Effect of fracture-induced stress on casing integrity during fracturing in horizontal wells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a necessary technical method for shale gas development, hydraulic fracturing technology may cause casing failure while realizing actual reservoir reformation. The fracture-induced inhomogeneous stress generated while the hydraulic fracture is one of the main reasons for the non-uniform compression and failure of the casing. The fracture-induced stress field is mainly related to the fracture net pressure and is unrelated to the initial in-situ stress. The non-uniform load difference near the fracture is more significant, and the mechanical environment of the casing deteriorates. In this study, we combined the fracture-induced stress calculation model and the casing-cement-formation system stress distribution model to analyze the mechanical properties of the system during hydrofracturing. We used the model to calculate the casing stress distribution under fracture-induced stress and analyzed various influencing factors that affect the maximum equivalent stress (MES) on the casing. The studies show that the closer to the fracture, the greater the induced stress and MES in the casing, and the risk of casing collapse increases. The wall thickness of the casing has an influence on the MES. The larger the wall thickness, the smaller the MES. The MES of the casing reaches the maximum value when the elastic modulus of the cement stone is close to that of the stratum. Softer formation increases the potential that the fracture-induced stress transfers to the casing. The potential is responsible for the greater stress of the casing. By increasing hydraulic fracturing stages, reducing hydraulic fracturing wellhead pressure, increasing casing wall thickness and reducing the elastic modulus of cement stone can reduce the casing stress and alleviate casing damage.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".