2000
DOI: 10.1007/s100640000055
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Strength anisotropies in mudrocks

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
14
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 75 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
1
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The output of the model is the moisture content, which is an important parameter to update the UCS (uniaxial compressive strength) of the rock. It is shown that increase in the moisture content of shale has a negative effect on its compressive strength, as noted by various investigators [21,[43][44][45][46]. The presented correlations share a common theme in which uniaxial compressive strength reduces exponentially as the moisture content increases (Table 2).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 53%
“…The output of the model is the moisture content, which is an important parameter to update the UCS (uniaxial compressive strength) of the rock. It is shown that increase in the moisture content of shale has a negative effect on its compressive strength, as noted by various investigators [21,[43][44][45][46]. The presented correlations share a common theme in which uniaxial compressive strength reduces exponentially as the moisture content increases (Table 2).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 53%
“…Niandou et al, 1997;Val es et al, 2004), others do show slight to significant strengthening parallel to bedding (e.g. Fjaer and Nes, 2014;Ajalloeian and Lashkaripour, 2000). All results given in this paper are for compaction and deformation normal to bedding and should not be extended to other stress orientations with respect to fabric anisotropies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…However, static rock strength decreases from orientations normal to bedding through to 30e45 to bedding, then increases again as the maximum principal stress becomes parallel to bedding, sometimes exceeding the bedding normal strength, sometimes equalling it (e.g. Fjaer and Nes, 2014;Niandou et al, 1997;Ajalloeian and Lashkaripour, 2000). Hence, trying to estimate shale strength from velocity in a deviated well would be significantly flawed (Sayers et al, 2009).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Although this assumption is considered satisfactory for modeling stability of isotropic rocks, it is not valid while drilling through high angle wells (sub-parallel to bedding) through laminated (anisotropic) shale because the bedding layers serve as weak planes that result in strength anisotropy [39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49] . Chenevert (1965) studied the mechanical anisotropies of laminated sedimentary rocks experimentally 39 and determined that the formation compressive strength can vary significantly as the angle between the direction of the axial load and bedding planes vary.…”
Section: Wellbore Stability Modelingmentioning
confidence: 99%