Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 82–83 (2012) 120–124

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/petrol

Mechanical and physico-chemical aspects of wellbore stability during

drilling operations
Mohammad Ebrahim Zeynali
Iran Polymer and Petrochemical Institute, P.O. Box: 14965/115. Tehran, I. R. Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: One of the problems during drilling operation is wellbore instability. Many parameters affect the wellbore
Received 14 April 2009 stability. Some of these parameters are related to the properties of drilling mud and its interaction with
Accepted 7 January 2012 the formation and some of them are related to the mechanical properties of the formation and the magnitude
Available online 15 January 2012
and distribution of the forces around the wellbore. Generally the wellbore instability is calssified as mechan-
ical, physico-chemical or both. This paper is an attempt to investigate the mechanical and physico-chemical
Keywords:
wellbore stability
aspects of wellbore stability during drilling operations
drilling mud © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
2. Mechanics of borehole stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
3. 2-physico-chemical aspects of wellbore stability in shale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

1. Introduction
It is estimated that wellbore instabilities have resulted a loss of
about US$ 1 billion per year worldwide. Maintaining wellbore stabil-
ity is a key factor in improving safety and drilling efficiency while
minimizing problem costs associated with well construction and pro-
duction operations. Wellbore stability is the determination of the
conditions under which failure will initiate in the rock surrounding
the wellbore. The key in the analysis is that when a well is drilled
the rock surrounding the hole must take the load that was previously
taken by the removed rock. As a result an increase in stress around
the wall of the hole, a stress concentration is produced. If the rock is
not strong enough the borehole will fail. A common operational ap-
proach to wellbore stability problems is the drillers method of trial
and error based on field observations and experience. Considerable
effort has been directed towards solving rock mechanics problems as-
sociated with wellbore instabilities through providing predictive
methods (Zhou et al., June, 1996; Zhang et al., 2003), understanding
and quantifying shale mechanical behavior (Steiger and Leung,
1992), development of theoretical concepts (Bradley, 1979a, 1979b;
E-mail address: m.zeynali@ippi.ac.ir.
Zobak et al., 1986; and Vardoulakis et al., 1988; Moos et al., 2003)
and experience in field applications (Maury and Sauzay, 1987).
According to the field experience and theoretical interpretation the
causes of instability are often classified into either chemical or me-
chanical effects or combination of both. Special issue on borehole sta-
bility has been addressed in the literature (Aadnoy, 2003). Various
parameters influence the wellbore stability and depending on relative
importance should be considered in modeling and analysis. This
paper is an attempt to briefly review the mechanical and physico-
chemical aspects of wellbore stability and most important factors
influencing the wellbore stability during drilling operations.
2. Mechanics of borehole stability
Mechanical instabilities are caused directly by drilling operation.
Removal of the cylindrical material induces a stress concentration
around the wellbore which usually can be balanced by hydrostatic
pressure of drilling mud. The mechanics of borehole stability have
been analyzed mathematically using analytical and numerical
methods by numerous authors and many publications can be found
in the literature (McLean and Addis, 1990; Tan and Willoughby,
1993; Zhou et al., June, 1996; Wang and Dusseault, 2003; Coelho et
al., 2005; Zhang et al., 2006).

0920-4105/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.petrol.2012.01.006
 M.E. Zeynali / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 82–83 (2012) 120–124
When a borehole is drilled into the rock, the stresses are redistrib-
uted around the hole. If the stresses are high enough so as to exceed a
yield criterion, a yield zone can appear around the borehole. Linear
elastic stress analysis is frequently used as a method of computing
the stress state around a wellbore due to its simplicity of the analysis.
A support pressure or drilling fluid density that will prevent instabil-
ity can be calculated by assuming a linear elastic stress concentration
around the hole and maintaining these stresses below the rock
strength (Bradley, 1979a, 1979b; and Steiger and Leung, 1990). Al-
though this approach is convenient but is often conservative due to
non-linear and inelastic rock behaviors. The linear elastic model un-
derestimate fracture pressures measured on hollow concrete cores.
The uncertainty in the predicted critical mud weights associated
with the estimated in-situ stress magnitudes and material properties,
and the linear elastic analytical method can be reduced by calibrating
the predicted mud weights with reference mud weights based on
drilling experience (Tan and Willoughby, 1993). Elasto-plastic frac-
turing model for wellbore stability using non penetrating fluids has
been introduced (Aadnoy and Belayneh, 2004). Also poroelastic
models which consider pore pressure changes within the rock have
been used for wellbore stability analysis. Confining pressure depen-
dent models describing stress concentrations around circular open-
ings provide better predictions of yield than do linear elastic
solutions, when compared to model tests (Santarelli et al., 1986).
This model considers the strengthening of the rock due to confining
pressure. However, the main basis for this assumption is hollow
tests, which may be subject to scale effects relative to full scale well-
bores. Shale mechanics in conjunction with numerical analysis, such
as the finite element method, can lead to greatly improved wellbore
stability predictive capabilities (Mitchel and Goodman, 1987; Zhou
and Gassemi, 2009).
When determining the stability of the wellbore, the computed stres-
ses must be compared with a failure criterion. A main mechanical aspect
of wellbore stability analysis is the selection of an appropriate rock fail-
ure criterion. The most commonly used criterion for brittle failure of
rocks is the Mohr–Coulomb criterion. The criterion involves only the
maximum and minimum principal stresses and therefore assumes
that the intermediate stress has no influence on rock strength. Al-Ajmi
and Zimmerman (2006) developed the Mogi–Coulomb failure criterion
and showed that it is reasonably accurate in modeling polyaxial failure
data from a variety of rocks. It neither ignores the strengthening effect
of intermediate principal stress as is done by the Mohr–Coulomb crite-
rion, nor does it predict a strength as unrealistically high as does the
Drucker–Prager criterion. Coelho et al. (2005) presented a comparison
among Drucker–Prager, Mohr–Coulomb and cap model in wellbore sta-
bility analysis for a borehole drilled in 30% porosity limestone from a
deep water reservoir. Stability analysis of a horizontal wellbore drilled
in the same reservoir was done. Drucker–Prager shear model presented
shear failure during drilling, while Mohr–Coulomb shear model pre-
sented no failure.
A comprehensive list of the factors that may influence wellbore in-
stability is given by McLean (1988) and Chen et al. (1997). A wellbore
stability model that includes all factors will be very complex. The
complexity can be reduced when the model is developed in relation
to the location of the well under consideration.
Therefore consideration should be given to the relative importance
of the parameters involved. Some of the theoretically identified and
most important factors that affect mechanical wellbore stability are:
(1) in situ stresses existing in different layers of rock
(2) the mechanical properties of rock
(3) variation of pore pressure
(4) mud weight
(5) hole angle and direction
(6) thermal effects and
(7) anisotropy.
121
The various analytical tools which provide insight into wellbore
stability require knowledge of in-situ stresses and response of the
rocks to the stress changes imposed by drilling operation. In order
to predict whether the walls of a proposed well will be stable or
will spall, it is necessary to specify the far field in situ stresses that
will be experienced by the wellbore. For example controlling of
stress-induced wellbore instability and designing of the deviated
and horizontal wellbores require knowledge of the magnitude and
orientation of the in-situ stress field (Tan et al., 1993). Hydraulic frac-
turing is the widely accepted technique for the determination of in-
situ stress magnitude from a wellbore. The method essentially con-
sists of pressurizing an isolated section of a vertical wellbore until
the rock strength and the concentrated tectonic stresses overcome.
Bell (2003) outlined how to estimate stress orientations and magni-
tudes with average data suites and it alludes to mapping applications.
Zoback et al. (2003) reviewed a suite of techniques for determination of
in situ stress orientation and magnitude in deep wells and boreholes. As
these techniques can be utilized in both vertical and highly deviated
well, they have had extensive applications in petroleum industry where
knowledge of orientation and magnitude at depth is important for
addressing a wide range of problems. In situ stresses analysis based on
the identification of compressive and tensile failures of the borehole
wall in electrical and acoustic borehole imaging logs carried out by
Brudy and Kjorholt (2001) on Norwegian continental shelf. This method
for the determination of the stress orientation is found to be highly reli-
able and capable of delivering detailed and accurate results, and thus is
far superior to the analysis of breakouts from four-arm caliper logs. The
influence of the in situ stress regime on wellbore stability varies with
the relative magnitude between vertical stresses, maximum and mini-
mum horizontal stresses rather than their absolute magnitude. Unequal
horizontal principal stresses in near vertical boreholes commonly cause
localized spalling of the wall-rock in a direction parallel to that of the min-
imum compressive stress. Consideration of stress field around a
arbitrarily oriented borehole shows that in an extensional stress regime
(σv >σH >σh), wellbore parallel to the direction of minimum horizontal
principal stress are the least prone to compressive shear failure (break-
out). The most stable deviation angle (from the vertical) depends on
the ratio of the horizontal principal stresses to the vertical stresses, and
the higher the ratio σH/σv, the higher the deviation angle for minimizing
breakout. In a strike-slip stress regime (σH >σv >σh) horizontal wells are
the least prone to breakout, and the higher the ratio σH/σv, the closer the
drilling direction should be to the azimuth of σH.
