OTC 19870

Subsurface Safety Valve Control System for Ultradeepwater Applications

Darren E. Bane and Brock Peoples, Baker Hughes Incorporated
Copyright 2009, Offshore Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2009 Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston, Texas, USA, 47May2009.

This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Offshore Technology Conference, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Offshore Technology Conference is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of OTC copyright.


Abstract

The typical subsurface safety valve for deepwater high-pressure/high-temperature (HP/HT) subsea applications
employs many operational techniques including pressure-balanced pistons using gas energy for assisted closure,
hydraulic balance lines, or a heavy spring to ensure failsafe closure in the event of an emergency shutdown.
Each of these techniques has an impact on the valves characteristics, which can raise concerns about valve
operation or reliability.

A solution is desired that minimizes valve opening pressures by balancing tubing pressure , yet allowing extreme
valve setting depth capability without compromising operational characteristics such as high opening pressures or
pressure-balanced pistons using long term valve gas charge storage.

This paper discusses a new surface-controlled subsurface safety valve (SCSSV) control system that uses the low
opening pressures of a tubing-pressure-insensitive safety valve, without gas-charged assisted closure or dual
control lines for balanced line applications. This system eliminates the need for pressure reversals across the
valves critical actuating piston seals, which increases valve reliability and sealing performance while maintaining
tubing pressure insensitivity. This control system allows for deeper valve depth capabilities compared to the
methods previously discussed, allowing the safety valve to overcome annulus pressure buildup scenarios not
possible in current SCSSVs for the applications described.

This paper presents design considerations using an SCSSV control system allowing technological
accomplishments not previously possible with existing SCSSV technology. Test results demonstrate the
suitability of the new control system design for previously unattainable valve operating depths in aggressive well
designs or annulus pressure buildup situations while enhancing valve reliability.

Introduction

Deepwater production and operations in the outer continental shelf (OCS) is defined by the United States
Minerals and Management Service (MMS) as operations taking place in OCS water depths in excess of 1,000
feet or 305 meters
1
. Given that deepwater discoveries are considered higher-risk ventures with unique
operational, environmental, health, and safety concerns, it is no surprise that the visibility and criticality of
subsurface safety valve designs for these applications are taking center stage in critical field completions.

Many projects in the Gulf of Mexico are taking place in excess of 7,000 feet of water depth and new discoveries
support the future of deepwater development as technically feasible and financially justifiable. Existing
technologies for subsurface safety valves each pose unfavorable features or risk when exceeding the earlier
noted depths. Recognizing the high costs associated for a deepwater well workover, every precaution must be
taken to ensure optimum valve performance and reliability.

Recognizing that even deeper depths will be required in the future, it becomes necessary to develop a subsurface
safety valve operating control system capable of standard operating pressures in extraordinary water depths
2 OTC 19870
considering working pressures in excess of 15,000 psi and temperatures of 400F. For the purposes of this
paper, ultradeepwater depths are defined as water depths in excess of 10,000 feet. Unique nonstandard failure
modes must be considered that can require extraordinary closure forces while keeping the safety valve operating
pressures at achievable levels for current subsea control system designs.

Current Technology and Applications

Selection of a subsurface safety valve for deepwater applications is critical in that it can impart significant
implications with regards to the design and specification of resulting subsea control systems. Subsurface safety
valve actuation pressures are of particular significance for this concern in deepwater service given that lower
operating pressures have less of an adverse effect on the subsystems design requirements and resulting cost.
Generally, valve operating pressures increase as deeper failsafe setting depths are required for subsurface safety
systems in deepwater applications.

Conventional tubing-pressure-sensitive subsurface safety valve designs require that tubing pressure be offset
with operating control pressure, in addition to operating pressure required to compress the closure spring, for
opening the safety valve. In high-pressure/high-temperature (HP/HT) applications for deepwater operations,
safety valve control pressures can become enormous in various valve configurations, resulting in designs that
require exotic high-yield-strength materials to withstand the high-pressure requirements.

Existing conventional subsurface safety valve technologies primarily exist in three categories: Heavy
Compression Spring Designs, Balanced Line Designs, and Gas Charged Designs. Each category will be briefly
described, noting primary benefits and concerns, as this will show an appreciation for the new control system
introduced in this paper.

