You are on page 1of 9

# Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 128 (2015) 44–52

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/petrol

A simple and accurate numeric solution procedure for nonlinear
buckling model of drill string with frictional effect
Youhong Sun a, Yongping Yu a,b,n, Baochang Liu a
a
b

College of Construction Engineering, Jilin University, Changchun 130026, PR China
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA

art ic l e i nf o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 9 April 2014
Accepted 17 February 2015
Available online 25 February 2015

The nonlinear buckling analysis of drill string in a rigid well is presented in this paper. Considering
effects of friction and boundary constraints, this problem could be taken as a model of a rod laterally
constrained in a rigid cylinder (horizontal, oblique and vertical rigid cylinder could be included). After
introducing a new variable, the resulting coupled nonlinear integral–differential equations are successfully solved by employing the extended system shooting method. Examples with various friction
coefﬁcients and combinations of boundary conditions are proposed. It is found that the axial frictional
force plays a more signiﬁcant part on buckling load for horizontal well than vertical one. Compared to
experimental data or results obtained by using the discrete singular convolution algorithm (DSC) and the
ﬁnite element method (FEM), the accuracy of the formulations and solution procedures, is veriﬁed.
What’s more, the nonlinear buckling behaviors of two instances of vertical scientiﬁc wells are analyzed.
The present results are useful for practical design applications related to calculation of buckling loads
and selection of bottom hole assembly (BHA) elements.
& 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Buckling
Horizontal well
Friction
Shooting method
Drill string

1. Introduction
This study of the structural buckling behavior of drill pipes is
motivated by interest in many aspects of petroleum engineering
(such as the functions of pipes, safety and surveying accuracy of
down-hole instruments, etc.). Because of the high frequency of
drill string failure, drill string lock-up, and casing wear, the
stability of drill string has been a serious problem in oil/gas ﬁeld
operations for many years (Gulyayev et al., 2009; Tan and Gan,
2009). On the other hand, with the development of drilling
technology, oil/gas and deep continental scientiﬁc drilling wells
become very long currently, even more than ten kilometers.
Furthermore, some oil/gas and deep continental scientiﬁc drilling
wells may have very complex geometrical conﬁgurations, such
that parts of wells may be inclined, vertical, horizontal, just plane
curved, and even 3-D curved. Therefore, it is important and
meaningful to investigate the buckling behavior of drill string for
the science and technologies in petroleum engineering, deep
continental scientiﬁc drilling and other related ﬁelds.

n
Corresponding author at: College of Construction Engineering, Jilin University,
Changchun 130026, PR China.
E-mail addresses: yuyongping@jlu.edu.cn, yuypjlu@berkeley.edu (Y. Yu).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2015.02.026
0920-4105/& 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

In despite of the complexity of the problem, many results are
still reported. Paslay and Bogy (1964) ﬁrst studied the problem of
sinusoidal buckling of the tube. Based on the principle of minimum potential energy, the problem of helical buckling of a vertical
tube was ﬁrst analyzed by Lubinski et al. (1962). Since then,
Cheatham and Pattillo (1984), He and Kyllingstad (1993), Miska
and Cunha (1995) have studied helical buckling of tubes in vertical,
horizontal or inclined wellbores, based on the energy method.
Experimental study of helical buckling of a horizontal rod in a tube
was performed by McCann and Suryanarayana (1994). While
Wicks et al. (2008) reviewed available analytical and experimental
results on the structural behavior of constrained horizontal cylinders subjected to axial compression, torsion, and gravity.
Frictional interactions with the constraining wellbore could
cause buckling lock-up of drill strings, in which the drill strings are
unable to progress, especially in large displacement horizontal
wells. Understanding the post-buckling behavior of drill string,
therefore, is important to avoid lock-up condition. Mitchell (1986),
Wu and Juvkam-Wold (1993), Gao and Miska (2009) have took the
friction effects into consideration in the theoretical analysis, while
McCann and Suryanarayana (1994) study the frictional effects on
buckling behavior by experimental method. Recently, Gan et al.
(2009) use the differential quadrature element method to investigate effect of the gravitational and friction loads on buckling
behavior of drill string, in order to overcome the shortage of the

weight per unit length and bending rigidity of the rod are L. Wang and Yuan (2012) investigate the effects of friction and boundary constraints on the nonlinear buckling behavior of a relatively short rod constrained in a rigid horizontal cylinder and subjected to axial compression. v. Sketch of a drill string in a rigid well (including horizontal and vertical wells). ð10Þ S 0 ! Ndτ ðθ0 Þ2 þ ðθ0 Þ4  Q cos θ sin α ¼ 0 θð0Þ ¼ θð2π Þ ¼ θ″ð0Þ ¼ θ″ð2π Þ ¼ 0 S S ð11Þ ð12Þ . (2) (4)–(7) and (9) can be expressed in the following dimensionless form: ! Z S θð4Þ þ λ þ qS cos α  μ Ndτ θ″ þ ðq cos α  μN Þθ0  6ðθ0 Þ2 θ″ 0 þ Q sin θ sin α ¼ 0 Z N  λ þ qS cos α  μ Fig. (Yuan and Wang. 2012) 9 8 8 9 8 9  r dθ sin θ > ds > > > Z s> = < <u > = > < r cos θ > = cos θ r dθ v ds ð9Þ ¼ r sin θ þ ds > > > > > > 0 > : . 2008). 1. could be approximated by β  sin β ¼ r dθ ds ð8Þ For details of the model derivation. Wicks et al. q and EI. here W n is the contact force per unit length. 2008. The rod is subjected to a compressive force P at its left end and a resulting RL compressive force F b ¼ P þqL cos α  μ 0 W n ds at its right end if the θð0Þ ¼ θðLÞ ¼ θ0 ð0Þ ¼ θ″ðLÞ ¼ 0 C S ð6Þ θð0Þ ¼ θðLÞ ¼ θ0 ð0Þ ¼ θ0 ðLÞ ¼ 0 CC ð7Þ where θ is the deviation angle of the drill string axis in the X. . Through analyzing the buckling deformation of drill strings in two speciﬁc wells. They conclude that effects of friction on the buckling behavior are strongly depended on the boundary conditions for short drill pipes. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the nonlinear buckling analysis of drill string in a rigid well by using the extended system shooting method. and μ is the frictional coefﬁcient. A modiﬁed version of DSC-based iterative scheme is presented to solve the coupled nonlinear integral–differential equations. although real boundary conditions would involve rod centralized in packers. Note that initially the rod laterally contacts with the cylinder to simplify the problem. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 128 (2015) 44–52 local methods (such as the ﬁnite element method). : . compared to experimental data or results obtained by using the DSC and FEM. The path of the deformed drill pipe centerline could be calculated by the following formulae. The buckling governing equation of a drill string with a wellbore can be expressed as in the following form (Mitchell.. therefore. while the vertical one is α ¼ 01. Nonlinear buckling equations θð0Þ ¼ θðLÞ ¼ θ″ð0Þ ¼ θ0 ðLÞ ¼ 0 SC ð5Þ For the title problem. and the global method (such as the differential quadrature method). The material of the rod is isotropic with an elasticity modulus of E. 2012)  2 2 4 2 d θ d θ dθ dθ d θ q  sin θ sin α EI 4 þ F 2 þ F 0  6EI ¼0 ð1Þ þ ds ds ds2 r ds ds  W n  Fr dθ ds 2   q  cos θ sin α þ EIr dθ ds 4 ¼0 where is the axial force (Wicks et al. Y plane. we ﬁnd that the axial frictional force plays a less signiﬁcant part on buckling loads for vertical well than horizontal one.. The helix angle β shown in Fig. The path of the deformed drill string centerline is s A ½0. 1. L. Assume that the rod can rotate freely with respect to its axis. gravitational and frictional loads. respectively. The length. which always contacts with the outer well during deformation. The present results are useful for practical design applications related to calculation of buckling loads and selection of bottom hole assembly (BHA) elements. The inclined angle of the drill string is α. For simply expressing. a model of a drill string laterally constrained by a horizontal or vertical rigid well is schematically displayed in Fig. 2002. readers are referred to Wang and Yuan (2012). 1. andw are components of the position vector of the deformed drill string centerline.. Z s W n ds F ¼ P þ qs cos α  μ 0 ð2Þ ð3Þ The different boundary conditions are as follows: θð0Þ ¼ θðLÞ ¼ θ″ð0Þ ¼ θ″ðLÞ ¼ 0 S S ð4Þ 2. 1988. (1). 2008). the horizontal well is corresponding to α ¼ 901. and r is the radial clearance between the pipe and the wellbore. Eqs. Wang and Yuan. thus only axial friction force is encountered (Wicks et al. The drill string is assumed inextensible. Gao et al. 45 drag friction force is taken into considerations. 1 is small. Sun et al.. The accuracy of the formulations and solution procedures is veriﬁed.Y. By using the discrete singular convolution (DSC) algorithm. once θ are obtained. : 1  1r 2 dθ2 > w 0 s¼0 2 ds where u. and f ¼ μW n is the drag friction force per unit length acting opposite to the loading direction. A right-handed Cartesian coordinate system is set in Fig.

θ″ζ ðsÞ could be obtained: h i 2 θðξ4Þ þ λ þqS cos α  μΓ  6ðθ0 Þ θ00ξ þ ðq cos α  12θ0 θ00  μΓ 0 Þθ0ξ þQ cos θ sin α  θξ  0  μ θ0  Γ ξ ¼ 0 h i θðζ4Þ þ λ þqS cos α  μΓ  6ðθ0 Þ2 θ00ζ þ ðq cos α  12θ0 θ00 μΓ 0 Þθ0ζ  0 þ Q cos θ sin α  θζ  μ θ0  Γ ζ ¼ 0 h i Γ 0ξ  2θ0 θ0ξ λ þ qS cos α  μΓ  2ðθ0 Þ2 þ μΓ ξ ðθ0 Þ2 þ Q sin θ sin α  θξ ¼ 0 h i Γ 0ζ  2θ0 θ0ζ λ þ qS cos α  μΓ 2ðθ0 Þ2 2 θ‴ð0Þ ¼ ζ. (19) and (20) with respect to ξ.1. (10) and (11) coupled each other. Eqs. θð0Þ ¼ 0. m. (19)–(23). Q . the solving procedures of the extended system shooting method are presented only to Eqs. λÞ ¼ 3. m. L ¼ 3:683 m. λÞ. P cr 4π EI u . 0 r S r 2π. So a new variable Γ is ﬁrst introduced to the system: Z S Γ¼ Ndτ: ð18Þ 0 Eqs. (26) can be calculated as follows. Yu. the following IVPs for derivatives θξ ðsÞ. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 128 (2015) 44–52 θð0Þ ¼ θð2π Þ ¼ θ″ð0Þ ¼ θ0 ð2π Þ ¼ 0 SC ð13Þ θð0Þ ¼ θð2π Þ ¼ θ0 ð0Þ ¼ θ″ð2π Þ ¼ 0 CS ð14Þ θð0Þ ¼ θð2π Þ ¼ θ0 ð0Þ ¼ θ0 ð2π Þ ¼ 0 CC ð15Þ 9 8 9 8 cos θ > > > > = < <u > = > v ¼ Rsinh θ i > > S > > > 2 2 : . r ¼ 0:015875 m. mk ¼ mk  1  ½Fm ðmk  1 . It is well known that ordinary differential equation (ODE) boundary-value problems (BVPs) can be solved by shooting methods (Seydel. Sun et al. S  Sθð2π Þ ¼ θ″ð2π Þ ¼ 0 θ0 ð0Þ ¼ ξ. 2012). without the integral term. θ ¼ n ∂ξ ξ dS ∂ξ Eqs. θ″ξ ðsÞ. etc. . m0 is assumed to be the initial iteration vector. P). readers are 4. Example I To verify the derivations of formulae and the solution procedures. Eq. λÞ ¼ ðmk  1 . respectively. The trajectory that starts from an initial vector m ¼ ðξ. (19) and (20). A combination of Newton’s method with an integrator serves as the simplest shooting device. α. m. as follows. (20) and (27) simultaneously. θζ ð0Þ ¼ θ0ζ ð0Þ ¼ 0. therefore.. the elements needed in Eq. By using Eq. for given values of dimensionless parameters μ. the classical shooting method could not directly be employed to obtained the solution. λÞ. θ00ξ ð0Þ ¼ θ000 ξ ð0Þ ¼ Γ ξ ð0Þ ¼ 0 ð19Þ 0 θ0 ð0Þ ¼ 0. uð0Þ ¼ 1. The extended system shooting method (for details of the procedures of this method. 2012). θ″ð0Þ ¼ ξ. some present results are compared to the data available in literature (McCann and Suryanarayana. Results and discussion 4. Here. The vector m in terms of λ would be solved. et al. we denote θξ ¼ ∂θ .46 Y. For   ðnÞ dn ∂θ convenience. 2000) or recalculated by using the FEM and the DSC method (Wang and Yuan. uð0Þ ¼ 1. 1994. L . q. Note that the dimensionless parameters μ. λÞ 0 Fðm. (10) and (11). J¼ 2πr L ð17Þ Without the friction effect. 1994. " θξ ð2π Þ.. The elements of Eq. (24) is a system of nonlinear equations. are the nonlinear integral–differential equations. Γ ð0Þ ¼ vð0Þ ¼ wð0Þ ¼ 0. (19). such that the following boundary conditions at S ¼ 2π are satisﬁed: !   θð2π. ð20Þ θ‴ð0Þ ¼ ζ. θð0Þ ¼ 0. ζÞT . uð0Þ ¼ 1. α. the above governing differential equations are the same as the ones in Mitchell (1988). S  Cθð2π Þ ¼ θ ð2π Þ ¼ 0 θ0 ð0Þ ¼ 0. Huang and Pattillo. the iteration could be implemented and then the solution to buckling behavior of the drill string could be obtained in terms of λ (i. The initial and ﬁnal values of an arbitrary trajectory of the differential equation do not generally satisfy the RS boundary conditions. mk in the kth step can be calculated from that of the ðk  1Þth step using Fm ðmk  1 . Due to the friction effect. θ000 ζ ð0Þ ¼ Γ ζ ð0Þ ¼ 0 ð27Þ Solving Eqs. r qL4 ð2π Þ4 EIr w¼ w . C  Cθð2π Þ ¼ θ ð2π Þ ¼ 0 θ00ζ ð0Þ ¼ 1. λÞ  1 Fðmk  1 . then. and λ. Γ ð0Þ ¼ vð0Þ ¼ wð0Þ ¼ 0. Shooting methods integrate initial-value problems in a systematic way in order to ﬁnd the initial values of the particular trajectory that satisfy the boundary conditions. θ″ð0Þ ¼ 0. : 0 1  12J ðθ0 Þ dτJ > w ð16Þ where S¼ N¼ 2πs . The exact solutions of Eqs. (10) and (11). are difﬁcultly obtained. θ0 ð0Þ ¼ ξ. . θ0ξ ð0Þ ¼ 1. For each λ. λÞ 0 ð23Þ Note that solutions of the system are all depending on the dimensionless parameter λ (i. r . L μ¼ W n L4 4 ð2π Þ EIr 2πrμ . where ð25Þ þ μΓ ζ ðθ0 Þ þQ sin θ sin α  θζ ¼ 0 θξ ð0Þ ¼ 0. the geometrical and material parameters are α ¼ π=2. θζ ðsÞ. the system including the S–S boundary condition. Γ ð0Þ ¼ vð0Þ ¼ wð0Þ ¼ 0. For comparisons.e.u¼ . Solution method ð4Þ advised to Yu et al. Differentiating . θð0Þ ¼ 0. and J are constants when real physical and geometric parameters of the system are given. θ00ζ ð2π Þ ð26Þ here and hereafter }mk  1 . q¼ λ¼ qL3 ð2π Þ3 EI P PL2 ¼ 2 . 2012) would be used to solve Eqs. ð21Þ θ‴ð0Þ ¼ ζ. P). λ} is omitted for variables evaluated at ðm. λÞ ¼ ¼ : ð24Þ θ″ð2π. and ζ. λÞ. Q . uð0Þ ¼ 1. is denoted by θðS. Γ ð0Þ ¼ vð0Þ ¼ wð0Þ ¼ 0. For the sake of the integral term 0 Ndτ. 0 ð22Þ θ‴ð0Þ ¼ ζ. (26) can be got. and J. θ″ð0Þ ¼ 0. r Q¼ v v¼ .e. are transformed into a system of differential equations with the corresponding transformed boundary conditions. (25). θ 0 0 0 2 þ ðλ þ qS cos α  μΓ Þθ″ þ ðq cos α  μΓ Þθ  6ðθ Þ θ″ þ Q sin θ sin α ¼ 0 Γ 0  ðλ þ qS cos α  μΓ Þðθ0 Þ2 þ ðθ0 Þ4  Q cos θ sin α ¼ 0 u0 ¼  θ0 sin θ v0 ¼ θ0 cos θ 1 1 w0 ¼  J ðθ0 Þ2 J 2 θð0Þ ¼ 0. C  Sθð2π Þ ¼ θ″ð2π Þ ¼ 0 θ″ð0Þ ¼ ξ. q. θζ ð2π Þ # θ00ξ ð2π Þ.

