Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of the Depth and Width of Progressive Failure of Breakout Based on Different Failure Criteria, Using a Finite Element Numerical Model

  • Research Article-Petroleum Engineering
  • Published:
Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript


Shear failure due to compressive stress around a borehole is called breakout. Breakout occurs along the minor principal stresses. Due to the change in the cross section of the borehole due to the collapse of the crushed layers of rock into the borehole, breakout is developed to achieve stability. Accurate estimation of breakout dimensions is important for two reasons; first, breakout in large volumes can cause borehole instability. Secondly, in recent years, efforts have been made to use breakout dimensions to estimate in situ stresses. Failure breakout area depends on the material properties, in situ stresses and the failure criterion. In this paper, using a simple numerical model based on the finite element method, a comprehensive analysis of the breakout phenomenon and its dimensions for 5 different failure criteria has been performed. The proposed numerical model examines breakout expansion step by step until stability is achieved. According to the obtained results, the failure criterion and intermediate principal stress are effective in the breakout dimensions, as the Drucker-Prager failure criterion suggests the smallest breakout failure area and the Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion provides the largest failure area due to not considering the intermediate principal stress, for this reason, Mohr–Coulomb criterion is not suitable for breakout analysis. Comparing the results of numerical analysis with the results of breakout experiments performed on Tablerock sandstone, it was observed that the breakout failure depth, for certain in situ stresses, could be close to the breakout failure depth obtained according to Drucker-Prager and modified Lade criteria.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others


  1. Babcock, E.A.: Measurement of subsurface fractures from dipmeter logs. AAPG Bull. 62(7), 1111–1126 (1978).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gough, D.I.; Bell, J.S.: Stress orientations from borehole wall fractures with examples from Colorado, east Texas, and northern Canada. Can. J. Earth. Sci. 19(7), 1358–1370 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Zoback, M.D.; Moos, D.; Mastin, L.; Anderson, R.N.: Wellbore breakouts and in situ stress. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth. 90(B7), 5523–5530 (1985).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Amadei, B.; Stephansson, O: Rock stress and its measurement. Springer Science and Business Media.UK (1997)

  5. Aadnoy, B.; Looyeh, R.: Petroleum rock mechanics: drilling operations and well design, 2nd edn. Houston, TX, USA, Gulf Professional Publishing (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Leeman, E.R.: The measurement of stress in rock: part I: the principles of rock stress measurements. J. South. Afr. Inst. Min. Metall. 65(2), 45–81. (1964)

  7. Cox, J. W., 1970. The high resolution dipmeter reveals dip-related borehole and formation characteristics. J. Can. Pet. Technol. 11(01).

  8. Carr, W.J.: Summary of tectonic and structural evidence for stress orientation at the Nevada Test Site. U.S. Geol. Surv. Open-File Rep. (1974).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bell, J.S.; Gough, D.I.: Northeast-southwest compressive stress in Alberta evidence from oil wells. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 45(2), 475–482 (1979).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Haimson, B.C.; Herrick, C.G.: Borehole breakouts-a new tool for estimating in situ stress?. In: Proc. Int. Symp. on Rock Stress and Rock Stress Measurements. Stockholm, Sweden, pp. 271–280 (1986)

  11. Martin, C.D.; Martino, J.B.; Dzik, E.J.: Comparison of borehole breakouts from laboratory and field tests. In: Proc. Eurock’ 94: Int. Symp. on Rock Mech. in Petrol. Eng., Delft. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 183–190. (1994)

  12. Haimson, B.C.; Herrick, C.G.: In-situ stress evaluation from borehole breakouts: experimental studies. In: Proc. 26th US Symp. Rock Mech., Rapid City. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 1207–1218 (1985)

  13. Haimson, B.C., Herrick, C.G., 1989. Borehole breakouts and in situ stress. In: Rowley JC (ed) Proceedings of drilling symposium 1989, 12th annual energy-sources technical conference and exhibit. Houston, Am Soc Mech Eng, New York, pp. 17–22.

  14. Haimson, B.C.; Song, I.: Laboratory study of borehole breakouts in Cordova Cream: a case of shear failure mechanism. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr. 30(9), 1047–1056 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Herrick, C.G.; Haimson, B.C.: Modeling of episodic failure leading to borehole breakouts in Alabama limestone. In: Nelson, P., Laubach, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1st North American rock mechanics symposium, Rock mechanics: models and measurements. Balkema, Austin, Rotterdam, pp. 217–224 (1994)

  16. Ewy, R.T.; Cook, N.G.W.: Deformation and fracture around cylindrical openings in rock—I. Observations and analysis of deformations. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr. 27(5), 387–407 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lee, M.; Haimson, B.: Laboratory study of borehole breakouts in Lac du Bonnet granite: a case of extensile failure mechanism. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr. 30(7), 1039–1045 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Song, I.: Borehole breakouts and core disking in westerly granite: mechanisms of formation and relationship in situ stress. Doctoral dissertation. University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA (1998)

  19. Cuss, R.J.; Rutter, E.H.; Holloway, R.F.: Experimental observations of the mechanics of borehole failure in porous sandstone. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 40(5), 747–761 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Haimson, B.C.; Lee, M.Y.: Estimating in situ stress conditions from borehole breakouts and core disking-experimental results in granite. In: Proc. Int. Workshop on Rock Stress Measurement at Great Depth, 8th ISRM Congress, Tokyo, Japan, pp. 19–24 (1995)

  21. Lin, H.; Kang, W.H.; Oh, J.; Canbulat, I.; Hebblewhite, B.: Numerical simulation on borehole breakout and borehole size effect using discrete element method. Int J Min Sci Technol. 30(5), 623–633 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lakirouhani, A.; Bahrehdar, M.; Medzvieckas, J.; Kliukas, R.: Comparison of predicted failure area around the boreholes in the strike-slip faulting stress regime with Hoek-Brown and Fairhurst generalized criteria. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Gerolymatou, E.: A novel tool for simulating brittle borehole breakouts. Comput. Geotech. 107, 80–88 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mastin, L.G.: The development of borehole breakouts in sandstone. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, California, USA (1984)

  25. Zheng, Z.; Kemeny, J.; Cook, N.G.: Analysis of borehole breakouts. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth. 94(B6), 7171–7182 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Shen, B.; Stephansson, O.; Rinne, M.: Simulation of borehole breakouts using FRACOD2D. Oil Gas Sci. Technol. 57(5), 579–590 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Liu, H.; Lin, J.-S.; He, J.; Xie, H.: A discrete element exploration of V-shaped breakout failure mechanisms in underground opening. Undergr. Space 5(4), 281–291 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Rahimi, R.; Nygaard, R.: Effect of rock strength variation on the estimated borehole breakout using shear failure criteria. Geomech. Geophys. Geo Energy Geo Resour. 4(4), 369–382 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lin, H.; Singh, S.; Oh, J.; Canbulat, I.; Kang, W.-H.; Hebblewhite, B.K.; Stacey, T.R.: A combined approach for estimating horizontal principal stress magnitudes from borehole breakout data via artificial neural network and rock failure criterion. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Faraji, M.A.; Rezagholilou, A.; Ghanavati, M.; Kadkhodaie, A.; Wood, D.A.: Breakouts derived from image logs aid the estimation of maximum horizontal stress: a case study from Perth Basin, Western Australia.

  31. Han, Y.: Refined equations for estimating maximum horizontal stress from borehole breakouts in vertical wells. Geomech. Geophys. Geo Energy Geo Resour. 7(2), 45 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Abdelghany, W.K.; Radwan, A.E.; Elkhawaga, M.A.; Wood, D.A.; Sen, S.; Kassem, A.A.: Geomechanical modeling using the depth-of-damage approach to achieve successful underbalanced drilling in the Gulf of Suez rift basin. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 202, 108311 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Hasanzadehshooiili, H.; Lakirouhani, A.; Medzvieckas, J.: Evaluating elastic-plastic behaviour of rock materials using hoek–brown failure criterion. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 18(3), 402–407 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lakirouhani, A.; Hasanzadehshooiili, H.: Review of rock strength criteria. In: Proc. of the 22nd World Mining Congress & Expo. Istanbul, Turkey, pp. 473–482 (2011)

  35. Jaeger, J.C.; Cook, N.G.; Zimmerman, R.: Fundamentals of rock mechanics. John Wiley & Sons (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Al-Ajmi, A.M.; Zimmerman, R.W.: Stability analysis of vertical boreholes using the Mogi-Coulomb failure criterion. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 43(8), 1200–1211 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Ewy, R.T.: Wellbore-stability predictions by use of a modified Lade criterion. SPE Drill Compl. 14(02), 85–91 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Zhou, S.: A program to model the initial shape and extent of borehole breakout. Comput. Geosci. 20(7–8), 1143–1160 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sadd, M.H.: Elasticity: theory, applications, and numeric, 4th edn. Academic Press (2020)

  40. Reddy, J.N.: Introduction to the finite element method, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill Education, New York, USA (2018)

  41. Lee, H.; Moon, T.; Haimson, B.C.: Borehole breakouts induced in arkosic sandstones and a discrete element analysis. Rock Mech. Rock Eng. 49(4), 1369–1388 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Haimson, B.; Lee, H.: Borehole breakouts and compaction bands in two high-porosity sandstones. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 41(2), 287–301 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Prothero, D.R.; Schwab, F.: Sedimentary geology: an introduction to sedimentary rocks and stratigraphy, 3rd edn. W.H. FreemaN and company, New York, USA (2013)

  44. Vernik, L.; Zoback, M.D.: Estimation of maximum horizontal principal stress magnitude from stress-induced well bore breakouts in the Cajon Pass scientific research borehole. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth. 97(B4), 5109–5119 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ali Lakirouhani.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

According to the analytical Kirsch’s relations, the stress around a borehole with radius shown in Fig. 1, is equal to [35]:

$$\sigma_{{{\text{rr}}}} = \frac{1}{2}\left( {\sigma_{{\text{H}}} + \sigma_{{\text{h}}} } \right).\left( {1 - \frac{{r_{o}^{2} }}{{r^{2} }}} \right) - \frac{1}{2}\left( {\sigma_{{\text{H}}} - \sigma_{{\text{h}}} } \right).\left( {1 - 4\frac{{r_{o}^{2} }}{{r^{2} }} + 3\frac{{r_{o}^{4} }}{{r^{4} }}} \right).{\text{cos}}2\;\theta + P_{{\text{b}}} \;\left( {\frac{{r_{o}^{2} }}{{r^{2} }}} \right)$$
$$\sigma_{\theta \theta } = \frac{1}{2}\left( {\sigma_{{\text{H}}} + \sigma_{{\text{h}}} } \right).\left( {1 + \frac{{r_{o}^{2} }}{{r^{2} }}} \right) + \frac{1}{2}\left( {\sigma_{{\text{H}}} - \sigma_{{\text{h}}} } \right).\left( {1 + 3\frac{{r_{o}^{4} }}{{r^{4} }}} \right).{\text{cos}}2\theta - P_{{\text{b}}} \;\left( {\frac{{r_{o}^{2} }}{{r^{2} }}} \right)$$
$$\sigma_{{{\text{zz}}}} = \sigma_{{\text{v}}} + 2\;\nu \,\left( {\sigma_{{\text{H}}} - \sigma_{{\text{h}}} } \right).\left( {\frac{{r_{o}^{2} }}{{r^{2} }}} \right).{\text{cos}}2\theta$$
$$\tau_{r\theta } = \frac{1}{2}\left( {\sigma_{{\text{H}}} - \sigma_{{\text{h}}} } \right).\left( {1 + 2\frac{{r_{o}^{2} }}{{r^{2} }} - 3\frac{{r_{o}^{4} }}{{r^{4} }}} \right).{\text{sin}}2\theta$$

In these relations \(\sigma_{{\text{H}}}\) and \(\sigma_{{\text{h}}}\) are major and minor horizontal in situ stresses, respectively, and \(P_{{\text{b}}}\) is internal borehole pressure and \(\nu\) is the Poisson’s ratio.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bahrehdar, M., Lakirouhani, A. Evaluation of the Depth and Width of Progressive Failure of Breakout Based on Different Failure Criteria, Using a Finite Element Numerical Model. Arab J Sci Eng 47, 11825–11839 (2022).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: