Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 20 (2014) 285e291

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering

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

Mechanical analysis and design of casing in directional well under

in-situ stresses
Fei Yin*, Deli Gao
MOE Key Laboratory of Petroleum Engineering, China University of Petroleum, Beijing, China

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

Article history: Casing deformation and collapse hamper the regular drilling, production and downhole operation. The
Received 8 June 2014 casing in directional well under the action of inelastic surrounding rock displays a complex mechanical
Received in revised form state. Taking the in-situ stresses and well trajectory into account, the mechanical model of casing in
12 July 2014
directional well under in-situ stresses is established. By coordinate rotation, the three principal in-situ
Accepted 13 July 2014
stresses are converted to a stress tensor in the wellbore coordinate. The mechanical interaction of cas-
Available online 1 August 2014
ing and surrounding rock is simplified to a generalized plane strain problem. Based on the theory of
pressurized hole in plate, the stress of the infinite surrounding rock is calculated. To analyze the casing
Keywords:
Well integrity
behavior, the complicated solution is divided into three simpler problems: the elastic mechanics analyses
Mechanical analysis under mean stress, deviator stress and shear stress respectively. The analytical expressions of casing
Casing design stress and load in directional well under in-situ stresses and inside hydrostatic pressure are deduced.
Directional well This analytical solution is verified by numerical simulation. Furthermore, casing design for the directional
In-situ stress well through complex formation in an oilfield has been conducted. The results can remedy the current
Surrounding rock standards of casing design and guide the well integrity design in directional well under in-situ stresses.
© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction According to the elastic theory, the mechanical behavior of

With the development of petroleum exploration and drilling
technology, more directional wells have been drilled in complex
geological environment. Although the casing design standards,
such as API, GOCT and SY/T, have been amended for many times
(API, 1994; NDRC, 2008), there are still a lot of casings designed
obeying the standards failure. The current standards only consider
hydrostatic pressure and gravity of overburden formation in the
anhydrite and salt interval simply. It has been proved that casings
bear not only the above loads but also the formation forces
(Huaiwen and Xueshi, 1991). In the inelastic formations, such as salt
rock and shale rock, casings will gradually bear the mechanical
action of surrounding rock (Willson et al., 2002; Poiate et al., 2006).
After a long time, the mechanical action will tend to a steady
pressure, which is named in-situ stresses' load (Li and Yin, 2006).
The processes of casing collapse are different when the external
load is applied by solid formation or fluid (Morita et al., 2005). So, it
is significant to analyze and design the casings in directional wells
under in-situ stresses.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: yinfei999@163.com (F. Yin).
casings in vertical wells under the in-situ stresses can be analyzed
by simplifying to a plane strain problem (EI-Sayed and Khalaf,
1992; Yin and Gao, 2012; Li et al., 2012). The finite element
analysis (FEA) is also used to simulate the stresses of casing,
cement, and formation (Chatterjee and Mukhopadhyay, 2003;
Nabipour et al., 2010). The difference between the theoretical
calculation and the FEA solution for von Mises stress is tiny
(Rodriguez et al., 2003). In view of application, casing deformation
caused by tectonic forces in Andean Foothills has been evaluated
and managed (Last et al., 2006). But, the research on the me-
chanical behavior of casings in directional wells under the in-situ
stresses is rare. A plane model for the stress field around an in-
clined, cased and cemented wellbore was developed by Atkinson
and Eftaxiopoulos (1996). The stress distribution around an in-
clined cased wellbore can be simulated by numerical model (Li
et al., 2005; Jo and Gary, 2010).
The axis of a directional well is not perpendicular to the plane of
the horizontal in-situ stresses any more. The casing and sur-
rounding rock will display the mechanical interaction in a three-
dimensional space. The mechanical analysis for this problem is
very difficult to obtain and the design standard is lacked. To address
the issue, comprehensive application of the coordinate rotation, the
theory of pressurized hole in plate, the theory of composite cylinder

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2014.07.014
1875-5100/© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
286 F. Yin, D. Gao / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 20 (2014) 285e291

and the method of stress function, the analytical expressions of The coordinate rotation matrix is formed by multiplying direc-
casing stress and load in directional wells under in-situ stresses are tion cosine matrix in reversed order. Now, we will build the coor-
deduced. Furthermore, the numerical simulation is performed to dinate rotation matrix from the coordinate system of principal in-
verify this analytical solution. The research results have been situ stresses to wellbore coordinate system. The wellbore devia-
applied for casing design in one oilfield successfully. tion angle is a, and the angle between wellbore azimuth and hor-
izontal maximum in-situ stress is b. The coordinate rotation process
2. The in-situ stresses in wellbore coordinate is: firstly rotating b around z0-axis, then rotating a around y1-axis
(the y0 after the first time rotation). The coordinate rotation process
The stress field of deep formation is usually described by triaxial from the coordinate system of principal in-situ stresses to wellbore
principal in-situ stresses, which include the horizontal maximum coordinate system is shown in Fig. 2.
in-situ stress, the horizontal minimum in-situ stress and the ver- The coordinate rotation matrix can be expressed as:
tical in-situ stress (sH, sh and sv). The magnitude and orientation of 2 32 3
in-situ stresses can be determined by borehole breakout and cos a 0 sin a cos b sin b 0
acoustic emission Kaiser etc. The stress field in vertical wells is C ¼ Cy Cz ¼ 4 0 1 0 54 sin b cos b 05
sin a 0 cos a 0 0 1
consistent with in-situ stresses. But the situation of casings in 2 3
directional wells is different. The schematic diagram of the casing cos a cos b cos a sin b sin a
in directional well under in-situ stresses is shown in Fig. 1. ¼ 4 sin b cos b 0 5 (4)
The coordinate system of the principal in-situ stresses (x0, y0, z0) sin a cos b sin a sin b cos a
is established, and the directions of coordinate axis are consistent
So, the three principal in-situ stresses are converted to the stress
with in-situ stresses sH, sh and sv respectively. In order to be
tensor in the wellbore coordinate (Hossain et al., 1999; Garrouch
convenient to analyze the casing behavior, the in-situ stresses are
and Ebrahim, 2001; Liu et al., 2005). The stress tensor in the
converted to the stress tensor in the wellbore coordinate system by
wellbore coordinate is:
adopting coordinate rotation matrix. The Oz axis of wellbore co-
ordinate (x, y, z) is established along with the axis of the wellbore. 2 3 2 3
sxx txy txz sH
The Ox axis and Oy axis lie in the plane that is vertical with the axis 4 tyx syy tyz 5 ¼ C4 sh 5 CT (5)
of the wellbore. tzx tzy szz sv
Arbitrary rectangular coordinate system can be obtained by
three-time rotations from the original coordinate system. The The formation stress acting on casing in directional well can be
rotate angle are called Euler angle. According to right-hand rule, the obtained by substituting principal in-situ stresses, wellbore devi-
direction cosine matrixes rotating around x-axis, y-axis and z-axis ation angle and wellbore azimuth to the Eq. (4) and Eq. (5). The
(Zhu et al., 2010) are: stress field of surrounding rock in wellbore Cartesian coordinate
2 3 system can be rewritten as follow:
1 0 0 8
Cx ¼ 4 0 cos ax sin ax 5 (1) >
>
>
> sxx ¼ sH cos2 acos2 b þ sh cos2 asin2 b þ sv sin2 a
0 sin ax cos ax >
>
>
> syy ¼ sH sin2 b þ sh cos2 b
>
<
2 3 szz ¼ sH sin2 acos2 b þ sh sin2 asin2 b þ sv cos2 a
cos ay 0 sin ay >
> txy ¼ sH cos a cos b sin b þ sh cos a cos b sin b
Cy ¼ 4 0 1 0 5 (2) >
>
>
>
> txz ¼ sH sin a cos acos2 b þ sh sin a cos asin2 b  sv sin a cos a
sin ay 0 cos ay >
>
: tyz ¼ sH sin a cos b sin b þ sh sin a cos b sin b
2 3
cos az sin az 0 (6)
Cz ¼ 4 sin az cos az 05 (3)
0 0 1

3. Mechanical analysis of casing in directional well

To simplify the analysis process, the cement sheath is neglected

because its material is similar with formation. The axial length is far

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of casing in directional well under in-situ stresses. Fig. 2. The coordinate rotation process.
 F. Yin, D. Gao / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 20 (2014) 285e291 287

8
greater than the lateral dimension for the well structure, and the < sr ¼ sxx þ syy
axial displacement of casing is restricted by cement and wellhead. 2 (9)
:
The load along the axial direction is regarded as a constant. Based trq ¼ 0
on elastic mechanics, the mechanical interaction of casing and
surrounding rock can be simplified to the generalized plane strain The second stress boundary condition:
problem (Zhenye and Shiping, 1990; Youquan et al., 2006; Jo and 8
Gary, 2010). So the stress components relevant to z direction in > sxx  syy
>
< sr ¼  cos 2 q
Eq. (6) are ignored. In addition, the inner wall of casing is subjected 2
(10)
to the hydrostatic pressure pi. The simplified plane strain me- >
> sxx  syy
: trq ¼ sin 2 q
chanical model of casing under stress of surrounding rock and 2
hydrostatic pressure is shown in Fig. 3.
The third stress boundary condition:
Based on the theory of pressurized hole in plate, the stresses of
surrounding rock under the sxx, syy and txy can be solved. By linear 
sr ¼ txy sin 2 q
superposition, the stress state of surrounding rock in wellbore cy- (11)
trq ¼ txy cos 2 q
lindrical coordinate system is expressed as:

8  2  2 4  2 4
>
> sxx þ syy rw sxx  syy rw rw rw rw
>
> sr ¼  1   1  4 þ 3 cos 2 q  t xy 1  4 þ 3 sin 2 q
>
> 2 r2 2 r2 r4 r2 r4
>
>
>
<    4  4
sxx þ syy r2 sxx  syy rw rw
sq ¼ 1þ w  1 þ 3 cos 2 q  t xy 1 þ 3 sin 2 q (7)
>
> 2 r2 2 r4 r4
>
>
>
>  4  4
>
> s  syy r2 rw 2
rw rw
>
: trq ¼ xx 1þ2 w  3 sin 2 q þ t 1 þ 2  3 cos 2 q
xy
2 r2 r4 r2 r4

So far, the mechanical analysis of casing in directional well

under in-situ stresses can be resolved into three simpler prob-
When the radius tends to infinite, the normal stress and shear lems. They include: first, casing mechanical analysis under mean
stress at infinite surrounding rock are obtained as follow: pressure; second, casing mechanical analysis under deviation
stress; third, casing mechanical analysis under shear stress.
These problems can be solved by using elastic mechanics. Then,
8
>
> sxx þ syy sxx  syy the analytical solution for the whole problem can be achieved by
< sr ¼   cos 2 q  txy sin 2 q
superposition.
2 2
(8)
>
> s  s
: trq ¼ xx yy
sin 2 q þ txy cos 2 q
2 3.1. Solution for first stress condition
Eq. (8) is the outer boundary condition of the plane strain me-
chanical model. This mechanical boundary can be divided into Based on the Lame formula and the continuity at the interface
three stress boundary conditions. between casing and surrounding rock, the casing stress under the
The first stress boundary condition: first stress boundary condition is calculated:
8  
>   b2 a2
>
> s r; q ¼ 1  s1
>
>
r
b2  a 2 r2
>
<
 
  b2 a2 (12)
>
> s r; q ¼ 1 þ s1
>
> q
>
> b2  a 2 r2
:
trq ðr; qÞ ¼ 0

ð1  ys Þðsxx þ syy Þ
s1 ¼    (13)
1 þ 1m2 ð1þy
1 c Þ Es
ð1þys Þ Ec 1  2ys þ m 2

3.2. Solution for second stress condition

By adopting elastic mechanics reverse method, the expressions

of stress distribution of casing and surrounding rock are deduced,
and the parameters are determined by continuity conditions
(Youquan et al., 2006). The casing stress under the second stress
Fig. 3. The simplified plane strain mechanical model. boundary condition can be solved as follow:
288 F. Yin, D. Gao / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 20 (2014) 285e291

8        
" >
> 2 5
 2 #
2 4 6
8    4 >
> A ¼ 1  y c þ 5  6y c m þ 3  2y c m þ  2y c m
b b >
> 3 3
>
> sr r; q ¼  n1  n2  2n4 cos 2 q >
>
>
> >
>    
>
> r r >
> 2 4
>
> >
> B ¼  y þ 2y m 2
 2 2  y m 4
  2y m6
>
> "  4 # < 3
c c c
3
c
<   b  r 2
sq r; q ¼ n1 þ n2 þ 2n3 cos 2 q    
(14) >
> 2 4
>
> r b >
> C ¼  y þ 2y m 2
 2 2  y m 4
  2y c m
6
>
> >
> c c c
>
> "  4  2 # >
> 3 3
>
>    r 2 >
>        
>
> b b >
> 2 5
: trq r; q ¼ n1  n2 þ n3  n4 sin 2 q >
> 2 4
 2yc m6
r b r : D ¼ 1  yc  3  2yc m þ 3  2yc m þ
3 3
(18)
Where:
3.3. Solution for third stress condition