different units. both of them are close to the experimental buckling load P Lcr ¼ 35:72 determined under unloading (McCann and Suryanarayana. Fig. is exactly the same as the theoretical datum (Dawson and Paslay. deformation of drill string is very obvious. 2012) and θF by FEM for applied load of P ¼ 70 N and P ¼ 85 N.e. for the existence of the frictional force.. The 3-D buckling conﬁgurations of drill string with four boundary conditions (i. 4. S–S. are cr closest to the experimental buckling load P HM ¼ 84:52 detercr mined under loading (McCann and Suryanarayana. the effect of boundary condition on the buckling 47 Fig. It is clearly seen that the cr present data are very close to that of DSC obtained by Wang and Yuan (2012). 5 and 6. HY The numerical results of critical helix buckling pressure P cr obtained by the present extended system shooting method and P HW DSC one are displayed in Fig. and the frictional force f obtained by the present extended system shooting method. As could be seen in Fig. 2. 1994). compared with P HC ¼ 79:21 from Chen et al. As seen in the graphs. S–S. C–S. and P HH ¼ 71:60 cr cr obtained by using the Rayleigh–Ritz technique (Huang andPattillo. and C–C). 3. 1994). S–S. 2000. the symmetric feature of both drill string buckling deformation and the contact force per unit length W n is broken in Figs. Comparisons of θ for different boundary conditions (P ¼ 80 N.EI ¼ 5:9966 Nm2 (Huang and Pattillo. (1990). compared with the absence of friction. namely. Comparisons of critical helix buckling loads P H cr obtained by the present and the DSC method for various friction coefﬁcients. are considered. 1994). 1994). Comparisons of critical linear buckling loads P Lcr obtained by the present and the DSC method for various friction coefﬁcients. S–C. respectively. Fig. μ ¼ 0:4). C–C) at the load P ¼ 80 N and μ ¼ 0:4 are shown in Fig. McCann and Suryanarayana. it is clearly seen that numerical solutions of critical linear buckling pressure obtained by the present extended system shooting method P LY and the DSC one cr P LW (Wang and Yuan. S–C. 8(a–d). It is different from the linear buckling case. S–C.Y. 5–7. Furthermore. Note that cr the present numerical result P Lcr ¼ 36:245 for the S–S drill string and μ ¼ 0. the present results agree very well with the DSC and FEM data. Note that the deformed drill string axis is . the contact force per unit length W n . 2000). C–S.e. Sun et al. Fig. all results from different methods agree with the experimental one obtained during loading (McCann and Suryanarayana. 5. 1984). 2 cr for various friction coefﬁcients and four different boundary conditions (i. 8(a–d). centimeters in the u. The present buckling critical load for C–C drill pipe is close to the experimental buckling load P Lcr ¼ 53:02 obtained under loading (McCann and Suryanarayana. 2012) are very close to each other. are used for clarity. θW by the DSC (Wang and Yuan. The numerical solutions of critical linear buckling pressure obtained by the present extended system shooting method P LY cr and the DSC one P LW (Wang and Yuan. 1994). Four combinations of boundary conditions. 3. μ ¼ 0:5 and S–S condition are shown in Fig. for applied load of P ¼ 80 N. and C–C. i. The numeric results of θ. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 128 (2015) 44–52 q ¼ 0:86828 N=m. the DSC and FEM. Both the present numerical result P HY ¼ 85:7715 cr and DSC data P HW ¼ 85:77 for the S–S drill string and μ ¼ 0. The comparisons of θY obtained by the present extended system shooting method. respectively. C–S. As seen in the graph. 2. μ ¼ 0:4 and all four boundary conditions are shown in Figs. 2012) are displaced in Fig. 4. Comparisons of θ obtained by the present method.and v-axis and meters in the w-axis. From Fig.e. The coefﬁcient of friction varies from 0 to 0:6.

μ ¼ 0:4: (a).5 9. (b).0 127 139. Fig. Element name of the BHA Drill bit Φ150=70 Core barrel LSC—Φ133/71 Heavy weight drill pipe 5:5″  3:5=8″ Heavy weight drill pipe 5″  3″ Heavy weight drill pipe 5:5″  3:5=8″ Fig.8 750 3100 10 40. 8(a–d). 7. Weight Length Out diameter L=m M=kg d=mm δ=mm 30 1020 3100 0. Buckling conﬁgurations of drill string at P ¼ 80 N. The designing sketch of the SW well depth structure.0 139.48 Y. the length is 100 m. When simple support is applied. 9.4 23. Comparisons of W n for different boundary conditions (P ¼ 80 N. (c). S–C. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 128 (2015) 44–52 obtained by using Eq. μ ¼ 0:4). (d). μ ¼ 0:4). the buckling deformation of the drill string is very large. while the clamped condition is supposed.0 150 133.8 Note that the weight of the BHA is 8t. C–C. Thickness . Fig.5 40. S–S. Table 1 The parameters of the BHA of the SW well. Comparisons of f for different boundary conditions (P ¼ 80 N. (9) in Fig.7 40 31 23. Sun et al. C–S. 8. 6. the buckling behavior of the drill Fig.7 25.

therefore. μ ¼ 0:4). For P ¼ 0. the buckling behavior of the BHA in certain vertical well adopting impregnated diamond core bit is analyzed by employing the above model. In the other hand. some strategies should be adopted to solve this problem. corresponding length of the drill string being shorter. μ ¼ 0:4). the loading capacity is improved (the length is equivalently shorter). r ¼ 5:15 mm). respectively. By the way. given diameter of the well D ¼ 150 mm.e. Because we are focusing on the buckling deformation of the BHA (i. buckling of the drill string is more serious. It is obviously found that the boundary condition signiﬁcantly affects on the buckling deformation of drill string. such as deformation shapes. the contact force per unit length of the drill string W n . corresponding with the ﬁrst three post buckling equilibrium paths. and the critical loads. and drill . In this section. Therefore. The designing sketch of the SW well structure is displayed in Fig. In order to suppress buckling. The advantages of adding stabilizers at the equilibrium points of second or higher order buckling modes are that the features of the original system are not changed. therefore. one can decrease the length of BHA via proper selection of drillstring combination. J ¼ 0:000323584. θ ¼ 0). 12. or the maximum point. One could choose to add stabilizers to decrease the buckling deﬂection of the drill string. the loading capacity is greatly improved. or at least minimize it. the features of the original system are changed. Comparisons of θ corresponding with the ﬁrst three post buckling equilibrium paths for S–S (P ¼ 0.e. Example II Fig. only the parameters of the BHA are shown in Table 1. Note that origin point of the drill string centerline coordinate s ¼ 0 is the neutral point. Note that the function of adding stabilizers is that the model is equivalently added to simple support. Fig. when the locations of the added stabilizers are at the maximum point. 9. q ¼ 784 N=m. the friction force in the vertical well is smaller than the horizontal one for the different direction between contact force and gravity. Example III Fig. the post buckling deformation θ. From Figs. P 3cr ¼  0:683373. Sun et al. When the length of the drill string is increased. for the short drill string. 11. Comparisons of f corresponding with the ﬁrst three post buckling equilibrium paths for S–S (P ¼ 0. such as deformation shapes. the dimensionless parameters could be obtained as: μ ¼ 0:00012943. q ¼ 1:04213. 3-D post buckling conﬁgurations. for α ¼ 0 and only the S–S boundary condition. It is bad for drilling engineering. it is not hard to observe that the maximum deﬂection of the ﬁrst buckling mode of the BHA is very large.2. μ ¼ 0:4). Furthermore. especially.Y. 10–13. P ¼ 0). P 3cr ¼  2:251563. the longer the BHA is. Young’s modulus of steel material E ¼ 2:0  1011 Pa. and s ¼ L locates in the drill bit. Comparisons of W n corresponding with the ﬁrst three post buckling equilibrium paths for S–S (P ¼ 0. Out diameter of the drill string d ¼ 139:7 mm (i. or adding stabilizers. for α ¼ 0. because of the very large dimensional length. However. 4.e. and the frictional force f . and μ ¼ 0:4 are given for model simpliﬁcation. the locations of the added stabilizers could be at the equilibrium points (i. μ ¼ 0:4 and only the S–S boundary condition. And then. the drill string assembly under the neutral point). 10. the buckling behavior of certain vertical scientiﬁc drilling well named as “SW well” is analyzed by employing the above model. and the 3-D post buckling conﬁgurations of a drill string are displayed in Figs. Note that the top end of the BHA is the position of the neutral point (i. Moreover. the effect of boundary condition becomes weaker. In this section. given the bit size (i. 10–13. the ﬁrst three critical linear buckling loads are P 1cr ¼  4:473963.3.e. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 128 (2015) 44–52 49 string is restricted. 4. The higher the position of the neutral point is.e. 3-D post buckling conﬁgurations. The aim of the example is to analyze the effect of drill string wall thickness on the stability of BHA.