Heavy Compression Spring Approach:
Conventional design deepwater subsurface safety valves use rod pistons in combination with large power springs
to attain deep water depths. The use of a small-diameter rod piston in the valves annular wall cavity to actuate
the valve helps minimize hydrostatic pressure forces that must be overcome for valve failsafe closure. However,
in reaching ever-deepening water depths, the closure compression spring forces contine to increase to ensure
valve closure. These valve designs are tubing pressure sensitive, therefore the tubing pressure is additive to the
standard control pressure required to compress the closure spring and open the safety valve.

Heavy sprung valves present proven valve technology which minimizes risk, yet high valve opening pressures
require a significant expense in subsea operating subsystems. Hence, heavy sprung valves have limited
applications in HP/HT deepwater subsea applications.

Balanced Line Approach:
Balanced line valves use a secondary control line initiating from the surface in intimate contact opposite the
hydraulic control seal which actuates the valve. This arrangement establishes hydrostatic pressure balance on
the rod piston as well as a balance of tubing pressure and eliminates the need to overcome tubing pressure
during valve opening. Hence, valve opening pressures are reduced drastically. However, various critical failure
modes resulting in the subsurface safety valve failing in the open position have discouraged the widespread use
of this valve design configuration.

The most concerning failure mode presents itself in the form of a balance line leak into a low pressure annulus.
Pressures below the piston would result in equalization to the low annulus pressure, resulting in excessive
downward acting hydrostatic forces on the rod piston which would hold the valve open during a possible
catastrophic event where valve closure is essential. Given the critical nature of the potential fail open scenario,
limited applications are found for this design configuration.

Gas-Charged Approach:
Gas-charged subsurface safety valves incorporate an integral pressure-charged gas chamber within the valve
acting on the valves rod piston which opposes the hydrostatic pressure acting on top of the piston. To aid in low
valve opening pressures, these valves are designed to be tubing pressure insensitive. The primary challenge
with gas-charged safety valves presents itself in the form of containing high-pressure gas for extended
timeframes in downhole environments. Ultra deepwater applications for gas-charged subsurface safety valves
are limited to the pressure capacity of the gas-charged chamber. Ultra deep water depths can require the storage
of nitrogen gas within the valves annular space in excess of 10,000 psi for the life of the valve. Nitrogen pressure
loss can result in a fail closed valve requiring workover operations, or even a fail open condition in some valve
OTC 19870 3
configurations. Current valve technologies using this approach are limited by the pressure capacity of the gas
chamber, which limits the depth at which these valves can be installed and maintain their failsafe closure
capabilities.

A new control system is required for HP/HT applications in ultra deepwater operations. The new control system
presented addresses reliability, risk, and operational concerns of each of the preceding valve types in order to
meet the rigorous requirements for ultradeepwater HP/HT service.

Atmospheric Chamber Technology

The solution to the challenges of HP/HT ultradeepwater applications for subsurface safety valve control systems
involves a unique approach of incorporating an atmospheric chamber below the valves operating rod piston
isolating the requirement of opening the valve against tubing pressure. The valves rod piston is balanced from
tubing pressure resulting in a tubing pressure insensitive valve design. The valves compression spring is sized
appropriately to close the valve against hydrostatic pressure acting on the rod piston. Hence, the reliability of a
heavy sprung subsurface safety valve can be realized in conjunction with insensitivity to tubing pressure. The
result is a valve with standard opening pressures in high-pressure applications with ever increasing water depths.
For ultra deepwater applications, large compression springs must be used, however any lateral spring force
concerns can be offset by the spring cavitys end containing components which mitigate the spring torque from
acting on the rod piston interface mechanism. The atmospheric chamber control system is illustrated in Figure 1.



Figure 1: Subsurface Safety Valve Atmospheric Chamber Control System

As shown in Figure 1, the control system pressure to open the subsurface safety valve is applied through the
control line (1) into the control chamber (2) which acts against the control system seal (3). The rod piston (5) acts
downward on the flow tube (10), compressing the heavy power spring (9) to open the flapper (8). The
atmospheric chamber (7) isolates the bottom side of the rod piston from exposure to high pressure in the tubing
string. The seals on the rod piston (4 and 6) seal and balance the effects of tubing pressure while opening the
valve, making the valve control system insensitive to tubing pressure. The result is a subsurface safety valve
control system containing a reliable compression power spring for failsafe closure, yet the tubing pressure
insensitivity allows for extreme setting depths with relatively low opening pressures, even in HP/HT environments.

