1

PETE 661
Drilling Engineering
Lesson 5
Casing Design
2
Assignments:
READ: ADE Ch. 7

HW # 4: API Pressure Drop
Due Monday, Sept. 29
3
Casing Design
 Why Run Casing?
 Types of Casing Strings
 Classification of Casing
 Wellheads
 Burst, Collapse and Tension
 Example
 Effect of Axial Tension on Collapse Strength
 Example
4
Casing Design
Why run casing?

1. To prevent the hole from caving in
2. Onshore - to prevent contamination of
fresh water sands
3. To prevent water migration to
producing formation
What is casing?
Casing
Cement
5
Casing Design
4. To confine production to the wellbore

5. To control pressures during drilling

6. To provide an acceptable environment for
subsurface equipment in producing wells

7. To enhance the probability of drilling to total
depth (TD)

e.g., you need 14 ppg mud to control a lower zone,
but an upper zone will fracture at 12 lb/gal.
What do you do?
6
Types of Strings of Casing
1. Drive pipe or structural pile
{Gulf Coast and offshore only}
150’-300’ below mudline.

2. Conductor string. 100’ - 1,600’
(BML)

3. Surface pipe. 2,000’ - 4,000’
(BML)
Diameter Example

16”-60” 30”

16”-48” 20”

8 5/8”-20” 13 3/8”
7
Types of Strings of Casing
4. Intermediate String

5. Production String (Csg.)

6. Liner(s)

7. Tubing String(s)
7 5/8”-13 3/8” 9 5/8”
Diameter Example
4 1/2”-9 5/8” 7”
8
Example Hole and String Sizes (in)
Structural casing
Conductor string


Surface pipe

IntermediateString

Production Liner
Hole Size
30”
20”

13 3/8

9 5/8

7
Pipe Size
36”
26”

17 1/2

12 1/4

8 3/4
9
Example Hole and String Sizes (in)
Structural casing
Conductor string







Surface pipe
IntermediateString
Production Liner
250’

1,000’


4,000’

Mudline
10
Classification of CSG.
1. Outside diameter of pipe (e.g. 9 5/8”)
2. Wall thickness (e.g. 1/2”)
3. Grade of material (e.g. N-80)
4. Type to threads and couplings (e.g. API LCSG)
5. Length of each joint (RANGE) (e.g. Range 3)
6. Nominal weight (Avg. wt/ft incl. Wt. Coupling)
(e.g. 47 lb/ft)
11
o
c
12
Length of Casing Joints
RANGE 1 16-25 ft

RANGE 2 25-34 ft

RANGE 3 > 34 ft.
13
Casing Threads and Couplings
API round threads - short { CSG }
API round thread - long { LCSG }
Buttress { BCSG }
Extreme line { XCSG }
Other …

See Halliburton Book...
14
API Design Factors (typical)
Collapse 1.125

Tension 1.8

Burst 1.1
Required

10,000 psi

100,000 lbf

10,000 psi
Design

11,250 psi

180,000 lbf

11,000 psi
15
Normal Pore Pressure Abnormal Pore Pressure
0.433 - 0.465 psi/ft g
p
> normal
Abnormal
16
Design from bottom
17
X-mas Tree
Wing Valve
Choke Box
Master
Valves
Wellhead

• Hang Csg. Strings
• Provide Seals
• Control Production
from Well
Press. Gauge
18
Wellhead
19
Wellhead
20
Casing Design
Burst: Assume full reservoir pressure all along the wellbore.
Collapse: Hydrostatic pressure increases with depth
Tension: Tensile stress due to weight of string is highest at top
STRESS
Tension
Burst
Collapse
Collapse
Tension
Depth
Burst
21
Casing Design - Collapse
Collapse pressure is affected by axial stress
22
Casing Design - Tension
23
Casing Design - Burst
(from internal pressure)
 Internal Yield Pressure for pipe
 Internal Yield Pressure for couplings
 Internal pressure leak resistance
p
p
Internal
Pressure
24
Casing Design - Burst
Example 1

Design a 7” Csg. String to 10,000 ft.

