.

SPE

%ca?~ of FWx4eum EngIrh%jrs

SPE 23127
The Prediction of Well Stability Usirlg the Yield Zone Concept
J.M. Somerville
SPE Members

and B,G,D, Smart,

Heriot.Watt

U.

1
opyrighl 19S1, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc.
his papar was prepared for preaerdation at the Offshore Europe Conference

heldin

Aberdeen, 3-6 September 1991.

his paper was selacled for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by me author(s), Contents of the paper,
s presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Pelroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the aufhor(s). The material, as presented, doea not necessarily reflect
ny PcMitionOrIhe Society of p8trO19umEnginee:a, ita officers, ?: ,~embers. Papera presentad at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of me Society
I Petroleum Engineers. Permls40n to copy ia restricted to ar. abstract ot not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment
f where and hy whom the paper is praaented. Write Lorarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836 U.S.A. Telex, 730989 SPEDAL.

TRACT
This paper presents work conducted on borehole stability of
consolidated and unconsolidated sandstone formations. A
simplified stress equation, developed for work in mine tunnels
in soft sedimentary rocks, which has been modified for the case
of petroleum reservoir rocks is presented, A method of
determining failure criteria from limited unconsolidated samples
is presented, and the results used to predict the extent of a failed
zone in an unconsolidated formation for various mud weights.

The problems associated with wellbore failure are well known in

the petroleum industry and influence the driiling and completion
operations of the well. There has been much work associated
with borehole failure primarily aimed at understanding the
properties of shales and unconsolidated sandstones. The failure
can be described by mechanical instability of the reek material
which is influenced by the geometry of the structure (the
borehole) and by additional effects of a chemical or thermal
nature.
This analysis addresses mechanical stability only. A simple
failure criterion for both intact and failed reek is used to
determine the extent of a zone of failed or yielded reek around a
borehole, Parameters such as rhe rock material properties, pore
pressure and drilling mud weight influence the development of
the yielded zone and the paper describes the application of this
approach to consolidated and unconsolidated sandstone.
BACKGROUND

The stresses and strains around a borehole wi.hin a formation

can be readily described by the theory of elasticity, This
identifies the magnitude and position of stresses around various
shapes of hole and provided the rctk has sufficient strength and
reacts in an elastic manner, the strain or deformation of these
References and illustrations at end of paper

can be calculated. Investigators such as Pasley and

Cheatham (1963) and Bradley ( 1979) have previously analysed
the failure of material around boreholes using elastic solutions,

regions

If the formation IS subjected to a stress in excess of its elastic

limit, it will deform andh fail. This situation can be shown to
be typical for soft reservoir rocks at depths greater than the mnge
1000 to 2000 feet. There are two zones which react differently to
the redistributed stresses and which have been termed by some
investigators a plastic zone (immediately around the wellbore)
and an elastic zone (adjacent to the plastic zone), The annulus of
plastic material deforms and reduces the local stress
concentration. If the ultimate strain is not exceeded the hole is
stabkx if the ultimate strain is exceeded before the required width
of plastic zone has developed the borehole will collapse. Bratli
and Rinses (1981), Rinses, Bratli and Horsrund (1982) and
Geertsma (1978) have considered elasto-plastic deformation
mechanisms, The assumption of perfect plasticity may be valid
for formations such as salt, but may be unrealistic for
sandstones, shales and limestones,
The nature of the material in the failed region has been
investigated in relation to the stability of mine tunnels in
sedimentary formations. Wilson (1980), Airey (1977) and
Whittaker (1984) have shown that the formation adjacent to the
tunnel wall had been overloaded and had failed, but the failed
material still had a residual strength. The extent of the failed or
yielded zone depended on the nature of the strata. For most
consolidated formations, blocks of materiai form from the
overloaded rock mass, The size and geometry of the blocks is
determined by the mechanical properties of the reek and the
natural structural features, The resultant configuration of blocks
and the friction properties of their adjacent surfaces controls the
deformation,
Therefore, although the solid rock has been overloaded by the
redistributed stress around the hrehole, the yielded material has
a load bearing capacity related to the degree of confii]ement.
Material adjactmt to the wall of the borehole may span into the
borehole, but farther into the formation the geometry effects
restrict the deformation and the degree of confinement increases.
Ultimately, the degree of confinement is such that the material
will accept all of the redistributed load while reacting elastically.
-..
Ziiu

.
SPE 23127

THE PREDICTION OF WEJ L STABILITY USING THE YIELD ZONE CONCEPT

where

This creates an interface between the yield zone and elastic zone
at a distance from the borehole wall depending on the degree of
confinement, redistributed load and properties of the failed and
intact rock.

2
A =

of Yield 7@g

ka3

(1)

(11)

Since the radial stresses at the yield elastic boundary are the
same for the yielded material and the unbroken rock, the radius
of the boundary, f, can be fou],d from the following equation

Wi\son and Aircy analysed the stress condition in the yield and
elastic zones assuming the failure criteria:
(J1 = CTo +

1{

(k+l)q + (JO 2q-ao+p(k+l)

(pi- p)(k+l)
k+l
{

1
- co+p(k i-1) ~

i = ro 2q
(p+ p)(k + 1)
{

in the intact zone, where rso is the unconfined compressive

strength and k is the triaxial stress factor, and in the yield zone

al = ISOi

kq

where al is the stress required to cause movement in the

broken material when confined by a stress G3, CT()is the
corresponding stress at zero confinement,
Assuming
1.Circular cross-sectional area for the tunnel
2.Homogeneous and isotropic rock
3,Pkme strain conditions
4.Hydrostatic stresses
Wilson and Airey produced equations to describe the radial and
tangential stresses in the yield zone, at the yield/elastic boundary
and within the elastic zone, These are shown below,

The equation required modification to account for the following

1.Oriented borehole, The tangential stress around the borehole
was calculated from the orientation of the borehole relative to the
earth stresses.
2. Inclusion of mud weight, The boundrwy stress, p, was
replaced by the pressure of the mud in the wellbore. It was
assumed that an impermeable filter cake was formed on the
borehole wall which gave support to the wall and prevented
communication between the pore fluid and the mud,
3, Effective stress. Consideration of effective stresses allowed
the effects of pore pressure to be included in the analysis, This
was of particular relevance when examining the effect of
pressure drawdown on the reservoir not immediately around the
wellbore.

1. Within the yield zone

k-l
-p

{)

(3)

k-1

tangential stress, crO = k(p + p) ~

ro J
where, r. is the radius of the owing,
boundary

-p

(4)

p the restraint on its

60
and p =
k-1

(5)

2q -ml

k+l
Go _ k(2q - cm))
k+l

2. Comparison of the measured borehole diameter through a

North Sea consolidated sandstone with the diameter predicted by
the yield zone analysis,

(6)
+ rso (on yield side of boundary)

-.O _ k(2q - CO)

+ cro(on clastic side of boundary)
ki-1

Three yield analyses were perfornxxi:

1. A sensitivity study on the effect of different rock properties
of the extent of the yield zone created,

2. At the yield- elastic boundary

&=-

(12)

where r. is the rssdius of the opening before yield, 2q is the

tangenti?( stress at the edge of the opening, p is the restraint on
the bou,ldary of the opening, p is the augmentation to the
restraint on the boundary. The equation was developed for
horizontal mine tunnels where the tunnel lining provided the
stress, p. The augmentation to the restraint, p, has been found
to be 0.1 MPa fort ypical soft rocks and represents a cohesion of
the broken material reflecting t}le degree of interlocking of the
individual blocks,

(2)

radial stress, or = (p -i-p) ~

{}

(7)

3. An assessment of different mud weights on the stability of

an unconsolidated sand,

(8)