The mechanical properties of rock influence the wellbore stability.
Generally, two methods: direct laboratory measurement, and indirect
well logging interpretation are used to determine rock mechanical
properties. The direct method is more accurate if was run by using prop-
er laboratory techniques, but it is expensive and time consuming. Fur-
thermore, it is difficult to obtain a complete formation strength profile
without running many tests. The indirect method predicts rock strength
by acoustic log data and log/strength correlations. One limitation of this
method is that it requires accurate experimental data to establish corre-
lations between strength and velocity (Al-Bazali et al., 2008a, 2008b).
The role of pore pressure in failure phenomena is evident in soil
mechanics. Unstable slopes along highways after heavy rains and cat-
astrophic land slides in open-pit mining operations serve to illustrate
the important role of pore pressure. In rocks, the same effects exists
but is less easily observed. A triaxial compression cylinder of rock
fails at decreasing stresses as the pore pressure is increased to the
confining pressure. Under the same dimensional and boundary condi-
tions, the tangential stress induced in the cylinder would assume its
highest values for a porous cylinder with a permeating fluid of con-
stant viscosity, and its lowest values for an impermeable cylinder;
the difference in stresses developed in permeable and impermeable
cylinders could be quite significant. For example, rock cylinders at el-
evated stress levels loaded uniaxially to a stress less than the yield
strength can be fractured by holding the constraints constant and
122 M.E. Zeynali / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 82–83 (2012) 120–124
increasing the pore fluid pressure. When the pore pressure and con-
fining pressures are equal, the pore pressure appears to be totally ef-
fective in reducing the confining pressure effects. Therefore the pore
pressure must be included in any discussion of the state of stress
within a rock.
Application of inappropriate mud weight is an obvious source of
any formation instability. Safe mud weight can be obtained for vari-
ous conditions by mechanical wellbore stability analysis.
The temperature gradient with depth may vary considerably from re-
gion to region. The drilling mud will warm up due to heating by the for-
mation. In general at the depths of interest to the petroleum industry the
drilling fluid will be cooler than the surrounding formation. A cooling of
the formation around the wellbore should reduce the compressive shear
failure (McLean, 1988).
Sedimentary formations, because of their depositional environ-
ments, have laminated structures with directional elastic as well as di-
rectional strength properties which are best described as transversely
isotropic media. At great depth, these formations are under a state of
compressive, anisotropic in-situ stress. With the introduction of the
borehole, the in-situ stress magnitude as well as the orientation is sig-
nificantly modified at the borehole wall. The influence of anisotropies
on the stability of the borehole only becomes critical when the inclina-
tions of the borehole are high, such as the case of extended-reach and
horizontal boreholes.
3. 2-physico-chemical aspects of wellbore stability in shale
The coupling between mechanical properties and physico-chemical
processes exists in shale formations. Drilling fluids consist of various
chemicals which physically and sometimes chemically interact with
the shale formations. These interactions influence the mechanical prop-
erties of shale. For example shale consists of clays with various chemical
composition and structures. For some purposes univalent and divalent
ions are used in drilling fluid formulations. The ions react with the
fixed ions of the clay in the shale and finally replacement between dril-
ling mud ions and clay ions occurs. Various ions have got various capac-
ity of hydration water. Hydration water changes the c-spacing of the
clay and cause swelling. Swelling affects strongly the mechanical prop-
erties of the shale. In determining the stability limit of shale the me-
chanical strength of shale is an important parameters in mathematical
modeling. When the mechanical properties of the shale are altered
due to the physico-chemical phenomena we observe different results
in comparison with pure mechanical interactions between drilling
mud and shale. Another evidence of coupling of mechanical and phy-
sico-chemical aspects of wellbore stability is time dependency of that
during drilling operations. It is well known that in practice in shale well-
bore instability occurs after some time of drilling. These partly are due
to time consuming chemical reactions and resulting swelling of the
shale. Hydration of shale by water is a physico-chemical phenomenon
which influences the mechanical properties of shale. In water based
drilling muds polyacrylamide is used as shale stabilizer and viscosifier.