Pore pressure gradient = 0.5 psi/ft
Design factor, N
i
=1.1

Design for burst only.
25
Burst Example
1. Calculate probable reservoir pressure.
psi 000 , 5 ft 000 , 10 *
ft
psi
5 . 0 p
res
= =
2. Calculate required pipe internal yield
pressure rating
psi 500 , 5 1 . 1 * 000 , 5 N * p p
i res i
= = =
N
i
= API Design Factor for BURST = 1.1
26
Example
3. Select the appropriate csg. grade and wt.
from the Halliburton Cementing tables:

Burst Pressure required = 5,500 psi

7”, J-55, 26 lb/ft has BURST Rating of 4,980 psi
7”, N-80, 23 lb/ft has BURST Rating of 6,340 psi
7”, N-80, 26 lb/ft has BURST Rating of 7,249 psi

Use N-80 Csg., 23 lb/ft
27
28
23 lb/ft
26 lb/ft

N-80
29
Collapse Pressure
The following factors are important:

 The collapse pressure resistance of a pipe
depends on the axial stress

 The API Design Factor
30
Casing Design
Collapse pressure - with axial stress

1.
¦
)
¦
`
¹
¦
¹
¦
´
¦
|
|
.
|

\
|
÷
(
(
¸
(

¸

|
|
.
|

\
|
÷ =
P
A
2 / 1
2
P
A
P PA
Y
S
5 . 0
Y
S
75 . 0 1 Y Y
Y
PA
= yield strength of axial stress
equivalent grade, psi
Y
P
= minimum yield strength of pipe, psi
S
A
= Axial stress, psi (tension is positive)
31
Example 3
Determine the collapse strength for a 5 1/2” O.D.,
14.00 #/ft, J-55 casing under axial load of 100,000 lbf

The axial tension will reduce the collapse pressure
as follows:
P
p
A
2
p
A
PA
Y
Y
S
5 . 0
Y
S
75 . 0 1 Y
(
(
(
¸
(

¸

|
|
.
|

\
|
÷
|
|
.
|

\
|
÷ =
( )
psi
Area
F
S
A
A
820 , 24
012 . 5 5 . 5
4
000 , 100
2 2
=
÷
= =
t
32
Example 3 cont’d
The axial tension will reduce the collapse
pressure rating to:
psi 216 , 38
000 , 55
000 , 55
820 , 24
5 . 0
000 , 55
820 , 24
75 . 0 1 Y
2
PA
=
(
(
¸
(

¸

|
.
|

\
|
÷
|
.
|

\
|
÷ =
Here the axial load decreased the J-55
rating to an equivalent “J-38.2” rating
P
p
A
p
A
PA
Y
Y
S
Y
S
Y
(
(
(
¸
(

¸

|
|
.
|

\
|
÷
|
|
.
|

\
|
÷ = 5 . 0 75 . 0 1
2
33
Example 3 - cont’d
We shall be using API Tables to correct for the
effect of axial tension on collapse strength of
casing.
The Halliburton Cementing Tables list the
collapse resistance of 5 ½ -in, 14.00 lb/ft J-55
casing at 3,120 psi.

The axial tension in this case would derate the
collapse strength to about 2,550 psi.
34
35
36
Casing Design Example
 Example Problem
 API Design Factors
 “Worst Possible Conditions”
 Effect of Axial Tension on Collapse Strength
 Iteration and Interpolation
 Design for Burst, Collapse and Tension
37
Casing Design Example
Design a 9 5/8-in., 8,000-ft combination
casing string for a well where the mud wt.
will be 12.5 ppg and the formation pore
pressure is expected to be 6,000 psi.

Only the grades and weights shown are
available (N-80, all weights). Use API
design factors.

Design for “worst possible conditions.”
38
Casing Design - Solution
Before solving this problem is it necessary to
understand what we mean by “Design Factors”
and “worst possible conditions”.

