Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ENI Diseño de TRS PDF
ENI Diseño de TRS PDF
1
ENI S.p.A. DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY' DEPT. TYPE SECTION N.
TITLE
CASING DESIGN MANUAL
DISTRIBUTION LIST
NOTE: The present document is available in Eni Agip Intranet (http://wwwarpo.in.agip.it) and a CD-
Rom version can also be distributed (requests will be addressed to STAP Dept. in Eni -
Agip Division Headquarter)
The present document is CONFIDENTIAL and it is property of AGIP It shall not be shown to third parties nor shall it be used for
reasons different from those owing to which it was given
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 2 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
INDEX
1. INTRODUCTION 5
1.1. PURPOSE OF CASING 6
8. DESIGN CRITERIA 46
8.1. BURST 46
8.1.1. Design Methods 46
8.1.2. Company Design Procedure 47
8.2. COLLAPSE 50
8.2.1. Company Design Procedure 50
8.3. TENSION 54
8.3.1. General 54
8.3.2. Buoyancy Force 54
8.3.3. Company Design Procedure 59
8.3.4. Example Hook Load During Cementing 59
8.4. BIAXIAL STRESS 62
8.4.1. General 62
8.4.2. Effects On Collapse Resistance 62
8.4.3. Company Design Procedure 64
8.4.4. Example Collapse Caclulation 65
8.5. BENDING 67
8.5.1. General 67
8.5.2. Determination Of Bending Effect 68
8.5.3. Company Design Procedure 70
8.5.4. Example Bending Calculation 70
8.6. CASING WEAR 72
8.6.1. General 72
8.6.2. Volumetric Wear Rate 73
8.6.3. Factors Affecting Casing Wear (Example) 76
8.6.4. Wear Factors 80
8.6.5. Detection Of Casing Wear 86
8.6.6. Casing Wear Reduction 86
8.6.7. Wear Allowance In Casing Design 87
8.6.8. Company Design Procedure 88
8.7. SALT SECTIONS 89
8.7.1. General 89
8.7.2. External Loading Due To Salt Flow 89
8.7.3. Company Design Procedure 94
9. CORROSION 96
9.1. General 96
9.1.1. Exploration and Appraisal Wells 96
9.1.2. Development Wells 96
9.1.3. Contributing Factors to Corrosion 97
9.2. Forms Of Corrosion 98
9.2.1. Sulphide Stress Cracking (SSC) 98
9.2.2. Corrosion Caused By CO2 And Cl- 105
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 4 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
1. INTRODUCTION
The selection of casing grades and weights is an engineering task affected by many factors,
including local geology, formation pressures, hole depth, formation temperature, logistics and
various mechanical factors.
The engineer must keep in mind during the design process the major logistics problems in
controlling the handling of the various mixtures of grades and weights by rig personnel without
risk of installing the wrong grade and weight of casing in a particular hole section. World-wide,
experience has shown that the use of two/three different grades or two/three different weights
is the maximum that can be handled by most rigs and rig crews.
After selecting a casing for a particular hole section, the designer should consider upgrading
the casing in cases where:
• Extreme wear is expected from drilling equipment used to drill the next hole
section or from wear caused by wireline equipment.
• Buckling in deep and hot wells.
Refer to the following sections for descriptions of the casings listed above.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 8 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
The designer should plan to combine many of these objectives when selecting a single
casing point. A liner may be used instead of a full intermediate casing and difficult wells may
actually contain several intermediate casings and/or liners. Caution should be taken when
using liners as it is necessary to ensure the higher casing is designed for the pressures at
lower depths.
The cement should cover all hydrocarbon zones and any salt or other creeping evaporites.
Zones containing highly corrosive formation waters are also often cemented off, especially
where there may be aquifer movement which replenishes the corrosive elements around the
wellbore.
Longer cement columns are sometimes required to prevent buckling of the casing during
deeper drilling. Many operating companies cement up inside the previous casing shoe for this
reason and is legislated on by some regulatory authorities.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 10 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
It is also possible that the casing itself could be used as a conduit for maximising well
deliverability (casing flow), for minimising the pressure losses during frac jobs, for chemical
injection or for lift gas. Consideration must be given to production operations which will affect
the temperature of the production casing and impose additional thermal stresses. Annulus
thermal expansion can cause production casing collapse when it is cemented up into the
intermediate casing. The loads to which a production casing is subjected are, therefore, quite
different from those imposed during drilling.
It is very important that the selection of the steel grade and connections for the production
string are made correctly.
Special considerations are required where the production casing will be drilled through and
may therefore suffer some damage e.g.: open hole (barefoot) completions, open hole gravel
packs, liner completions, deep zone appraisal.
In a liner completion, both the liner and casing form the production string and must be
designed accordingly.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 11 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
2.2.4. Liner
A liner is a string of pipe which is installed but does not extend all the way to surface. It is
hung a short distance above the previous casing shoe and is usually cemented over its entire
length to ensure it seals within the previous casing string.
Drilling liners may be installed to:
• Increase shoe strength.
• Meet with rig tensional load limitations.
• Minimise the length of reduced diameter and the possible adverse effects on
drilling hydraulics.
Either type of liner may subsequently be tied-back to surface with a string of pipe stabbed into
a liner hanger Polished Bore Receptacle (PBR).
There are a number of disadvantages to installing liners, including:
• The risk of poor pressure integrity, either across the liner lap due to poor
cementation or as a result of wear to the casing from which the liner is hung off.
• The risk of the liner running equipment being cemented in the hole.
• The difficulty of obtaining a good cementation due to smaller liner to hole and liner
to production casing clearances.
• The need to set a retrievable bridge plug above the liner lap if the BOP stack
needs to be removed. (This does not apply to completion operations when a
tubing string has been run and landed.)
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 12 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
The selection of casing setting depths is one of the most critical in the well design process
and is based on:
• Total depth of well.
• Pore pressures.
• Fracture gradients.
• The probability of shallow gas pockets.
• Problem zones.
• Depth of potential prospects.
• Time limits on open hole drilling.
• Casing programme compatibility with existing wellhead systems.
• Casing programme compatibility with planned completion programme (production
well).
• Casing availability (grade and dimensions).
• Economy, i.e. time consumption to drill the hole, run casing and cost of
equipment.
When planning, all available information should be carefully documented and considered to
obtain knowledge of the various uncertainties.
Information is sourced from:
• Evaluation of the seismic and geological background documentation used as the
decision for drilling the well.
• Drilling data from offset wells in the area. (Company wells or scouting
information).
The key factor to satisfactory picking of casing seats is the assessment of pore pressure and
fracture pressures throughout the well.
As the pore pressures in a formation being drilled approach the fracture pressure at the last
casing seat then installation of a further string of casing is necessary.
figure 3.a and figure 3.b show typical examples of casing seat selections.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 13 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
To ensure the integrity of the surface casing seat, leak-off tests are necessary and must be
specified in the Drilling Programme.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 16 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Sometimes it is necessary to alter the setting depth of the intermediate casing during drilling
under certain circumstances such as when:
• Hole problems prohibit further drilling.
• Pore pressure changes occur substantially shallower or deeper than originally
calculated or estimated. For this reason the Geological Drilling Programme should
state the pore pressure requirement at which casing should be set when setting
casing into a transition zone.
The chart in figure 3.c can be used to select the casing bit sizes required to fulfil many drilling
programme options.
To use the chart:
1) Determine the casing or liner size for the last size pipe to be installed.
2) Enter the chart at that point.
3) The flow of the chart then indicates hole sizes that may be required to set that size pipe
(i.e., 5” Liner inside 6” or 61/2” hole).
Solid lines indicate commonly used bits for that size pipe and can be considered to
have adequate clearance to run and cement the casing or liner (i.e., 51/2” Casing inside
77/8” hole).
The broken lines indicate less common optional hole sizes used (i.e., 5” inside 61/8”
hole, etc.).
The selection of one of these broken paths requires special attention be given to the
connection, mud weight, cementing and doglegs.
Large connection ODs, thick mud cake build-up, problem cementing areas (high water
loss, lost returns, etc.) and doglegs all aggravate the attempt to run casing and liners in
low clearance situations.
Once the hole size has been selected. a casing large enough to allow passage of a bit
to make that hole can be selected. The solid lines are commonly required casing sizes.
encompassing most weights (i.e., 61/2” bit inside 75/8” casing).
The broken lines indicate casing sizes where only the lighter weights can be used
(i.e. 61/8” inside 7” casing).
This selection process is repeated until the anticipated number of casing sizes has
been reached.
Note: Some drilling programmes can require special tools and operations to
obtain the wellbore size for the casing to be installed. An underreamer is
a drilling tool, used to enlarge section of hole below a restriction
(situations where equipment, such as BOP or wellhead size restrictions,
limit the tool entry size).
figure 3.d shows the standard casing programme and figure 3.e the possible alternative.
further standard casing and hole sizes information is shown in table 3.a.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 20 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Largest Inner
Outer Casing Under-Reaming
Casing Size
Size
Minimum Pilot Under-reamed Maximum
Hole Size Diameter Tool OD
24 20 181/2 26 18
1
20 16 17 /2 22 17
3 3 1
16 13 /8 14 /4 17 /2 14
3 3 1
13 /8 (48-68#) 10 /4 12 /4 15 113/4
113/4 85/8 105/8 121/4 10
5 5 3 1
9 /8 (29.3#) 7 /8 8 /4 11 /2 81/4
85/8 (24-32#) 65/8 75/8 91/2 71/4
85/8 (36-49#) 6 73/8 9 7
5 1 1 1
7 /8 5 /2 6 /4 8 /2 6
7 (17-32#) 5 6 8 53/4
Table 3.A - Recommended Casing Size Versus Hole Size
There is a great range of casings available from suppliers from plain carbon steel for
everyday mild service through exotic duplex steels for extremely sour service conditions. The
casings available can be classified under two specifications, API and non-API.