Additionally, this control system benefits from the ability to eliminate pressure reversals on the rod piston seals.
Traditional seal designs in current subsurface safety valves require that dominating pressures acting on dynamic
seals occur on either side of the seal stack, causing the seal stack to cyclically shift in its gland. This operating
characteristic is commonly referred to as pressure reversals. A unique advantage to an atmospheric chamber
safety valve control system is the fact that the rod piston dynamic seals will not experience pressure reversals.
One side of the dynamic seal always experiences atmospheric pressure while the other side remains constantly
4 OTC 19870
pressurized from the control system for tubing pressure, resulting in a static seal that is not forced to cycle within
its gland. With the lack of pressure reversals on the dynamic seals, seal redundancy can be more readily
incorporated into the dynamic seal stack design. This results in a more reliable subsurface safety valve posing
less risk to the end user.

Addressing the particular failure scenarios that can occur with this system, one can readily see that an unlikely
leak at either the tubing pressure seals or fittings exposed to tubing pressure will result in a tendency to
pressurize the atmospheric chamber, aiding the valves compression spring and closure capability by applying a
pressure force below the piston. Valve hold open pressures would increase to the point that eventually this
pressure would be exceeded and the valve would close. A leak in the control system seal to the atmospheric
chamber will result in an equalized piston allowing the compression spring to close the valve.

Future Applications

The atmospheric chamber control system within a subsurface safety valve yields specific advantages over many
existing control system technologies. The advantages of this system overcome many of the weaknesses of
current subsurface safety valve operating systems and will allow for deepwater applications in extreme HP/HT
conditions for both dry tree and subsea completions. Additionally, the operating system provides a surface-
controlled subsurface safety valve (SCSSV) solution for future ultradeepwater applications in water depths that
are currently impossible to attain with existing safety valve control systems. Testing of the atmospheric chamber
control system has proven the system to have repeatable operation for ultradeepwater HP/HT applications in
excess of 15,000 psi and temperatures of 400F. Analysis of this system reveals it is applicapable for shallow
setting depths of 2,000 feet down to depths as deep as 20,000 feet while maintaining reasonable opening
pressures for applications as high as 20,000 psi. This vast range of flexibility allows an operator to account for
various failure scenarios not possible with existing SCSSV technologies. For example, considering the possible
risks of annulus pressure buildup (APB) within the A annulus for subsea deepwater application can require large
closure forces for the SCSSV. With this new operating system, a large reliable power spring design can be used
to close an SCSSV with high APB considering a possible APB pressure leak into the control chamber fitting on
the exterior of the SCSSV.

Conclusions

The concept of using an atmospheric-based control chamber system within a subsurface safety valve has created
capabilities that arent possible with existing SCSSV technology. The isolation of tubing pressure from the
actuation mechanism while operating the valve allows reasonable opening pressures that can be coupled with the
reliability of a compression spring for closure force. This mitigates concerns regarding loss of pressure from gas-
charged chambers and allows deeper depths since gas-charged chambers have a finite pressure containment
capacity. Existing designs only capable of attaining 10,000 feet setting depth can now easily reach setting depths
approaching 20,000 feet with similar opening pressure requirements. Sealing mechanisms for this new control
system are not required to undergo pressure reversals allowing enhanced functionality. All failure modes for this
new control system support failsafe closure of the SCSSV in the event of a catastrophic occurrence requiring an
emergency shut down. Finally, the atmospheric chamber control system makes possible the exploration and
production of future ultradeepwater HP/HT applications that is not possible with existing safety valve technologies.

Nomenclature

HP/HT = High pressure and high temperature
OCS = Outer continental shelf
MMS = United States Minerals and Management Service
SCSSV = Surface controlled subsurface safety valve
APB = Annulus pressure buildup

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge and extend appreciation to Baker Hughes Incorporated for their support and
encouragement to publish this paper.

References

1. Adams, Jeff K., Methodology for Optimum Deepwater Safety System Selection, Baker Oil Tools
Publication, March 2000.


SPE 136867
Safety Valve for Ultradeepwater Applications
Jim Sloan and Darren Bane, Baker Hughes Incorporated



Copyright 2010, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Deepwater Drilling and Completions Conference held in Galveston, Texas, USA, 56 October 2010.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.


Abstract

In recent years, offshore oil and gas exploration has continued to push into deeper and deeper waters, such as
those in the Lower Tertiary fields of the Gulf of Mexico. As these field discoveries are being completed, the
application requirements for safety valve installations are moving toward valves that can be set very deep, but still
only require a relatively low operating pressure to control the valve. In traditional safety valve applications,
operating pressures are sensitive to the wellbore pressure and are typically above those pressures to hold the
valve in the open position. As the setting depth of these valves goes deeper, the operating pressures increase to
a significant level such that umbilical and wellhead design and performance is detrimentally affected.

As a result of these constraints that occur in deep, offshore fields, a safety valve solution is desired to provide an
ability to minimize opening pressures by balancing tubing pressure in high-pressure/high-temperature (HP/HT)
conditions, yet allow extreme valve setting depth capability without compromising operational characteristics such
as high opening pressures or pressure-balanced pistons using long-term valve gas charge storage.

This paper discusses a new surface-controlled, subsurface safety valve (SCSSV) that uses the low opening
pressures of a tubing-pressure-insensitive safety valve, without gas-charged assisted closure or dual control lines
for balanced line applications. This system enhances valve reliability by eliminating the need for pressure
reversals across the valves critical actuating piston seals while maintaining tubing pressure insensitivity. This
system provides for much deeper valve depth capabilities compared to the methods previously discussed and
also allows the safety valve to account for annulus pressure buildup scenarios not possible in current SCSSV
applications.

This paper presents design and development considerations for a new SCSSV solution allowing ultradeep setting
depths without closed volume gas charged spring techniques utilized in current deep-set SCSSV technology.
Test results will demonstrate the features, benefits, and reliability of this new safety valve in reference to
previously unattainable valve operating depths in aggressive subsea well designs or annulus pressure buildup
scenarios.

Introduction and Background

As oil and gas discoveries become more difficult to find, operators are forced to move into deeper waters to
search for profitable discoveries. In many offshore areas around the world, it is becoming common to be working
in water depths of at least 5,000 ft. At these ultradeep depths, operators face a host of challenges on all fronts of
exploration, drilling, completion and production. All of these challenges are expensive and, as a result, operators
insist on minimizing uncertainty and risk.

When considering completing a well in these ultradeep fields, a normal subsurface safety valve for these
applications must be considered. In the industry today, a normal hydraulically controlled subsurface safety valve
is one that is controlled via a hydraulic control line from the surface. These valves have a closure spring that
counteracts the resulting hydrostatic pressure within the control line such that it will fail closed in the event of loss
of applied control pressure. In the deep offshore fields such as those with 5,000 or more feet of water, the setting
2 SPE 136867
depth of these valves will need to be significantly deeper than the water depth to be reasonably below the
wellhead. In these cases, setting depths greater than 5,000 ft will be required and this is pushing the physical
limits of existing normal, heavy-sprung subsurface safety valves. At these depths, two factors within the safety
valve design prove impossible to ignore. The first is the factor of the closure spring design, which becomes
apparent when trying to reach depths greater than 5,000 ft. While it is still possible to package a spring within a
valves geometrical envelope to lift the hydrostatic pressure in the control line, the forces become physically
limiting at depths between 5,000 and 10,000 ft. The other factor that makes a normal safety valve design difficult
is the operating pressure required to open the valve. A normal, heavy-sprung valve is tubing-pressure-
dependent, which means that the opening pressure required will be in addition to the amount of pressure in the
tubing at the safety valve. At these ultradeep setting depths, opening pressures of 7,500 to 12,000 psi, in addition
to tubing pressure, can be required. As these fields are ultradeep, they typically exhibit havehigh pressure
reservoirs. Therefore, the opening pressures become physically prohibitive due to the addition of tubing pressure.

In order to achieve deeper depths without driving opening pressures prohibitively high, another deepwater safety
valve design was introduced to keep opening pressures low while striving to achieve deep setting depths. This
valve design achieved deep setting depths with the use of a nitrogen-gas-charged spring. This design enabled
deep setting depths as a gas charge was used to provide the energy for closure and it became possible to
physically set these valves at up to 10,000 ft from the surface. Given that the the gas charge was applied to the
lower side of the operating piston, the valve became tubing-pressure-insensitive and the operating pressures
became relatively low as compared to a normal, heavy-sprung valve. However, these nitrogen-charged valves
were more sensitive to temperature fluctuations. As such, nitrogen-charged valves fit extremely well in fields with
deep water depths that required setting depths below 5,000 ft water depth and below 250F. As exploration
technology developed into ever greater water depths, nitrogen-charged valves began to show their limitations and
a new valve design became desired for those depths beyond 5,000 ft from surface and temperatures beyond
250F.


Safety Valve Design

Historical Design Philosophies

As detailed above, the critical factors for designing an ultradeep setting depth safety valve are achieving a high
closing pressure while maintaining a relatively low opening pressure. For ultradeepwater fields, wellbore
pressures could reach 5,000 psi, 10,000 psi, or even higher. As such, a normal, heavy-sprung valve doesnt
easily fit into these scenarios because the actual tubing pressure must be added to the required opening pressure
of the valve. In deep waters that require setting depths of more than 5,000 ft below the surface, opening
pressures with these wellbore pressures could reach between 15,000 psi and 20,000 psi. As a result, a normal,
heavy-sprung valve only offers the significant closing forces, but has opening pressures that are too high and
unacceptable for these applications. One other benefit of a normal, heavy-sprung valve is its relative insensitivity
to temperature changes.

In order to reduce the opening pressure requirement of a valve for these deep setting depths, the tubing pressure
must be taken out of the equation, which means designing a tubing-pressure-insensitive valve. In the last 10
years, the gas-charged or nitrogen-charged safety valve design has found applications for these scenarios. In
these valve designs, a relatively light mechanical closure spring is paired with a nitrogen charge that acts as an
additional gas spring for closure. Tubing pressure insensitivity is accomplished by using an actuating piston that
is contained in both an upper and a lower balanced piston bore. As shown in Fig. 1, when the piston operates in
the same-diameter piston bore for both the upper and lower seal stacks, the tubing pressure is effectively
balanced and cancels out. One of the additional benefits of this type of design is that the nitrogen gas pressure
that is applied to the lower piston bore can be varied prior to running, which essentially changes the setting depth
or closure force that is applied. This convenience simplifies the valve design, yet complicates the setup of the
valve prior to running. With this valve design in practical applications, setting depths between 5,000 ft and 10,000
ft are achievable with opening pressures below 15,000 psi. However, the temperature of the application plays a
significant role in these pressures due to its effect on the gas charge.




SPE 136867 3

Tubing pressure acts on both the upper seal
stack and lower seal stack. With equal areas,
the forces are balanced and, therefore,
insensitive to tubing pressure.

Fig. 1. Cross-sectional view of a piston configuration demonstrating tubing-pressure-insensitivity. The
piston is contained in both an upper and a lower piston bore with the same area. As tubing pressure acts
upon the upper and lower seal stacks, it is balanced in opposing directions.


While the nitrogen-charged valve design appears to have the necessary characteristics for use in ultradeepwater
fields, it doesnt fit every application. The reason for this is because of the temperature influence in the setup and
operation of these valves in fields with high temperatures above 200F to 250F. In cases with well temperatures
above 250F, the initial nitrogen charge pressure that is applied during setup rises dramatically enough to push
the opening pressures of the valve into unacceptable ranges above 15,000 psi for those 5,000-ft to 10,000-ft
ranges.