Sun et al. Buckling conﬁgurations of drill string corresponding with the ﬁrst three post buckling equilibrium paths for S–S (P ¼ 0.50 Y. 13.e. the third equilibrium path. and the frictional force f . Fig. (c). the contact force per unit length of the drill string W n . Via calculating. 14–17. and the same outside diameter of the drill string d ¼ 127 mm. the post buckling deformation θ. For P ¼ 0 (i. the second equilibrium path. Comparisons of θ of the drill strings with two different wall thickness for S–S (P ¼ 0.4 34. μ ¼ 0:4): (a). The maximum deformation θmax of the drill string with wall thickness δ ¼ 25:4 mm is beyond 1. μ ¼ 0:4). and the 3-D post buckling conﬁgurations of two different wall thickness (δ ¼ 25:4 mmandδ ¼ 34:9 mm) drill strings are displayed in Figs.9 Out diameter d=mm The length L=m Speciﬁc gravity q=ðN=mÞ 127 95 524 127 75 653 Bending stiffness EI=Nm2 The space gap r=mm The upper end pressure P 2:33412  106 11:5 0 2:57131  106 11:5 0 Fig.5 times of the drill string with . the top end of the BHA is the position of the neutral point). the values of the parameters the two different wall thickness drill strings for impregnated diamond core bit are listed in Table 2. Comparisons of W n of the drill strings with two different wall thickness for S–S (P ¼ 0. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 128 (2015) 44–52 Fig. Table 2 The parameters of the drill string for impregnated diamond core bit. μ ¼ 0:4). 15. the ﬁrst equilibrium path. pressure 50 kN). (b). respectively. 14. Values of the parameters of the drill string Thickness δ=mm 25.

51 Fig. given drill pressure. Speciﬁcally. EI ¼ 343:3498 Nm2 (Munteanu and Barraco. q ¼ 13:2 N=m. for only the S–S boundary condition. with respect to the one for μ ¼ 0:0. and friction. As could be seen from Fig. μ ¼ 0:4): (a). 0:5844 cm. one could ﬁnd that the friction load plays important roles on the post-buckling conﬁgure of the oblique drill string. Sun et al. respectively. Conclusions Fig.4. Post-buckling mode θ of the oblique drill strings for S–S (P ¼ 800 N). μ ¼ 0:4). Via two scientiﬁc drilling well instances. from Fig. The accuracy of the present method is veriﬁed by comparisons the present data to results obtained by the ﬁnite element method and existing data in literatures. The effect of the friction force on lateral and helical buckling loads is revealed. 2008). its value is about 0:4363 rad for μ ¼ 0:0. respectively. and wall thickness of the drill string on the buckling deformation are presented. μ ¼ 0:4. and conﬁgures of the drill string are shown in Figs. while the value is 0:2223 rad for μ ¼ 0:4. with respect to the one for μ ¼ 0:0. 0:3808 cm. The maximum value j θmax j decreases with the increase of μ. The results are useful for practical design applications related to calculation of buckling loads and selection of the parameters of drilling well. 18. In this section. The value of compressive load is given as P ¼ 800 N. Comparisons of f of the drill strings with two different wall thickness for S–S (P ¼ 0. while the 3-D post buckling conﬁguration of the wall thickness δ ¼ 25:4 mm drill strings is more serious than the wall thickness δ ¼ 34:9 mm one. the maximum values j vmax j are 0:7298 cm. The nonlinear buckling of drill string in a well. for δ ¼ 34:9 mm. Buckling conﬁgurations of the drill strings with two different wall thickness for S–S (P ¼ 0. (b). 16. subjected to end compression. The relative error of j θmax j . Example IV Consider the buckling of an oblique drill string. are about 19:9%. through numerical examples with various values of friction coefﬁcients and four different boundary conditions.Y. the angles θ. for δ ¼ 25:4 mm. is successfully analyzed by using the extended system shooting method. reaches about 49:0%. the friction load has a signiﬁcantly effect on the post-buckling mode θ. gravity. such as the bottom hole assembly (BHA) elements. . 4. μ ¼ 0:2. From these ﬁgures. wall thickness δ ¼ 34:9 mm. With the increase of μ. even for including the effect of friction load. for μ ¼ 0:0. 18 and 19. the geometrical and material parameters are α ¼ π=4. 5. respectively. the buckling behavior of an oblique drill string is analyzed by employing the above model. 18. For various values of the coefﬁcient of friction. r ¼ 0:01727 m. the level of post-buckling conﬁgure becomes less severe. Similarly. 17. 47:8%. effect of friction load. L ¼ 21:34 m. While the relative errors of j θmax j . / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 128 (2015) 44–52 Fig. one could conclude that adopting thicker wall drill string could make smaller buckling deformation for the same out diameter of the drill string. 19.

J. J.D.V. 2009. 655–670.F. I. Barraco. Helical buckling of tubing sealed in packers. Bogy. 538–549.B. Wu. Pet. X. 590–595. Technol. L.P. Gorbunovich. Z. Gao. J. 303–310.. Miska. Gan. 1995. Pattillo. Acknowledgments The work described in this paper is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant no. 12 (2).. P. Int. Mitchell. Liu. Tubing and casing buckling in horizontal wells. Helical buckling of a tube in an inclined wellbore.. Munteanu. 2013ZY14). Mech.. Energy Resour.. J. 2009. OK. Wicks.V. P. Soc. C. Kyllingstad.. Seydel. (b) for μ ¼ 0:2. 196–201. Huang. Nonlinear buckling analysis of tubular in a deviated well with differential quadrature element incremental iterative method. 2013D FR70490). I. Sci.. 52 (3). Wang. J. Post buckling behavior of a slender beam constrained to a cylindrical tube.G.R. Cunha. Dawson. Yuan. 2–5 May. Numerical and analytical approximations to large post-buckling deformation of MEMS. S. 467–472. 1984. Sci. J. Mech.. A. Drillpipe buckling in inclined holes. N. . SPE. 2008. Yu. Tan. Italy. 19. Houston.L.... McCann.. SPE 29460.. Sci. International S&T Cooperation Program of China (Grant no. J. Z..R. 35.. 25370. Pattillo. Sun et al. 1986. and Innovative Project of Scientiﬁc Forefront and Interdisciplinary of Jilin University (Grant no. 90-91. Xu.. AIME 36. 699–711. Experimental study of curvature and frictional effects on buckling.H. 2012. Mitchell. H. Althouse. 126–130.S. N. SPE.. J. M. 42 (191). J. Trans. 1994.L. Technol.. Lubinski. Effects of boundary conditions and friction on static buckling of pipe in a horizontal well. 2009. R. Gaidaichuk. 2012. 11402095). D.L. 129–134.. Suryanarayana.. 1734–1738. 2012. Miska. Eng. Int. M. 1994. Appl. Post-buckling conﬁgurations of the oblique drill strings for S–S (P ¼ 800 N): (a) for μ ¼ 0:0.C. B. Comput. 1964. Non Linear Mech. Wang.F.. He. OTC 7568. W.. Helical buckling and lock-up conditions for coiled tubing in curved wells.. Sci. 1988.W. Paslay. R.. Prog. Springer Verlag... J.. New concepts for helical buckling. 26. P. 911–923. second ed. Juvkam-Wold.F.C. J. Pet. D. 50 (3).B.. J. Chen..C. Phys.. Helical buckling of pipes in extended reach and horizontal wells—Part 2: Frictional drag analysis. Simple frictional analysis of helical buckling of tubing. Non Linear Mech. R. 2–4 April.L. Paslay. Solovjov.. 70–78. Oklahoma City. Int.R. A. M.H. Gan. Sci. Logan. 1993. J. Technol. P. Eng. 67... Investigation of frictional effects on the nonlinear buckling behavior of a circular rod laterally constrained in a horizontal rigid cylinder... Wang. In: Presented at the SPE Production Operations Symposium. F. B.B. Helical postbuckling conﬁguration of a weightless column under the action of an axial load. 2008. Gulyayev. 140–141. Technol. E: Technol.. R.-ASME 31... J.. 2009. Mech.. Sci. 1990. L. Ser..C. S. The buckling of elongated rotating drill strings. Y. Eng. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 128 (2015) 44–52 Fig.. Pet. V. Tan. D. Pet. 457–465. A. X. 36. 1993. 115. 140–148. SPE Drill. 1962. TX.. J. Buckling behavior of pipes in oil and gas wells.W..Y. Cheatham.C. Gao. 3. Y. Chin. References Cheatham. SPE 13064. V. Y. Practical Bifurcation and Stability Analysis-From Equilibrium to Chaos.I.. G.. B. R. 95–103. 47. J. China. Paﬁtis. Nonlinear buckling analysis of inclined circular cylinderin-cylinder by the discrete singular convolution.52 Y. Equilibrium equations for nonlinear buckling analysis of drill-strings in 3D curved well-bores.. Eng. In: Presented at the 26th Annual Offshore Technology Conference. 1984. 605–610. J. Pet. 55. Horizontal cylinder-in-cylinder buckling under compression and torsion: review and application to composite drill pipe. J. (c) for μ ¼ 0:4. Wu. 782–796. An analysis of helical buckling of tubulars subjected to axial and torsional loading in inclined wellbores.. Venice.S. 2000. Lim. Pet. Wardle..V. Int. Lin. X. In: Fifth ECCOMAS. 2002. 14.. Sci. P.L.D. Nat.. The stability of a circular rod laterally constrained to be in contact with an inclined circular cylinder. X. Yuan.