3 WellPlan 2018 2019 CasingDesign

Well Planning WS 2018 / 2019
Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

Institut für Erdöl- und Erdgastechnik Well Planning WS 2018 / 2019 1
Contents List
 Casing Functions & Technology
 Tubular Design Considerations
 Casing Strings and their Functions Part I
 Casing and Tubing Pipe Technology
 Connection Selection
 Casing Design Methodology
 Casing Setting Depth & Size
 Load Cases / Load Calculation Equations
Part II
 Design & Safety Factors
 Mechanical Property Calculations
 Materials Qualification and Testing
 Manufacturing Specifications
 Testing Methods & Equipment Part III
 Connection Evaluation and Qualification
Well Planning WS 2018 / 2019

Casing Design
Establishes the minimum requirements for casing and tubing to
withstand the earth’s stresses and surrounding conditions in a
borehole. This should be considered the starting point for the thought
process each Drilling Engineer should employ in defining the loads
that a casing or tubing will experience during his well’s life cycle.
“Mistakes are a good investment. If you want to succeed, double your

failure rate”
Tom Watson, IBM
Mistakes are a horrible investment in casing design.

You need to get it right, as you don’t have a second shot !!!
Tubular Design Considerations
General
A variety of factors can influence tubular designs. While wells usually are similar in a particular field, they usually are subjected to varying conditions from field to field.
Some of these factors involve the following considerations:
Well Function Flow Rate Pressure Type/Size of Drilling Rig Hole Angle
Well Depth Corrosion Temperature Well Life Well Location
Wear Erosion Subsidence Economics
Well Function
• The primary function of well tubulars is to facilitate the controlled withdrawal of fluids from hydrocarbon bearing
formations to the surface. Thus, the objective of drilling and subsurface engineers is to ensure that all wells are
drilled, cased, and completed to a specific target; designed and operated for high productivity and longevity; and
safely and economically operated.
• The proper design of all tubulars run in the well will assist in achieving the above objective. The following are some
of the more important tubular design considerations for casing and tubing.
Flow Rate
• Flow rate is a primary design consideration because it controls the diameter of the tubing string. Hence, the tubing
string diameter governs the sizes of all the casing strings that surround it.
• Large diameter tubing strings usually are associated with high-production rate wells. While not a normal tubing size,
some high-production rate wells (e.g., Middle East, North Sea) are completed with 7-inch tubing (i.e., casing used
as tubing). In this situation, the smallest possible production casing is 9-5/8 inches in diameter.
• Flow rate has significant implications on well design since it influences the entire tubular program for the well.

Well Depth
• Well depth controls the lengths of the various tubular strings that are run in the well. Consequently, depth has a direct bearing on tension loads and is also
related to well pressure and temperature since deep wells normally have higher pressures and temperatures than those at shallow depths.
• Well depth influences tubular size, material selection, connection selection, and other factors associated with tubular design.
Hole Angle
• Hole angle, like well depth, impacts the length of the various tubular strings that are run in the well. Because of the longer flow path, hole angle also may
influence the tubing size required to achieve optimum productivity.
• The connections on casing and liner strings may require higher torsional resistance to overcome friction and facilitate pipe rotation for cementing. Higher
strength tubulars may be required to overcome additional drag during running and pulling operations.
Pressure
• The pressure that a well will encounter primarily controls burst and collapse considerations for tubulars, but also influences specified ratings for wellheads and
other equipment.
• Wells that require high-pressure stimulation treatments also require the treating pressures to be included in the tubular design. In these situations knowledge of
the treating pressure or fracture gradient is required to assess the impact of the stimulation treatment on the tubular design.
Temperature
• Wellbore temperature can significantly affect the forces imposed on tubulars subjected to deeper drilling, placed on production, or subjected to high-rate
stimulation treatments. These forces may be either high tensile forces that result from significant cooling or compressive forces that occur as the well heats up.
• Tensile forces generated are often capable of parting the tubing or unseating packers. Compressive forces generated can cause wellhead rise and have been
sufficiently large to destroy the cement-formation bond on the surface casing and raise the wellhead several feet. In cases where high tensile or compressive
loads resulting from changes in temperature can be identified, the effects of these forces should be included in the tubular design.
Subsidence
• Subsidence of the ground sediments around the well (due to water withdrawal from shallow aquifers) can impose significant compressive loading on surface
casing. Even if the casing is well cemented, the compressive loading may be sufficiently large to destroy the support provided by the cement-formation bond.
• Subsidence can usually be accommodated in the casing design through the use of heavy wall thickness pipe, by setting the surface casing above the
subsiding intervals, and installing a special subsidence-type wellhead.
Corrosion
• Corrosion can seriously affect the life and safety of wells if not accounted for in the design.
• The most common causes of corrosion in wells are the introduction of carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, oxygen, or formation water. Six alternatives to
control corrosion are commonly used: corrosion inhibition, corrosion-resistant alloy materials, cathodic protection, plastic-coated tubulars, fiberglass
tubulars, and annular cement lining.
• Selection of an alternative is usually based on its effectiveness in that particular application and the corresponding cost.
Erosion
• Erosion may be a design consideration for tubing and other production equipment with surfaces exposed to high-velocity fluids.
• While the API has developed relationships to predict when erosion may present problems, the velocities that are calculated using API RP 14E equation
are considered to be extremely conservative. To date, there is no evidence of tubing failures attributed solely to fluid erosion.
• However, erosion has contributed to tubing failures when corrosion and/or sand production has also been present in the flow stream. Hence, design
consideration for erosion may be necessary in some high-production rate wells.
• Corrosion-resistant alloys usually are less affected by velocity and thus, should be considered when API RP 14E becomes a limiting factor.
Wear
• Wear caused by the rotation of drill strings can significantly lower the burst resistance (as well as other load resistance ratings) of casing by reducing the
wall thickness.
• While it is normal practice to allow for some wear (normally 10%) on all casing strings that are drilled through, in some applications greater wear
allowance may be necessary to prevent failure.
• Wear caused by sucker rods and wireline operations can similarly lower the burst resistance of tubing. However, tubing can be periodically retrieved,
inspected for wear, and replaced as necessary to prevent failure.
Well Location
• Whether a well is drilled on or offshore normally only impacts the conductor structural casing program. Conductors are used in essentially all wells drilled
offshore since shallow sediments below the mudline provide little formation integrity or stability.
• Many land wells are drilled without conductors since shallow sediments are more compacted and provide better structural integrity.

Type/Size of Drilling Rig
• The type and size of drilling rig selected are normally based on the well design program. However, in cases where the drilling rig is a constraint, the casing
program may be impacted. Often times the constraint can be related to the load capacity or available space on the rig. For wells drilled offshore in shallow
water, one design consideration is whether to design the conductor casing to be selfstanding or to require lateral support. In most platform operations lateral
support for conductors is provided by conductor guides. Once the conductor is in place, only slight movement can occur within the constraints of the guides.
• However, in wells drilled from bottom-founded rigs, lateral support for the conductor is only provided during drilling operations. Hence, when the rig is moved
off location, the conductor must be of sufficient size and wall thickness to remain freestanding. Floating drilling, especially when using dynamically
positioned vessels, also can impart substantial lateral loads to the top of the BOP stack. This large moment arm can impose significant (dynamic) bending
loads on the structural and conductor strings.
• Mudline suspension equipment can be used to temporarily abandon the well and recover all tubulars above the mudline. After installation of a platform, the
temporarily abandoned well can then be accessed by running tubulars from the mudline suspension equipment back to the surface. However, tubular sizing
may be influenced by the desire to subsequently run small workstrings between the casing annuli to assist in washing out any cement debris and to facilitate
the removal of the tubulars above the mudline. Another effect of the mudline suspension equipment is that all of the casing weight is suspended at the
mudline which can influence the stability of the riser and casing subsequently run from the platform.
Well Life
• Well life may be a design consideration in some situations; however, it is seldom as important as most of the items previously mentioned. In those situations
where well life can be identified as either short or long, it should be included as a design consideration if conditions permit.
• Such may be the case when evaluating the use of used versus new tubulars in a well expected to have a short life.
Economics
• Tubular design has a direct effect on well costs and operating expenses which have a direct impact on economics. While these two factors may not
significantly affect the profitability of extremely high-production rate wells, they can impact the profitability of some projects to the point that they are no
longer economical.
• Regardless of the well flow rate, a design philosophy should be adopted to drill and complete all wells to ensure safe, economic production at the maximum
rate for a given set of reservoir conditions. The availability of excess inventory may impact the feasibility of some development projects.

Purpose of Casing
Why Running Casing?
Casing
1. To prevent the hole from caving in

2. Onshore - to prevent contamination of fresh Cement
water sands
3. To prevent water migration into
producing formations
4. To confine production to the wellbore
5. To control pressures during drilling
6. To provide an acceptable environment for subsurface equipment in producing wells
7. To enhance the probability of drilling to total depth (TD)

Casing Schemes
Pressure
True Vertical Depth
Ramp
Pore Pressure
Normal Pore Pressure Abnormal Pore Pressure
gp > normal
Casing Scheme Example
Picture from BP’s “Deepwater Horizon Accident Investigation” Report, September 8, 2010
Remember: Every casing run adds to the complexity and cost of the well
- Macondo well (deepwater) had 9 different casing strings / liners -

Conductor Pipe
 Provides a means of nippling up diverters until
surface casing (BOP) is installed
 Provides a mud return path
 Prevents erosion of ground below rig
 Isolates very weak formations
Water  Conductor casing, or drive pipe, is a short
string of casing of large diameter (16 to 48 in.)
required for offshore operations, swampy
locations, and other conditions in which extra
wellhead support is necessary. Its principal
function is to keep the top of the wellbore open
and to provide a means of conveying the
drilling fluid returns from the wellbore to the
mud pit. The depth to which it is set varies but
is usually 100 to 400 ft. The part of the
wellhead on the top of the conductor string is
the base plate, which is either an integral part
of the casing head or a fabricated (welded-on)
plate of steel connected to the casing head by
gussets.
Surface Casing
 Provides a means of nippling up BOP

 Provides a casing seat strong enough to safely close
in a well after a kick.
 Provides protection of fresh water sands
 Provides wellbore stabilization
 Generally from app. 100 to1000m
 The surface casing is the first string of casing run on a

land well and is generally thought of as the foundation
of the wellhead and BOP during drilling phase. The
size generally ranges from 8 5/8 to 20 in. outside
diameter (OD), and the length of this string varies
greatly in different areas, from 200 to several
thousand feet. It is set at a depth sufficient to protect
all fresh water-bearing sands and to prevent an
underground blowout. The cement is circulated to the
surface on this string. The part of the wellhead at the
top end of this string is the casing head, which is
either screwed or welded onto the last joint of casing.
The casing head top connection flange is then used to
install the blowout prevention stack, which allows for
deeper drilling.
Intermediate Casing
 Usually set in the first abnormally pressured zone

 Provides isolation of potentially troublesome zones
 Provides integrity to withstand the high mud weights
necessary to reach TD or next csg seat
 The intermediate casing may be the second casing string that

is run in a well. Its purpose is to allow for deeper drilling by
isolating weak formations that could either cause the hole to
cave in or lose circulation. The size range for intermediate
casing is typically 7 5/8 to 13 3/8 in. OD. Setting depths vary to
meet regulations and geological conditions in a given well, but
commonly range from 3000 to 8000 ft. A well may have one or
two strings of intermediate casing, or it may have no
intermediate casing at all. The part of the wellhead at the top
end of an intermediate casing string is a casing spool. Some
form of isolation seal is used to seal the top end of this casing
to the bottom bowl of the casing spool. This seal makes
possible the increase in pressure ratings necessary for the
higher pressures encountered in deeper drilling. The
intermediate casing may be cemented all the way back to the
surface, but generally it is cemented back to the end of the
previous string or far back enough to isolate a particular
formation.

Production Casing
 Provides zonal isolation (prevents migration of water
to producing zones, isolates different prod. zones)
 Confines production to wellbore
 Provides the environment to install subsurface
completion equipment
 The final string of casing is called the production casing. It is
usually set to or beyond the formation that is to be produced.
In either case, this will be the effective total depth (TD) of the
well. The production casing isolates all the other formations
from the producing zone or zones and is generally cemented,
like the intermediate casing, back to the end of the previous
string or far back enough to provide the necessary isolation of
the producing zone or zones. Since the production casing
cannot be easily replaced, and since a smaller string can
produce the oil in a more efficient manner, tubing is usually
installed inside the production casing. The tubing can be
sealed off to the inside surface of the production casing by a
Reservoir packer or some other sealing device. Production casing
typically ranges in size from 4 1/2 to 9 5/8 in. OD. The part of
the wellhead that works over the top end of the production
casing is the tubing head. Some form of isolation seal is used
between the top end of the production casing and the bottom
bowl of the tubing head. This seal allows for pressure rating
increase and isolates the production casing from the rest of
the wellhead. The strength of the production casing string
must be sufficient to contain the full working pressure of the
Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp well.
Liners
 Drilling liners
- Same as Intermediate or protective casing
 Production liners
- Same as production casing
 Tieback liners
- Tie back drilling or production liner to the surface. Converts
liner to full string of casing
 A liner is a casing string that does not extend to the top of the
wellbore, but instead is anchored or suspended from inside
the bottom of the previous casing string. There is no
difference between the casing joints themselves. The
advantage to the well designer of a liner is a substantial
savings in steel, and therefore capital costs. To save casing,
however, additional tools and risk are involved. The well
designer must trade off the additional tools, complexities and
Reservoir risks against the potential capital savings when deciding
whether to design for a liner or a casing string that goes all the
way to the top of the well (a "long string"). The liner can be
fitted with special components so that it can be connected to
the surface at a later time if need be.

Manufacturing
How Oilfield Casing & Tubular Goods (OCTG) are made

Seamless Pipe (I)
 The production process for seamless pipe begins by
Seamless Pipe Process heating a steel billet to about 2250° F. The red-hot billet
is rotated and drawn by rolls over a piercing rod, or
mandrel. The action of the rolls causes the metal to flow
over and about the mandrel to create a hollow cylinder.
 After reheating, the shell is moved forward over a

support bar and is hot-rolled in several reducing/sizing
stands to the desired wall thickness and diameter. The
pipe, which has grown significantly in length during the
piercing and sizing processes, is then cut into sections
and conveyed across a cooling bed to cool slowly in the
air. It then receives whatever finishing processes are
needed to meet customer requirements.

Classification
API Classification of tubular goods
- Normal Steels H40, J55, K55, N80
- High Strength Steels P105, P110, Q125, V150
Grade - Steels with a limited yield Strength C75, L80, C90, C95
- Non-Upset Short / Long Round Thread, Buttress Thread

- External Upset
CASING Upset - Internal Upset
- Internal and External Extreme line Casing
- Short Round Thread Casing

Type - Long Round Thread Casing
- Buttress Thread Casing
- Extreme line Casing
API
- Normal Steels H40, J55, K55, N80
- High Strength Steels P105, P110, Q125, V150
Grade - Steels with a limited yield Strength C75, L80, C90, C95
- Non-Upset - Non-Upset Tubng

- External Upset - External-Upset Tubing
TUBING Upset - Internal Upset
- Internal and External - Integral Joint Tubing
- External Upset Tubing

Type - Non-Upset Tubng
- Integral Joint Tubing
Types
Casing types
- Short Round Thread Casing
Hydraulic tight - Long Round Thread Casing
- Buttress Thread Casing
API
Gas tight - Extreme line Casing
CASING Selected connections:
- BG Tubulars GB 3P
Hydraulic tight
NON-API
Gas tight - V&M VAM MUST
- V&M VAM FJL
- Nippon Steel NK 3SB
- Tenaris Blue
- Tenaris MS 28 XT/XC
- Grand Prideco Advanced NJO
- Kawasaki FOX
- Kawasaki KSBEAR
- Hydrill SuPreme LX
- Voest Alpine VAGT

Classifications
Classification of Casing
1. Outside diameter of pipe (e.g. 9-5/8”)
2. Wall thickness (e.g. 1/2”)
3. Grade of material (e.g. N-80)
4. Type to threads and couplings (e.g. API LCSG)
5. Length of each joint (RANGE) (e.g. Range 3)
6. Nominal weight (avg. wt/ft incl. Wt. Coupling,

e.g. 47 lb/ft, also in kg/m)

Connection Selection
• One of the single most important tasks in casing and tubing design.
• Once well conditions are known, the specific requirements for the connections can be determined.
• These requirements, in turn, determine the types of connections that are appropriate. For a particular type of
connection, several candidate designs generally are available from various manufacturers.
• Selection of the best design from among these candidates depends on inventory, price, field experience, company
testing and analysis data.
• An understanding of the various types of connections that are available will assist in the selection of connections for
casing and tubing.
General
• Connections for casing and tubing must withstand all expected wellbore loading for the life of the well, including axial tension and compression, collapse
and burst pressures, and bending.
• In addition, tubing connections must be capable of withstanding multiple makeups and breakouts. The maximum expected design loads for the connections
need to be known.
• In addition to the wellbore loads, connections often have other requirements that may include OD/ID clearance, hostile-service environments, and makeup
characteristics.
• In addition, CRA tubulars generally have other special connection considerations.
OD/ID Clearance
• External clearances and/or internal drift requirements sometimes become important factors in connection selection.
• Proprietary connections are frequently the best solution for small annular clearance applications. Smaller OD dimensions usually are achieved using
integral-joint or flush-joint connection designs. In extreme cases, achieving increased ID dimensions requires the use of a nonstandard, slightly larger pipe
OD. Reduced OD dimensions also can be obtained by machining smaller the coupling OD of standard connections (i.e., special-clearance couplings).
• This practice generally should be limited to moderate depth and pressure wells. All or some degree of the strength lost in machining smaller OD couplings
may be regained by using couplings of higher grade than the pipe body. However, this cannot be done when the service environment is a factor that
precludes use of the higher grade materials.

Hostile-Service Environments
• Hostile environments require special consideration in connection selection. Corrosion and erosion, by different chemical and mechanical means, can
sometimes lead to pipe body failure, small leaks in a connection, or connection failure.
• Sometimes, it is desirable to use plastic-coated or cement-lined tubing to avoid weight-loss corrosion. Special purpose connection designs are available for
these strings.
• Erosion of tubulars and connections can be caused by the turbulent high velocity flow of two-phase production fluids, particularly if the fluid contains carbon
dioxide and/or large amounts of other gases. Solid, gritty materials (such as sand) in the production fluids also can cause or significantly increase erosion.
Some connections have internal recesses at the ID surface between the pin and box. Sharp changes in flow area can cause or exacerbate weight-loss
corrosion/ erosion.
• Tubing connections with flush, or smooth, internal profiles should be used in high-velocity, hostile production wells. These connections use an internal
shoulder at the box or coupling to create a continuous ID. Alternatively, coupling inserts are available for API connections to provide an internally flush ID.
• Sulfide-stress-cracking (SSC) failures of tubular goods and connections can also influence connection selection. When connections are to be used in a
wellbore environment that can cause SSC, special care should be used to select a connection design that does not generate high tensile stresses under
makeup or external loading conditions.
Makeup Characteristics
• A function of a connection’s resistance to galling, mishandling, or cross-threading. Galling propensity in a connection is governed by local bearing pressures,
makeup speed, type of tubular material and its surface preparation, and thread compound type, placement, and amount. To the extent that galling problems
can be relieved for a particular application through the reduction of local bearing pressures or the use of special surface treatments, proprietary connections
should be considered.
• Resistance to handling damage and cross-threading is a difficult feature to measure; however, physical testing and analytical methods for evaluating the
relative damage resistances of different connection designs have been developed
• Also, a connection is more susceptible to cross-threading when its design has relatively small thread heights, particularly on larger OD tubulars. Thread crests
that are cut parallel to the thread taper rather than parallel to the pipe centerline also increase cross-threading susceptibility.

Special Considerations for CRA Tubulars
• The use of corrosion resistant alloy (CRA) materials requires special attention to connection selection, particularly with respect to galling
propensity.
• The most important contribution to the reduction of galling propensity on connections machined onto CRA materials has been the
development of advanced surface treatments (such as copper plating over a nickel strike) by various proprietary connection
manufacturers.
• In addition, some proprietary connections have been designed to minimize local bearing pressures, and thereby reduce galling
propensity.
• CRA materials also can be susceptible to stress corrosion cracking (SCC). Connection designs with lower tensile stress states are
expected to have better resistance to SCC.
Special Considerations for Composite Materials Tubulars

• Fiber-reinforced tubulars (i.e. glassfiber, carbonfiber, etc.) have unique physical limitations that must be addressed when considering.
• Their physical limitations are recognized in the industry, but are unfortunately not well understood. Specific areas of concern are the
long-term behavior of connections and pipe body materials under tension and pressure loads, and how temperature affects this.
• Another area of concern is their ability to withstand damage during handling and connection makeup.
• Every manufacturer of fibre tubulars uses a somewhat different philosophy regarding the design of their connections. As a result,
different thread compounds, makeup torque and thread engagement values are required for makeup of the different manufacturer’s
connections. Some design differences that are applied are the use of integral versus threaded and coupled connections, and the use of
molded epoxy threads versus threads machined into the pipe material, or threads wound with fiber and resin materials. Each design
configuration will have different temperature, tension, and pressure limitations that should be established.
Example of Carbonfibre tubular

Connection Types
• Casing and tubing threaded connections are commonly categorized as
API connections or
Proprietary (also known as “premium”) connections
• API has published a number of specifications, standards, recommended practices, and other documents
prescribing minimum requirements covering the manufacture and physical performance of API connections.
These connections have been in use for decades and have proved to be satisfactory for most applications.
• Increasing structural and dimensional demands placed on tubulars, particularly in hostile well environments, has
led to the development of a number of proprietary connection designs.
• Proprietary connections are designed and manufactured outside the scope of API specifications. They often
employ different thread designs than API connections and are generally claimed by their manufacturers to meet or
exceed the performance of API connections. Proprietary connections usually are governed by patents or special
processes owned or licensed by the manufacturer.

API Connections
Round-Thread Connections. These connections have

threads with rounded crests and roots. The load and stab
flanks of the threads are identical. Round-thread connections
may be manufactured for either casing or tubing. These
connections normally have a pitch of 8 threads per inch,
however, in some smaller tubing sizes, they have a pitch of
10 threads per inch. Round- thread connections may be
long-thread and coupled (LTC), short-thread and coupled
(STC), externally upset end (EUE), non-upset end (NUE), or
integral- joint (IJ). Optionally, a resilient elastomeric or plastic
seal ring may be specified for API round-thread tubing
connections.
Buttress-Thread Connections. These connections have

threads that are not symmetric for the load and stab flanks.
Buttress-thread connections are manufactured for casing
only. They have a pitch of 5 threads per inch and are
available only as threaded and coupled (BTC).
Extreme-Line Connections. These connections have

Acme threads and are manufactured for casing only.
Extreme-line (XL) connections also incorporate a metal-to-
metal seal at the pin nose. Depending on size, extreme-line
connections have a pitch of 5 or 6 threads per inch.