API Design Factors
Design factors are essentially “safety factors”
that allow us to design safe, reliable casing
strings. Each operator may have his own set
of design factors, based on his experience,
and the condition of the pipe.
39
Casing Design
In PETE 661, we’ll use the design factors
recommended by the API unless otherwise
specified.

These are the API design Factors:

Tension and Joint Strength: N
T
= 1.8
Collapse (from external pressure): N
c
= 1.125
Burst (from internal pressure): N
i
= 1.1
40
Casing Design
What this means is that, for example, if we
need to design a string where the maximum
tensile force is expected to be 100,000 lbf,
we select pipe that can handle 100,000 * 1.8
= 180,000 lbf in tension.

Note that the Halliburton Cementing Tables
list actual pipe strengths, without safety
factors built in.
41
Casing Design
Unless otherwise specified in a particular
problem, we shall also assume the following:

Worst Possible Conditions
1. For Collapse design, assume that the
casing is empty on the inside (p = 0 psig)

2. For Burst design, assume no “backup”
fluid on the outside of the casing (p = 0 psig)
42
Casing Design
Worst Possible Conditions, cont’d
3. For Tension design,
assume no buoyancy effect

4. For Collapse design,
assume no buoyancy effect
The casing string must be designed to stand up to the
expected conditions in burst, collapse and tension.
Above conditions are quite conservative. They are also
simplified for easier understanding of the basic concepts.
43
Casing Design - Solution

Burst Requirements (based on the expected pore
pressure)





The whole casing string must be capable of
withstanding this internal pressure without failing in
burst.
psi 600 , 6 P
1 . 1 * psi 000 , 6
Factor Design * pressure pore P
B
B



=
=
=
D
e
p
t
h

Pressure
44
Casing Design - Solution
Collapse Requirements
For collapse design, we start at the bottom of
the string and work our way up.

Our design criteria will be based on
hydrostatic pressure resulting from the 12.5
ppg mud that will be in the hole when the
casing string is run, prior to cementing.
45
Casing Design
Collapse Requirements, cont’d
severe less are
ts requiremen collapse the hole the up Further
. bottom the at d ' req psi 850 , 5 P
125 . 1 * 000 , 8 * 5 . 12 * 052 . 0
factor design * depth * weight mud * 052 . 0 P
c
c
÷ =
=
=
D
e
p
t
h

Pressure
46
Casing Design
Req’d: Burst: 6,600 psi Collapse: 5,850 psi
47
Casing Design
Note that two of the weights of N-80 casing
meet the burst requirements, but only the
53.5 #/ft pipe can handle the collapse
requirement at the bottom of the hole (5,850
psi).

The 53.5 #/ft pipe could probably run all the
way to the surface (would still have to check
tension), but there may be a lower cost
alternative.
48
Casing Design
To what depth might we
be able to run N-80, 47
#/ft? The maximum
annular pressure that this
pipe may be exposed to,
is:
psi 231 , 4
125 . 1
760 , 4
factor design
pipe of pressure Collapse
P
c
= = =
D
e
p
t
h

Pressure
49
Casing Design
First Iteration
At what depth do we see this pressure (4,231
psig) in a column of 12.5 #/gal mud?
ft 509 , 6
5 . 12 * 052 . 0
231 , 4
5 . 12 * 052 . 0
P
h
h * 5 . 12 * 052 . 0 P
c
1
1 c
= = =
=
50
Casing Design
This is the depth to which the pipe
could be run if there were
no axial stress in the pipe…

But at 6,509’ we have (8,000 - 6,509) =
1,491’ of 53.5 #/ft pipe below us.

