Next Article in Journal
Functional and Bioactive Characterization of Hemp Cake Proteins and Polyphenols from Non-Psychoactive Cannabis sativa
Previous Article in Journal
Improving Combined Cycle Performance with Pressure Gain Combustion in the Gas Turbine
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Quantitative Mechanisms of Long-Term Drilling-Fluid–Coal Interaction and Strength Deterioration in Deep CBM Formations

1
CNPC Coalbed Methane Co., Ltd., Beijing 100028, China
2
China United Coalbed Methane National Engineering Research Center Co., Ltd., Beijing 100095, China
3
CNPC Engineering Technology R&D Co., Ltd., Beijing 102206, China
4
State Key Laboratory of Low Carbon Catalysis and Carbon Dioxide Utilization, Yangtze University, Wuhan 430100, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Processes 2025, 13(10), 3183; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13103183
Submission received: 19 August 2025 / Revised: 20 September 2025 / Accepted: 26 September 2025 / Published: 7 October 2025
(This article belongs to the Topic Exploitation and Underground Storage of Oil and Gas)

Abstract

During deep coalbed methane (CBM) drilling, wellbore stability is significantly influenced by the interaction between drilling fluid and coal rock. However, quantitative data on mechanical degradation under long-term high-temperature and high-pressure conditions are lacking. This study subjected coal cores to immersion in field-formula drilling fluid at 60 °C and 10.5 MPa for 0–30 days, followed by uniaxial and triaxial compression tests under confining pressures of 0/5/10/20 MPa. The fracture evolution was tracked using micro-indentation (µ-indentation), nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), and scanning electron microscopy (SEM), establishing a relationship between water absorption and strength. The results indicate a sharp decline in mechanical parameters within the first 5 days, after which they stabilized. Uniaxial compressive strength decreased from 36.85 MPa to 22.0 MPa (−40%), elastic modulus from 1.93 GPa to 1.07 GPa (−44%), cohesion from 14.5 MPa to 5.9 MPa (−59%), and internal friction angle from 24.9° to 19.8° (−20%). Even under 20 MPa confining pressure after 30 days, the strength loss reached 43%. Water absorption increased from 6.1% to 7.9%, showing a linear negative correlation with strength, with the slope increasing from −171 MPa/% (no confining pressure) to −808 MPa/% (20 MPa confining pressure). The matrix elastic modulus remained stable at 3.5–3.9 GPa, and mineral composition remained unchanged, confirming that the degradation was due to hydraulic wedging and lubrication of fractures rather than matrix damage. These quantitative thresholds provide direct evidence for predicting wellbore stability in deep CBM drilling.
Keywords: coalbed methane; drilling fluid; mechanical parameters; wellbore stability coalbed methane; drilling fluid; mechanical parameters; wellbore stability

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Miao, Q.; Liu, H.; Wang, Y.; Wang, W.; Li, S.; Zhai, W.; Wei, K. Quantitative Mechanisms of Long-Term Drilling-Fluid–Coal Interaction and Strength Deterioration in Deep CBM Formations. Processes 2025, 13, 3183. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13103183

AMA Style

Miao Q, Liu H, Wang Y, Wang W, Li S, Zhai W, Wei K. Quantitative Mechanisms of Long-Term Drilling-Fluid–Coal Interaction and Strength Deterioration in Deep CBM Formations. Processes. 2025; 13(10):3183. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13103183

Chicago/Turabian Style

Miao, Qiang, Hongtao Liu, Yubin Wang, Wei Wang, Shichao Li, Wenbao Zhai, and Kai Wei. 2025. "Quantitative Mechanisms of Long-Term Drilling-Fluid–Coal Interaction and Strength Deterioration in Deep CBM Formations" Processes 13, no. 10: 3183. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13103183

APA Style

Miao, Q., Liu, H., Wang, Y., Wang, W., Li, S., Zhai, W., & Wei, K. (2025). Quantitative Mechanisms of Long-Term Drilling-Fluid–Coal Interaction and Strength Deterioration in Deep CBM Formations. Processes, 13(10), 3183. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13103183

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop