [(5 +P) . First. y. + P 1 0 r i x.\i(S +p+S +p)] E 2 Y MATHEMATICAL The mathematical description of the stres distribution around the hole drilled in the formation can be obtained by again using the principle of superposition. v(o rl Y z = . the strains as shown in Equations 9 are obtained..) sin 26 2 r r where r = 8'" x 1 = -E 1 = 3(1-2\/) [0x .+ -2.v(o v(o v(o Eo (12) = horizontal radial distance +0 ) Yz +0 ) xz +0 ) xY - (1-2\/) l1P] 8 (1-2\/)8l1P) (1-2v)8 llP] (13) 6 = angle measured from the direction of S and Is I < Is I. c e c and P = per) Po = fluid pressure in porous body x2 1 = . z (11) I r6 (0 -0 ) 4 2 xy[ 3a 2a 1 . there are no stresses due to fluid flowing into.3 0 rl + Since the body shown in Figure 2 is the superpOSition of Figures 3 and 4. These can be regarded as acting on the edges of a very large rectangular porous plate with a small circular hole (radius a) at its center The pressure in the hole and the fluid pres sur in the porous body are both equal to the farfield pore pressure.\/(5 +p+S +p) z x z - EMPJ 3 Defining an effective stress using Equation 11 and the quantity 8 using Equation 12. Consequently. 1 13 c s: e: J[ 1 + a~ r 4 J J cos 26 (14) 1 + 3: r T = S.[ °x~Oy +k.-4. the resulting constitutive equations are given by Equation 13.a~ ) r [¥] [1 e z °e = 1. or out of. 0i = Si + p. consider a stress field due to two horizontal tectonic stresses. and polar coordinates are given by Equations 14.

Initially.£. =r .rL l:.v --or 00 (1-2v)8 or lE.(1-2v)8CP-P_) o Eliminating the radial displacement term from Equations 18 results in Equation 19. or 0 = 2 (16) dp + B Symmetry and compatibility indicate that the radial and hoop strains are expressible in terms of the radial displacement.Po and the fluid pressure in the porous material is zero. 00 r2 Further manipulations and the substitution of Equations 16 and 20 into Equation 19 and the integration of the result gives Equation 21 0e 2 +a r2 =( l+8-2v8 J (P-P ) + 2A I-v 0 (21) where A is a constant of integration. a z2 = v(o +oe) + (1-2v)8(P-P ) r2 2 0 (20) The boundary conditions for a we11bore fluid which will not invade the formation are given by Equations 25. E ou JJ 0 a ar =a "z .. = Ar2 + (1+8-2v8) I-v J r (P-P ) rdr o a (22) r -- or . Figure 5 shows an element of a cylindrical body of the porous material with fluid pressure p. u.£. . z2 . £ Further manipulation (including integration by parts) results in Equations 23 for the three principal stresses e =r U (17) a (. a.4 STRESS AROUND A WELLBORE SPE 2557 Next.HL rL J a )) 1 a r 0 (23) (P-P _) 0 rdr (l+v)(0 r2 -oe) 2 e2 l.(1-2v)8(P-P ) 0 + (P-P ) +1L r 2 (18) °e 2 A --+ 2 r B [ v+8-2v8 ) I-v 8+2v-1-2vB l-v (P-P ) 0 . The equation for equilibrium in the radial direction is given by Equation 16. by Equation 17.aOor (19) z2 2vA + l ( v+S-2va I I-v J (p-P ) The constants A and B can be evaluated by imposing the boundary conditions. however. The outer radius of the cylinder is very large with respect to the inner radius. r2 A+l~2Jl r 0 "\ r B+2v=1~2vB "\ rr (P-P ) rdr I-v Hence. the first two equations of Equations 13 can be rewritten as Equations 18. determine the stress distribution in a thick-wall cylinder of porous material. The boundary conditions for a wellbore fluid which penetrates the formation are given by Equations 24. due to the pressure difference.v(oe +0 2 z2 ) . an expression for the vertical stress in terms of the radial and tangential stresses can be written as shown in Equation 20. the pressure in the hole is Pw . the wellbore fluid will flow into the porous body. It will be assumed that the vertical stress does not vary with vertical distance and that the vertical strain is zero.J l Since the vertical strain is zero. Further utilization of Equation 16 and integration of the result gives Equation 22.

it has been assumed that failure occurs at the wall of the hole due to stresses at the wall.. (h-l)(P -P ) w 0 J a An additional vertical stress equal to the effective weight of the overburden is given by Equation 28. 8 z + \I[(S+S ) . it is possible to simplify Equations 29 to Equations 30.~2 . Therefore.SPE 2557 At r as r = -+ STRESS AROUND A WELLBORE a.a o r ° (25) [ a +0 . the three principal stresses are given by Equations 27. h. The resulting stress distribution is given by Equations 29.z). can be interpreted as a measure of the effectiveness of a filter . (P -P ) +[ \I +13-2\113 (P-Po) J w0 1- (P-P ) . a o ""..P -P a w0 pressure at r = a + [ crx~cry 1 + 3~4 _ 4~2 ) cos )[ r r ze R2 = v+13-2\113 1-\1 H2\1 + ( (P_P ) _ a o r 2 2 (P -P ) ) w 0 8+2\1-1-2\113 1-\1 Jf (P-P ) rdr o a The quantity.IJ /'1'\. r P P . A = [ O~ -Oy )[ 1 + ::4 J cos 28 0..\ - lre _ .2(8x -S y ) cos 2e + (l+hRl)(P -P ) + 2P woo a z z depth. psi/ft = 0e = (Sx +S y ) . H \£.__Y 2 J[ 1+ 2 a.e.. In order to simplify the expression. r " ) \. the values of A and B are given by Equations 26.. ft (30) x y Addition of the stress distributions results in the superposition of the rectangular plate and the thick-walled cylinder.~ o r 2 2 (P -p ) w 0 13+2\1-1-2\113 I-v (p-P ) rdr o 13+2\1-1-2\113 1-\1 a Jf (P-P ) rdr o a z (29) + (1-2\1)8(P-P ) + 8 o °e a =2 r \1+8-2\113 (P -P ) + [ (P-P ) 2 w0 1-\1 0 J 2 z +P 0 r\ \. P ~ P .2(S -S ) cos 2e] x y + hRl (P -P ) + R2P woo where P -P +a r 2 h-~ and P : formation fluid .(a -a ) xy r1 l sin 26 8+2\1-1-2\113 rr I-v 1 ) (p-p ) 0 rdr STRESS STATE AT THE WALL OF THE HOLE The expressions given by Equations 29 describe the state of stress at any general position (r. B = _a2 (P -P ) w 0 (26) +a r 2 2 Consequently. S +P Z 0 -yz + P o (28) where y stress gradient. ] 2 r Regardless of which of the conditions is assumed.2..

the value of V is again increased. (b) for various rock Equations 30 indicate that the radial stress decreases linearly with increasing wellbore pressure.oe'o ) r z ficult problem of determining what relationship exists between these calculated stresses when the wellbore fails must be approached. (b) if the body is brittle.Pw plot of Figure 6. B). (c) for various tectonic stresses (Sx. since only the conceptual significance gf variations of V with Pw are discussed. Let us conSider the Maximum Distortional Strain Energy failure criteria first. Illustrative of the results of such a calculation for V is the generalized V . or if it is not effective. porous.6 STRESS AROu~D A w~LLBORE cake at the wall of the hole. No quantities are assigned to this figure. the value of V is greater. from Equations 31 and 32. For this condition the value of V was calculated (a) at various angular positions (e) around the hole. Consequently. Here it is seen that there is a particular value of Pw. the Von Mises criterion may indicate hole instability due to two different causes. Sz). the Distortional Strain Energy stored in the system (rock) reaches an upper limit. Now the far more dif- (32) When V reaches a critical value. it will fracture at some point without appreciable yielding. This instability may be due to the tendency of the horizontal tectonic stresses to cave the hole. Mathematically. At values of Pw less than this critical value. while the tangential and vertical stresses increase linearly with Pw• therefore. If the filter cake is completely effective or if the formation is impermeable to the wellbore fluid. this is defined as a number V (termed the Von Mises Number) which relates the principal stresses according to Equation 31. indicating some instability of the hole. The second is the Maximum Distortional Strain Energy. reapectively. The values of V and Tmax. Most substances will behave elastically at low stress levels. At values of the wellbore pressure greater than the wellbore pressure at maximum stability. Sy. Which yields a minimum value of V. This can be interpreted as the wellbore pressure necessary for maximum stability of the hole. resulting in values of V higher than the critical value. (d) for various values of filter cake effectiveness (h). Although not completely satisfactory in accounting for all observable facts. If there is no filter cake. (a) if the body is ductile. depending on the values of the other variables. Many failure criteria exist and were considered during this investigation. Consider now the Maximum Principal Stress criterion represented by Equation 32. As the stress is increased. This is due. for very low values of Pw' the value of T ax will decrease linearly with Pw unti~ the radial stress equals the greater of the tangential or vertical stress. The first is the Maximum Principal Stress. and (e) for various values of formation and wellbore pressure (Po.0. This has several conspicuous mathematical advarttages and is much used in modern theories of yield. a different pressure. FAILURE CRITERIA It is now possible to calculate the stress state for a large. This criterion can also result in a wellbore pressure necessary for maximum hole stabili ty• Tmax ~ Max (0 . the value of h is 1. It is well known that the same rock can exhibit both properties under different loading conditions. having fixed all the other parameters in the system.4 Two were selected as workable. Pw). perhaps. h = O. pressurized elastic body with a cylindrical hole also containing fluid at SPE 2557 properties (v. Then Tmax will increase linearly with Pw• There will be a value of Pw at which Tmax is a minimum and this could be interpreted as the wellbore pressure for maximum hole stability based on the maximum stress failure criterion. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS Equations 30 were used to calculate the state of stress at the wall of the hole and the values of the failure criteria were calculated using Equations 31 and 32. it is essentially the criterion for brittle fracture. will cause the rock to fail. Attempts to apply higher stresses to the rock. it will begin to yield. It is desired to set up a criterion which will predict at what stress and at which point fracture or yield will begin in a rock subjected to the complicated stress systems existing around the wellbore. Here V is plotted versus variations in Pw. It was preViously stated that the analysis of failure was restricted to the wall of the hole. fluidfilled. to the tendency of the high wellbore pressure to cause cracking of the formation. are a measure of the stability .

do not affect the Von Mises number as much as do variations in the relative magnitUdes of the tectonic stresses.5 ppg. Pw.9 1.5 Figure 7 shows the variation in Von Mises number when Sz/z. the portion of the curve that decreases with increasing mud density is the radial stress while the portion that increases with mud density is the tangential (hoop) stress. The reference state chosen was: Depth (z) + = 14. with mud density. It will be noted that when Sy/Sz is decreased to 0. the location on the hole relative to Sx (e) is also a variable. If the mud density is less than the value necessary for maximum stability. the hole is more unstable. the vertical stress gradient. Figure 8 shows the variation in the Von Mises number with varying mud density at various values of Sy/Sz. the mud density necessary for maximum stability is less than 12 ppg. Therefore. This instability is due to the higher wellbore pressure tending to cause Figures 10-14 are similar to Figures 8 and 9 except that other variables are used as parameters.0 ppg Pore Pressure Gradient s z/z y = -1.6 (horizontal stresses much less than the vertical stress). is varied.6 ppg.6 ppg.18 0. of the formation at the wall of the hole. there is most concern about the stability of the hole when the wellbore pressure. However. and increased mud density causes further instability due to cracking. At Sz/z of 0. a mud density greater than 22 ppg is necessary for maximum stabili~ The variation of the maximum Von Mises number with mud density at various values of Sx/Sy is shown in Figure 9. it was also interesting to study the effects of the remaining independent variables on the values of the failure criteria. the minimum occurs at 17. Tmax. V. In each case. the minimum value of V occurs at about 15. changes from 0. as the mud density (a measure of Pw) varies. However. Variations of vertical stress gradient in this relatively small range show substantial changes in V.9. Since the primary concern is variation with wellbore pressure.05. Since there are eight independent variables in addition to Pw.2.05 causes the minimum Von Mises number to occur at 18. Figures 15-21 show the variation in the maximum stress. Increasing Sz/z to 1.SPE 2557 STRESS AROUND A WELLBORE cracking of the formation due to the tensile hoop stresses at the wall of the hole.5 ppg) while at higher mud densities the instability is due to the increased wellbore pressure which may cause cracking of the formation. Therefore. It is again evident that the relative magnitudes of the tectonic stresses are much more important than the values of the remaining independent variables. as a function of mud density using the remaining independent variables as parameters. only the maximum value of V was chosen since it was reasoned that failure would occur at the point of maximum V. there is some instability due to the tendency for the tectonic stresses to cause caving at low mud densities (less than 14. It can be seen that the mud density necessary for maximum hole stability varies with the value of Sx/Sy. the importance of accurately knowing the .9 to 1. Sy/Sz = 1. it was necessary to choose a reference condition so that the values of the variables other than Pw and the parameter could be fixed. When Sz/z is 1. The value of Sy/Sz is the ratio of the larger compressive horizontal stress to the vertical stress. if the larger horizontal stress is larger than the vertical stress.6). However. with the exception of pore pressure gradient. It can be noticed that for Sy/Sz = 0. Figures 7-14 show the variation in the Von Mises number. When Sx/Sy is low (0.5 ppg. there is a tendency for the formation to be unstable due to cracking at mud densities greater than 12. At higher values of Sx/Sy. the stresses tending to cause caving of the wellbore are relatively large and this is the cause of the hole instability. the effects of the remaining variables were studied using values of one of the remaining variables as a parameter. the hole is less stable due to the tendency of the highly compressive tectonic stress to cause caving of the hole. The hole will become increasingly stable as the mud density is increased. It should be noted that those remaining variables. Since the horizontal tectonic stresses are unequal in two cases (Sx/Sy 1).0 psi/ft = z Sx/Sy S /S 0. In general.0 = v = 0. Figures 15-21 show the value of the maximum stress.9 there is a minimum value of V at a mud density of about 18 ppg. This indicates the importance of knowing the relative magnitudes of the tectonic stresses.16 s h = 0.0. This indicates maximum stability of the hole.000 ft 15. Tmax. If the mud der~ity is greater than approximately 18 ppg.

