Simulation of drilling‐induced compaction bands using discrete element method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Rock failure is observed around boreholes often with certain types of failure zones, which are called breakouts. Laboratory‐scale drilling tests in some high‐porosity quartz‐rich sandstone have shown breakouts in the form of narrow localized compacted zones in the minimum horizontal stress direction. They are called fracture‐like breakouts. Such compaction bands may affect hydrocarbon extraction by forming barriers that inhibit fluid flow and may also be a source of sand production. This paper presents the results of numerical simulations of borehole breakouts using 3D discrete element method to investigate the mechanism of the fracture‐like breakouts and to identify the role of far‐field stresses on the breakout dimensions. The numerical tool was first verified against analytical solutions. It was then utilized to investigate the failure mechanism and breakout geometry for drilled cubic rock samples of Castlegate sandstone subjected to different pre‐existing far‐field stresses. Results show that failure occurs in the zones of the highest concentration of tangential stress around the borehole. It is concluded that fracture‐like breakout develops as a result of a nondilatant failure mechanism consisting of localized grain debonding and repacking and grain crushing that lead to the formation of a compaction band in the minimum horizontal stress direction. In addition, it is found that the length of fracture‐like breakouts depends on both the mean stress and stress anisotropy. However, the width of the breakout is not significantly changed by the far‐field stresses. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".