API Casing
API Short / Long

Round Thread Casing
API Buttress Thread Casing
API Extreme Line Casing

Premium Connections
• Growing variety of proprietary connection designs.
• These connections generally can be differentiated by one or more of several distinguishing features.
These include:
1. type, location, and number of metal-to-metal or thread seals,
2. type or shape of threads,
3. profile of connection taper, and
4. use of elastomeric or plastic ring seals. Sealing mechanisms are covered later in this section.
• Connection threads are machined on two basic pipe end finishes:

1. (1) non-upset end (NUE) and
2. (2) upset-end. NUE pipe
Pipe can be upset externally (EUE), internally
(IUE), or both.
(b) shows an externally upset tubing
connection. Although upsetting increases the
strength of the connection, it also increases
the OD and/or decreases the ID of the
connection. In well designs where radial
clearance between strings is limited, external
upsetting may be a design consideration.
Excessive internal upsetting can exacerbate
erosion or limit the drift diameter.
Pipe end finishes

(a) API non-upset-end threaded-and-coupled tubing connection
(b) API external-upset-end threaded-and-coupled tubing connection
Premium Connections
• Integral-joint (IJ) connections primarily were developed to satisfy the desire for a strong,
leak-tight connection with an OD that was smaller and more gradual than that of T&C
connections.
• This prevents the problems of downhole hang-up. IJ connections do not employ couplings,
but generally do require some form of upsetting. An IJ connection consists of two joints of
pipe, joined together by an externally threaded pin end and internally threaded box end.
• Therefore, an IJ connection has only half as many potential leak paths as a T&C
connection.
May result in an increase in

costs due to the required
machining operations and an
offsetting decrease in costs
due to the elimination of
couplings.
Integral Joint Connection

Sealing Technology (I)
General
• A threaded connection must prevent high-pressure fluid from leaking
• It also needs to provide structural support for the entire tubular string under the imposed wellbore
loads
• Because of the extreme mechanical and environmental demands placed on tubular connections in
downhole service and the large number of connections in a typical string, leaks do occur.
• Seal mechanisms tend to be rather complex.
Basic Principles
There are four basic seal mechanisms used on threaded connections for casing and tubing:
 Tapered-Threads/Thread Compound Seals

 Metal-to-Metal Seals
 Elastomeric Ring Seals
 Combination Seals

Sealing Technology (II)
Bearing Pressure between the threads
If the threads serve as the

primary pressure-sealing
mechanism, the helical path of
the thread clearances must be
plugged; thread compounds
serve this function. Thread
compounds are mixtures of
grease, soft metal particles, and
sometimes Teflon or silicone. The
soft metal particles fill the helical
paths and provide a seal.
• Most API casing and tubing connections utilize tapered threads

combined with thread compound as the primary sealing mechanism.
• Many proprietary connections also employ tapered threads, but for the
majority of proprietary connections, the threads do not function as the
primary seal; rather, they normally only provide a secondary seal and
prevent downhole connection back-out by providing resistive torque from
thread interference.

Thread Compounds
• Thread compounds serve 3 basic functions:
1. seal thread clearances in the thread profile,
2. lubricate the threads during makeup, and
3. help prevent galling that results from metal-to-metal contact.
• To fulfill these functions, API thread compounds are composed of 3 principal materials:
1. fine metal particles,
2. graphite, and
3. grease.
API thread compounds

specified in API Bul
5A2
• The grease acts as a base carrier to suspend the graphite and the fine metal particles
(e.g., zinc, lead, or copper)
• The grease itself provides only minimal lubricity and does not prevent galling. Graphite
and copper flakes serve as the primary lubrication mechanism by reducing makeup
torque, which also assists in reducing galling.
• Powdered lead and zinc dust act as filler material and are the principal sealing agents
Metal to Metal Seals (I)
 Metal-to-metal seals are the non-threaded metal surfaces of the pin and box that, when mated during makeup,
produce a bearing stress as a result of interference fit (i.e., radial seal) or axial mechanical shouldering (i.e.,
shoulder seal).
 Radial seals are composed of a smooth metal surface machined on an angle or taper. As the pin and box are
made up, metal interference develops between the smooth surfaces, thus producing bearing pressure. The
magnitude of this bearing pressure is controlled by the amount of makeup. Although thread compound is not
necessary to affect a seal, it does lubricate the threads during makeup and help prevent galling that results from
metal-to-metal contact
Internal Intermediate External Pin to Pin

Metal to Metal Seals (II)

Connection Make-Up
• During makeup of the connection, the pin advances into the box until the pin end or box end meets a torque-
shoulder.
• After contacting the torque-shoulder, makeup continues until a torque range (specified by the manufacturer) is
reached forming the shoulder seal.
• Between initial torque-shoulder contact and final torque, metal- interference develops between the pin and the
box at the shoulder, resulting in a During makeup of the connection, the pin advances into the box until the pin
end or box end meets a torque-shoulder, resulting in a bearing pressure which results a seal.
• On many proprietary connection designs, however, the preloaded shoulder seal separates under relatively
modest tensile loads, thus eliminating a pressure seal.
• To control the make-up process, a computer analyzed torque turn diagram is recommended by most
manufacturers:

Connection Selection (I)
Selected Connections Classification
Sealing
Form Upset Shoulder
Metal to metal
Nr. of metal seals
Tangent point
cone to cone
Connection
Intermediate
Sliding Seal
Seal Ring
Coupling
Thread *
External
External
Integral
Internal
Internal
Radial
Non
1. V&M VAM MUST x x x x 2 xx
2. V&M VAM FJL x x x x 2 xx What is the
3.
4.
Nippon Steel NK 3SB
Tenaris Blue
x
x
x
x
x
x
1
1
x
x
best
5. Tenaris MS 28 XT/XC x x x 1 x choice?
6. Grand Prideco Advanced NJO x x x 2 xx
7. Grand Prideco FL-4S x x x x 1 x x
8. Kawasaki FOX x x x 1 x
9. Kawasaki KSBEAR x x x 1 x
10. Hydrill SuPreme LX x x x 2 x x
11. Hydrill Series 500 Type 563 x x 1 x x
12. Hunting Int. TS -HP & TS-HD x x x x 1 x x
13. Voest Alpine VAGT x x x 1 x
14. BG Tubulars GB 3P x x x x
15. API Non-Upset Tubing x x x
16. API External-Upset Tubing x x x
17. API Intergral Joint Tubing x x x x
18. API Short Round Thread Casing x x x
19. API Long Round Thread Caisng x x x
20. API Buttress Thread Casing x x x
21. API Extreme Line Casing x x x 1 x
* Only thread sealing
Connection Selection (II)
1. Assess the need for API vs. proprietary connections
 API connections (specifically STC, LTC, BTC, NUE, and EUE) have proved to be reasonably reliable over many years of
application
 The existing record of reliable performance combined with low cost, wide availability and a rugged, simple design results in
API connections being recommended for most wells
2. Review of performance properties information in API documents, vendor catalogs, and Company
data bases. Major differences are:
 cost,
Each of these (alone or in combination) may
 load and pressure ratings, provide sufficient justification to select a
 radial clearance, proprietary connection over an API connection.
 ease of assembly, and
 performance in hostile-service environments
3. Review of field performance history

 A good measure of a particular connection design’s suitability for use is its documented field history
 Information of this type is generally available from your company records or the manufacturer of a particular connection
design
4. Consider look-alike proprietary connections

 The patent coverage for some popular connection designs has now expired and other manufacturers have copied these
designs and marketed so-called “look- alike” connections
 These connections are generally guaranteed to be interchangeable with those by the original manufacturer

Connection Selection Process
1. Review the availability of tubulars in Company inventory
2. Obtain firm bids of connection cost (ITT):
3. Review the corporate connection performance data base (if existing), or

any recommendations from your Best Practice department
4. Performing connection qualification work if required
5. Predict connection design performance using the Company computer

model library (if available)

Connection Selection Process

Steel Types (I)
API considers three types of Steel for Casing Pipes:
 a) Normal Steels (Table 4)

 The tubular is seamless or electrically welded with no addition of extra metal and
undergoes heat treatment. Maximum phosphate content is 0,040% and sulphur
0,060%.
Yield Strength Tensile Strength

Grade Minimum Maximum Minimum
psi Mpa psi Mpa psi Mpa
H40 40.000 276 80.000 552 80.000 414
J55 55.000 379 80.000 552 75.000 517
K55 55.000 379 80.000 552 95.000 665
N80 80.000 552 110.000 758 100.000 689

Steel Types (II)

 b) High Strength Steels (Table 5)
 The tubular has to be seamless. Phosphate and sulphur values are the same as for
normal steels.

P105 105.000 724 135.000 931 120.000 827
P110 110.000 758 140.000 965 125.000 827
Q125 125.000 862 155.000 1069 135.000 931
V150 150.000 1034 160.000 1104

Steel Types (III)

 c) Steels with a limited yield Strength (Table 6)
 The tubular has to be seamless or electrically welded with no addition of extra
metal und undergo heat treatment. Besides 0,50% of carbon, they may contain,
manganese, molybdenum, chromium, nickel or copper. They have 0,040%
phosphorus, 0,060% sulphur and 0,35 silicon.