J. Jaeger.. "The Theory of Elasticity for Porous Bodies Displayin~ a Strong Pore Structure. . S. S. of Second U.ity. Methuen & Co. E. Second Edition (1962). SPE 2557 2. pore pressure gradient. Lubinski. 2. 3. CONCLUSIONS 1.8 STRESS AROUND A WELLBORE relative magnitudes of the tectonic stresses is evident for the maximum stress criterion as well as for the Von Mises criterion. For an elastic porous body. "Effect of Penetrating Fluids on Rock Formation Stresses. McGraw-Hill Second Edition (1951).. Equations 29 give the stress state at a general point (r. and Flow. C. J." Humble Oil & Refining Co. and effectiveness of a filter cake (h) do not have as great an effect on the stress state at the wall or on the values of the future criteria as do the relative magnitudes of the tectonic stresses. Timoshenko. The accurate determination of the state of stress at the wall of the hole and. N. National Congo of Applied Mechanics (1954).. therefore. the values of the failure criteria depend to a great extend upon the accuracy of the relative magnitudes of the tectonic stresses. 3. 4. Merwin. Fractnre. J." Proc. The remaining variables such as Poisson's ratio (v). Report (1963). and Goodier. REFERENCES 1. Elastic.. Arthur. Theory of Elasticity.e) in the region surrounding the wellbore. ratio of compressibilities (S).

I-'. 3 PRINCIPAL STRESSES IN THE NEIGHIORHOOD OF A WELLIORE CTz Fig.--. 5 Fig. (WELLBORE PlESSURE)_ 5" 5" Fig. 2 TO POROUS 10DY CONTAINING NO FLUID SUIJECTED TO EXTERNA'i STRESS 5z + P P P 5z + P Fig.L------r-_-d.--\-· Fig. 6 ..-::__ - __ CTZ »> r---' .FLUID CO NT AINING POROUS 10DY WITH CYLINDRICAL HOLE Pw REMENTOF POROUS 10DY FLUID 5z CONTAINING s. 1 POROUS 10DY CONTAINING FLUID & SUIJECTED EXTERNAL FLUID PRESSURE P Fig. 4 DISTORTIONAL STRAIN ENERGY VS WELLIORE PRESSURE v CT.

1. -+-----------------.1..-_1 . 9 Fig.' Ss/Sy = LO . = ·1. 7 Fig.PPG.0.6 1'1=0.0"G // 5.. Sy/5o=0.EFFECT OF Sz/z 120c-_:==:::::::::==~=------' EFFECT OF Sy/Sz o °0~.11 . I ~' > 20 i2 14 'u MUD DENSITY ... 600'" ~E"H=I •.st/fT Sy/S.PPG.... 10 . 20 22 0_ u +....16 /·0...~~---:--------~ /.=0.0 'stiff /.: __ ~. 80 DEPTH1'. Fig.~.16 fJ= 0. '" ..5 '" ~ i > ~400r-----h-=-0.000Ff Po= 15.~~12~--~1~4----~~~~~~~~~ 12 20 22 MUD DENSITY .1 • 60 h =0. MUD DENSITY ..".PPG 20 22 Fig. = 0./ ~.- '" ~ i z 0 40 Z o °0 ~l~~~~-'--~~-=-~-~t~-----~i~~~==~=O~ i2 i4 16 18 MUD DENSITY .. ~ ::l Z ..PPG.=0. 8 EFFECT OF SxlSy EFFECT OF PORE PRESSURE GRADIENT 100 I 8oo'r-----r---------------~----~----~ "? o -./' 200r_------l~--"'--·· ~----------~----cc~'--'-'--_j ' j..000 fT = Ss/. = ..-5--~------~./' 12I'PG "? S! =: .

