PETE 7212

Completion Design
CASING DESIGN EXAMPLE

Casing Design Example

Example Problem
API Design Factors
Worst Possible Conditions
Effect of Axial Tension on Collapse Strength
Design for Burst, Collapse and Tension

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

Casing Design Example

Design a 9 5/8", 8000-ft combination casing string.

Completion fluid is 12.5 ppg drilling mud.

Formation pore pressure is expected to be 6,000 psi.

Use API design factors.

Design for worst possible conditions.

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

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.

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

Casing Design

We will use the design factors recommended by the

API unless otherwise specified.

These are the API design Factors:

Tension and joint strength:

FT = 1.8
Collapse (from external pressure): FC= 1.125
Burst (from internal pressure):
FB = 1.1

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

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 100,0001.8 = 180,000 lbf in tension.
Note that the tables provided by Bourgoyne et al. list
actual pipe strength (without safety factors)

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

Casing Design

Unless otherwise specified in a particular scenario,

we shall also assume the following:

Worst possible conditions

l

l
l

For collapse design, assume that the casing is empty on the

inside (P i = 0)
For burst design, assume no backup fluid on the outside of
the casing (Pe = 0)
For tension design, assume no buoyancy effect
For collapse design, assume no buoyancy effect

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

Casing Design
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.

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

Casing Design Solution

Burst requirements (based on the expected pore pressure)
Pbr

PB = pore pressure Design Factor

= 6,000 psi 1.1
= 6,600 psi

Design

Pore
Pressure

6,000

6,600

The entire casing string must be able to withstand 6,600 psi

without failing in burst.

When would it ever fail in burst?

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

Casing Design Solution

Collapse Requirements

10

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.

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

Casing Design Review

Design of a combination casing string requires an iterative
process:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Determine the depth capability without axial stress.

Determine the axial stress in the casing at this point.
Determine collapse resistance corresponding to axial stress level.
Determine the depth where this pressure exists.
Compare with previous depth estimate. Repeat steps 2-4 if not
converged. Accept answer if depths agree.
Verify that the selected casing will meet tension requirements at
the wellhead.

Typically between 2-4 iterations are required. Agreement to

within 30 ft (one casing joint) is satisfactory.
Louisiana State University

11

College of Engineering

Casing Design Solution

Pc

Collapse Requirements, contd

PC = 0.052 D FC

Design

= (0.052 )(12.5)(8,000 )(1.125 )

= 5,850 psi

Mud
Gradient

5,200

5,850

Due to lower pressures and higher tension,

Collapse requirements are less severe
further up the hole.
12

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

Casing Design Solution

We can make the following preliminary selections for

the bottom section of casing:

Burst: 6,600 psi

Collapse: 5,850 psi

Grade

Weight
(lb/ft)

End
Area
(in2)

Burst
Rating
(psi)

Collapse
Rating
(psi)

Comments

N-80

40

11.454

5,750

3,090

Fails Burst and Collapse

N-80

43.5

12.559

6,330

3,810

Fails Burst and Collapse

N-80

47

13.572

6,870

4,760

Fails Collapse

N-80

53.5

15.547

7,930

6,620

Meets Burst and Collapse

Louisiana State University

13

College of Engineering

Casing Design Solution

Note that two of the weights of N-80 casing meet the

14

burst requirements, but only the 53.5 lb/ft pipe can

handle the collapse requirement at the bottom of the
hole.
The 53.5 lb/ft pipe could probably run all the way to
the surface (we would still have to check tension),
but there may be a lower cost alternative.

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

Casing Design Solution

How deep can we safely run N-80, 47 lb/ft?

The maximum annular pressure that this pipe may be

exposed to is:
Pc =

Collapse rating of pipe 4,760

=
= 4,231 psi
design factor
1. 125

This corresponds to a depth of

h1 =

4231
= 6,509 ft
(0.052)(12.5)

The casing will certainly collapse if we run it this

deep. WHY?
Louisiana State University

15

College of Engineering

Casing Design Solution

6,495 ft is the depth to which the pipe could be run if

there were no axial stress in the pipe.
But at 6,495 we have 1,505 of 53.5 lb/ft pipe below us.
The weight of this pipe will reduce the collapse
resistance of the upper 47 lb/ft string.
The weight of 1,491 ft of 53.5 lb/ft casing is
W1 = (1491 )(53 .5 ) = 79 ,769 lbf

This weight results in an axial stress of:

1 =

16

weight
79 ,769 lbf
=
= 5,877 psi
area
13.572 in 2

6,509
8,000

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

Casing Design Solution

The above stress will reduce the collapse pressure

from 4,760 psi to
Pcc1

4760
3 5877
1 5877
=
1

1.125
4 80000
2 80000

= 4,067 psi

Note use of the design factor of 1.125.

Louisiana State University

17

College of Engineering

Casing Design Solution

This pressure (4,067 psi) occurs at a depth of

h2 =

4 ,575
= 6,256 ft
(0.052 )(12 .5)

This depth does not agree with the initial depth of

18

6,509 ft.
We need to do another iteration.

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

Casing Design Solution

Second Iteration

Consider running the 47 lb/ft pipe to the new depth of

6,257 ft.
W 2 = ( 8 ,000 6 ,257 ) (53 . 5 ) = 93 ,251 lbf
2 =

93251
= 6 ,871 psi
13 .572

Louisiana State University

19

College of Engineering

Casing Design Solution

Pcc 2

4760
3 6871
1 6871
=
1

4 80000
2 80000
1.125

= 4,038 psi

This pressure occurs at a depth of

h3 =

4038
= 6 ,212 ft
(0 .052 )(12 .5 )

This is within 45 ft of the assumed value of 6,257 ft.

We should do one more iteration:

20

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

10

Casing Design Solution

Iteration #3

Run 47 lb/ft casing to 6,212 ft.

h 2 = 6 ,212 ft
W 3 = ( 8 ,000 6 ,212 ) (53 . 5 ) = 95 ,658 lbf
95658
= 6 ,429 psi
13 .572
= 4 ,031 psi

3 =
Pc 3

h 3 = 6 ,202 ft

This value is within 10 ft of the assumed value of 6,212 ft.

Just for fun, lets do another iteration.
Louisiana State University

21

College of Engineering

Casing Design Solution

Iteration #4

Run 47 lb/ft casing to 6,202 ft.

h 3 = 6 ,212 ft
W 4 = ( 8 ,000 6 ,202 )(53 .5 ) = 96 ,193 lbf
95658
= 7 ,119 psi
13 .572
= 4 ,030 psi

4 =
Pc 4

h 4 = 6 ,200 ft

22

This value is within 2 ft of the assumed value of 6,202 ft. Its

time to stop!
Louisiana State University
College of Engineering

11

Casing Design Solution

This is the answer we are looking for, i.e., we can

run 47 lb/ft N-80 pipe to a depth of 6,200 ft, and 53.5

lb/ft pipe between 6,200 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 lb/ft
pipe?

Louisiana State University

23

College of Engineering

Casing Design Solution

At some depth the 43.5 lb/ft pipe would be able to

handle the collapse requirements.

We have already determined that it will not meet
burst requirements.

NO!
24

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

12

N-80
43.5 lb/ft
?

???? ft

N-80
47.0 lb/ft
6,200 ft
N-80
53.5 lb/ft
8,000 ft
Louisiana State University

25

College of Engineering

N-80
53.5 lb/ft
?

???? ft

N-80
47.0 lb/ft
6,200 ft
N-80
53.5 lb/ft
8,000 ft
26

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

13

Tension Check

Investigate running 47 lb/ft from surface to 6,200 ft

and 53.5 lb/ft from 6,2008,000 ft.

The weight on the top joint of casing would be

(6200 )(47 ) + (1800 )(53 .5) = 387 ,700 lbf

With a design factor of 1.8 for tension, we require a

pipe strength of

(1.8 )(387700 ) = 697 ,860 lbf

Louisiana State University

27

College of Engineering

Tension Check

The casing mechanical property tables indicates that

9-5/8 (N-80, 47 lb/ft) casing has a yield strength of

1,086,000 lbf for the pipe body and a joint strength of
905,000 lbf for LT & C.
Recall that we require a minimum of 698,000 lbf in
order to be adequate to run 47 lb/ft to surface.
47 lb / ft is OK to surface.

28

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

14

Casing Design Review

We have four different weights of casing available to us in
this case

Two of the four weights are unacceptable to us everywhere in the

string because they do not meet burst requirements
Only the N-80, 53.5 lb/ft pipe is capable of withstanding the
collapse requirements at the bottom of the string.
Since the 53.5 lb/ft pipe is the most expensive, we want to use as
little of it as possible, so we want to use as much 47.0 lb/ft pipe as
possible.
Dont forget to check to make sure the tension requirements are
met!
l
l

Pipe body
Threads and couplings (T&C)
Louisiana State University

29

College of Engineering

Casing Design Review

The collapse resistance of N-80, 47 lb/ft will

determine the maximum depth to which it may be

run.
Two factors will reduce the depth capability of a
particular casing

30

Choice of design factor

Axial stress

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

15

Relative Cost of API Casing

Grade

Coupling

Relative Cost

H-40

Short

0.97

J-55

Plain End

0.95

J-55

Short

1.00*

J-55

Long

1.05

J-55

Buttress

1.12

J-55

Extreme Line

1.30

N-80

Long

1.24

P-110

Long

1.55

* Base Value
31

Louisiana State University

College of Engineering

16