The weight of this pipe will reduce the
collapse resistance of the 47.0 #/ft pipe!
8,000’
6,509’
51
Casing Design
Weight, W
1
= 53.5 #/ft * 1,491 ft
= 79,769 lbf

This weight results in an axial
stress in the 47 #/ft pipe
psi 877 , 5
in 13.572
lbf 769 , 79
area end
weight
S of
2
1
= = =
52
Casing Design
The API tables show that the above
stress will reduce the collapse resistance
from 4,760 to somewhere between

4,680 psi (with 5,000 psi stress)
and 4,600 psi (with 10,000 psi stress)
53
Casing Design
Interpolation between these values shows
that the collapse resistance at 5,877 psi
axial stress is:
psi 148 , 4
125 . 1
666 , 4
P
psi 666 , 4 ) 600 , 4 680 , 4 ( *
) 000 , 5 000 , 10 (
) 000 , 5 877 , 5 (
680 , 4 P
cc1
1 c
= =
= ÷
÷
÷
÷ =
With the design factor,
( )
2 1
1 2
1
1 c1
P P P
S S
S S
P ÷
|
|
.
|

\
|
÷
÷
÷ =
54
Casing Design
This (4,148 psig) is the pressure at a
depth



Which differs considerably from the
initial depth of 6,509 ft, so a second
iteration is required.
ft 382 , 6
5 . 12 * 052 . 0
148 , 4
h
2
= =
55
56
57
Casing Design
Second Iteration
Now consider running the 47 #/ft
pipe to the new depth of 6,382 ft.
psi 378 , 6
in 572 . 13
lbf 563 , 86
S
lbf 563 , 86 5 . 53 * ) 382 , 6 000 , 8 ( W
2
2
2
= =
= ÷ =
58
Casing Design
Interpolating again,





This is the pressure at a depth of


( ) psi p
cc
140 , 4 600 , 4 680 , 4 *
5000
5000 378 , 6
680 , 4
125 . 1
1
2
=
)
`
¹
¹
´
¦
(
¸
(

¸

÷
÷
÷ =
ft 369 , 6
5 . 12 * 052 . 0
140 , 4
h
3
= =
( )
(
(
¸
(

¸

÷
|
|
.
|

\
|
÷
÷
÷ =
2 1
1 2
1
1 c1
D.F.
1
P P P
S S
S S
P
59
Casing Design
This is within 13 ft of the assumed value. If
more accuracy is desired (generally not
needed), proceed with the:
Third Iteration

psi 429 , 6
572 . 13
259 , 87
S
lbf 259 , 87 5 . 53 * ) 369 , 6 000 , 8 ( W
' 369 , 6 h
3
3
3
= =
= ÷ =
=
P
cc3
= ?
60
Casing Design
Third Iteration, cont’d

2
3
140 , 4

) 600 , 4 680 , 4 ( *
000 , 5
000 , 5 429 , 6
680 , 4
125 . 1
1

cc
cc
P psi
P thus
= =
)
`
¹
¹
´
¦
÷
÷
÷ =
61
Casing Design
Third Iteration, cont’d
This is the answer we are looking for, i.e.,
we can run 47 #/ft N-80 pipe to a depth of
6,369 ft, and 53.5 #/ft pipe between 6,369
and 8,000 ft.

Perhaps this string will run all the way to the
surface (check tension), or perhaps an even
more economical string would include some
43.5 #/ft pipe?
62
Casing Design
At some depth the 43.5 #/ft pipe would be
able to handle the collapse requirements,
but we have already determined that it will
not meet burst requirements.
! NO
63
N-80
53.5 #/ft
N-80
47.0 #/ft
N-80
43.5 #/ft?
Depth = 5,057?
5,066?
5,210?
Depth = 6,369
6,369
6,382
6,509
8,000
64
Tension Check
The weight on the top joint of casing
would be



With a design factor of 1.8 for tension, a
pipe strength of
weight actual 602 , 386
) / # 5 . 53 * 631 , 1 ( ) / # 0 . 47 * 369 , 6 (
lbs
ft ft ft ft
=
+
required is lbf 080 , 695 602 , 386 * 8 . 1 =
65
Tension Check
The Halliburton cementing tables give a
yield strength of 1,086,000 lbf for the pipe
body and a joint strength of 905,000 lbf for
LT & C.
surface to OK is ft / # 0 . 47