Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
471
2 S.K. CHOI and C.P. TAN SPE 47304
The governing equations for conductive heat transfer in the in pore pressure together with the increase in thermal stress
shale are given by: will lead to a less stable wellbore condition. Conversely, -.
cooIing the formation will result in a decrease in pore pressure
and tangential stress which will give rise to a more stable
v (coVT) . ; ................................................................(l) condition. However, the reduction of the tangential stress will
aIso lead to a lower hydraulic ticture gradient and in extreme
case, the tangential stress can become tensile and initiate
k hydraulic ficture.
co= ............................ .. . ......................................@) The model has been integrated with poro-elasticity and
ps drilling fluid-shale interaction models to form the time-
dependent wellbore stability analysis sofhvare. The numerical
The effects of temperature change on pore fluid pressure approaches used in the modeling of initial value problems
are given by: described by non-linear coupled equations have been described
in previous publications.s
U.i .
Model Results. For a step change of 50 C, the induced Model Results. The model results for thermal difisivity G =
change in principal stresses was 5.5 MPa (compressive), and 1.055 x 104 m2s-1and permeable wellbore wall condition are
the induced change in pore pressure was 29.8 MPa. On shown in Figs. 3 to 12. Key aspects of the model results are
removal of the constraints, the cube expanded and the discussed in more detail in the following sections.
principal stresses and pore pressure at the new equilibrium
state were 11.8 MPa (tensiIe) and 29.7 MPa respectively. Evolution of Tangential and Radial Stresses, Pore
These values agreed with those determined using Pressure, and Safety Factor. As thermal and induced pore
Equations 3,4,5 and 7 with the material properties used in the fluid diffusion proceeded, the effective stress and pore
anaIyses. For the case where the step change was -50 C pressure distributions changed with time. Figs. 5 to 12 show
(cooling), the induced changes in stresses and pore pressure evolution of the tangential and radial stresses, and pore
were of the same magnitude of the heating case but opposite in pressure due to the processes, and the factor of safety with
sign as _ed. respect to plastic yielding.
The results show that for permeable wall condition, cooling
473
4 S.K. CHOI and C.P. TAN SPE 47304
.
dted in a sharp decrease in pore pressure near the wellbore time-dependent changes in stresses and pore fluid pressure
wall after a short elapsed time. The peak of the pore pressure induced by thermal and fluid diffision has been developed.
decrease moves away from the wellbom wall with time and the The model results of the validation analyses agree well with
shape becomes flatter, indicating that the thermal effect has analytical solutions for the instantaneous fluid injection of a
apreaded out. Heating resuIted in the pore pressure increasing poro-elastic medium. The results of the simple numerical
slightly above the weIlbore pressure which moved further into experiment show that the computed changes in effective
the formation with time. It is found that cooling improves the stresses and pore pressure satis~ the constitutive equations for
stability of the weIIbore while heating reduces the factor of the thermo-poro-elastic medium used in the model.
safety with respect to plastic yieIding, and can induce weIlbore The results of the parametric study showed that difference
instability. Due to the boundary condition at the wellbore wall, in temperature between drilling fluid and formation can induce
the effective radial stresses are very simiIar for both cooling significant changes in pore fluid pressure and effective stresses
and heating. However, afier less than 690 seconds, the around the wellbore wall. The extent of the effects vary
difference in effective tangential stress is about 6 MPa. significantly with thermal diffusivity of the formation. In
Depending on the stress state in the region around the well general, cooling the formation tend to increase the stability of
wail, such changes in effective stresses may lead to shear or the wellbore while the reverse applies to heating of the
tensile failure of the rock. formation. The results also shows the importance of
In general, drilIiig fluid which is cooler than the formation considering the geothermal gradient, and thermal and fluid
tend to improve the stability of the wellbore while heating of transport properties of shales in wellbore stability analysis and
the formation can induce faiIure due to thermo-poro-elasticity development of recommendations to manage instability.
effects. Hence, cooling of the driIIing fluid may be used as an
effective option to manage wellbore instability, especially Nomenclature
when the use of high mud weight is not feasible. However, a = radius of wellbore
caution should be exercised in the implementation of the B = Skemptons pore pressure coefficient
process as k needs to be compatible with other aspects of c = fluid difisivity coefficient
welIbore stabifity such as thermaI induced hydraulic fracture. CO= thermal diffisivity
G = shear modulus
Effects of Thermal Diffusivity. The effects of thermal K = drained bti modulus of rock framework
difiivity on weIIbore stabiIity are shown in Figs. 11 and 12. K. = undrained buk modulus of rock
A higher thermal diffisivity wouId imply that heat is going to KS = bulk modulus of mineral constituents
difie faster into the rock formation, hence giving less time k = intrinsic permeability
for the induced pore pressure to dissipate As a result, the p = pore pressure
magnitude of the induced pore pressure and stress changes are p. = mltial formation pore pressure
higher for shales of a given fluid difisivity but with higher pw = wellbore pressure
thermal difiivity. Consequently, it will lead to a reduction in s = specific heat
the effective mud support and hence, a less stable weIIbore T = temperature
condition. t=time
A higher thermal difisivity resulted in a higher increase t*=ctla
and decrease in safety factor for cooling and heating r = radial distance from centre of wellbore
respectively. Wellbore instability is induced by the highest a = Biot coefficient
thermal diffisivity for the permeable wellbore wall whereas ali ay = coefficient of thermal expansion of pore fluid
the thermal diffusivities resulted in instability for the as = coefficient of thermal expansion of solid matrix
impermeable wall condition. A = change with respect to reference state
&j = Kronecker delta
Effects of Fluid FIOWBoundary Condition at WelIbore
Wall. SmalIer changes in safety factor and a much earlier
&ij = strain tensor
rebound are observed for the permeable wall condition ~=i
com~d to the impermeable condition. This is because the
changes in safety factor are caused mainly by changes in pore @= ptrosity
fluid pressure. If the waII is impermeable, pore fluid can only q=~ I-2V
dime into (heating) or from (cooling) the formation driven 2(1 - v)
by the thermal induced pore pressure gradient. However, if the
A = thermal conductivity
wall is permeabIe, pore fluid can also diffuse into or from the
p = viscosity of pore fluid
weIIbore, causing a smaIIer change in safety factor and an
v = drained Poissons mtio
earlier rebound. Thii is especially true if a high pore pressure
vu = undrained Poissons ratio
gradient exists adjacent to the wall.
p = mass density
= effective stress tensor
= Y
Conclusions fY ~ = effective vertical stress
A numerical thermo-poro-elasticity model which can model c h = effective minor principal horizontal stress
474
.
.
->. !
References
I. Tan, C. P., Rahman, S. S., Richards, B.G. and Mody, F.K. :
Integrated Rock Mechanics and Drilling Fluid Design
Approach to Manage Shale Instability, Eurock 98 - Rock
Mechanics in Petroleum Engineering. (1998), Trondheim,
Norway.
2. Rice, J.R. and Ciearly, M.P. : Some basic stress-diffusion
solutions for fluid saturated elastic porous media with
compressible constituents, Rev. Geophys. Space Phys. (1976),
14,227.
3. Detoumay E. and chen~ A.H-D. : PoroeIastic response of a
borehole in a non-hydrostatic stress fieId, Int. J. Rock Mech.
A4in Sci. & Geornech. Abstr.(1988), 25, No. 3, 171.
4. W% Y., Papamichos, E. and Dusseault, M.B. (1996). Thermal
Stresses and Borehole Stability in Rock Mechanics. Proc. 2nd
NARMS, Rock Mechanics Tools and Techniques, pp. 1121-
1126.
5. Biot, M. A.: General theory of three-dimensional
consoIidatio& J Appl. P~s.(194 l), 12, 155.
6. Bio4 M.A. : General sohrtions of the equations of elasticity and
consolidation for a porous material,~, Appl, Mech., Trans. Am.
Sm. Mech. Engrs.(1956), ~, 91.
7. Choi, S.K., Chun& WK., Chen, B.K. and Thomson, P.F. (1993)
: Numerical modelling of the non-linear behaviour of materials
with application to metals,. AJvance~ in Engineering Plasticity
and Zts Applications, Lee (eds), Elsev ier Science Publishers,
Amsterdam (1993) 695.
8. Choi, S.K. : FLOMEC - A 3D Coupled Fluid FIow-
Geomechanical Numerical Model, DPR Unrestricted Report
No. 2. CS~O Division of Petroleum Resources, Melbourne
(1998j.
9. CharIe~ P.A. : *Rock Mechanics Volume 2. Petroleum
Applications, Editons Technip, Paris, France, (1997).
10. Booker, J.R. and Savvidou, C. : Consolidation around a Point
heat source, Int. J. Numer. Anal. Method Geomech. (1985), 9,
173.
11. McTlgue, D.F. . ThermoeIastic Response of Fluid-Saturated
Porous Roc~ Journal oJGeophysical Research (1986), 19, No.
B9, 9533.
12. Innaurab, N. and OccelI% E. : Laboratory and In Situ Rock
Thermal property Measurements, Hot Mine. Rock at Great
Depth, BalkemA Rotterdam (1989).
13. Sommerton, W.H. : Thermal Properties and Temperature-
related Behaviour of Rock/Fluid System, Elsevier Science
Publishers (1992).
475
6 S.K. CHOI and C.P. TAN SPE 4~04
m
.---r .ool(~
.ol(~
----- r.io(~
.0,0< (Incdml
=0,1 (mofhl)
.I.o(rmdntl
OM 1 15 2253
~llnm
s
, ,:, , ,:. .
I ~-,===>.+
:, .,,-
.-,>,. .
, .-. .
#--
. 4.5 5
I = .a5L 1 1,522S 33.54
I - -nuo ~
.- ..
Fig. 2 Comparison of modef results and analytical solutions of Fig.5- Isochrones of pore preaaure vsriation with normansed
normalised tangential stress (u~omp.) variation at Various radius (r/a) for drilling fluid 50C cooler than formation.
normalised radius (r/a).
..... !=18io.08a
Fig. 3- Iaochronea of temperature variation with normalised Fig.6- Isochrones of pore pressure variation with normalised
radius (r(a) for drilllng fluid SOCcooler than formation. radius (r/a) for drilling fluid 50C hotter than formation.
SPE 47304 MOD~LING OF EFFECTS OF DRILLING FLUID TEMPERATLIRE ON WELLBORE STABILITY 7
-.
I
I
1,4
0 1 z $ 4
~-
Fia. 8 Isochrones of etiectlve radial stress variation with Fig. 11 Temporal variation of factor of safety with respect to
no-maNsed rsdlus (r/a) for drilling fIuid 50C hotter than formation. plastic yielding for formation with different thermal diffusivitles (H
= 1.60. M = 1.055. L =0.51 XIO+ mkf) and Dermeable fluid flow
boundary condition at borehole wall.
..
.... .
1:. ~.93x
I
.8300W
-.laloo$ec,
0 i s
1
2 4 s
~-
Fig. 9- Isochrones of eWectlve tangential stress variation with Fig. 12 Temporal variation of factor of safety with respect to
normslised radius (r/a) for drilling fluid 50C cooler than plastic yielding for formation with different thermal diffusivities (H
tirmation. = 1.60, M = 1.055, L =0.51 x IOA ink) and impermeable fluid flow
boundaW condition at borehole wall.
477