9 = 1. !!! 40 1 I 2°L 00 12 22 ~ n MUD DENSITY . . .9 = 1. ./s.. 11 Fig.0 'SI/Ft SyJ5z :: 0..0 PPG S./..DDO FT Po = 15... DE"H = 14..S = 0. s"/Sy = -1.0 S.PPG 14 i w[ ! • • . iC ::.0 'PG S.0 PPG S.l6 h IllMI I3=O. \ \ ' 13=0.. 12 EFFECT OF DEPTH b 801---+-iC .9 S.EFFECT OF h 100 0 EFFECT OF POISSON'S 100 RATIO "1 80 DE"H = 14.::0.S .DOO Ft Po:: 15. S..' . Sy/S.60 Z 110 . ::.1' \h=O..0 . = -1. "1 Po:: 15. I ' "f./..PPG 14 16 18 20 22 I Fig. iC 0 !II Z OIl s./...9 c 1. = -1.) 0 '511Ft "1 0 iC ./s..1l~ = O. 60 r=O..r . '" OIl 6O[ 40 ~= 0.0 '$1m = ~ Z = 0.1' i 0 Z > 16 18 20 22 t 100 80 I I 12 MUD DENSITY ../.. 13 Fig./Sy :: to ~ Z '" ~4O ~t s i ! I " o 0 1 12 i MUD DENSITY .) DE"H = 14. = -1.) 60 \1'..0 '$lIn Sy/S.0 PPG S.0 = 0.DDO Ft Po :: 15.0 ~ ::../S.16 ~ ~ > .PPG u ~ ~ w n Fig. 14 .

. 0. on 22 -1000 DEPTH = 14./. 18 16 20 MUD DENSITY ..' .. S. "./s. ·1.11 _= s.6 I 0...=0. / -2000L---------------- Fig. = ·1././1v = to .' = 14. / ...S / / / = 1.0"G = = = 2000 ~ ::: .1. 3000 TENSIL£ yo.PPG . .000 FT '.16 MUD DENSITY . / / OH~---12~---14~~~16~--~18~.. 15 Fig.ie '511FT .~~l.. ". 16 EFFECT OF RATIO OF HORIZONTAL STRESSES EFFECT OF h DEPTH = 14.EFFECT OF Sz/ z EFFECT OF SyLSz 3ooor----..000 FT '..~~------~--.0'$lIn Sy/5.16 0.. 14 '16.1 / 0...0'$lIn Sy/5.. = ·1._----.0'$lIn s"/Sy = I 5..j Fig.' / ..=0../5. 17 Fig.' = .. 12 20 22 MUD DENSITY .-~r I lOOO~ I 5. .11 h = O.000 FT '0 ::15.0--/ 18 / / . 18 ..PI'c./. 22 _2ooo...f-~20~~22 -1000 DEImI 5. = 0. tOy .._----------------_:"--_J e::5" .9 If = 0-'6 fJ 0.PPG.

0.---------------___j Fig.I~ I:'/ . = ·lD PSi/FT IIPPO 2000 Sy/5....9 = 1.~I I D. 0. ~ 0 "OO"'"'-"". 14 "'1~ 18 I 'I/~ " MUD DENSITY . 22 -2000L. '511FT Sy/S.11 . 2000~ 5.~FT '.0 PSi!FT Sy/5../Sy /J= 0. 20 I ~ -mo -2000 ~~--~----~~~----~~ 12 <. 21 .} Fig.' ' /1 22 ~:::rL----12--HG·-·-~---'-'-'-'-.EFFECT OF Po 3000r-----------D~E~"~H-=~14~.5 I _ ~~ 0r'l ' -. I.1. f.9 s"/Sy lD 0.1.16 /J = 0.16 18' 20 22 .-"-.ii' I / /~J I I /~ DEPTH = 14.32--. " {j' 20 .. 12'.~ FT 1 2000 5:1 i = ·1.5 . 5 : 1000 ~ -f I' ..24"1/.h = 0.. 0.5 0 ~~12 1.. 5. ~~~I: '.0. '" ~ )( .' ...PPG 20.=IS. C = 0. '" '" ./.~:-~'/--LI-II-I!-1_' __ ~I I Fig...'1 D..= = = / / / .h =0.-.if. 19 EFFECT OF 1/ EFFECT OF ~ 3000 DE"H=14.11 = 0.. 0.0. S.. mo 15 ~( h = 0.06 D~~I 1000' ·'.. PPO = ...DHG '.. ..~~FT~--~---. = ISO.9 lD 0.

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulAre you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.