The mechanism of preventing the shale instability is covering the sur-
faces of the clay by chemical reactions. The surface coverage of the
shale layers prevents hydration by water and therefore prevents the
mechanical failure of the shale due to hydrostatic and local mechanical
forces. This is another example of coupling of physico-chemical and me-
chanical phenomena in drilling operations. Pore pressure is another pa-
rameter which comes into consideration when modeling the wellbore
stability. Pore pressure changes by various mechanisms such as capil-
lary flow, viscous flow and osmosis flow. Osmosis flow driving force is
due to existing chemicals and ions with different composition in pores
and drilling mud. Development of pore pressure due to osmosis cause
fast failure of shale and significantly influences the mechanics of well-
bore. The above explanations are some evidences and examples of cou-
pling of physico-chemical and mechanical phenomena in drilling
operations.
Shale instability is a costly problem for the oil and gas industry.
Over-gauged boreholes induced by borehole collapse failure, the
loss of drilling fluid into the formation due to borehole breakdown
failure, and consequent hole cleaning and well control problems are
typical occurrences when shale experience failure (Yu et al., 2001).
Wells in troublesome shale have been traditionally drilled with oil
based mud. However, this technique is under critical scrutiny due to
its negative environmental impact and is banned in some regions of
the world. To overcome the problem, a number of non-oil-based
mud approaches have been attempted. For example, Obrien and
Chenevert (1973); Clerk (1976) developed various polymer/KCL
water based mud to improve wellbore stability in shale. Walker et
al. (1983) reported the improvement of wellbore stability in shale
by using potassium modified lime mud. However, all these studies
are based on experimental investigation only and there is no in-
depth understanding of the mechanisms of wellbore instability in
shale. The interactions between drilling fluid and shale cause pore
pressure and mechanical properties alterations around the wellbore,
thereby leading to formation collapse (Al-Bazali et al., 2008a,
2008b). As mentioned, during the drilling operation shale fails if the
effective state of stress exceeds the strength of the material. Changes
in pore pressure have a strong influence on wellbore stability when
drilling shale. As shale have very low permeability (Zeynali and
Rahman, 1995), the flux of ions and water is very slow. This means
that significant pore pressure variations occur near the wellbore
wall. Large, chemically induced pore pressure gradient can be build
up in this small region (Yu et al., 2003). In shale formations, drilling
fluids may affect the stability of the well by changing the effective
stress state and the material strength (Oort et al., 1994; Tan and
Rahman, 1994; and Tan et al., 1995). Changing effective stress and
shale strength is a result of physico-chemical interactions between
drilling mud and shale which introduces a more complex form of in-
stability. To examine the physico-chemical interactions and mechan-
ical behavior of the shale simulated systems can be used. Using
simulated systems the behavior of shale under a variety of processes
in and around the wellbores where chemistry of the mud/shale inter-
actions are different can be studied.
The simulations show that as long as the material behaves elasti-
cally the purely mechanical behavior of the borehole wall is not se-
verely influenced by the weakening (ageing) of the material. As
soon as the material starts to deform plastically, much larger differ-
ences in behavior are observed. Plastic strains increase rapidly and
tangential stress at the borehole wall decreased significantly. These
simulations support the assumption that mechanical behavior alone
can not explain all the borehole instability problems encountered,
and that other effects such as physico-chemical reactions and time
dependent effects must taken into account. Effects of different factors
on time dependent wellbore stability and ballooning induced by well-
bore deformation and fracture charging were investigated (Helstrup
et al., 2004). Rock matrix permeability and the presence of mud
cake have significant effects on wellbore instability and ballooning.
Increase in matrix permeability and filtration time reduces both stress
intensity and ballooning volume while the presence of mud cake pro-
vides a barrier for mud pressure to penetrate into the formation,
resulting in higher stress concentration at the fracture tip and larger
ballooning volume.