Casing specifications, including API and its history, are described and discussed in sections
4.1 and 4.2. Non-API casing manufacturers have produced products to satisfy a demand in
the industry for casing to meet with extreme conditions which the API specifications do not
meet. The area of use for this casing are also discussed in section 4.1 below.
The properties of steel used in the manufacture of casing is fundamentally important and
should be fully understood by design engineers, and to this end these properties are
described in section 4.2.
When using non-API pipe, the designer must check the methods by which the strengths have
been calculated. Usually it will be found that the manufacturer will have used the published
API formulae (Bulletin 5C3), backed up by tests to prove the performance of his product
conforms to, or exceeds, these specifications. However, in some cases, the manufacturers
have claimed their performance is considerably better than that calculated by the using API
formulae. When this occurs the manufacturers claims must be critically examined by the
designer or his technical advisors, and the performance corrected if necessary.
It is also important to understand, that to increase competition, the API tolerances have been
set fairly wide. However, the API does provide for the purchaser to specify more rigorous
chemical, physical and testing requirements on orders, and may also request place
independent inspectors to quality control the product in the plant.
An example of an API table showing the parameters listed above in given in table 4.a.
Reference should always be made to current API specification 5C2 for casing lists and
performances.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 24 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
5.1. GENERAL
Failure of a material or of a structural part may occur by fracture (e.g. the shattering of glass),
Yield, wear, corrosion, and other causes. These failures are failures of the material. Buckling
may cause failure of the part without any failure of the material.
As load is applied, deformation takes place before any final fracture occurs. With all solid
materials, some deformation may be sustained without permanent deformation, i.e. the
material behaves elastically.
Beyond the elastic limit, the elastic deformation is accompanied by varying amounts of
plastic, or permanent, deformation, If a material sustains large amounts of plastic deformation
before final fracture. It is classed as ductile material, and if fracture occurs with little or no
plastic deformation. The material is classed as brittle.
Similar arbitrary rules are followed with regard to the elastic limit in commercial practice.
Instead of determining the stress up to which there is no permanent set, as required by
definition, it is customary to designate the end of the straight portion of the curve (by definition
the proportional limit) as the elastic limit. Careful practice qualifies this by designating it the
‘proportional elastic limit’.
As extension continues beyond yielding, the material becomes stronger causing a rise of the
curve, but at the same time the cross-sectional area of the specimen becomes less as it is
drawn out. This loss of area weakens the specimen so that the curve reaches a maximum
and then falls off until final fracture occurs. The stress at the maximum point is called the
tensile strength (TS) or the ultimate strength of the material and is its most often quoted
property.
The mechanical and chemical properties of casing, tubing and drill pipe are laid down in API
specifications 5CT and 5C2.
Depending on the type or grade, minimum requirements are laid down for the mechanical
properties, and in the case of the yield point even maximum requirements (except for H 40).
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 30 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
The denominations of the different grades are based on the minimum yield strength, e.g.:
In the design of casing and tubing strings the minimum yield strength of the steel is taken as
the basis of all strength calculations
As far as chemical properties are concerned, in API 5CT only the maximum phosphorus and
sulphur contents are specified, the quality and the quantities of other alloying elements are left
to the manufacturer.
API specification 5CT ‘Restricted yield strength casing and tubing’ however, specifies the
complete chemical requirements for grades C 75, C 95 and L 80.
See the following tables for process of manufacturing, heat treatments, chemical composition
and mechanical properties of API tubulars.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 32 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Tempering
Temperature Min.
Process of o o
Group Grade Type Heat F C
Manufacture
Treatment
H 40 - S or EW None - -
J 55 - S or EW None - -
Note 1
1 K 55 - S or EW None - -
Note 1
N 80 (Casing) - S or EW None - -
Note 1
N 80 (Tubing) - S or EW Note 1 - -
C 75 1 S or EW N&T 1,150 621
C 75 2 S or EW Q&T 1,150 621
C 75 3 S or EW N&T 1,150 621
C 75 9 Cr S Q&T* 1,100 593
C 75 18 Cr S Q&T* 1,100 593
2 C 90 1 S Q&T 1,150 621
C 90 2 S Q&T 1,150 621
C 95 - S or EW Q&T 1,000 538
L 80 1 S or EW Q&T 1,050 566
L 80 9 Cr S Q&T* 1,100 593
L 80 13 Cr S Q&T* 1,100 593
3 P 105 - S Q&T or N&T** - -
P 110 - S Q&T or N&T** - -
Q 125 1 S or EW*** Q&T - -
4 Q 125 2 S or EW*** Q&T - -
Q 125 3 S or EW*** Q&T - -
Q 125 4 S or EW*** Q&T - -
Note:
Full length normalised, normalised and tempered (N&T) or quenched and tempered (Q&T) at the
manufacture’s option or if so specified on the order.
Type 9 Cr and 13Cr grades may be air quenched
** Unless otherwise agreed between purchaser and manufacturer/processor
*** Special requirements unique to electric welded Q 125 casing are specified in SR11. When
welded Q 125 casing is furnished, the provisions of SR11 automatically in effect.
S = Seamless pipe
EW = Electric welded Pipe
Table 5.A - API Process of Manufacture and Heat Treatment
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 33 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Group Grade Type Carbon Maganese Molybdenum Chromium Nickel Copper Phos- Sulphur Silicon
phorous
min max. min max. min max. min max. max. max. max. max. max.
1 H - 40 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 ...
J - 55 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 ...
K - 55 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 ...
N - 80 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 ...
2 C - 75 1 ... 0.50 ... 1.90 0.15 0.40 *** *** *** *** 0.040 0.060 0.45
C - 75 2 ... 0.43 ... 1.50 ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 0.45
C - 75 3 0.38 0.48 0.75 1.00 0.15 0.25 0.80 1.10 ... ... 0.040 0.040 ...
C - 75 9Cr ... 0.15 0.30 0.60 0.90 1.10 8.0 10.0 ... ... 0.020 0.010 1.0
C - 75 13Cr 0.15 0.22 0.25 1.00 ... ... 12.0 14.0 0.5 0.25 0.020 0.010 1.0
L - 80 1 ... 0.43* ... 1.90 ... ... ... ... 0.25 0.35 0.040 0.060 0.45
L - 80 9Cr ... 0.15 0.30 0.60 0.90 1.10 8.0 10.0 0.5 0.25 0.020 0.010 1.0
L - 80 13Cr 0.15 0.22 0.25 1.00 ... ... 12.0 14.0 0.5 0.25 0.020 0.010 1.0
C90 1 ... 0.35 ... 1.00 ... 0.75 ... 1.20 0.99 ... 0.030 0.010 ...
C90 2 ... 0.50 ... 1.90 ... NL ... NL 0.99 ... 0.030 0.010 ...
C95 ... ... 0.45* ... 1.90 ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 0.45
3 P -105 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 ...
P- ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 ...
110
4 Q -125 1 ... 0.35 ... 1.00 ... .75 ... 1.20 0.99 ... 0.020 0.010 ...
Q -125 2 ... 0.35 ... 1.00 ... NL ... NL 0.99 ... 0.020 0.020 ...
Q -125 3 ... 0.50 ... 1.90 ... NL ... NL 0.99 ... 0.030 0.010 ...
Q -125 4 ... 0.50 ... 1.90 ... NL ... NL 0.99 ... 0.030 0.020 ...
Note:
*** For Grade C - 75, Type 1, Chromium, Nickel and Copper combined shall not exceed 0.50%.
* The Carbon contents for L - 80 may be increased to 0.50% max. if the product is oil
quenched.
* The Carbon contents for C - 95 may be increased to 0.55% max. if the product is oil
quenched.
NL No Limit. Elements shown must be reported in product analysis.
Table 5.B - Chemical Composition of API Tubulars
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 34 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
4 Q -125 125,000 860 150,000 1035 135,000 930 ... ... 0.500 or less 3.0
Q -125 125,000 860 150,000 1035 135,000 930 ... ... 0.501 to 0.749 4.0
Q -125 125,000 860 150,000 1035 135,000 930 ... ... 0.750 and 5.0
above
* In case of dispute, laboratory Rockwell C hardness tests shall be used as the referee
method.
Range 1 2 3
Casing And Liners
** Total range length include 16-25 25-24 24-48
* Range Length for 95% or more of carload
Permissible Variation, max. 6 5 6
Permissible length, min 18 28 36
Tubing
** Total range length include 20-24 28-32 -
* Range Length for 100% or more of carload
Permissible Variation, max. 2 2 -
Permissible length, min 20 28 -
Pup Joint
*** Lengths 2,3,4,6,8,10 and 12ft
Tolerance ±3ins
* Carload tolerance shall not apply to orders of less than a carload. For any carload of pipe, shipped
to the final destination without transfer or removal from the car, the tolerance shall apply to each car.
For any order consisting of more than a carload and shipped from the manufacturer’s facility by rail.
but not to the final destination, the carload tolerance shall apply to the total order, but not to the
individual carloads.
** By agreement between purchaser and manufacturer or processor the total range length for range
1 tubing may be 20-28ft
*** 2ft pup joints may be furnished up to 3ft long by agreement between purchaser and
manufacturer, and lengths other than those listed may be furnished by agreement between
purchaser and manufacturer.