The reference variable is introduced:

2 4 4
þ m þ 2m
8 n1 ¼ 1  2m p
> 3 s2 þ  3 s3 q¼ 4 (19)
>
> 1m 2
1  m2 4
>
>
>
> Substituting the Eq. (19) is into the Eq. (11), the third stress
>
>
>
> 3m4 þ m6 2m6 boundary condition can be rewritten as:
>
>
> n2 ¼ 
> 3 s2 þ  3 s3 
>
> 2 2 sr ¼ txy cos 2 4
>
< 1  m 1  m
(20)
(15) trq ¼ txy sin 2 4
>
> 1 þ 3m2 1  3m2
>
> n3 ¼   s2 þ  3 s3 So we find that this stress boundary condition and the second
>
> 3
>
> 1  m 2
1  m2 stress boundary condition are in the same form. The casing stress
>
>
>
> under the second stress boundary condition can be obtained by
>
>    
>
> analogy as follow:
>
> m2 2 þ m2 þ m4 m2 m2 þ m4
:n ¼  s2  
4  3 3 s3 8   "  4  2 #
1  m2 1  m2 >
> s r; q ¼  n0
 n 0 b
 2n 0 b
sin 2 q
>
> r 1 2 4
>
> r r
>
>
>
> "  4 #
<    2
0 0 b 0 r
sq r; q ¼ n1 þ n2 þ 2n3 sin 2 q (21)
>
> r b
 >
>
8  >
> "  4  2 #
4 1  y2s E  3 s  s  >
>  2
>
>
> D 1 þ B1 c 2 xx yy > t r; q ¼ n0  n0 b þ n0 r  n0 b
>
: cos 2 q
> s
< 2 ¼  1  m rq 1 2 3 4
A1 D1  B1 C1 ð1 þ yc Þ Es 2 r b r
  (16)
>
>
>
> 4 1  y2s Ec  3 s  s 
: s ¼ C1 þ A1 1  m 2 xx yy Where:
3
A1 D1  B1 C1 ð1 þ yc Þ Es 2  
8
> D þ B 4 1  y2s Ec  3
>
> 0 1 1
1  m2 txy
> s2 ¼ 
< A1 D1  B1 C1 ð1 þ yc Þ Es
  (22)
>
>
8   >
> C þ A 4 1  y2s Ec  3
3 : s0 ¼ 1 1
1  m2 txy
>
> ð1 þ ys Þ Ec 5 3
> A
> 1 ¼ A þ  2y s 1  m2 A1 D1  B1 C1 ð1 þ yc Þ Es
>
> ð1 þ yc Þ Es 3
>
> The other parameters are the same with those in the second
>
>   3
>
> ð1 þ ys Þ Ec 4 stress boundary condition.
>
> B ¼ B   2y 1  m2
< 1
ð1 þ yc Þ Es 3
s

  3 (17)
>
> ð1 þ ys Þ Ec 4 3.4. Solution for the whole problem
>
> C ¼ C   2y 1  m2
> 1
> ð1 þ yc Þ Es 3
s
>
>
>
>   Form the above, the solution for the whole problem can be ob-
>
> ð1 þ ys Þ Ec 5 3
>
>  2ys 1  m2 tained by superposing the Eq. (12), Eq. (14) and Eq. (21). The casing
: D1 ¼ D þ
ð1 þ yc Þ Es 3 stress distribution in directional well under in-situ stresses is
expressed as:

8   ! "  4  2 # "  4  2 #
> b2 a2 b b 0 0 b 0 b
> s
> r r; q ¼ 1  s þ  n  n  2n cos 2 q þ  n  n  2n sin 2 q
>
> b2  a 2 r2
1 1 2
r 4
r 1 2
r 4
r
>
>
>
> ! " # " #
>
<    4  r 2  4  2
b2 a2 b 0 0 b 0 r
sq r; q ¼ 2 1 þ s 1 þ n 1 þ n 2 þ 2n 3 cos 2 q þ n þ n þ 2n sin 2 q (23)
>
> b  a2 r2 r b 1 2
r 3
b
>
>
>
> "  4  2 # "  4  2 #
>
>    r 2  r 2
>
> b b 0 0 b 0 0 b
: trq r; q ¼ n1  n2 þ n3  n4 sin 2 q þ n1  n2 þ n3  n4 cos 2 q
r b r r b r
 F. Yin, D. Gao / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 20 (2014) 285e291 289

The casing load can be solved: Under the in-situ stresses, casing in directional well bears not only
 the radial pressure but also the tangential stress. All these stresses
sn ¼ s1 þ s2 cos 2 q þ s02 sin 2 q vary with the phase angle of casing. The radial component of
(24)
tn ¼ s3 sin 2 q þ s03 cos 2 q external load is 73.4 MPae77.2 MPa and the tangential component
is 0 MPae5.8 MPa.
Furthermore, the casing stress under the hydrostatic pressure is:
Based on salt water hydrostatic pressure and 50% casing empty,
the casing internal pressure approximates 15.2 MPa.
8 a2 p a2 b2 pi
>
> sr ¼ 2 i 2    The API casing strength standard is not fit to the nonuniform
>
> b a b2  a2 r 2
< load of casing. The failure types of casing under external load can be
(25) divided into elastic instability and yielding. Casing tends to elastic
>
> a2 pi a2 b2 pi
>
>  instability when the diameter-thickness ratio is bigger than 32
: sq ¼ 2 2
þ
b a b  a2 r 2
2 (Zheng et al., 1998). The diameter-thickness ratio of recommended
casing equals 16.2, so the failure type should be yielding. Therefore,
Comprehensive consideration of the outside in-situ stresses and the yield criterion of distortion energy is adopted to analyze the
the inside hydrostatic pressure, the expression of casing stress in casing strength:
directional well is deduced as follow:

! "  4  2 # "  4  2 #
8   b2 a2 b b 0 0 b 0 b a2 pi a2 b2 pi
>
> sr r;q ¼ 2 1  s 1 þ  n1  n 2  2n 4 cos 2 q þ  n  n  2n sin 2 q þ   
>
> b  a2 r2 r r 1 2
r 4
r b2  a2 b2  a2 r 2
>
>
>
>
>
> ! "  4 # "  4 #
<   b2 a2 b  r 2  2 a2 p a2 b2 pi
0 0 b 0 r
sq r;q ¼ 2 1 þ s 1 þ n 1 þ n2 þ 2n 3 cos 2 q þ n þ n þ 2n sin 2 q þ 2 i 2 þ  
>
> b a 2
r 2 r b 1 2
r 3
b b a b 2
 a 2 2
r
>
>
>
>
>
> "     # "     #
>
> b 4  r 2 b 2 b 4  r 2 b 2
:  
trq r;q ¼ n1  n2 þ n3  n4 sin 2 q þ n01  n02 þ n03  n04 cos 2 q
r b r r b r
(26)

The Eq. (26) indicates that the casing stress in directional well is
affected by many factors, such as in-situ stresses, inside hydrostatic
pressure, wellbore deviation angle, wellbore azimuth, geometry of
casing, and elastic parameters of casing and formation.
4. Case study
Directional wells are planned to be drilled through anhydrite
and salt formation in an Iraq oilfield. The in-situ stresses are
speculated to impose on casing due to the creep property of the
formation. But, it is still a challenge for casing design in directional
well under in-situ stresses. The bottom depth of anhydrite and salt
formation is 2900 m. The horizontal maximum in-situ stress is
71.12 MPa, the horizontal minimum in-situ stress is 65.43 MPa, and
vertical in-situ stress is 68.28 MPa. The direction of horizontal
maximum in-situ stress is N30 E. The well deviation angle is 25
and well azimuth is N120 E. The borehole size is 12-1/4 in. and the
casing size is 9-5/8 in. in this well interval. The elasticity modulus of
the formation is 5000 MPa, and Poisson's ratio is 0.4.
Substituting the principal in-situ stresses, wellbore deviation
angle and wellbore azimuth into Eq. (5), the stress field of sur-
rounding rock in wellbore coordinate system is calculated as
follow:
2 3 2 3 449.3 MPa. The deviation between analytical and numerical solu-
sxx txy txz 65:939 0 1:092
4 tyx
syy tyz 5 ¼ 4 0 71:120 0 5
tzx tzy szz
1:092 0 67:771
The casing with steel grade C-95 and wall thickness 15.11 mm is
recommended initially. Substituting relevant parameters into Eq.
(24), the external load of casing is calculated and shown in Fig. 4.
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 
1h i
ðsr  sq Þ2 þ ðsr  sz Þ2 þ ðsz  sq Þ2 þ 3 t2rq þ t2qz þ t2zr >ss
2
(28)
As for the plane strain, there are adding formulas among the
stress components as follow:

sz ¼ yc ðsr þ sq Þ
(29)
trz ¼ tqz ¼ 0
Substituting relevant parameters into Eq. (23) and Eq. (26), the
von Mises stress of casing under in-situ stresses and hydrostatic
pressure is calculated and the stress distribution is drawn in Fig. 5.
Fig. 5 describes the von Mises stress of casing versus phase
angle. Under the action of in-situ stresses, the maximum stress at
the inner wall is 657.6 MPa and the maximum stress at the outer
wall is 419.6 MPa. Under the united action of in-situ stresses and
hydrostatic pressure, the maximum stress at the inner wall is
536.5 MPa and the maximum stress at the outer wall is 322.5 MPa.
To verify the analytical solution proposed in this paper, a 3D
model by using the finite element code is built to simulate this
complex mechanical problem. The stress nephogram of casing and
part of formation is shown in Fig. 6. The maximum stress at the
inner wall is 673.8 MPa and the maximum stress at the outer wall is
tions is 2.4%e6.6%. Obviously, this deviation of results is due to the
(27)
difference between the plane strain model for the analytical solu-
tion and the full 3D model for numerical solution (Jo and Gary,
2010). The deviation is tolerant for petroleum engineering, so the
analytical method is a good alternate to the costly and time-
consuming numerical software programs.
290 F. Yin, D. Gao / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 20 (2014) 285e291

After verifying the analytical results, the casing strength should

be checked. Under the in-situ stresses and hydrostatic pressure, the
maximum stress of casing is 536.5 MPa and the yield strength of the
C-95 steel is 655 MPa. The safety coefficient of the casing is 1.2, so
the recommended casing is appropriate. It is approved by the oil-
field that the methodology guides the casing design in directional
well under the complex in-situ stresses successfully.

Fig. 5. The von Mises stress distribution of casing.

Fig. 6. The stress nephogram of casing and part of formation.

5. Conclusions

(1) The current casing design isn't suitable for the working
condition of casing in directional well under the action of in-
situ stresses. It requires special attention and treatment.
(2) The casing stress in directional well under in-situ stresses is
affected by in-situ stresses, hydrostatic pressure, wellbore
deviation angle, wellbore azimuth, geometry of casing, and
elastic parameters of casing and formation.
(3) The deviation between analytical and numerical solutions is
tiny, so the analytical method proposed in this paper is a
good alternate to the costly and time-consuming numerical
simulation.
(4) The methodology of casing mechanical analysis in direc-
tional well under in-situ stresses has been applied to the
casing design in one oilfield successfully, which remedies the
limitation of current standards.

Acknowledgment

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the

Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC, 51221003). This
research was also supported by the other projects (Grant numbers:
2011 A-4208, 2010CB226703, 2011ZX05009).

Nomenclature

a the inner radius, m

Fig. 4. External load of casing. b the outer radius, m
 F. Yin, D. Gao / Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 20 (2014) 285e291 291

Es elastic modulus of formation, MPa Hossain, M.M., Rahman, M.K., Rahman, S.S., 1999. A Comprehensive Monograph for
Hydraulic Fracture Initiation from Deviated Wellbores under Arbitrary Stress
Ec elastic modulus of casing, MPa
Regimes. SPE 54360.
m ratio of a and b Huaiwen, Zhao, Xueshi, Gao, 1991. Study on hydraulic compressive collapse of well
pi casing inside hydrostatic pressure, MPa casings. J. Univ. Pet. China 15 (5), 39e45.
r radius of casing or surrounding rock, m Jo, H., Gary, K.E., 2010. Mechanical Behavior of Concentric and Eccentric Casing,
Cement, and Formation Using Analytical and Numerical Methods. ARMA
rw radius of wellbore, m 10e142.
ys Poisson's ratio of formation Li, Zhiming, Youquan, Yin, 2006. Calculation of the External Pressure of Casing and
yc Poisson's ratio of casing the Mechanical Basis. Petroleum Industry Press, Beijing (in Chinese).
Li, Jun, Chen, Mian, Zhang, Hui, 2005. Study on varying rules of casing stress in
q phase angle of casing or well section,  directional hole with in-situ stress conditions. ACTA PET. SIN. 26 (1), 109e112.
ax, ay, az Euler angles rotating around x-axis, y-axis and z-axis Li, Yong, Yuan, Jinping, Qi, Fengzhong, 2012. Analysis of Cemented Casing Me-
respectively,  chanical Failure under Arbitrary In-situ Stress Field Coupling Effects of Down-
hole Pressure and Temperature. IADC/SPE 155895.
a wellbore deviation angle,  Liu, Shunyao, Mo, Jiangtao, Wang, Jingwen, 2005. Illustration of similarity of stress
b the angle between wellbore azimuth and horizontal tensor in different coordinate systems. J. Hunan Inst. Eng. 15 (1), 20e24.
maximum in-situ stress,  Morita, N., Kasahara, Y., Hikida, H., et al., 2005. Collapse Resistance of Tubular
Strings under Geotectonic Load. SPE 95691.
sH horizontal maximum in-situ stress, MPa Nabipour, A., Joodi, B., Sarmadivaleh, M., 2010. Finite Element Simulation of
sh horizontal minimum in-situ stress, MPa Downhole Stresses in Deep Gas Wells. SPE 132156.
sv vertical in-situ stress, MPa NDRC, 2008. Design for Casing String Structure and Strength. SY/T 5724e2008.
sxx, syy, szz, txy, tyz, txz the stress field of surrounding rock in Last, Nigel, Mujica, Santiago, Phillip, Pattillo, et al., 2006. Evaluation, impact, and
management of casing deformation caused by tectonic forces in Andean Foot-
wellbore Cartesian coordinate system, MPa hills, Colombia. SPE Drill. Complet. 6, 116e124.
sr, sq, trq the radial stress, the tangential stress, and the shear stress Poiate Jr., E., Costa, A.M., Falcao, J.L., 2006. Well Design for Drilling through Thick
of surrounding rock or casing, MPa Evaporite Layers in Santos Basin-Brazil. IADC/SPE 99161.
Rodriguez, W.J., Fleckenstein, W.W., Eustes, A.W., 2003. Simulation of Collapse
ss the yield strength of casing, MPa Loads on Cemented Casing Using Finite Element Analysis. SPE 84566.
Willson, S.M., Fossum, A.F., Fredrich, J.T., et al., 2002. Assessment of Salt Loading on
Well Casings. IADC/SPE 74562.
Yin, Fei, Deli, Gao, 2012. Mechanical analysis of casings in boreholes, under non-
References uniform remote crustal stress fields: analytical & numerical methods. CMES
89 (1), 25e37.
Youquan, Yin, Yong'en, Cai, Zhaowei, Chen, et al., 2006. Theoretical solution of
API, 1994. Bulletin on Formulas and Calculations for Casing, Tubing, Drill Pipe, and
casing loading in non-uniform ground stress field. ACTA PETROL. EI SIN. 27 (4),
Line Pipe Properties. API BULL 5C3. 133e138.
Atkinson, C., Eftaxiopoulos, D.A., 1996. A plane model for the stress field around an
Zheng, Junde, et al., 1998. Calculation of casing strength under nonuniform loading.
inclined, cased and cemented wellbore. Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods Geomech. Acta Pet. Sin. 19 (1), 119e123.
20 (8), 549e569. Zhenye, W., Shiping, L., 1990. The generalized plane strain problem and its appli-
Chatterjee, R., Mukhopadhyay, M., 2003. Numerical Modelling of Stress Around a cation in three-dimensional stress measurement. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci.
Wellbore. SPE 80489. Geomech. 27 (1), 43e49.
EI-Sayed, A.A.H., Khalaf, Fouad, 1992. Resistance of cemented concentric casing
Zhu, Leiming, Wu, Xiaoping, Li, Jianwei, 2010. The euler rotation and dynamic
strings under nonuniform loading. SPE Drill. Eng. 3, 59e64. equation of rectangular coordinate system. Hydrogr. Surv. Charting 30 (3),
Garrouch, Ali A., Ebrahim, Abdullah S., 2001. Assessment of the Stability of Inclined
20e22.
Wells. SPE 68861.