Mud pressure penetration changes the intergranular stress be-
tween solids of soils and rocks and is defined as the difference be-
tween total stress and the pore pressure that is called effective
stress. According to this concept, all the measurable effects of a
change in stress, such as compression and shearing resistance, are
controlled by changes in effective stresses. In the past several types
of shale were mechanically tested and characterized (Steiger and
Leung, 1992). The tests demonstrate directly that the strengths of
low permeability shale follow the effective stress principle. Funda-
mentally, besides inadequate mud weight, borehole instability is
 M.E. Zeynali / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 82–83 (2012) 120–124
caused by the influx of water (fluid) into the formation, which aggra-
vates instability by increasing the near-wellbore pore pressure and by
decreasing shale strength (Mody and Hale, 1993). For instance, the
ageing of the shale samples resulted in a distinct change in mechani-
cal parameters. Stiffness was reduced by 26–57%, and the peak
strength reduced by 5–47%. Hence, shale is severely influenced by
physico-chemical reactions. Pore pressure change is a result of the
unsteady state fluid flow through porous media. In geological systems
there can be various mechanisms for water transport such as thermal,
hydraulic, electrical and osmotic flow resulting from chemical poten-
tial difference (Zeynali, 1996).
The magnitude and direction of hydraulic flow in the pores of the
formation is a function of the pressure difference between the mud
pressure and the formation pressure. At the moment of penetration
the pressure difference is applied at the wall of the borehole, but
with time a pressure gradient is established in the pores of the forma-
tion. It has been shown that the hydraulic pressure gradient thus cre-
ated can influence hole stability (Pasley and Cheatham, 1963; and
Darley, 1969). The effect of hydraulic gradient is to increase the
hoop stress gradient, and hence to destabilized the hole. Experimen-
tal investigation of invasion, mud/shale interaction and hole instabil-
ity is often carried out using model wellbores under appropriate
stress and flow conditions (Ewy and Cook, 1990; Bailey et al., 1991)
with observations of the wellbore wall or examination of the interior
of the rock. However, experimental pore pressure–time data can not
be obtained using model wellbores. In literature, not many authors
have samples of shale formation and exposed them to different mud
filtrates to study the pore pressure gradient in the sample and change
the shale strength.
Depending on the conditions and geo-physico-chemical proper-
ties of shale the difference between chemical potential of drilling
mud and pore fluid can be involved in conducting the fluid into or
out of the formation to change the pore pressure. Previous laboratory
studies have shown that geologic materials can act as osmotic mem-
branes. Olsen (1969) studied a kaolinite shale sample and concluded
that Darcy's law is not sufficient to describe the magnitude or direc-
tion of liquid movement in confined clay reach beds. Oort et al.
(1994) and Mody and Hale (1993) reported osmotic flow when
they separated salt solution and water with a shale membrane. As a
result of membrane properties of shale permeability due to chemical
potential difference can be significant compared to hydraulic perme-
ability in compacted shale. Therefore understanding of the mecha-
nisms of osmotic flow is important to develop and design drilling
mud composition that inhibit shale hydration and maintain shale
strength. Osmosis may be important in oil fields where clays and
shale commonly separate waters of different salinity. In these situa-
tions, osmosis may cause anomalously high fluid pressure (Marine
and Fritz, 1981).
A membrane is described in simple terms as a phase usually
heterogeneous, acting as a barrier to the flow of molecular and
ionic species present in the liquids contacting two surfaces. In an
ideal membrane the fluid flux consists only of water, whereas in
non-ideal membranes (leaky membrane) the fluid flux includes
some solute components (coupled transport). Obviously porous
media can behave as osmotic membrane if they have salt-rejecting
capability. The rejection factor or ideality coefficient not only
depends on pore size distribution (mechanical rejection), but is
also a function of the concentration of fixed charges (retardation
effects) in the clay structure. Quantifying osmotic effects using
shale properties and mud composition is a requirement to predict
the interaction between water-based drilling mud and shale proper-
ly and to define the final equilibrium condition of the shale. And any
mathematical model to describe osmotic pressure in shale should
provide a means of computing the ideality coefficient (reflection
coefficient) of the membrane in terms of the measurable properties
of mud and shale.
123
The ideality coefficient of shale as a non-ideal semi-membrane have
not been adequately addressed in the past to predict the osmotic pres-
sure using mud activity and shale petrophysical properties such as CEC,
porosity, diffusivity and permeability. Knowledge about these parame-
ters will certainly enhance wellbore stability modeling capabilities.
Finally, wellbore stability analysis should be conducted by an ex-
perienced multi-disciplinary team of geomechanics engineers, dril-
ling engineers, geologists, geophysicists, and petrophysicists. Future
objective in research on wellbore stability should be identifying
which currently used methodologies are most effective predicting ac-
tual wellbore stability conditions and to establish and document
guidelines for their use.
References
Aadnoy, B.S., 2003. Introduction to special issue on borehole stability. J. Petrol.Sci. Eng.
38, 79–82.
Aadnoy, B., Belayneh, M., 2004. Elasto-plastic fracturing model for wellbore stability
using non penetrating fluids. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 45, 179–192.
Al-Ajmi, A.M., Zimmerman, A.W., 2006. Stability analysis of vertical boreholes using
Mogi–Coulomb failure criterion. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min Sci. 43, 1200–1211.
Al-Bazali, T., Zhang, J., Chenevert, M.E., Sharma, M.M., 2008a. Experimental and numer-
ical study on the impact of strain rate on failure characteristics of shales. J. Petrol.
Sci. Eng. 60, 194–204.
Al-Bazali, T., Zhang, J., Chenevert, M.E., Sharma, M.M., 2008b. Factors controlling the
compressive strength and acoustic properties of shales when interacting with
water-based fluids. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 45, 729–738.
Bailey, L., Denis, J.H., Maitland, G.C., 1991. Drilling fluids and wellbore stability current
performance and future challenges. In: Ogden, P.H. (Ed.), Chemicals in the oil in-
dustry. Royale Society of Chemistry, London.
Bell, J.S., 2003. Practical methods for estimating in situ stresses for borehole stability
applications in sedimentary basins. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 38, 111–118.
Bradley, W.B., 1979a. Failure of inclined borehole. Energy Resour. Tech. Trans. ASME
101, 232–239.
Bradley, W.B., 1979b. Mathematical concept-stress cloud can predict borehole failure.
Oil&Gas J. 77 (8), 92–102.
Brudy, M., Kjorholt, H., 2001. Stress orientation on the Norwegian continental shelf de-
rived from borehole failures observed in high-resolution borehole imaging logs.
Tectonophysics 337, 65–84.
Chen, X., Tan, C.P., Haberfield, C.M., 1997. Guidelines for efficient wellbore stability
analysis. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci 34, 418.
Clerk, R.K., 1976. Polyacrylamide/KCL mud for drilling water sensitive shales. JPT.
Trans. AIME 261, 719–727.
Coelho, L.C., Soares, A.C., Ebecken, N.F.F., Alves, J.L.D., Landau, L., 2005. The impact of
constitutive modeling of porous rocks on 2-D wellbore stability analysis. J. Petrol.
Sci. Eng. 46, 81–100.
Darley, H.C.H., 1969. A laboratory investigation of borehole stability. J. Petrol. Technol.
Trans AIME 246, 821–826.
Ewy, R.T., Cook, N.G.W., 1990. Deformation and fracture around cylindrical openings in
rock-I. Observations and analysis of deformation. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 27,
387–407.
Helstrup, O.A., Chen, Z., Rahman, S.S., 2004. Time dependent wellbore instability and
ballooning in naturally fractured formations. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 43, 113–128.
Marine, I.W., Fritz, S.J., 1981. Osmotic model to explain anomalous hydraulic heads.
Water Resour Res. 17, 73–82.
Maury, V.M., Sauzay, J.M., 1987. Borehole instability: case histories, rock mechanics ap-
proach, and results. Drilling Conf., New Orleans, LA, pp. 11–24. SPE/IADC 16051.
McLean, M. R., 1988. Analysis of wellbore stability. PhD Thesis, University of London.
McLean, M.R., Addis, M.A., 1990. Wellbore Stability: The Effect of Strength Criteria on
Mud Weight Recommendations. SPE Annual Tech. Conf. and Exhib., New Orleans,
LA, pp. 9–17. SPE 20405.
Mitchel, R.F., Goodman, M.A., 1987. Borehole stresses: plasticity and the drilled hole ef-
fect. Drilling conference held in New Orleans, LA, pp. 43–49. SPE/IADC 16053.
Mody, F.K., Hale, A.H., 1993. A borehole stability model to couple the mechanics and
chemistry of drilling fluid shale interaction. IADC/SPE drilling Conf., Amesterdam,
pp. 473–490. IADC/SPE 25728.
Moos, D., Peska, P., Finkbeiner, T., Zoback, M., 2003. Comprehensive wellbore stability
analysis utilizing quantitative risk assessment. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 38, 97–109.
Obrien, D.E., Chenevert, M.E., 1973. Stabilizing sensitive shales with inhibited,
potassium-based drilling fluids. JPT. Trans. AIME 255, 1089–1100.
Olsen, H.W., 1969. Simultaneous fluxes of liquid and charge in saturated kaolinite. Soil
Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 33, 338–344.
Oort, V.E., Hale, A.H., Mody, F.K., 1994. Critical parameters in modeling the chemical as-
pects of borehole stability in shales and in designing improved water-based shale
drilling fluids. IADC/SPE Conf., New Orleans. IADC/SPE 28309.
Pasley, P.R., Cheatham, J.B., 1963. Rock stresses induced by flow of fluids into boreholes.
Soc. Petrol. Eng. J. Trans AIME 228, 85–94.
Santarelli, F.J., Brown, E.T., Maury, V., 1986. Analysis of borehole stresses using pressure-
dependent, linear elasticity. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr. 23, 445–449.
Steiger, R.P., Leung, P.K., 1990. Prediction of wellbore stability in shale formations at great
depth. Proc. ISRM-SPE semp. Rock at Great Depth. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 1209–1218.
124 M.E. Zeynali / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 82–83 (2012) 120–124
Steiger, R.P., Leung, P.K., 1992. Quantitative determination of the mechanical properties
of shales. SPE drill. Eng. J. 7 (3), 181–185.
Tan, C.P., Rahman, S.S., 1994. The mechanism of mud support reduction due to mud
pressure penetration. Euro. Rock Conf. Proc., Hague.
Tan, C.P., Willoughby, D.R., 1993. Critical mud weight and risk contour plots for designing
inclined wells. SPE Annual Tech. Conf. and Exhi. Houston, Tx, pp. 101–115. SPE 26325.
Tan, C.P., Willoughby, D.R., Zhou, S., Hillis, R.R., 1993. Analytical methods for determining
horizontal stress bounds from wellbore data. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech.
Abstr. 30, 1103–1109.
Tan, C.P., Zeynali, E.M., Rahman, S.S., 1995. The effects of drilling fluid-shale interac-
tions on wellbore stability. APEA J. 678–691.
Vardoulakis, I., Sulem, J., Guenot, A., 1988. Stability analysis of deep boreholes. Int. J.
Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr. 25, 159–170.
Walker, T.O., Dearing, H.L., Simpson, J.P., 1983. Potassium modified lime muds improve
shale stability. World Oil 197 (6), 93–100.
Wang, Y., Dusseault, M.B., 2003. A coupled conductive-convective thermo-poroelastic
solutions and implications for wellbore stability. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 38, 187–198.
Yu, M., Chen, G., Chenevert, M.E., Sharma, M.M., 2001. Chemical and thermal effects on
wellbore stability of shale formations, SPE 71366, New Orleans.
Yu, M., Chenevert, M.E., Sharma, M.M., 2003. Chemical–mechanical wellbore instability
model for shales: accounting for solute diffusion. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 37, 131–143.
Zeynali, M. E. 1996, Management of wellbore stability by controlling physical and
chemical properties of drilling muds. PhD thesis, UNSW, Australia.
Zeynali, M.E., Rahman, S.S., 1995. Measurement of permeability of tight rocks. Meas.
Sci. Technol 6, 1519–1527.
Zhang, J., Bai, M., Roegiers, J.C., 2003. Dual-porosity poroelastic analyses of wellbore
stability. Int. J. Rock Mech Min.Sci. 40, 473–483.
Zhang, J., Bai, M., Roegiers, J.C., 2006. On drilling directions for optimizing horizontal
well stability using dual-porosity poroelastic approach. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 53,
61–76.
Zhou, X., Gassemi, A., 2009. Finite element analysis of coupled chemo-poro-thermo-
mechanical effects around a wellbore in swelling shale. Int.J. Rock Mech. Min.Sci.
46, 769–778.
Zhou, S., Hillis, R.R., Sandifod, M., June 1996. On the mechanical stability of inclined
wellbores. SPE drilling & completion.
Zoback, M.D., Barton, C.A., Brudy, M., Castillo, D.A., Finkbeiner, T., Grollimund, B.R.,
Moos, D.B., Peska, P., Ward, C.D., Wiprut, D.J., 2003. Determination of stress magni-
tude and orientation in deep wells. Int. J Rock Mech Min. Sci 40, 1049–1076.
Zobak, M.D., Moos, M., Mastin, L., 1986. Wellbore breakouts and in-situ stress. J. Geo-
phys. Res. 90, 5523–5530.