Influence of Confining Pressure on

Crushing Effect of the Wellbore under

Explosive Fracturing

Xu Peng, Shi Li-bao, Liu Xin-yun

PetroChina Research Institute of petroleum Exploration & Development, Beijing
100083, China

ABSTRACT
Explosive fracturing which uses the energy of explosives to improve the physical properties of
low permeability reservoir and the oil and gas recovery is an oil and gas production technology.
Explosive fracturing is easier to smash the well bore and compact the formation dense. In order
to solve this problem, the laboratory does explosive fracturing simulation test in-house. The
results show that: if the confining pressure to bear on the cement sample, the results which
explode under confining pressure is different from the one that explode under normal pressures.
The blast hole of the cement sample goes to bigger and the surrounding of blast hole becomes
smash that explode under the normal pressures; if the explosion happens under a confining
pressure, the smash regional would disappear and the number of macro-crack would increase,
the length of the macro-crack also longer than those explode under normal pressures. The effect
of making cracks which explode under a confining pressure is much better than that explode
under normal pressures. Based on those results, this paper thinks about the influence of
confining pressure on crushing effect and makes research about the stress that bears on the rock
of underground. Then, it induces the condition under which it can keep the stability of the well
bore and make cracks at the same time. It also does verification about the boundary condition
through in-house tests.
KEYWORDS: low permeability reservoir, rock mechanics, explosive fracturing, in-
house test, confining pressure

INTRODUCTION
In short, explosive fracturing is a technical method used in the development of oilfields which
uses the lots of energy due to explosive to fracture formation and improve oil recovery rate of the
low permeability reservoir[1-4]. This technology used explosive energy to recover petroleum can be
traced back to the 1860's, explosive in the wellbore not only produced cracks, but also decreased
the skin factor of the reservoir formation and connected natural cracks with wellbore. During

- 2327 -
 Vol. 17 [2012], Bund. P 2328

1860’s and 1950’s, explosive technology was widely used and increased oil and gas production.
But, the explosive technology which usually caused damage of the wellbore was imperfect at that
time. As the development of explosive technology and appearance of the new type of explosives, it
is possible to inhibit the plastic deformation of the wellbore and increase efficiency of the explosive
energy. But, how to restrain the wellbore’s comminuted destruction caused by explosive has not
been resolved. In order to solve this problem, in this paper, it carried out explosive fracturing tests
in house and found that confining pressure could inhibit the comminuted destruction of the
wellbore, based on which, it analyzed the stress state of the wellbore under the explosive
condition[5-8], and deduced calculation formula about the amount of explosive under which it could
prevent the wellbore’s comminuted destruction but produce cracks in the reservoir formation. At
last, it verified the accuracy of the formula through the indoor explosion fracturing tests.

LABORATORY EXPLOSIVE FRACTURING TEST

These tests have mainly considered effects of confining pressure to explosive fracturing. Before
the test starts, a sample is put into the pressure chamber, and hydraulic oil is injected in the pressure
chamber, which brings pressure on the sample. Then, it detonates the explosive charge that
assembles into the core hole of the sample. At last, it relieves the pressure of the chamber and
observes test results.

Explosive fracturing test equipment

The explosive fracturing test equipment is mainly made up of by the high-pressure vessel which
can hold large-size cement sample and provide explosive fracturing environment, hydraulic control
system which can apply axis pressure and confining pressure to the cement sample and simulate the
stress state of the rock around the borehole, ignition control system which can be used to detonate
the explosives inside the sample, and the data acquisition systems that can be used to collect and
save the test data. The main part of the test equipment is a cylinder-shaped device which is
composed of the base unit, pressure chamber, the top cap of the pressure chamber, piston and other
components. All the parts of the cylinder-shaped device are connected and fastened by slips which
effectively improve its anti-high-pressure properties.

Samples and explosive charge

In order to ensure the repeatability of the samples, the specimen is manufactured by ordinary
Portland cement. The size of cement sample is Ф80cm×80cm. In the middle of the sample, there is
a hole where the explosives are to be placed and the size of which is Ф3cm×40cm. Detonating cord
that produced by cyclonite is used with a certain length every time in the simulation tests. The
density of detonating cord is 12~14g/m and its detonation velocity is not less than 6500 m/s. In
 Vol. 17 [2012], Bund. P 2329

order to make the simulation test close to the true explosive fracturing process, the detonator and
detonating cord were banded together and were placed in the hole in the middle of the sample.
When all is ready, the test can be started.

Designing of the test scheme

Tests that kept the same amount of explosive each time were carried out under different
confining pressures. The test designs were arranged as follows: sample of group 1 which numbered
C1 was tested under the normal pressure; sample of group 2 which numbered C2 was tested under
the pressure of 20MPa.

Test procedure
(1) assemble test equipment;
(2) plant explosive (8.2g)in the core hole of cement sample;
(3) bring pressure to bear on the sample that located in the pressure chamber;
(4) detonate the explosive charge;
(5) release the pressure of the pressure chamber;
(6) open the upper cover of the pressure chamber and put the sample out of the pressure
chamber;
(7) observe and record the test results.
 Vol. 17 [2012], Bund. P 2330

TEST RESULTS
(1) Test results of C1 (Fig. 1): there were four macro-cracks in the surface of cement sample,
which run throughout the surface of the C1, and they were distributed regularly and symmetrically.
There were still a few short cracks between the macro-cracks, which differ in size.

Figure 1: Test results of C1

(2) Test results of C2: affected by the confining pressure of 20MPa, cracks produced by
explosive fracturing are shorter (about 5～10cm) and centered around the hole (Fig. 2). Also the
macro-cracks formed by explosive fracturing appear deviously, irregularly and the cracks are
concentrated and different in size. Moreover, the existence of bifurcation is universal.

Figure 2: Cracks distributed around the hole of C2

 Vol. 17 [2012], Bund. P 2331

Results of the explosive fracturing test show that confining pressure bear to the sample restrain
the appearance of the crushing zone which would appear near the core hole of the sample. So, it
will be more suitable to determine the amount of explosive considering with the confining pressure
of the reservoir formation.

STRESS ANALYSIS OF THE BOREHOLE FORMATION

UNDER EXPLOSIVE FRACTURING
Stress analysis of the borehole can be simplified to the infinite plane with a circular hole which
bears hydrostatic pressure caused by mud p , shock pressure p , overburden stress σ v , horizontal
h f
stress σ H and σ h . Under the combine action of those forces, the stress state of the formation
surrounding the wellbore with the distance of r can be expressed as follows:

+ R − R R R
= 1− + 1− 1−3 cos 2 + (
2 2 (1)
+ )

+ R − R R
= 1+ − (1 + 3 ) cos 2 − ( + ) (2)
2 2

R
= − 2μ [( − ) cos 2 − − ] (3)

− R R
= =− 1− (1 + 3 ) sin 2 (4)
2

In above equations, σ r is the radial stress, MPa; σ θ is the hoop stress, MPa; θ is angle between

the maximum horizontal stress and the line which is the connection of the center hole and any point

of the wellbore; σ z is the axial stress, MPa; τ rθ is the shear stress, MPa; R is the radius of

wellbore, m; r is the distance from the position that is analyzed surrounding the wellbore to the

center of the hole, m; u s is the Poisson ratio of the formation.

The shock pressure on bore hole by decoupling charging can be expressed as follow:

1 −2γ
= en (5)
2

1 2
= 0
(6)
1+γ
 Vol. 17 [2012], Bund. P 2332

In above equations, p 0 is the detonation pressure, MPa; ρ 0 is the density of explosive charge,

kg/m3; D is the detonation velocity, m/s; γ is the adiabatic expansion coefficient of the detonation

products; K is the radial decouple coefficient of the explosive charge; l e is the axial decouple

coefficient of the explosive charge; n is the explosive pressure expansive coefficient.

Under the condition of explosive fracturing, wellbore formations bear tensile stress and press
stress, so the equivalent state of stress can be expressed as follows:

1
= [( − ) +( − ) +( − ) ] (7)
√2

Supposing that σ t, d is the dynamic compression strength and σ l, d is the dynamic tensile

strength:

, =A (8)

, =A (9)

In above equations, σ t is the compression strength, MPa; σ l is the tensile strength, MPa; A is

conversion factor from static to dynamic. When the wellbore was not damaged by compress effect
but fractured by tensile effect, the equivalent stress state of the formation should be satisfied as
follow:

, < < , (10)

According to above analysis, explosive fracturing experiment was carried out again to certify
the correctness of those formulas derived above. Some basic data needed for formulas certifying are
those: the initial internal pressure is standard atmospheric pressure, confining pressure is 20MPa,
the diameter of the central hole is 3cm, compression strength is 32MPa, tensile strength is 2.8MPa,
detonation velocity is 6500m/s, the density of explosive is 1.1g/cm3. Based on the calculation, the
range of reasonable amount of explosive charge is from 4.2g to 15.6g. Compared with the 8.6g
practical amount of explosive charge that experiment test used, above analysis and formulas are
accurate and dependable.

CONCLUSIONS
Compared with the explosive fracturing test results which test was carried out with standard
atmospheric pressure, those results with 20MPa confining pressure are obvious different, such as
the length of the cracks and the number of the cracks produce by explosive. The test results also
 Vol. 17 [2012], Bund. P 2333

show that confining pressure restrains the emergency of the wellbore’s comminuted destruction. So
it advises that calculation of the amount of explosive charge should consider the effect of the
confining pressure in order to get a much more striking explosive fracturing effect.

REFERENCES
1. Ding Yan-sheng, CHeng Li, Xie Xie, et a1. On the stimulation of “exploding in fractures”
in low permeability reservoir[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2001, 28(2):90-
96 (in Chinese).

2. Lin Ying-song, Jiang Jin-bao, Sun Feng-cheng, et al. Exploding technology and low
permeability reservoir improvement[J]. Drilling & Production Technology, 2007, 30(5):48-
52 (in Chinese).

3. Lin Ying-song, Jiang Jin-bao, Zhu Tian-yu, et al. Research of cement sample’s damage and
fracture by exploding load[J]. Journal of Chins University of Petroleum, 2006,30(3):55-58
(in Chinese).

4. Lin Ying-song, Wang Li, Ding Yan-sheng, et al. Experimental study of damage and
fracture zone in cement sample subjected to exploding wave[J]. Explosion and Shock
Waves, 2008,28(2):186-192 (in Chinese).

5. Xu Ying, Meng Yi-ping, Cheng Yu-sheng. Study on control of blast crack by decoupling
charge index[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2002,21(12):1843-
1847 (in Chinese).

6. Zong Qi, Luo Qiang. Experimental study on distribution character of blasting stress when
boreholes with water-couple charge[J]. Journal of Experimental Mechanics, 2006,
21(3):393-397(in Chinese).

7. Zong Qi, Li Yong-chi, Xu Ying. Preliminary discussion on shock pressure on hole wall
when water-couple charge blasting in the hole[J]. Journal of Hydrodynamics,
2004,19(5):610-615(in Chinese).

8. Liu Jie, Song Hui-zhen, Wang Yu-jie, et a1. Numerical simulation of stress around bore
hole[J]. Journal of Geo-mechanics, 1999,1(5):38-44(in Chinese).

© 2012 ejge