Table 6.A - API Range Length In Feet
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 37 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Range 1 2 3
Casing And Liners
Total range length include 4.88-7.62 7.62-10.36 10.36-14.63
* Range Length for 95% or more of carload
Permissible Variation, max. 1.83 1.52 1.83
Permissible length, min 5.49 8.53 10.97
Tubing
** Total range length include 6.10-7.32 8.53-9.75 -
* Range Length for 100% or more of carload
Permissible Variation, max. 0.61 0.61 -
Permissible length, min 6.10 8.53 -
Pup Joint
*** Lengths 0.61, 0.19, 1.22, 1.83, 2.44, 3.05 and 3.66m
Tolerance ±76.2mm
* Carload tolerance shall not apply to orders of less than a carload shipped from the manufacturer’s
or processor’s facility. For any carload of pipe shipped from the manufacturer’s or processor’s
facility to the final destination without transfers or removal from the car, the tolerance shall apply to
each car. For any order consisting of more than a carload and shipped by rail, but not to the final
destination in the rail cars loaded, the carload tolerance shall apply to the total order, but not to the
individual carloads.
** By agreement between the purchaser and manufacturer or processor the total range length for
range 1 tubing may be 6.10-8.53m
*** 0.61m pup joints may be furnished up to 0.91m long by agreement between purchaser and
manufacturer, and lengths other than those may be furnished be agreement between purchaser and
manufacturer.
Table 6.B - API Range Length in Metres
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 38 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
For pup joints shorter than 6ft (1.83m) in length, the entire surface except the threads shall be
painted.
The colour and number of bands shall be as follows:
Grade H 40 No colour marking, or black at the manufacturer’s option
Grade J 55 One bright green band
Grade K 55 Two bright green bands
Grade N 80 One red band
Grade P 105 White
Grade P 110 White
Grade Q 125 Orange
Group 2
1) A paint band or bands encircling the pipe at a distance not greater than 2ft (0,61m) from
the coupling or box.
Grade C75 One blue band
Grace C75, 9Cr One blue band and two yellow bands
Grade C75, 13Cr One blue and one yellow band
Grade L80 One red band and one brown band
Grade L80, 9Cr One red and one brown and two yellow bands
Grade L80, 13Cr. One red and one brown and one yellow band
Grade C90 One purple band
Grade C95 One brown band
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 40 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Casing design is actually a stress analysis procedure. The objective of the procedure is to
produce a pressure vessel which can withstand a variety of external, internal, thermal, and
self weight loading, while at the same time being subjected to wear and corrosion.
During the drilling phase, this pressure vessel is a composite of steel and in conjunction with
a variety of biaxially stressed rock materials.
As there is little point in designing for loads that are not encountered in the field, or in having a
casing that is disproportionally strong in relation to the underlying formations, there are four
major elements to the casing design process:
• Definition of the loading conditions likely to be encountered throughout the life of
the well.
• Specification of the mechanical strength of the pipe.
• Estimation of the formation strength using rock and soil mechanics.
• Estimation of the extent to which the pipe will deteriorate through time and
quantification of the impact that this will have on its strength.
Considering the axial stress (σa) in a string of casing, it is obvious that the stress due to the
buoyant weight of the casing below any point of interest will be a major component of the total
axial stress.
Furthermore any changes in the internal and external pressures acting on casing will induce
changes in the axial stress as well as the radial (σr) and tangential (σt) stresses.
In addition, since the pipe is held or fixed at both ends, changes in all three stresses will occur
due to temperature changes and from the occurrence, and degree, of any buckling effect.
The inter-relationship between these loads can be analysed manually by applying a
combination of Hooke's Law, ‘Lame's Equations’ and some form of yield criteria. This is
referred to as ‘Triaxial Stress Analysis’.
The forces affecting casing design are outlined in section 7.1.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 42 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
This list above is by no means comprehensive and research in progress may identify some
other effects.
The steps in the casing design process are:
1) Consider the loading factors for burst first, since burst will dictate the design for the
major part of the string.
2) Next, the collapse loading should be evaluated and the string sections upgraded if
necessary.
3) Once the weights, grades and section lengths have been determined to satisfy the
burst and collapse loading, the tensile load can then in turn be evaluated.
4) The pipe can be upgraded as necessary as the loading is determined.
5) From all of the above, the appropriate casing connection can be determined although, if
the well is to be completed and the casing exposed to long term production,
consideration may be given to using a premium connection.
The final step is a check on biaxial reductions in burst strength and collapse resistance
caused by compression and tension loads, respectively. If these reductions show the
strength of any part of the section to be less than the potential load, the section should again
be upgraded.
The DF may vary with the capability of the steel to resist damage inflicted from handling and
running equipment.
The company values selected for DFs are a compromise between safety margin and
economics. The use of excessively high DFs guarantees against failure but provides
excessive strength and, therefore, increased cost. The use of low DFs requires accurate
knowledge about the loads to be imposed on the casing as there is less margin available.
Casing is generally designed to withstand stress which, in practice, it seldom encounters due
to the assumptions used in calculations, whereas, production tubing has to bear pressures
and tensions which are known or can be calculated with considerable accuracy.
Furthermore, casing is cemented in place after installation whereas tubing is often recovered
and used again. As a consequence of this, and due to the fact that tubing has to combat
corrosion effects from formation fluid, a higher DF is used for tubing than casing.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 44 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Note: The tensile DF on grade C 95 and below is 1.7, and higher than C 95 is 1.8.
Note: The tensile DF must be considerably higher than the previous factors to
avoid exceeding the elastic limit and, therefore invalidating the criteria
on which burst and collapse resistances are calculated.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 45 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Collapse Use only column 11 of the API casing tables and divide the value by
the DF to obtain the collapse resistance for design calculations.
Tension Use the lowest value from columns 20 through 27 of the API casing
tables and divide it by the DF to obtain the joint strength for design
calculations.
Note: It should be recognised that the Design Factor used in the context of
casing string design is essentially different from the ‘Safety Factor’ used
in many other engineering applications.
The term ‘Safety Factor’ as used in tubing design, implies that the actual physical properties
and loading conditions are exactly known and that a specific margin is being allowed for
safety. The loading conditions are not always precisely known in casing design, and therefore
in the context of casing design the term ‘Safety Factor’ should be avoided at all times.
Section 8 describes the exact design process in detail including the determination of all the
loading applied.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 46 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
8. DESIGN CRITERIA
8.1. BURST
Burst loading on the casing is induced when internal pressure exceeds external pressure.
Based on the vast amount of well data which is currently available, a set of key design
considerations are made:
a) Blowouts, especially those which are capable of exerting ultra high surface
pressure (i.e. dry gas blowouts), are very rare.
b) Ultra high surface pressures can only be experienced if an actual dry gas blow-
out does occur.
c) High strength casing, regardless of how overdesigned it may be, has no impact
on the reduction of the blow-out risk.
d) Once a blow-out has occurred, damage to the rig, environment, etc. will have
already commenced, regardless of how strong the casing may be.
e) If there is a blow-out, even a dry gas blow-out, it does not always concur that the
casing will is exposed to high burst pressures.
f) Surface wellheads have an advantage over subsea wellheads during drilling
operations, as there is access to any of the previous casing annuli whereas this is
not available with conventional subsea wellheads.
Access to these annuli could in turn provide a means of applying back-up
pressure to a casing string, thus reducing the net burst pressure being exerted on
that particular string. This feature is not always possible if the annulus may is
either cemented to the surface or not cemented into the previous casing shoe.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 47 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
The key to this problem is to recognise the rare and exceptional well circumstances that may
require or result in a hard dry gas shut-in. The decision process should be based on the initial
adoption of a ‘middle ground’ design.
The Eni-Agip Drilling Engineering Department evaluated these key design considerations and
have decided to use the most conservative method and to reduce the obtained results by
40%.
Surface Casing
a) Internal Pressure
1) The wellhead burst pressure limit is arbitrary, and is generally set equal to that of
the working pressure rating of the wellhead and BOP equipment but with a
minimum of 140kg/cm2. See ‘BOP selection criteria’ in section 12.1.
With a subsea wellhead, the wellhead burst pressure limit is taken as 60% of the
value obtained as the difference between the fracture pressure at the casing shoe
and the pressure of a gas column to surface but in any case not less than
2,000psi (140atm).
Consideration should be given to the pressure rating of the wellhead and BOP
equipment which must always be equal to, or higher than, the pressure rating of
the pipe.
When an oversize BOP having a capacity greater than that necessary is selected,
the wellhead burst pressure limit will be 60% of the calculated surface
pressure obtained as difference between the fracture pressure at the casing shoe
with a gas column to surface. Methane gas (CH4) with density of 0.3kg/dm 3 is
normally used for this calculation. In any case it shall never be considered less
than 2,000psi (140atm).
The use of methane for this calculation is the ‘worst case’ when the specific
gravity of gas is unknown, as the specific gravities of any gases which may be
encountered will usually be greater than that of methane.
2) The bottom-hole burst pressure limit can be calculated and is equal to the
predicted fracture gradient of the formation below the casing shoe.
3) Connect the wellhead and bottom-hole burst pressure limits with a straight line to
obtain the maximum internal burst load verses depth.
When taking a gas kick, the pressure from bottom-hole to surface will assume different
profiles according to the position of influx into the wellbore. The plotted pressure versus
depth will produce a curve.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 48 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
b) External Pressure
In wells with surface wellheads, the external pressure is assumed to be equal to the
hydrostatic pressure of a column of drilling mud.
In wells with subsea wellheads:
• At the wellhead - Water Depth x Seawater Density x 0.1 (if atm)
• At the shoe - (Shoe Depth - Air Gap) x Seawater Density x 0.1 (if atm)
c) Net Pressure
The resultant load, or net pressure, will be obtained by subtracting, at each depth, the
external from internal pressure.
Intermediate Casing
a) Internal Pressure
1) The wellhead burst pressure limit is taken as 60% of the calculated value obtained
as the difference between the fracture pressure at the casing shoe and the
pressure of a gas column to the wellhead.
In subsea wellheads, the wellhead burst pressure limit is taken as 60% of the
value obtained as the difference between the fracture pressure at the casing shoe
and the pressure of a gas column to the wellhead minus the seawater pressure.
3) The bottomhole burst pressure limit is equal to that of the predicted fracture
gradient of the formation below the casing shoe.
4) Connect the wellhead and bottom-hole burst pressure limits with a straight line to
obtain the maximum internal burst pressure.
b) External Pressure
The external collapse pressure is taken to be equal to that of the formation pressure.
With a subsea wellhead, at the wellhead, hydrostatic seawater pressure should be
considered.
Production Casing
The ‘worst case’ burst load condition on production casing occurs when a well is shut-in and
there is a leak in the top of the tubing, or in the tubing hanger, and this pressure is applied to
the top of the packer fluid (i.e. completion fluid) in the tubing-casing annulus.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 49 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
a) Internal Pressure
1) The wellhead burst limit is obtained as the difference between the pore pressure
of the reservoir fluid and the hydrostatic pressure produced by a colum of fluid
which is usually gas (density = 0.3kg/dm 3).
2) Actual gas/oil gradients can be used if information on these are known and
available.
3) The bottom-hole pressure burst limit is obtained by adding the wellhead pressure
burst limit to the annulus hydrostatic pressure exerted by the completion fluid.
Generally the completion fluid density is equal to, or close to, the mud weight in
which casing is installed.
Note: It is usually assumed that the completion fluid and mud on the outside of
the casing remains homogeneous and retains the original density values’
however this is not actually the case, particularly with heavy fluids, but it is
also assumed that the two fluids will degrade similarly under the same
conditions of pressure and temperature.
4) Connect the wellhead and bottomhole burst pressure limits with a straight line to
obtain the maximum internal burst pressures.
Note: If it is foreseen that future stimulation or hydraulic fracturing operations
may be necessary, assume: at the perforation depth the fracture pressure
at that point and at the wellhead the fracture pressure at the perforation
depth minus the hydrostatic head in the casing plus a safety margin of
70kg/cm2 (1,000psi).
b) External Pressure
The external pressure is taken to be equal to that of the formation pressure.
With a subsea wellhead, at the wellhead, hydrostatic seawater pressure should be
considered.
Tie-Back String
In a high pressure well, the intermediate casing string above a liner may be unable to
withstand a tubing leak at surface pressures according to the production burst criteria. The
solution to this problem is to run and tie-back a string of casing from the liner top to surface,
isolating the intermediate casing.
8.2. COLLAPSE
Pipe collapse will occur when the external force on a pipe exceeds the combination of the
internal force plus the collapse resistance.
It occurs as a result of either, or a combination of:
• Reduction in internal fluid pressure.
• Increase in external fluid pressure.
• Additional mechanical loading imposed by plastic formation movement.
Surface Casing
a) Internal Pressure
For wells with a surface wellhead, the casing is assumed to be completely empty.
In offshore wells with subsea wellheads, the internal pressure assumes that the mud
level drops due to a thief zone.
b) External Pressure
In wells with a surface wellhead, the external pressure is assumed to be equal to that of
the hydrostatic pressure of a column of drilling mud.
In offshore wells with a subsea wellhead, it is calculated:
• At the wellhead - Water Depth x Seawater Density x 0.1 (if atm).
• At the shoe - (Shoe Depth - Air Gap) x Seawater Density x 0.1 (if atm).
Intermediate Casing
a) Internal Pressure
The worst case collapse loading occurs when a loss of circulation is encountered while
drilling the next hole section with the maximum allowable mud weight. This results in the
mud level inside the casing dropping to an equilibrium level where the mud hydrostatic
equals the pore pressure of the thief zone. Consequently it will be assumed the casing
is empty to the height (H) calculated as follows:
(Hloss-H) x dm = H loss x Gp
H = H loss (dm - Gp)/dm
If Gp = 1.03 (kg/cm2/10m)
Then H = H loss (dm - 1.03)/dm
where:
Hloss = depth at which circulation loss is expected (m)
dm = mud density expected at Hloss (kg/dm 2)
Gp = pore pressure of thief zone (kg/cm2/10m) - usually normally pressured
with 1.03 as gradient.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 52 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
When thief zones cannot be confirmed, or otherwise, during the collapse design, as is
the case in exploration wells, Eni-Agip division and associates suggests that on wells
with surface wellheads, the casing is assumed to be half empty and the remaining part
of the casing full of the heaviest mud planned to drill the next section below the shoe.
In wells with subsea wellheads, the mud level inside the casing is assumed to drop to
an equilibrium level where the mud hydrostatic pressure equals the pore pressure of the
thief zone.
b) External Pressure
The pressure acting on the outside of casing is the pressure of mud in which casing is
installed.
The uniform external pressure exerted by salt on the casing or cement sheath through
overburden pressure, should be given a value equal to the true vertical depth of the
relative point.
Production Casing
a) Internal Pressure
Assume the casing worst case is being completely empty. It is a fact of life, that during
the productive life of well, tubing leaks often occur and wells. Also wells may be on
artificial lift, or have plugged perforations or very low internal pressure values and, under
these circumstances, the production casing string could be partially or completely
empty. This must be taken into consideration in the design and the ideal solution is to
design for zero pressure inside the casing which provides full safety, nevertheless in
particular well situations, the Drilling and Completions Manager may consider that the
lowest casing internal pressure is the level of a column of the lightest density producible
formation fluid.
b) External Pressure
Assume the hydrostatic pressure exerted by the mud in which casing is installed.
The uniform external pressure exerted by salt on the casing or cement sheath through
overburden pressure, should be given a value equal to the true vertical depth of the
relative point.
Tie-Back String
If the intermediate string above the liner is unable to withstand the collapse pressure
calculated according to production collapse criteria, it will be necessary run and tie-back a
string of casing from the liner top to surface.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 54 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
8.3. TENSION
8.3.1. General
Tensile failure occurs if the longitudinal force exerted on a pipe exceeds, either the tensile
strength of the pipe or its connection. Generally, the connection used in a string of casing is
stronger than the pipe body although this must always be confirmed.
For situations where a connection coupling has to be special clearance, (i.e. of a smaller
diameter than the normal) the connection will be weaker or if flush joint pipe must be used in
special circumstances.
Tensile loads are imposed on the casing by:
• The weight of pipe itself. The highest tensile stresses will occur at the uppermost
portion of the pipe. The tension is the weight of the pipe in air less buoyancy.
• Shock loading:
a) While lowering casing through unstable formations such as cavings where
the casing string may get temporarily stuck before suddenly slipping through
thereby inducing tensile shock loads.
b) When landing casing in a subsea wellhead from a floater.
Note: The varying parameters which can affect tensile loading leads to the
estimates used for the tensile forces are more uncertain than the
estimates for either burst and collapse. The DF imposed is therefore
correspondingly much larger.
The forces acting on the areas of collar shoulders (F3) are for practical purposes negligible in
casing design as the upward and downward facing shoulders countered each other over
short distances.
Note: When calculating the tension with regard to buoyancy trends, the
different weights per unit length of the casing must be taken into
account, as they have different cross-sectional areas. In the following
example an average weight value is assumed since this does not
substantially affect the calculations.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 56 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Fluid Head
Density
Degrees Specific kg/sp Buoyancy
lbs/gal lbs/cu ft g/cc psi/ft
API Gravity cm/m Factor*
60 0.738 6.160 46.08 0.738 0.320 0.0738 0.905
55 0.758 6.325 47.31 0.765 0.328 0.0758 0.903
50 0.779 6.499 48.62 0.779 0.336 0.0779 0.900
45 0.801 6.683 49.99 0.801 0.347 0.0801 0.897
40 0.825 6.878 51.45 0.825 0.357 0.0825 0.894
35 0.849 7.085 53.00 0.848 0.368 0.0649 0.891
30 0.876 7.304 58.64 0.876 0.379 0.0876 0.688
25 0.904 7.537 56.38 0.904 0.391 0.904 0.884
20 0.933 7.786 58.24 0.933 0.404 0.0933 0.680
15 0.985 8.052 60.23 0.965 0.418 0.0965 0.675
10 1.000 8.337 62.36 1.000 0.433 0.1000 0.872
1.007 8.400 62.63 1.007 0.435 0.1007 0.871
1.031 8.600 64.33 1.031 0.446 0.1031 0.868
1.055 8.800 65.82 1.055 0.457 0.1055 0.865
1.079 9.000 67.32 1.079 0.467 0.1079 0.662
1.103 9.200 68.82 1.103 0.477 0.1103 0.859
1.127 9.400 70.31 1.127 0.488 0.1127 0.856
1.151 9.800 71.81 1.151 0.498 0.1151 .0852
1.175 9.800 73.30 1.175 0.509 0.1175 0.849
1.199 10.00 74.80 1.199 0.519 0.1199 0.846
1.223 10.200 75.30 1.223 0.529 0.1223 0.843
1.247 10.400 77.79 1.247 0.540 0.1247 0.840
1.271 10.600 79.29 1.271 0.550 0.1271 0.837
1.295 10.800 80.78 1.295 0.561 0.1295 0.834
1.319 11.00 82.28 1.319 0.571 0.1319 0.831
1.343 11.200 83.78 1.343 0.581 0.1343 0.828
1.367 11.400 85.27 1.367 0.592 0.1367 0.825
1.391 11.500 86.77 1.391 0.602 0.1391 0.822
1.415 11.800 88.27 1.415 0.612 0.1415 0.819
1.439 12.000 89.76 1.439 0.823 0.1439 0.816
1.463 12.200 91.26 1.463 0.633 0.1463 0.613
1.487 12.400 92.75 1.487 0.644 0.1487 0.810
1.511 12.600 94.25 1.511 0.654 0.1511 0.806
1.535 12.800 95.75 1.535 0.664 0.1535 0.803
1.559 13.000 97.24 1.559 0.675 0.1559 0.800
1.583 13.200 98.74 1.583 0.585 0.1583 0.797
1.607 13.399 100.23 1.607 0.696 0.1607 0.794
BF = Buoyancy Factor
BF = 1 − ρm / ρs ρm = Mud Density
ρs = Steel Density
Fluid Density Pressure and Buoyancy Factors(60oF) (Continued Over Page)
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 58 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Fluid Head
Density
Degrees Specific kg/sp Buoyancy
lbs/gal lbs/cu ft g/cc psi/ft
API Gravity cm/m Factor*
1.631 13.600 101.73 1.631 0.706 0.1831 0.791
1.655 13.800 103.23 1.655 0.716 0.1655 0.788
1.679 14.000 104.72 1.679 0.727 0.1579 0.785
1.703 14.200 106.22 1.703 0.737 0.1703 0.782
1.727 14.399 107.71 1.727 0.748 0.1727 0.779
1.751 14.600 109.21 1.751 0.755 0.1751 0.776
1.775 14.800 110.71 1.775 0.768 0.1775 0.773
1.799 15.000 112.20 1.799 0.779 0.1799 0.770
1.823 15.200 113.70 1.823 0.789 0.1823 0.767
1.847 15.399 115.20 1.847 0.799 0.1547 0.764
1.871 15.600 116.89 1.871 0.610 0.1871 0.761
1.895 15.800 118.19 1.895 0.820 0.1895 0.757
1.919 16.000 119.68 1.918 0.831 0.1919 0.754
1.943 16.200 121.18 1.943 0.841 0.1943 0.751
1.967 16.400 122.68 1.967 0.851 0.1967 0.748
1.991 16.600 124.17 1.991 0.862 0.1991 0.745
2.015 16,800 125.67 2.015 0.872 0.2015 0.742
2.039 17.000 127.16 2.039 0.863 0.2039 0.739
2.063 17.200 128.66 2.063 0.893 0.2063 0.736
2.087 17.400 130.18 2.067 0.903 0.2087 .0733
2.111 17.600 131.65 2.111 0.914 0.2111 0.730
2.135 17.800 133.15 2.135 0.924 0.2135 0.727
2.159 18.000 134.54 2.159 0.935 0.2159 0.724
2.183 18.200 136.14 .2183 0.945 0.2183 0.72
2.207 18.400 137.64 2.207 0.955 0.2207 0.718
2.231 18.600 139.13 2.231 0.955 0.2231 0.715
2.255 18.800 140.63 2.255 0.976 0.2255 0.712
2.278 19.000 142.12 2.278 0.987 0.2278 0.708
2.326 19.400 145.12 2.326 1.007 0.2326 0.792
2.350 19.600 146.61 2.350 1.018 0.2350 0.699
2.374 19.800 148.11 2.374 1.028 0.2374 0.696
2.398 20.000 149.61 2.398 1.038 0.2398 0.693
Buoyancy factor is used is used compensate for loss of weight when steel tubulars are immersed in fluid.
Applicable only when tubing or casing is completely filled with fluid.
Apparent Weight = Weight in Air - Buoyant Force
Weight in Air x Mud Density
Buoyancy Force =
Steel Density
Steel Density − Mud Density
Apparent Weight = Wieght in Air
Steel Density
Apparent Weight = Weight in Air x Buoyancy Factors
Steel Density = 7.85 kg/l
Example:
Weight of casing in air = 250,000kg
Mud weight = 1.70kg/dm 3
Buoyancy factor = 0.782
Weight of casing in mud = 250,000 x 0.782
= 195,500kg
Buoyancy force = 54,500kg
3) Add the additional load due to bumping the cement plug to the casing string weight in
mud.
Note: More than one section of the casing string may be loaded in compression.
Example Data
Estimated top of cement 2,800m
Cemented length of casing 1,250m
Casing size 7ins
Steel grade P 110
Weight (imperial) 38lbs/ft
Weight (metric) 56.55kg/m
Internal diameter 5.898ins
Casing shoe depth 4050m
Mud weight during cementing operation 1.93kg/l
Average cement slurry density 2.00kg/l
Expected mud weight at end of next phase 2.16kg/l
Estimated bump plug pressure 140kg/cm2
Next phase total depth 4400m
API recommendation is to land the casing with the same tension at the end of the
displacement in all wells where the mud density does not exceed 12.5ppg (1.50kg/l) in the
next section.
The second option is used when excessive mud weights are anticipated, to prevent any
tendency of the casing to buckle above the freeze point.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 62 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Note: The effects of axial stress on burst resistance are negligible for the
majority of wells.
Note: Fortunately for instances, the biaxial effects of axial stress on collapse
resistance are insignificant.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 63 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
X= Tensile load
Pipe body yield strength
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1
0
0.1
Collapse resistence without tensile load
0.2
Collapsresistence with tensile load
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Y=
0.9
1.1
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 65 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
8.5. BENDING
8.5.1. General
When calculating tensile loading, the effect of bending must also be considered, if applicable.
The bending of the pipe causes additional stress in the walls of the pipe. This bending causes
tension on the outside of the pipe and in compression on the inside of the bend, assuming the
pipe is not already under tension (Refer to figure 8.f).
Bending is caused by any deviation in the wellbore resulting from side tracks, build-ups and
drop-offs.
Since bending load increases the total tensile load, it must be deducted from the usable rated
tensile strength of the pipe.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 68 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
MB × D Eq. 8.B
σ=
2×J
where:
MB = Bending moment (MB = E x J/R) (kg x cm)
D = Outside diameter of casing (cm)
J = Inertia moment (cm4)
σ = Bending stress (kg/cm2)
ExJ = Bending stiffness (kg x cm2)
R = Radius of curvature (cm)
MB × L Eq. 8.C
θ=
E×J
where:
MB = Bending moment (kg x cm)
L = Arch length (cm)
E = Modulus of elasticity (kg/cm2)
J = Inertia moment (cm4)
θ = Change in angle of deviation (radians)
θ ×E × J
Obtaining MB = from equation 2), equation 1) becomes:
L
θ × E× D Eq. 8.D
σ=
2×L
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 69 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Then, by using the more current units giving the build-up or drop-off angles in degrees/30m,
we obtain the final form of the equation for ‘TB’ as follows:
TB Eq. 8.E
σ=
Af
θ × E × D × Af
TB =
2× L
Note: Since most casing has a relatively narrow range of wall thickness (from
0.25 to 0.60ins), the weight of casing is approximately proportional to its
diameter. This means the value of the bending load increases with the
square of the pipe diameter for any given value of build-up/drop-off rate.
At the same time, joint tension strength rises a little less than the direct
ratio. The result is that bending is a much more severe problem with
large diameter casing than with smaller sizes.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 70 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Calculation:
1) Casing weight in air (Wa)
Wa = 107.14 x 2,000 = 214t
2) Casing weight in mud (Wm)
Wm = 214 x 0.859 = 184t
3) Additional tension due to the bending effect (TB)
TB = 15.52 x 3 x 13.375 x 133.99 = 83,441kg = 83t
This stress will be added to the tensile stress already existing on the curved section of
hole.
4) Tension in the casing at 300m(TVD)=156 t. 5)
5) Total tension in the casing at 300m = 156 + 83 = 239t
6) Tension in the casing at 600m (MD) =129t.
7) Total tension in the casing at 600m (MD) = 129 + 83 = 212t.
The location and magnitude of volumetric wear in the casing string can be estimated by
calculating the energy imparted from the rotating tool joints to the casing at different casing
points and dividing this by the amount of energy required to wear away a unit volume of the
casing. The percentage casing wear at each point along the casing is then calculated from
the volumetric wear.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 73 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Note: The chemical action of gases such as H2S, CO2 and 02 tends to reduce
the surface hardness of steel and, thus, contributes significantly to the
rate of wear.
The frictional energy imparted to the casing by the rotating tool joint equals:
Energy Input Per Foot = Friction Force Per Foot x Sliding Distance Eq. 8.I
where:
Friction Force Per Foot = Friction Factor x Tool Joint Lateral Load Per Foot
Sliding Distance = n x TJ Diameter x Rotary Speed x Contact Time
and
S x TJL Eq. 8.J
Tool Joint Contact Time =
DPJL
where:
S = Drilling distance(ft)
TJL = Tool joint length (ins)
P = Rate of penetration (ft/hr)
DPJL = Drill pipe joint length (ft)
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 74 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Combining eq. 8.h-eq. 8.l shows that the Wear Volume ’V’ equals:
60 x π x F x L x D x N x S Eq. 8.M
v=
P
where:
V = Wear volume per foot (in3/ft)
F = Wear factor (ins 2/lbs)
L = Lateral load on drill pipe per foot (lbs/ft)
D = Tool joint diameter (ins)
N = Rotary speed (RPM)
S = Drilling distance (ft)
P = Penetration rate (ft/hr)
The tool joint and drill pipe lengths do not appear in Equation 6 because they do not
effect the amount of casing wear in the linear model.
When tool joints are smooth, casing wear is minimised when the mud consists of water,
bentonite and barite, (F = 0.5 to 1.0).
The small particles of barite appear to act as ball bearings and prevents the tool joint and
casing materials from coming into intimate contact.
Casing wear is increased tenfold when the mud is weighted with drill solids instead of barite,
(F = 5 to 10). This shows the importance of having good solids control when running heavily
weighted muds.
Water (without solids) causes high wear, (F = 10 to 30) because there are no solids to
prevent the sliding metals surfaces from coming into contact and causing galling wear. In
extreme cases, the surface can weld together resulting in chunks of metal being torn from the
surfaces.