Full cores were available for the unconsolidated stmd only and
the experimental techniques developed to provide mechanical
properties is more fully dcscribcd, Typical mechanical property
ditta was used for cases 1 and 2,

(9)

The failure criteria for broken and intact rock are represented by
a 2nd order polynomial equation, however, Wilson showed the
error in assuming a Iineiu relationship to be negligible (a nonlinear failure criterion introduced comp]cxities which made the
application difficult), The failure criterion, the triaxial stress

where q is the stress field remote from the opening,

3, Within the clastic zone
2
or = q-A

:
{}
2

00 = q+A

;
{}

(10)
---

,
SPE 23127

J. M. SOMERVILLE, B, G, D. SMART

factor and the unconfined compressive strength arc determined

from laboratory tests on broken and intact rock. To adequately
define the failure envelope and the triaxial stress factor requires a
number of discrete tests on the formation, To overcome the
difficulty of retrieving sufficient cores an alternative testing
method was devised,

This was achieved using a diamond saw with a precisely aligned

rnmming feed. The specimen and the cutting edge of the saw
were immersed in a blanket of chilled nitrogen. This allowed the
core preparation to be completed without thawing the frozen
cores, Finished specimens were re[urned to the freezer for
storage.

Multi-state triaxial testing produces a series of failure stresses

from one sample by successively overloading the sample at a
number of confining stresses. The departure from elastic
deformatiorr is taken as the onset of yield, and provided the
confining stress is increased, the sample is returned to a stable
stress regime, The tests are conducted in a triaxial cell with the
axial load applied by stiff testing machine. Both axial and
confining stresses are applied by servo-controlled hydraulic
actuators, and the real time plot of axial load and axial
defo~mation indicates the onset of yield.

The configuration of the equipment used to perform the triaxial

tests on the specimens is shown in Figure 1. A modified Hock
cell allowed measurement of radial deformation of the samples
under test. For consolidated formations, strain gauged samples
allow radial strain to be measured,
The facilities that this configuration provided were:

To assess the applicability of the technique a series of 5 different

consolidated
sandstones were tested. For each type of
sandstone, five discrete failure tests were performed at different
confining stresses, and five multi-state failure tests were
conducted, each multi-state failure test producing one failure
envelope. The angle of internal friction and the apparent
cohesion were calculated and the results are shown in Table 1,
The results are comparable and show that reliable results can be
generated from multi-state tests on a very limited number of
samples, This technique was applied to the unconsolidated sand
cores.

Unconsolidated cores from a North Sea well were available,

They were delivered frozen and kept in a freezer before
preparation and testing.
Ss!2GU&
The lengths of frozen core were contained in fibreglass liners
and 2.54 cm (one inch) diameter test specimens removed from
these cores were stored in a deep freeze at -25*C.
QQL@
The frozen core was removed from the freezer and a wepannirtg
bit used in conjunction with a handheld electric drill to cut a
3.81 cm (1.5 inch) diameter hole in the fibreglass liner, The core
was then clamped horizontally on the table of a coring machine
with the hole in the liner ccntred cm the axis of a 2.54 cm ( 1
inch) diatneter thin walled coring bit,
Nitrogen gas, chilled try passing it through a cooling coil
immersed in liquid niwogtm, was used as a flushing medium. In
pure sand, 2.54 crn (1 inch) diameter cores were readily
ebtained by cnring through the full diameter of the core, the
intact and still frozen 2,54 cm ( I inch) diameter core being
snapped ofc at its base, retrieved through the hole in the
ftbreglass Iincr, and stored in the freezer, The only difficulties
arose when pieces of mudstonc were emcountcrd
in the
samples. In these cases, the matrix of sand surrounding the
mudstonc fragment did not offer sufficient reaction to counteract
the force applied to the mudstonc by the core barrel, As a result,
the mudstone fragment was pushed down through the sand
ahead of the bit and no core was retrieved.