New Design Philosophy

The preceding discussion generates a valid query in asking what can be done to take advantage of tubing-
pressure-insensitivity in an SCSSV while not relying on a limiting nitrogen charge due to temperature fluctuations.
In this case, a new design concept incorporating a normal, heavy-sprung valve design can be combined with a
closed-volume nitrogen-charged valve that provides extreme setting depth possibilities with the low opening
pressures that result from tubing-pressure-insensitivity. However, instead of charging the closed volume below
the piston with nitrogen, this volume is left as an atmospheric chamber that isolates the tubing pressure from
acting on the piston itself. The mechanical closure spring is then designed to provide all of the closing force while
the atmospheric chamber keeps tubing pressure from adding into the required opening pressure to operate the
valve. Fig. 2 below shows how the nitrogen-charged valve and the new design using an atmospheric chamber
are designed. Again, in the nitrogen-charged valve, high-pressure gas is applied to the lower piston seal stack,
but uses a light spring for its closure force. In the new atmospheric chamber valve, the low atmospheric pressure
is captured below the lower piston seal stack, but uses a heavy spring for its closure force.


4 SPE 136867

Lower Seal Stack
Middle Seal Stack
Hole through piston
communicates
nitrogen or
atmospheric
pressure to area
between upper and
middle seal stacks
Tubing pressure
in valve body
Control line
pressure from
surface
Nitrogen charge
pressure or
atmospheric pressure
in new design
Upper Seal Stack
Nitrogen Charged Valve: Upper seal stack sees differential pressure
reversals between control line pressure and nitrogen charge pressure.
Middle and lower seal stacks see differential pressure reversals between
nitrogen charge pressure and tubing pressure.
Atmospheric Chamber Valve: Upper seal stack always has positive
differential pressure from control line to atmospheric chamber (from
communication hole). Middle and lower seal stacks always have positive
differential pressure from tubing to atmospheric chamber.

Fig. 2. Cross-sectional view of piston seal stack arrangement for nitrogen-charged valve and
atmospheric chamber valve. Note the way pressure reversals across the seal stacks are different
between the valve designs.



Similar to the nitrogen-charged valve, the new atmospheric chamber valve design also appears to have enhanced
characteristics for use in ultradeepwater fields. Additionally, this valve design should be less sensitive to
temperatures and could be used in temperature applications as high as 350F. With a heavy mechanical closure
spring, setting depths up to 10,000 ft could be achievable at these temperatures with opening pressures below
15,000 psi. Additionally, these valves should show improved robustness in performance over the nitrogen-
charged valve as the sealing systems arent required to contain the high-pressure closed volume of nitrogen gas
for extended life.

In addition to the benefits of lower opening pressures for the ultradeep setting depth valves, there was a desire to
add improved reliability and performance to the overall design. As these valves are targeted for ultradeepwater
fields, these developments will likely be subsea completions and therefore, very difficult and costly to intervene in
the event of valve problems. One primary area of focus for this required reliability in performance is within the
dynamic sealing system. Like the nitrogen-charged safety valves that preceeded this design, the dynamic sealing
system must contain a closed volume and therefore, must be very reliable. In a nitrogen-charged valve, these
seals need to contain the nitrogen gas charge at pressures of up to 10,000 to 12,000 psi at elevated temperatures
for the life of the valve. While these valves tend to be very reliable in containing nitrogen, they have the potential
to be sensitive to slight nitrogen gas loss over time.

In the proposed valve design, it is desired to take these reliable sealing systems and improve them even further
so that they wont be sensitive to slight leakage over time. One possible variation to the sealing system is to
change how pressure is applied to the seals. In nitrogen-charged valves, the dynamic seals contain nitrogen
pressure that can be either higher or lower than tubing pressure or control line pressure. In this nitrogen-charged
valve, differential pressures across the dynamic seals can reverse as the valve is opened and closed. In the
proposed valve design with the atmospheric chamber, the dynamic seals will only need to hold differential
pressures in one constant direction regardless of opening or closing. Using the same piston seal arrangement, it
can be seen that a low atmospheric pressure below the piston and between the upper and middle piston seals.
This leads to tubing pressures and control line pressures that are always greater than or equal to the atmospheric
pressure chamber and doesnt result in pressure reversals across the seals. This type of sealing will be more
reliable in the long term than those that result in reversals of differential pressures. At those times where the
pressures reverse, the seal becomes the most susceptible to leakage.
SPE 136867 5
While this design using an atmospheric chamber and unique dynamic sealing system should allow never-before
possible deep setting depths within reasonable opening and operating pressures, it will need to be proven with
testing results in order to validate this design.

Safety Valve Testing

In order to qualify this new valve design, a suitable test program was developed. In creating this evaluation
program, testing needed to not only demonstrate performance, but also reliability. This was an absolute necessity
since these valves are targeted for ultradeepwater applications where intervention is extremely difficult and costly.
For this test program, a size 4-1/2-in. safety valve with a 10,000-psi working pressure and 350F temperature
rating was prepared. This product successfully completed all of the tests presented below (not necessarily in the
order presented).

Industry Standard Tests Functional and API 14A Class 1 & 2 Validation

Industry standard testing required by ISO 10432 and API 14A qualify a safety valve, but only in a limited fashion.
The only two normative tests required in these standards involve a functional test (or factory acceptance test) and
an Annex defined validation test. The functional test evaluates the control system with a long pressure hold at the
maximum rated control pressure to demonstrate high-pressure sealability. The test continues with opening and
closing cycles with no tubing pressure and half working pressure. This demonstrates repeatiblity in performance
at the two differing tubing pressure values. Leak checks through the control system and across the closure
mechanism are performed later in the test with both water and nitrogen gas; high pressure is demonstrated with
liquid and lower pressures (below 1200 psi) are demonstrated with nitrogen gas. All of the functional testing is
peformed at ambient temperature. The 4-1/2-in. 10,000-psi safety valve performed extremely well in this test with
no leakage into the atmospheric chamber, excellent repeatability in operating pressures, and no leakage across
the closure mechanism.

During validation testing, the valve is subjected to low-velocity gas slams, moderate temperature testing to 180F,
operational evaluations and holds, clean water flows, and finally sandy slurry flows. Throughout this test, the
control system and closure mechanism are evaluated for leakage and the control system is monitored for
repeatability in operating pressures. This test is actually the last test performed in the prototype test program, as
succesful completion allows the valve to be monogrammed with the ISO or API stamp. The 4-1/2-in. 10,000-
psisubsurface safety valve performed extremely well in this test with no leakage into the atmospheric chamber,
excellent repeatability in operating pressures in both Class 1 and Class 2 sandy service flows, and neglible
leakage across the closure mechanism in Class 2 flows.


Cyclic Temperature Test

A cyclic temperature test was devised to evaluate the overall valve performance under conditions of maximum
and minimum temperature values, full working pressure in the tubing, and nitrogen gas as the tubing media. For
the 4-1/2-in. 10,000-psi working pressure valve, the minimum and maximum temperature ratings were 40F to
350F respectively. The test consisted of applying nitrogen gas into the tubing section to 10,000 psi while cooled
to 40F and running a significant portion of cycles to evaluate the operating pressures to open and close the
valve. During each cycle, the control line pressure is applied up to the maximum control pressure rating.
Following that evaluation, the temperature was increased to ambient and another significant number of cycles
were performed. Following completion, again the temperature was increased to the maximum rating of 350F and
the cycles continued. Moving through the test, the temperatures were varied down and then back up to complete
the defined number of cycles to qualify the valve for a finite life that would exceed the majority of reservoir life
spans. During the test, repeatability of opening and closing cycles were evaluated along with any leakage of gas
into the atmospheric chamber. These results were excellent with predictable opening and closing pressures and
no leakage detected into the atmospheric chamber. In addtion, leak checks were performed on the valve closure
mechanism throughout the test with no leakage detected. As part of this test, a very deep setting depth spring
was used with a target depth of 5,000 ft. Actual results indicated the valve could be set at 6,000 ft with an
opening pressure of under 10,000 psi in the worst-case conditions throughout the test. In reviewing the test data,
these operating results indicate that deeper setting depth targets of 10,000 ft with opening pressures close to
15,000 psi are indeed possible at 350F. Again, as indicated above, this has never been achievable with previous
heavy-sprung or nitrogen-charged valve designs.


6 SPE 136867
Setting Depth Evaluation

In order to further evaluate valve performance, a specific setting depth test was created to evaluate the setting
depth or closing pressures and how the various factors such as temperature, tubing media, and tubing pressure
could influence the values. Although experience had been gained in the cyclic temperature test, the engineering
team desired to evaluate any further effects. As a result, the valve was tested at the maximum and minimum
temperatures, with liquid and later gas in the tubing and various tubing pressure applications. Again, opening and
closing pressures were evaluated for a significant series of cycles at the various test points. As a result, it was
determined how the significant variables such as temperature, pressure and tubing media affect setting depth,
which allows for accurate predictions when designing valves for alternate setting depths.