When tool joints have rough hardbanding, the wear is controlled primarily by the roughness of
the tool joint and is almost independent of the mud properties. In this case, the rough tool
joints tend to machine away the casing in even larger pieces (similar to the cutting action of a
mill) resulting in rapid failure of the casing. table 8.d gives comparisons of casing wear with
twelve different hardmetal materials tested in the DEA-42 project.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 81 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
figure 8.r below shows casing wear versus tool joint passes.
The data given in table 8.c and table 8.e show that drill pipe rubber protectors (F= 1 to 10) will
reduce casing wear under all conditions except when using smooth tool joints with water
base mud weighted with barite, (F = 0.5 to 1.0).
In applications where very rough hard metal tool joints (F= 200 to 400) are being used, the
rubber protectors (F = 1 to 10) can reduce casing wear by 95 to 99 percent.
Limited casing wear data for oil based muds is also available. These limited tests indicate that
casing wear rates are nearly identical for oil based and water based muds.
Shell (Bol. 1985) found that the addition of barite to the mud significantly reduces casing wear
(Refer to figure 8.s).
The barite apparently acts as ball bearings and keeps the sliding metal surfaces from coming
into contact with each other and causing galling wear as already described in the previous
section.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 83 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
The barite reduced the wear factor from 25 using no barite to 1 to 2 with barite.
Shell (Bol, 1985) conducted tests which showed that a 10ppg mud weighted with drill solids
produced significantly more casing wear then a 10ppg mud weighted with barite (Refer to
figure 8.t below).
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 84 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
With lateral loads of 900 to 1,800lbs (4 to 8kN), the wear factor ranged from 5 to 10 with drill
solids compared to 0.5 to 1.0 with barite. Apparently the small diameter of the barite
contributed to this reduced wear.
Shell (Bol, 1985) conducted tests with muds weighted with different weighting materials and
found that weighting materials significantly reduce casing wear.
Weighting materials were found to reduce casing wear in all cases. Wear was greatest (F=
22 to 27), when no weighting material was present to act as a buffer between the tool joint
and the casing. The addition of silica sand to the bentonite and water reduced the casing
wear in half, (F = 11 to 13).
Drill solids (F = 5 to 11) produced less wear than silica sand.
Iron oxide (F = 3 to 4), which is often considered very abrasive, produced less wear than all of
the other weighting materials except barite. This is apparently due to the small size of the iron
oxide weighting particles.
These tests indicate that the size of the weighting particles may be more important than the
composition of the particles.
Oil based and water based muds weighted with barite produced minimal wear (F = 0.8 to
1.6). This shows the importance of having good solids control when using heavily weighted
muds.
Shell (Bol, 1985) found that the addition of 2% lubricant to an unweighted mud consisting of
water and bentonite significantly reduced casing wear refer to figure 8.v.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 86 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
The addition of 2% lubricant reduced the wear factor with the bentonite mud from between 30
to 5 with 1,800lbs lateral load (8kN) on the tool joint to between 30 to 0.5 with 900lbs load
(4kN).
These tests show that lubricants may be useful in wells where casing wear may be a
problem.
If the allowable operating time is less than the anticipated operating time, use heavier casing
(or increases the grade) 100m above and to 60m below the wear point until the allowable
operating time exceeds the anticipated operating time.
If the allowable operating time is greater than the anticipated operating time (say estimated 50
days allowable versus estimated 20 days operating) do not include a wear allowance. If the
allowable operating time and the anticipated operating time are about the same, either:
a) Include a wear allowance
or
b) Monitor casing wear during drilling, and commission an intermediate string if the
worn casing strength approaches the design loads.
In any given situation whether option a) or b) is exercised will be dependent upon a number of
factors, many of which are beyond the scope of routine casing design.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 88 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Option a)
Is the conservative approach, but it may be too high, given the gross uncertainties inherent in
wear estimations. However, in rank wildcats, particularly in remote locations, it may be
justified.
Option b)
Requires a base caliper survey to be run immediately after installing the casing string,
followed by runs at discrete intervals during the drilling phase.
If wear is proven to have occurred, and an intermediate string has to be commissioned early,
the deeper objectives of the well may not be reached. However, conditions as drilling
proceeds may indicate that the design loads assumed are not going to be encountered and
the reduction in casing strength is acceptable.
In any event, valuable data on casing wear in the area will be obtained and field practices may
be improved as result of the attention paid to wear, eventually leading to a reduction in overall
wear rates.
In most cases, option b) is preferred.
With regards to trouble free drilling, sticking due to salt flow, mud problems from salt
contamination, hole enlargement and the well's overall casing programme, are the prime
factors to be considered.
There are other factors that have to not be under evaluated such as:
• Control of gas flows from porous zones interbedded in the salt, differential sticking
in porous zones.
• Abnormal pressure due to entrapment of pressure by salt.
• Shale sloughing from interbedded or boundary shales.
To prevent casing collapse, the designer should plan for non-uniform salt loading, obtaining
the best possible cement job, using casing with higher than normal collapse ratings and
possibly two strings of casing through the salt section.
Running casing in salt sections is rather a cementing problem than a casing design problem.
In some cases, two strings may be more advantageous as experience has demonstrated that
it is not practical to design a casing string to resist collapse. This technique is probably the
most reliable and safest approach for preventing casing collapse but is probably not
necessary for the majority of salt sections.
If there is a possibility of salt loading, several remedial actions may be taken. The first group
of precautions may be classified under the general heading of filling the casing internally,
either, with gravel, other solids or a fluid. For production casing, such actions are usually not
possible.
The alternative is to run a scab liner inside the casing opposite the suspect formation and
cement the annulus between the two casing strings refer to figure 8.x.
The benefits gained from running such a liner are substantial.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 91 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Another source of non-uniform loading is bending of the casing as a result of curvature of the
wellbore. Consider an initially straight casing length under external pressure and axial loads
that are insufficient to result in collapse. Now assume that the casing is gradually bent by an
additional external force as for example due to salt flowing (Refer to figure 8.y below).
In the lower portion of the figure, the flowing formation has come in contact with the casing
thus restricting its movement. Above this point of contact, additional flow of the formation is
depicted as being in progress. Subsequent formation movement above the frozen point will
cause severe bending loads and, thus, reduce the casing cross-sectional integrity.
Problems may be observed before final catastrophic failure of the cross section e.g. the
ovality of the cross section may be sufficient enough to result in restrictions in the casing that
will prohibit the passage of bits or production equipment.
However, even in the presence of non-uniform external loads, the structural benefits of using
concentric casing strings are substantial.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 93 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Conclusions:
• Running casing in salt sections is rather a cementing problem than a casing
problem.
• If the pipe is well cemented, it is sufficient to design for collapse load in the
traditional mode (overburden pressure/design factor).
• If the casing is poorly cemented the collapse effect may be very high. In this case,
it may help to run heavier wall casing (Refer to figure 8.aa).
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 95 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
9. CORROSION
9.1. GENERAL
A production well design should attempt to contain produced corrosive fluids within tubing.
They should not be produced through the casing/tubing annulus.
However, it is accepted that tubing leaks and pressured annuli are a fact of life and as such,
production casing strings are considered to be subject to corrosive environments when
designing casing for a well where hydrogen sulphide (H2S) or carbon dioxide (CO2) laden
reservoir fluids can be expected.
During the drilling phase, if there is any likelihood of a sour corrosive influx occurring,
consideration should be given to setting a sour service casing string before drilling into the
reservoir.
The BOP stack and wellhead components must also be suitable for sour service.
These measures will provide a degree of short term protection necessary to control corrosion
of the casing in the hole during the drilling phase.
• External corrosion
Where the likelihood of external corrosion due to electrochemical activity is high and the
consequences of such corrosion are serious, the production casing should be
cathodically protected (either cathodically or by selecting a casing grade suitable for the
expected corrosion environment).
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 97 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
• Temperature
Like most chemical reactions, corrosion rates generally increase with increasing
temperature.
• Pressure
Pressure affects the rates of chemical reactions and corrosion reactions are no
exception.
In oilfield systems, the primary importance of pressure is its effect on dissolved gases.
More gas goes into solution as the pressure is increased, this may in turn increase the
corrosivity of the solution.
b) In highly deviated wells (i.e. deviations >80o), the risk of corrosion by H2S is higher
since the water, even if in very small quantities, deposits on the surface of the
tubulars and so the problem can be likened to the gas well case where the critical
threshold for the water cut drops to 1% (WC >1%).
The following formulae are used to calculate the value of pH2S (partial pressure of H2S) in
both the cases of gas (or condensate gas) wells or oil wells.
Firstly, the potential for SSC occurring is evaluated by studying the water cut values
combined with the type of well and deviation profile. If the conditions specified above are
verified then the pH2S can be calculated.
where:
SBHP = Static bottom-hole pressure [atm]
Y(H2S) = Mole fraction of H2S
pH2S = Partial H2S pressure [atm]
SSC is triggered at pH2S >0.0035 atm and SBHP >4.5 atm.
Undersaturated Oil
In an oil in which the gas remains dissolved, because the wellhead and bottom-hole
pressures are higher than the bubble point pressure (Pb) at reservoir temperature, is termed
undersaturated.
In this case the pH2S is calculated in two ways:
• Basic method.
• Material balance method.
If the quantity of H2S in gas at the bubble point pressure [mole fraction = Y(H2S)], is not known
or the values obtained are not reliable, the pH2S is calculated using both methods and the
higher of the two results is taken as the a reliable value. Otherwise the basic method is used.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 100 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Basic Method
This method is used, without comparison with the other method, when the H2S value in the
separated gas at bubble point conditions is known and is reliable or if Y(H2S), molar fraction in
the separated gas at bubble point pressure (Pb) is higher than 2%.
The pH2S is calculated by:
pH2S = Pb x Y(H2S)/100
where:
Pb = Bubble point pressure at reservoir temperature [atm]
Y(H2S) = Mole fraction in the separated gas at bubble point (from PVT data if
extrapolated)
pH2S = Partial H2S pressure [atm]
where:
H1 = Henry constant of the produced oil at separator temperature (atm/Mole
fraction). (See Procedure for calculating Henry constant)
PM = Mean molecular weight of the produced oil
The quantity of H2S in the gas in equilibrium is calculated (per litre of oil):
[H2S]gas = (GOR/23.6 x H2Ssep/106) Eq. 9.D
where:
GOR = Gas oil ratio Nm 3/m 3 (from production tests)
23.6 = Conversion factor
In general, H2S corrosion can occur at either the wellhead or bottom-hole without distinction.
There is SSC potential if pH2S >0.0035 atm and STHP >18.63 atm.
• Methylnaphthalene PM = 142
Having calculated the molecular weight of the produced oil PM using the formula in eq. 9.b,
the reference curve is chosen (given by points) to calculate the Henry constant on the basis
of the following value thresholds:
• If PM > 142, the H(t) curve of methylnaphthalene is used.
• If 100 < PM < 120, the mean value is calculated using the H(t) curve of propyl
benzene and the H(t) curve of methylnaphthalene.
• If 120 < PM < 142 the mean value is calculated using the H(t) curve of heptane
and the H(t) curve of propyl benzene.
• Given FTHT, wellhead flowing temperature, the H1 value is interpolated linearly on
the chosen curve(s). For this purpose the temperature values immediately before
and after the temperature studied are taken into consideration.
Having calculated the molecular weight of the reservoir oil PM res, using temperature
measured at the separator, H2 is measured in a similar way as H1.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 103 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
130 Henry
atm/Y[H 2 S]
120
110
100
90
methylnaphthalene PM = 142
80 N-propylbenzene PM = 120
heptane PM = 100
70
60
50
40
30
20
T C°
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
Oversaturated Oil
Oil is considered oversaturated when the gas in the fluid separates because the pressure of
the system is lower than the bubble point pressure. Two situations can arise:
Case A
FTHP < Pb
FBHP > Pb
Case B
FTHP < Pb
FBHP < Pb
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 104 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Basic Method
pH2S = STHP x Y(H2S) / 100
where:
STHP = static tubing head pressure [atm]
Y(H2S) = mole fraction in separated gas at STHP pressure and wellhead temperature
pH2S = partial H2S pressure [atm]
The SSC phenomenon is triggered off at the wellhead if pH2S >0.0035 atm and STHP >18.63
atm.
Calculation Of Partial Pressure In Case B:
Calculation of partial pressure in the reservoir:
In the reservoir the gas is already separated, FBHP <Pb, calculation of pH2S can be
approximated on the basis of the following:
• the PVTs are reliable, Y(H2S) >0.2%, the partial pressure is calculated as:
pH2S = Y(H2S)(1) x FBHP
where:
Y(H2S) = molar fraction in gas separated at FBHP and at reservoir temperature
(from PVT)
• the PVTs are not reliable, the material balance method can be used as in the
case of undersaturated oil; these are the worst conditions. The error made can be
high when Pb >FBHP.
Notes:
(1)
If the percentage (ppm) of H2S in the gas under static conditions is not known, the
corresponding value in reservoir conditions is assumed as being partial pressure at the
wellhead.
(2)
If the percentage (ppm) of H2S in the separated gas under static conditions is not
known, the corresponding value in reservoir conditions is assumed as being partial
pressure at the wellhead.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 105 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
where:
SBHP = Static bottom-hole pressure [atm]
Y(CO2) = Mole fraction of CO2
pCO2 = Partial pressure of CO2 [atm]
Corrosion occurs if pCO2 >0.2 atm.
where:
Pb = Bubble point pressure at reservoir temperature
Y(CO2) = Mole fraction of CO2 in separated gas at bubble point pressure (from the
PVTs)
pCO2 = Partial pressure of CO2 [atm]
Corrosion occurs if pCO2 >0.2 atm.
The pCO2 values calculated in this way are used to evaluate the corrosion at bottom hole and
wellhead; i.e. pCO2 at wellhead is assumed as corresponding to reservoir conditions.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 106 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Oversaturated Oil
The oil is considered oversaturated when the gas separates in the fluid because the pressure
of the system is lower than bubble point pressure. Two situations may arise:
Case A
FTHP <Pb
FBHP >Pb
Case B
FTHP <Pb
FBHP <Pb
where:
Pb = bubble point pressure at reservoir temperature
Y(CO2) = mole fraction in separated gas at bubble point pressure (from the PVTs)
pCO2 = partial pressure of CO2 [atm]
Corrosion occurs if pCO2 >0.2 atm.
where:
pCO2 = partial pressure of CO2 [atm]
Y(CO2) = mole fraction in separated gas at STHP (3)
STHP = static tubing head pressure [atm]
Corrosion occurs if pCO2 >0.2 atm.
Note:
(3)
If the percentage (ppm) of CO2 in the gas under static conditions is not known, the
corresponding value in reservoir conditions is assumed as being partial pressure at the
wellhead.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 107 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
where:
FBHP = flowing bottom-hole pressure [atm]
Y(CO2) = mole fraction in separated gas at pressure FBHP (from the PVTs)
pCO2 = partial pressure of CO2 [atm]
where:
pCO2 = partial pressure of CO2 [atm]
Y(CO2) = mole fraction in separated gas at STHP (4)
STHP = static tubing head pressure [atm]
There is corrosion if pCO2 >0.2 atm.
Note:
(4)
If the percentage (ppm) of CO2 in the gas under flowing/static conditions is not known,
the corresponding value in reservoir conditions is assumed as being partial pressure at
the wellhead.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 108 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Measure Means
Control of the environment • pH
• Temperature
• Pressure
• Chloride concentration
• CO2 concentration
• H2S concentration
• H2O concentration
• Flow rate
• Inhibitors
Surface treatment • Plastic coating
• Plating
Improvement of the corrosion resistivity of the Addition of the alloying elements micro structure
steel
Table 9.A - Counter Measures to Prevent Corrosion
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 109 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
In general, ferritic-austenitic (duplex) stainless steel consists of between 40-70% ferrite and
has a typical composition of 22% Cr-5.5% Ni-3% Mo-0.14% N.
The resulting steel has properties that are normally found in both phases: the ferrite promotes
increased yield strength and resistance to chloride and hydrogen sulphide corrosion cracking;
while the austenite phase improves workability and weldability.
This material is used extensively for tubulars used in severe CO2 and H2S conditions.
As a general note, there is a large gap between the 13CR and Duplex Stainless Steels used
as tubulars for their good anti-corrosion properties. This gap is attempted to be filled with
‘Super 13CR’ tubing being developed.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 113 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Application SM’
Domain Material Notes
(Refer to figure 9.e) Designation
Mild Environment Domain “A” API J 55 SM 95G
N 80 SM 125G
P 110
(Q 125)
Sulphide Stress Corrosion Domain “B” Cr or Cr Mo Steel
Cracking (medium pressure
and temperature) API L 80 SM 80S
C 90 SM 90S
T 95 SM 95S
Sulphide Stress Corrosion Domain “C” 1Cr 0.5Mo Steel SM 85SS Higher yield
Cracking (high pressure and Modified AISI 4130 SM 90SS strength for sour
temperature) SM C100 service
SM C110
Wet CO2 Corrosion Domain “D” 9Cr 1Mo Steel SM 9CR 75 Quenched and
SM 9CR 80 tempered
SM 9CR 95
13Cr Steel SM 13CR 75 Quenched and
Modified AISI 420 SM 13CR 80 tempered
SM 13CR 95
Wet CO2 with a little H 2S Domain “E” 22Cr 5Ni 3Mo Steel SM 22CR 65* Duplex phase
Corrosion SM 22CR 110** Stainless steels
SM 22CR 125**
25Cr 6Ni 3Mo Steel SM 25CR 75* * Solution Treated
SM 25CR 110**
SM 25CR 125** ** Cold drawn
SM 25CR 140**
Wet CO2 with H 2S Corrosion Domain “F” 25C -35Ni 3Mo Steel SM 2535-110 As cold drawn
SM 2535-125
22Cr 42N -3Mo Steel SM 2242-110
SM 2242-125
20Cr 35Ni 5Mo Steel SM 2035-110
SM 2035-125
Most Corrosive Environment Domain “G” 25Cr 50Ni 6Mo Steel SM 2550-110 As cold drawn
SM 2550-125
SM 2550-140
20Cr 58Ni 13Mo Steel SM 2060-110***
SM 2060-125***
SM 2060-140*** *** Environment
16Cr 54Ni 16Mo Steel SM 2060-155*** with free
SM C276-110*** Sulphur
SM C276-125***
SM C276-140***
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 118 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
where:
K0.2 = Yield strength as per ISO normative with permanent deformation of 0.2%.
Figure .A10.A - Temperature Effects
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 119 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
When running casing, shock loads are exerted on the pipe due to:
• Sudden deceleration forces (e.g.: if the spider accidentally closes or the slips are
kicked-in when the pipe is moving or the pipe hits a bridge).
• Sudden acceleration forces (e.g.: picking the pipe out of the slips or if the casing
momentarily hangs up on a ledge then freed).
Either of the above will cause a stress wave to be created which will travel through the casing
at the speed of sound.
This effect is quantified as follows:
SL = 150 x V x Af
where:
SL = Shock load (lbs x ins 2)
V = Peak velocity when running (ins/sec)
Af = Cross-sectional area (ins 2)
150 = Speed of sound in steel (lbs x sec/ins)
where:
CCL = Cementing contribution load (lbs)
Cw = Cement weight (psi/ft)
Mw = Outside mud weight (psi/ft)
D = Length over which Cw & Mw act(ft)
Ai = Internal area of casing (ins 2)
1,000 = Pressure increment (psi)
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 122 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
A cemented liner overlap will be positively tested applying a pressure greater than the lea-off
pressure of the previous casing. If there is any doubt, an inflow test could be carried out, with
a sufficient drawdown to test the liner top to the most severe negative differential pressure
that will exist during the life of the well.
The test pressure shall be held and remain stable for at least 10-15 mins
The test pressure and method for each well are determined on an individual basis and shall
be included in the Geological and Drilling Programme.
11.4.1. Buckling
Buckling is a failure of stability which can occur at stress levels well below the yield stress of
the material. Buckling cannot occur where the casing is supported by cement.
Factors responsible for buckling and the degree of buckling are:
• Length of casing, supported by cement.
• Hole size and degree of washout.
• Tensile loads on the casing string.
• Changed pressure conditions across the pipe.
• Temperature increases downhole.
All these factors are interrelated but the first three are generally considered major contributors
to buckling, while temperature and pressure changes are primarily the mechanisms that
cause the initial buckling.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 123 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
A buckling potential may exist in the uncemented portion of a string of casing, if the:
• Internal mud density is increased.
• Internal surface pressure is increased.
• Annular fluid removed or its density reduced.
• Casing is landed with less than full hanging weight.
• Temperature of the casing increases.
Buckling of long, uncemented portions of the casing string, in vertical wells, can be prevented
by:
• Cementing the casing up above the neutral point.
• Pre-tensioning the casing after landing.
• Limiting the increase in mud density used after drilling out the casing.
• Rigidly centralising the casing below the neutral point.
Provided that all casing strings can be landed with full hanging weight, the buckling calculation
is only required on the small percentage of deep vertical wells in which the mud density is to
be raised during the drilling of the next open hole section. Thus, for the majority of wells,
buckling is not a major design problem.
In most well designs, the total compressive load is the buoyant load of the intermediate
casings, the tubing to production packer overpull and the weight of the wellhead. This
compressive load is carried by the outer casing string. This outer casing is usually the
conductor or surface casing.
When discussing compressive loads it is convenient to consider three types of well where:
a) The wellhead is at ground level or at the seabed.
b) The wellhead is above seabed (i.e.: platform wells).
c) The mudline suspension takes the weight of the casing at the seabed, but the
wellhead is above seabed.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 124 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Mudline Suspension
In this case, the weight of the casing strings is taken at the seabed. The surface casing must
be designed and cemented as outlined in a) above.
The tieback strings above the mudline suspension hanger may be subject to some degree of
buckling.
Most wellhead hook-ups can be safely supported on a 20ins x 133lbs/ft casing string in water
depths up to 300ft (92m). However, if buckling may be suspected to occur in the tied back
surface string a full structural analysis should be commissioned. The structural analysis may
be carried out by companies involved in the supply of conductors.
The analysis is in effect a Riser Tensioner Analysis as is evaluated for semi-submersibles
and it takes into account the effect of waves, current and the weight of the pipe in the free
standing mode.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 125 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Decrease in Temperature
a) Drilling Phase:
It is highly unlikely that any routine operation (other than extensive reverse circulation)
will cause a long term temperature decrease in the uncemented portion of a casing
string, thus, no loading applies.
b) Production Phase:
Temperature induced stresses are of no consequence in the outer strings of casing
and attention need only be paid to the production string.
Producers are normally subjected to temperature increases under operating conditions
and the compressive load induced should be treated in the context of buckling.
The tensile loads induced by cooling in high volume injection wells, or in producers
during high volume stimulation treatments or emergency squeeze kills, must be taken
into account.
It should be added to the axial load and included in the design load if the occurrence of
such loading is anticipated
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 126 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
This section includes design criteria for BOP equipment which are extracted from the Well
Control Policy Manual.
The prime considerations, when selecting and procuring pressure control equipment, are the
safety of the personnel, rig and maintaining the integrity of the wellbore. In order to assure this
safety requirement, several factors need to be considered.
Note: It should be realised that each drilling area may have local regulations
unique to that particular area which exceed the general requirements
stated in this section, or indeed the Eni-Agip Well Control Policy Manual.
In addition, the various operating companies and their contractors may
also vary from these general requirements, if dictated by individual
company policy and philosophy providing they are not less stringent than
described herein.
The anticipated formation pressure is the governing parameter which dictates the casing
depth, casing selection, BOP selection and pressure rating of the BOP equipment as
described previously in section 2.
The weakest element within any pressure control system determines the maximum pressure
that can be safely controlled.
Individual elements of the pressure control system may exceed the assembly WP, and
under no circumstances should components be used which are less than the
assembly WP. For instance, a 10,000psi choke may be rigged up with a 2,000psi BOP stack
in anticipation of its later use when the 10,000psi BOP stack is nippled up for a subsequent
string of casing.
The equipment in the well control system which has the lowest pressure rating will set the
rating for entire system e.g. 2,000psi stack and 10,000psi choke manifold would be rated to
only 2,000psi WP.
Since the well control system must be able to contain any anticipated formation pressures
that may be encountered, the maximum anticipated surface pressures must first be
calculated.
Many different methods are available to determine the maximum casing pressures which may
be encountered during a kick as described in section 2.
The graph illustrated in the attached figure 12.a has been prepared to enable the first
approximation of the BOP rating necessary for use in drilling an exploration well. To use the
graph, the setting depths of the various casings and the relative pore pressure gradients must
be found or determined during the design phase.
The co-ordinates in the graph are depth and pressure and comprises two groups of lines
respectively, one representing the BOPs to be used while drilling and the other the BOPs to
be used during well testing.
Each group outlines the different solutions available to the various pore pressure gradients.
Example: The casing program assumes that a well test will be carried out at the shoe of 7”
casing. From the diagram shown in table 12.a, the maximum test, drilling
pressure values and the size of BOP to be used should be obtained which is
given in table 12.a below.
The maximum theoretical stress possible at the casing head, Pmax, occurs when the well is
full of gas and the fracture pressure has been reached at the shoe of the last casing run.
This pressure is:
H
Pmax = (Gr - Dg ) (Kg/cm2 )
10
where:
H = Casing shoe depth (m)
Gf = Fracture gradient of the casing shoe (kg/cm2/10m)
Dg = Gas density, assumed = 0.3(kg/dm 3)
In the case of a well test, this pressure roughly corresponds to the limit value required for
pumping gas into the formation and is thus actually attainable in practice.
This hypothesis however is completely unrealistic in the drilling design, for which 60% of the
pressure Pmax will be used as limit value according to company policy in ‘burst design
criteria’, section 8.1. This value is also adopted by many other companies as the realistic
criterion of choice.
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 128 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Gp × H − (Gi × Hi + Gm × Hm )
Ptop =
10
Ptop < Pfr
Hi =
[HS (Gf r − Gm ) + Gm × H − 10 × PP ]
Gm − Gi
Vshoe = Ca x Hi
V1 x P1 = P2 X V2
V1bottom x Pp = Vshoe x Pfr
where:
Ca = Annular capacity below the shoe, m
H = Total depth, m
Hi = Height of influx, m
HS = Shoe Depth
Gfr = Formation fracture gradient at shoe, kg/cm2/10m
Gm = Mud weight, kg/ltr
PP = Formation pressure at total depth, kg/cm2
Gi = Density of the influx
Ptop = Top Influx Pressure
Gp = Pore gradient
Hm = Hight of the mud below the influx
Pfr = Fracture pressure
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 130 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Appendix A - ABBREVIATIONS
API American Petroleum Institute
BG Background gas
BHA Bottom Hole Assembly
BHP Bottom Hole Pressure
BHT Bottom hole temperature
BOP Blow Out Preventer
BPD Barrel Per Day
BPM Barrels Per Minute
BSW Base Sediment and Water
BUR Build Up Rate
BWOC By Weight Of Cement
BWOW By Weight Of Water
CBL Cement Bond Log
CCD Centre to Centre Distance
CCL Casing Collar Locator
CET Cement Evaluation Tool
CGR Condensate Gas Ratio
CP Conductor Pipe
CRA Corrosion Resistant Alloy
CW Current Well
DC Drill Collar
DHM Down Hole Motor
DLP Dog Leg Potential
DLS Dog Leg Severity
D&CM Drilling & Completion Manager
DOB Diesel Oil Bentonite
DOBC Diesel Oil Bentonite Cement
DOR Drop Off Rate
DP Drill Pipe
DST Drill Stem Test
DV DV Collar
ECD Equivalent Circulation Density
ECP External Casing Packer
EMS Electronic Multi Shot
EMW Equivalent Mud Weight
EOC End Of Curvature
ESD Electric Shut-Down System
ESP Electrical Submersible Pump
FBHP Flowing Bottom Hole Pressure
FBHT Flowing Bottom Hole Temperature
FPI/BO Free Point Indicator / Back Off
FTHP Flowing Tubing Head Pressure
FTHT Flowing Tubing Head Temperature
GLR Gas Liquid Ratio
GMS Gyro Multi Shot
ARPO IDENTIFICATION CODE PAGE 131 OF 134
ENI S.p.A.
REVISION
Agip Division
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Appendix B - BIBLIOGRAPHY
Document: STAP Number
Drilling Procedures Manual STAP-P-1-M-6140
Drilling Design Manual STAP-P-1-M-6100
Overpressure Manual STAP-P-1-M-6130
Drilling Fluids Manual STAP-P-1-M-6160
Well Control Policy Manual STAP-P-1-M-6150
API Specification 5C
Holmquist & Nadai
Shell (Bol, 1985)
NACE Standard MR-01-75
Sumitomo Metals Literature