scholarly journals Analysis of Hydraulic Fracturing Efficiency Considering the Principal Stress in Brushy Canyon Formation of the Permian Basin

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 1069
Author(s):  
Hyemin Park ◽  
Wonmo Sung ◽  
Jihoon Wang
Keyword(s):  
Hydraulic Fracturing ◽  
Principal Stress ◽  
Horizontal Wells ◽  
Permian Basin ◽  
Actual Case ◽  
Principal Stress Direction ◽  
Stimulated Reservoir Volume ◽  
Stress Anisotropy ◽  
Stress Direction ◽  
Brushy Canyon Formation

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of principal stress direction on the efficiency of hydraulic fracturing treatment. There are two different drilling scenarios: 1. Four horizontal wells drilled in four orthogonal directions regardless of in-situ stress condition (“Actual”). 2. Three horizontal wells drilled equivalent to “Actual” case by considering the direction of principal stress (“Proposed”). The hydraulic fracturing modeling was carried out based on well logging data and completion reports of Brushy Canyon formation, Permian Basin. In the results of “Actual” case, transverse fractures were generated in two horizontal wells drilled parallel to σhmin-dir (direction of σhmin), similar to “Proposed” case. Meanwhile, for two other wells drilled perpendicular to σhmin-dir, longitudinal fractures were generated. These obliquely deviated fractures significantly decreased the fracture spacing between the stages up to 26%. This induced great stress shadow, however, the fractures propagated straight due to the large stress anisotropy of 2000 psi (σHmax/σhmin = 1.4). Therefore, it was found that due to the different direction of fracture propagation in “Actual” case, “Proposed” case was 14.6% of stimulated reservoir volume (SRV) higher. In conclusion, for successful hydraulic fracturing treatment, the direction of horizontal well must be determined in consideration of the principal stress direction as well as stress anisotropy.

Fatigue Design Criteria as Function of the Principal Stress Direction Relative to the Weld Toe

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inge Lotsberg
Keyword(s):  
Principal Stress ◽  
Hot Spot ◽  
Stress Conditions ◽  
Design Criteria ◽  
International Institute ◽  
Proportional Loading ◽  
Principal Stress Direction ◽  
Fatigue Design ◽  
Stress Direction ◽  
Weld Toe

For fatigue design it is necessary to provide guidelines on how to calculate fatigue damage at weld toes based on S-N data when the principal stress direction is different from that of the normal direction to the weld toe. Such stress conditions are found at details in different types of plated structures. Some different fatigue criteria for these stress conditions are presented in design standards on fatigue design. Criteria used by the International Institute of Welding (IIW), Eurocode, British Standard and in the DNV standards have been assessed against some relevant fatigue test data presented in the literature. Only proportional loading conditions have been considered here. (By proportional loading is understood that the principal stress direction is kept constant during a load cycle). An alternative equation for calculation of an equivalent or effective stress range based on stress normal to the weld toe and shear stress at the weld toe has been proposed. The proposed methodology can be used for nominal S-N curves and it can be used together with a hot spot stress S-N curve with stresses read out from finite element analysis. The different design criteria are presented in this paper together with recommendations on analysis procedure.

Powder strength after changes in principal stress direction

1994 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Dunstan ◽  
M. Jamebozorgi ◽  
S. Akbarian-Miandouab
Keyword(s):  
Principal Stress ◽  
Principal Stress Direction ◽  
Stress Direction

Comparison of Strain Rate Calculation Methods for Environmental Fatigue Correction Evaluation

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seiji Asada
Keyword(s):  
Strain Rate ◽  
Principal Stress ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Calculation Methods ◽  
Sample Problem ◽  
Nuclear Facility ◽  
Principal Stress Direction ◽  
Stress Direction ◽  
Rate Calculation ◽  
Fatigue Evaluation

A Code Case for procedure to determine strain rate and Fen for environmental fatigue evaluation is under preparation in the ASME BPV Committee on Construction of Nuclear Facility Components (III). The draft Code Case is to incorporate two methods for strain rate calculation. One is based on NB-3216.1 “Constant Principal Stress Direction” that comes from the JSME Environmental Fatigue Evaluation Method. The other is based on NB-3216.2 “Varying Principal Stress Direction” that was proposed by M. Gray et al. In this paper, both methods are explained and compared by using a sample problem.

ASME Sec VIII Div 3 Fatigue Life Predictions Using Critical Plane Approach

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kumarswamy Karpanan ◽  
William Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Shear Stress ◽  
Fatigue Life ◽  
Principal Stress ◽  
Stress Amplitude ◽  
Maximum Shear Stress ◽  
Fe Model ◽  
Critical Plane ◽  
Principal Stress Direction ◽  
Stress Direction ◽  
Surface Node

ASME VIII Div 3 fatigue evaluation is based on the theory that cracks tend to nucleate along the slip lines oriented in the maximum shear stress planes. This code provides methods to calculate the fatigue stresses when the principal stress direction does not change (proportional loading) and axes change (nonproportional loading). When principal stress direction does not change within a fatigue cycle, shear stress amplitude is calculated only on the three maximum shear stress planes. But when the principal stress directions do change within a loading cycle, the plane carrying the maximum shear stress amplitude (also known as critical plane) cannot be easily identified and all planes at a point needs to be searched for the maximum shear stress amplitude. This paper describes the development of an ANSYS-APDL macro to predict the critical plane at each surface node of an FE model using the FEA stress results. This macro searches through 325 planes (at 10° increments along two angles) at each surface node and for each load step to identify the maximum shear stress and the corresponding normal stress for each surface node. The fatigue life is calculated for each surface node and is plotted as a color contour on the FEA model. This macro can be extended to calculate the fatigue life using other critical plane approaches such as the Findley and Brown-Miller models.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document