1.
Control of the axial load (Z direction) applied to the
specimen
2,
Control of the confining pressure (X and Y directions)
applied to the specimen, viu servo-controlled hydraulics
3.
Measurement of specimen exptinsion/contraction in the Z
direction by averaging electronically the output of three vertical
displacement transducers placed at 12(Yintervals wound the test
cell.
4.
Measurement of the specimen compression/expansion in
the XY plane by averaging el,ec~ronically the output of three
horizontal displacement trafisducers spaced at 120 intervals
around the triaxial cell,
5,
Transmission of P waves through the specimen, the arrival
time determined from a display of the captured wweform on a
digitid oscilloscope,
6.
Measurement of specimen permeability, using drilled
platens and a nitrogen pcrmeametcr, Porous ceramic discs were
inserted between the platens and the specimen to prevent the
unconsolidated sand being extruded under load into the dri!led
platen.
A six channel X-Y chart recorder with input voltage offset
facilities was used to enhance the resolution of the two averaged
displacement transducer signals and provide a continuous record
of specimen deformation. These signals were recorded in the
chart X direction against axial load in [he chart Y direction.
An independent recording of the averaged output of the
displacement tmrrsducers monitoring the comprcssior of the
specimen in the Z direction was made against axial Iuad iipplied
in the Z direction. This recording was used to drive the test,
If there were sufficient numbers, three tests were conc!uctcd [o
produce Mohrs circles at cffcctivc confining pressures of 6.0,
18.0 and 30,0 MPa (870, 2610, 4350 psi) enabling failure
envelopes to be drawn. An additional point on the envelope was
determined from the observation that the sands had cffcctivcly
zero cohesion at zero confining pressure.
When there were only two specimens available, tests were
conducted at 6,() and 18.() MPa (870 and 4350 psi), the
fhttcning of the failure envelope dc[ected in the earlier tests ist
confining pressures above about 22,0 MPti (3190 psi) being
assumed,
The test proccdurc is shown in Table 2,
REsUIKi

The ends of the 2,54 cm ( 1 inch) diameter cores were trimmed to

produce test specimens with, as near as possible, a 2: I length to
diameter ratio.

Typical summary results are presented in Table 3.

All of the spccimcns were tested in a water saturated state,
excess water cxt)cllcd from the st)ccimcn during each stww of

*
THE PREDICHON OF WELL STABILITY USING THE YIELD ZONE CONCEPT

4
compaction.

The specimens did not show brittle failure, but a gradual

reduction in the angle of internal friction to zero. The confining
stresses applied were similar to those applied in the experiments
of Lee and Seed (1967) and the samples showed compaction
during loading until failure is imminent when an increase in
volume recurs, The measured densities of the samples show that
they had a high initial void ratio,

SPE 23127

rock properties on the yield zone radius is clearly visible,

At depths 5759ft, 5458ft, 5703ft a significant reduction in the
yield zone radius can be achieved by increasing the mud weight
beyond 10,5 lb/gal, while at depths 5229ft, 5269ft and 5437ft
no significant reduction can be achieved by increasing the mud
weight beyond 10,0 lb/gal,
CONC L~JSIONS

Typical specifications of the failure envelopes derived are shown

in Table 4 and a typical envelope is shown in Figure 2.

1, The comparison of predicted borehole diameter with

measured borehole diameter shows good agreemc ,,[, Only one
borehole in consolidated sandstone has been assessed, a number
remain to be tested.

Typical values of Youngs Modulus and Poissons ratio at 18

MPa (2610 psi) confining pressure are 16 GPa (14500 psi) and
0.15, The method used to determine those parameters from
recorded test data is shown in Figura 3.

2. The simplicity of the approach allows realistic appreciation

of the mechanical characteristics derived in the tabordtory, The
comparison of the multi-state and discrete failure tests for
sandstone indicate that this is a reliable method of determining
failure criteria from limited numbers of samples,

n of Yl~
The equation (12) determining the rddius of yield zone was
coded onto a spreadsheet to allow calculation of the extent of the
yield zone for combinations of rock properties, pore pressures
and borehole pressures (mud weights),

3, Unconsolidated formation appears to react mechanically in a

similar manner to consolidated formation. The mud weights
proposed to limit the extent of the yield zone do not appear to be
outwith the bounds of normal drilling practice,

1. Extent of yield zone and sensitivity to mechanical parameters

RECOMMENDATJON~

Figure 4 shows the extent of a yield zone around a vertical

borehole in three types of rock: weak, medium and strong as
defined by the following properties:
weak:

k = 2,5, cro = 5 MPa (725 psi)

medium:

k = 3.5, co = 15 MPa (2175 psi)

strong:

k = 4,5, Go = 25 MPa (3625 psi)

The approach requires further testing on other types of

formations. This must also require the applicability of the multistate failure test technique to be assessed on other types of
formations.
The full interaction between the borehole and pore fluids,
including leak off and chemical interaction, should be defined in
terms of the change in stress within the formation, It would then
be possible to include this in the analysis,

The graph shows the extent of the yield zone in dimensionless

fom~ (7 = radius of the yield zone, r. = radius of the borehole)
for various mud weights, The mud weight augments the
confining sums on the borehole wall and reduces the ex[ent of
the yield zone, Similarly, the stronger rock has a smaller yield
zone. The yield zone is free to collapse, to be held together by
the mud cake and remain in place or to be removed by the action
of the drilling assembly, If the material is removed the
confinement will be reduced and the yield zone will enlarge.
Figure 5 shows the development of a yield zone around a
borehole, It is assumed that the borehole has is circular crosssection before yield, The tangential stress around the borehole is
calculated with reference to the orientation of the borehole in the
earth stress field, and this is inserted into the yield equation. In
this way the extent of the yield zone around the borehole is
calculated,
2. Comparison of predicted and measured horcholc iiarnctcr in
consolidated sandstone

NOMENCLATLJRE
k
P
P
q
r
Y
t
r.
Or

= rnaxial stress factor

= pressure on boundary
= augmentation to pressure on boundary
= hydrostatic stress field
= radius
= radius of yield zone
= radius of borehole
= radial stress

crrj = tangential stress

i$r = average radial stress
?fo = yield zone tangential stress
& = clastic zone peak tan~cntial sums
Cro = unconfined uniaxial strength

ii

Data from well C was used to predict the extent of the yield
zone, The formation was weak sandstone (k= 2,5) at 1829m
(6000ft) depth. The no:ninal borehole diameter was 31cm
(12,25 in), The pore pressure gradient was taken as 10,5 kPa/m
(0,46!3psi/ft) and the mud weight 1199 kg/m3 (10 ppg). The
predicted yield radius was 0.209m (8,2 in) which compared
favotmbly with the rncasurcd borehole mdius of0.229111(9in),

00 = axial stress applied to broken

deformation
Cr] = axiaJ stress applied to intact material

material

to cause

al = axial stress applied to broken tnatcritil

03 = confining (radial) stress

3, Comparison of mud weights to prevent the fomlation of a

yield zone in an unconsolidated sand formation

~
Pasley, P.R. & J.13.Cheatham. 1963. Rock stresses induced by
flow of fluids into borcholes. Sot. Pet, Eng. J. Mar. 85-94
BradIcy, W.B. 1979. Failure of inclined boreholcs. J, Energy
Resources Tech. Dec. 233-239.

Table 5 lists the results of the rncchanical property tests and the
WCIIdata used to prcdlct the extent of the yield zone around a
borehole in unconsolidated sand, The values were modellcti and
produced the results in Table 6 imd Figure 6. The influence of
232

*
SPE23127

J, M. SOMERVILLE, B, G. D. SMART

Bradley, W.B, 1979. Borehole failure near saltdomes. OiI and

Gas J, Apr. 1.25-136
BratIi, R, K.& R. Rinses, 1981. Stability and failure of sand
arches,Soe. Pet. Eng. J. Apr. 236-248
Rinses, R., R.K, BratIi, & P. Horsrund. 1982. Sand stresses
around a wellbore. See. Pet. Eng. J. Dec. 883-894
Geertsma, J. 1978, Some reek mechanical aspects of oil and gas
well completion, European Offshore Petroleum Conference
and Exhibition, London. Oct. EUR 38
Wilson, A. H. 1980. The stability of underground workings in
the soft rosks of the coal measures. Ph. D. Thesis. University
of Nottingham.

Airey, 1?. M. 1977. A study of yield zones around roadw

British Coal final report on ECSC Research Project 6;
AB/8/802
Whittaker, B. N. 1984, Stability aspects of major coal mil
tunnel projects, in Design and performance of undergrc
excavations. ISRM/ BGS, Cambridge. 461-470
Jaeger, J, C. & N, G. W. Cook. 1976. Fundamentals of ]
mechanics. Chapman and Hall, London
Lee, K L and H B Seed, 1967. Drained Strength Charactcri
of Sands. J,Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, AS
vol. 93, no, SM6, November

TABLE 1
Comparison of results from discrete and mul[i-state failure tes[s
(Consolidated Sandstone)
Sandstone

Discrete
Angle of
internal friction

Multi-state
Mean angle of
internal friction

:
s

3;.0
41.0
28.0
33.0
36.0

3;.2
40.8
28.0
34.0
33.4

;
3
4
5

Discrete
Apparent
cohesion
MPa
16.5
37,0
26.9
40.0
40.0

Multi-stme
Mean apparent
cohesion
MPa
17.4
34.0
15.4
36.7
43.3

Standard
deviation
;.8
1.6
4,6
;:;

~tandard
deviation
MPa
2.9
::;
6,6
4.7

TABLE 2
Test Procedure, 18 MPa Ultimate Confining Pressure
(Unconsolidated Sand)
Insert frozen specimen in cell and load hydrostatically to 1 MPa
Leave for 30 minutes for specimen to thaw
Develop load hydrostatically to 4 MPa
Take pemwability measurements (three at 2 minute intervals)
Increase confining pressure to 6 MPa and take permeability measurements
Increase vertical stress until sufficient spccirnen deformation has been recorded to
enable Youngs Modulus and Poissons ratio-to be evaluated without initiating specimen
failure
7. Increase cor;fining pressure to 10 Ml]a and take permeability measurements
8, As step 6
9, As step 7, but to 14 MPa
10. As step 6
11. As step 8, but to 18 MPa
12. As step 6
13. Continue lo~ding to beyond onscl of failure
Simplified procedures were adopted for ultimate confining pressures of 6 MPa and 30
MPa, the specimens being loaded hydrostaticu]ly to these confining stresses, held and then
loaded to failure,

.-- -.

. --- --------- ---- ..-.-.-. -.---233

------.-- ------------ .. . - ----

.--. -... ----.

SW 23127
TABLE 3
TypicalSummary Results

Sample 5229#1
TABLE 5
33.86
24.75
31.89
1950

Length (mm)
Diameter (mm)
Weight (g)
Density (kgm-3)
Confining
pressure
(MI%)
4

Axial had
(kN)
2.00

Axial
Stress
(iVIPa)
4.16

Cross Sectional Area (mm2)

Volume (mms)

Youngs
Modulus
(GPa)

Poissons
Ratio

481
16290

Gas
Permeability
(mD)
864

Data for Determination of Yield Zone Extem

(iinconsolidated Sand)

P- Wave
Velccity
(krlis-1)

Rock Type
Number

Angle of
lntemal
Friction

Triaxial Stress
Faclor
k

In-situ
Unconfined
Compressive
Strength

.
6
10
14
18
II?

2.60
4.00
4.70
7.06
7.79
9.54
9.60
15.60
15.60
18.70

5.41
8.32
9.77
14.6S
16.20
19.83
19.96
32.43
32.43
38.88

0.11

773

0.79

1.2

0.09

654

0.79

1.6

0.14

645

0.97

1.0

0.15

630

!.13

0.5

0724

Augmentation
10 %ength
P

o~
(MPa)

(MPa)

15

1.7

1.03

0.34

26

~.6

1.38

0.41

30

3.0

13.78

4.75

1.30

w
u
&

Comments

Typical of
samples Ieste
at 5759ft,
5458ft, 5703
Typical of
samples ttxxe
al 5229ft,
5269ft, 5437
rypical of a
medium
strength
sandstone (f{
comparison)

The following a..sumptions have also been made

TABLE 4
Typical Specifications of ihe Failure Envelopes Derived
Sample Number

Cohesion

Angle of lntemal
Friction

Normal Stress
Level at onset of
Q.~

MPa
5229, 5269,
5431
5759, 545%
5703

0
o

.
26

10-15

~2Mpa (3]90
psi)
18 MPa (2610
psi)

Depth
Overburden stress
Horizontal Stress
Pore pressure
Mud Pressures:
9.0 lb/gal
9.5 lb/gal
10.0 lb/gal
10.5 lb/gal

.
.

.
.

174m (5722 feet) (average for fom,ation)

39.4 MPa (5722 psi)
39.42 * 0.825 MPa
32.53 MPa (4721 psi)
~
17.47 MPa (2536 psi) (measured)

.
.

10.59 kPa/m (0.468 psi/ft)

18.45 MPa at 174 m (2678
11.17 kPa/m (0.494 psi/ft)
19.48 NH%at 174 m (2827
11.76 I&/m (0.520 psi/ft)
20.50 MPa at 174 m (2975
12.35 kPa/m (0.546 pSi/fI)
MPa at 174 m (3124
21.52

psi al 5722 feet)

psi at 5722 feel)
psi aI 5722 feet)
psi at 5722 feet)

*
TABLE 6
Calculation of Yield Zone Radius
(Unconsolidated Sand)
Overburden Stress Ratio Horizontal
Pressure
!kress
(MPa)

(l@a)

Mud
pressure
(MPa)

Pore
Pressure
(MPa)

00

(MPa)

(MPa)

(MPa)

?1

ro
21.0
7.7
5.5
3,8

39,42

0.825

32.53

18.45
19,48
20,50
21,52

17,47
17.47
17,47
17347

0.98
2.32
3.02
4,05

1,03

0,34

1,7

39.42

0,825

32.53

18.45
19,48
20,50
21,52

17,47
17.47
17.47
17.47

0,98
2,32
3.02
4.05

1.38

0.41

2,6

18,45
19.48
20.50
21,52

17,47
17.47
17.47
17.47

0.98
2.32
3.02
4,05

13.78

39.42

0,825

32,53

;::
1,7
1,5
4,75

3,0

AX 1AL

LOAD

L
X,y

.L.tKWll
. . .. . ..L

e
-

COW INING
PRESSR[
~
M[.ASIJRCMINT

1 of 3

Showfl

u/

MfASURfMLNT OF
RADIAL COfItPRfSSION/1 XPANSIOti
(1 of 3 shown)

P-HAV[

El
II

7///

II

OUT
1

Fieurc 1
U;consolidtitcd Sand Test Equipment Configuration

235

WAT[R
TRAP

PERM[Atk T[R

1,2
1.1
1!1
1!0

SPE 23127

fl[cc4?01fK
Axial
mad
(Z dircctlm)

Samp!e

C4 RAOIAL [xPldlsIC#
MO vERllUi
AAIN. LOUl

COW4KSSK?I

AGAUIST

Radial

Expan%hm

5229

hfo%fs

Circlu

28.00
Cc4ws!cm .u rom

25.00

:cnw (*a)

: 0

24.00
22.00-

#l
25

20.00

Ia.oo

16.00

0-24

36,3

2 :7. e
3 10.4

20-40

?8.0
30.0
4.0

Vt.rllc.11

Cwrcsslcm

4--2

O.lhn

14.00
IXPAJCEO PORTION ff
12.00

10.OG

i?.oc
&.GC

REWRDIMG

Youngsfbodul.-,

= fd

1
-

4.00

2.00

;---=?/[

0.09
0.00

1 O.oc

Zo.m
Normol

S1rmS,

30.00

40,00

(uP.)
&a
RAOZN

FISUIS
2
Ty@l FaIIwc
timim (UIXOIXW
li&lcdsands)

ab

bcd

VER1lCM

FxPAHSZON

radial
cmress
i.m of SW.Cim?n
s ccnfining
vreswre
mcreawd
frm
10 - 14Wa.
radial
expansion of samlc as
Axial
load irtcmascd t constant
confining
nr.?ssurc of 14Wa.

11 is likely
*
rem-sent

Cmrrf[sslm

cf

slight
xial extension of
smlc
as confining
w-sure
*lied
causiq
inueasr
in
xial
load (*xial
length held
mmtant ).

fe

vertical
cmessicm
as azial
lcdd itxreamd
t ConStan,
confining
fmssvre
of 16P!Pa.

t>at bc nd fg mwescnt
a dccwme
. increase in mm imen volme.

in wecimen

WOIUSC.

cd nd

FiSUIT3
Typkd OuzpuIfmm a Tc..fandDcIcnninmion
cl Mechanicalhanxfem

,,*

23127

SPE
Weak Rock

Elastic Limit

10.5 lb/&l
10,0 lb/gal
9.5 lb/gil
9.0 lbkd

-------. . . ..-.

[1.ASTIC LIMIT

Min. RoMrcd
horizontal!
Sr.ress
Q
1

M;ix

=$

Rou[cd

Hmiimtd
Stress

--

Pv -

C3)

45L7

Radial Distance (iYrQ)

Medium Rock
First Stage of Yicldinc

---------~
~

w
~

--

$(/(0. .%
~,,
,
t
,

,,
-.
... -:

--l

\,,

,,

.,
\
\
\
\
\

\!
i:
,,
i:
~:
,,

IYJco-

... ..-

-..-.
.. .. ..

10.5
1().()
9.5
9,()

Ib/E:il
lb/gal
Ib/g:il
lb/&il

0) )

LL
?$

;,.:

~v

,.

;\!JL)j -r

..
,.,.

!;.
;,..

Radiid Distarrcc (iYro)

Stage of yi~lding

,sccotd

!+hoilc Rock

. ,:..:)
(j;
?.:::.!,.i.::.,.,.,

/
Q

., .;,!;..
,,.-,..,:,..
,.: ..;:
..,:, p.

.,,

.., ,!

. ... .. .

10,0llJ/~iil

9.5
. . . . . . 9,()

Ib/g:il
lb/gal

.,,,
., ,,,..~i,
.,, ,.

1..

I:igurc 5
DCVCIOl)t)K!llt

2
Rwiial Dist;incc (i7ro)

Figure 4
Comp:uison of Yield hnc DwdopmmI
in Ibn}utions
will) ditfwwt Mcch;iniciil
Propcnics ill)d diffctvnt Mild Wcighls

lhtcholc

Of ii ricltf

iAN)C

LiIt)ill)d

il

RADIUS
OF
Y IEL(I
20NE
(b;cm~o;e
20

15

10

9.0 lb/gal

10.0

9.5 lb/gal

Mud

lb/gal

10.5

Sandstone

lb/gal

Weight

Figure 6
R~~tionship

between

Radius

Of Yield

Zone and Mud Wc@t

238

for Unconsolidated

sand