Atmospheric Chamber Sensitivity Evaluation

Although the atmospheric chamber didnt show any leakage in the cyclic temperature test, there was a desire to
evaluate the sensitivity of this chamber to leakage of liquid or gas in the event of a dynamic seal problem. In
order to set up this test, the atmospheric chamber was initially filled with a small volume of water and a series of
opening and closing cycles were performed. Following the set number of cycles, an additional incremental fluid
volume was added into the atmospheric chamber and the cycles were repeated. This process was continued
until the atmospheric chamber was entirely filled with fluid. At the end of the test, the opening and closing
pressures were compared versus the amount of fluid in the atmospheric chamber. Interestingly, the amount of
liquid volume did not significantly increase opening pressures until the chamber was almost completely full of
liquid. This was interesting in that it demonstrated that the valve is relatively insignificantly sensitive to liquid
leakage into the atmospheric chamber.

High-Velocity Gas Slam Test

Although the API 14A validation test requires some low-velocity gas slam closure evaluations, the greatest
velocity achieved through the valves internal diameter is only 40 ft/s. In the high-velocity gas slam test, the 4-1/2-
in. 10,000-psi valve was slam tested with nitrogen at flowing pressures around 1200 psi and internal velocities
from 50 ft/s up through 185 ft/s at 177 MMSCFD. The velocities were increased with each slam closure
approximately 20 ft/s each time. The equalizing flapper performed exremely well with leakage less than 0.2
SCFM after all of the slam closures. The operating system, including the atmospheric chamber, performed
extremely well and showed excellent repeatability and no damage accumulated from any of the high-velocity
closures.

Combined Loading Test

In order to evaluate the integrity of the valve housings under combined internal pressure and tensile loading
conditions, a combined load test was completed on the 4-1/2-in. 10,000-psi working pressure valve. In this test,
the valve follows API 5C5 guidelines by applying combinations of internal gas pressure and applied external
tension that stresses the housing components to 95% of their actual yield strength values. During the test,
leakage is monitored through the housing joints. In this test, the valve successfully completed this test and
demonstrated no leakage through any of the housing joints.

Reliability Evaluation

As it was important to demonstrate valve performance with the suite of tests above, it was also important to
evaluate reliability with respect to cyclic temperature testing. Since this test incorporated the total number of
cycles anticipated for a finite life of most reservoirs, it was important to verify that the valve could consistently
demonstrate equivalent performance multiple times. As such, the valve was prepared for another cyclic
temperature test. Once again, the valve performed well throughout the test described earlier and demonstrated
consistent performance with repeatable operating pressures and no leakage into the atmospheric chamber.

By the end of the prototype test program, it had been demonstrated that this new valve control system is capable
of meeting the desired applications of ultradeepwater with extreme setting depths, HP/HT and low opening
pressure requirements. The test program showed that operating pressures under 10,000 psi at 350F for valves
with setting depths greater than 5,000 ft feet below the surface are indeed possible. This has not been achieved
previously with heavy-sprung valve designs or even nitrogen-charged valve designs.


SPE 136867 7
Conclusions

A newly designed hydraulically actuated tubing retrievable safety valve has been designed and tested to provide
the following advantages:

1. The valve is tubing-pressure-insensitive, which provides a significant benefit of keeping opening
pressures relatively low with respect to tubing pressure and setting depth.
2. Setting depths beyond 5,000 ft for 10,000 psi working pressure valves are now possible with opening
pressures below 10,000 psi at 350F
3. A robust dynamic seal design was designed and validated to provide additional reliability for extremely
long service life.
4. The valve design and validation test program has proven ultradeepwater fields are now feasible for
reliable safe gas and hydrocarbon production.


Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Baker Hughes for the opportunity to publish the enclosed material.

Nomenclature

HP/HT: High pressure and high temperature. These are typically pressures greater than 15,000 psi and
temperatures greater than 350F.
psi: Units of pressure in pounds per square inch
API: American Petroleum Institute
ISO: International Standards Organization
SCSSV: Subsurface-controlled subsurface safety valve