C75 75.000 517 90.000 620 95.000 655
L80 80.000 552 95.000 655 95.000 655
C90 90.000 620 105.000 724 100.000 690
C95 95.000 655 110.000 758 105.000 723

Pipe Weight & Range
Weight
The pipe weight is given in lb/ft [kg/m]. In API is defined by the following formula:
 WL = (wpeL) + ew
WL = calculated weight of a pipe of Length L, lb
wpe = plain end* weight, lb/ft
L = Length of pipe including end finish, ft
ew = weight gain or loss due to end finishing, lb; for plain end pipe ew = 0
Also this simplified formula describes the plain end pipe Weigth:
 W = (OD - t) * t * 10.679255
Range
 t = (OD – (OD2 – 0,3745 * W)^1/2)/2 1 2 3
W = Weight – Plain end (lbs/ft)

Casing 16 – 25 ft 25 – 34 ft 34 – 48 ft
t = Wall Thickness (inches)
Tubing 20 – 24 ft 28 – 32 ft -
OD = Outside Diameter (inches)

Casing Design Methodology
Worksteps Workflow
1. Select the casing sizes
and setting depths;
2. Define the operational

scenarios which will result
in burst, collapse and axial
loads (load cases);
3. Calculate the magnitude

of these loads, apply
appropriate design factors,
and select an appropriate
weight and grade of
casing to withstand these
loads.

Casing Setting Depth (I)
Determining casing shoe depths
 Geological criteria
- The shoe's sealing function
- Lithologic variations
 Criteria related to the mechanical properties of rock or casing

- Pressures
- Stability of formations
- Leak-off test procedure
- Formation pressure < Leak-off test pressure or LOTP

Casing Setting Depth (II)
Casing Setting Depth
 How many casing strings are necessary?
 What is the setting depth?
Bourgoyne et al, 1991

Casing / Tubing Sizes
Nominal Production String Diameter
 What completion equipment will be used?
 What will the reservoir's flow rate be? The tubing diameter will
depend on the flow rate.
 Should the option of drilling deeper be kept open?
 What is the degree of uncertainty about the depth?

Casing Sizes (II)
Well Completion for Exploratory Wells
 Well purpose is to discover potential reservoirs.

 Hole size focus on Formation Evaluation (FE)
 Logs, cores, pressures, formation samples
 The casing design is based on assumtions, since no wells have been
drilled before in that area.  RISK IS HIGH
 Plan for additional casing sizes, in case a hole size is lost
 Not always possible
 Slim-hole tools less available
 In most cases the wells are designed with minimum string diameters
that allow to reach the target. However, the risk associated with
drilling may lead to a different end diameter as planned.

Casing / Open Hole Sizes
Required Clearance
Economides,
Petroleum Well
Construction

Casing / Open Hole Sizes
Experience has yielded a rule of the thumb giving the minimum

hole diameter to enable a string of pipe to be run in and cemented

Casing Loads
Tubular loads
External pressure
Collapse
other
Static Tension
Axial Compression
Bending
Mechanical
Loads Burst Internal pressure
Torsion Torque
Dynamic Inertial
Shock
Thermal Tension
Compression
Casing Loads
Examples of Intentional Loads are:
 The casing must support the wellhead and BOPs.

 Running and cementing loads. These include self weight, fluid pressure force, acceleration/deceleration and
tension after casing is set and cemented.
 Friction loads, including both drag and doglegs
 External pressure forces
 Applied pressure loads for pressure tests and stimulation
 Intentional evacuation
 Bending forces in doglegs
Examples of Unintentional Loads are:
 Kick loads
 Loads placed on one string caused by the failure of another string (i.e. high internal pressures through a tubing
leak, or high external pressure by the evacuation of internal fluids)
 Stresses induced by temperature loads (i.e. including high axial loads by expansion or contraction of steel and
high pressure loads created by the expansion of fluids)
 Bending from buckling
 Casing corrosion and wear. While these are not loads in itself, they greatly influence the effect of loads on the
casing
Load Criteria
Risk analysis is the basis of casing design. The objective is not to eliminate failures.
The objective is to provide an optimum balance between cost and risk
Governing design load:
 Not the maximum conceivable load

 It’s the maximum load that is reasonably likely to occur
 In most cases the casing probably will not see the design load because the design condition corresponds to an
extreme condition
Minimum design load:
 Those loads that certainly will occur

 Casing must have adequate tensile strength to be run in the hole
 Casing must have adequate burst strength to allow for circulation of mud to surface
 Casing must have adequate collapse resistance to allow for cementing the annulus
 Much higher loads may occur (i.e. well shut-in on gas kick, or casing fully evacuated), but are not likely to occur
 The designer must consider the consequences. Tensile and collapse cases can be costly but pose little hazard to
safety of environment.
 On the other hand burst failures can be disastrous, particularly if the pipe bursts at surface
 Therefore one should design for load conditions with have a low probability of occurring (design loads)

Burst Design
Burst design for casing is controversial, as the industry uses many burst load design
conditions. Normal design guidelines fall into the following categories:
• Full column of gas-to-surface

hole evacuated, shut-in after kick or blowout
• Handling of kicks
Shut in the well, circulation of the kick, shearing of pipe
• Intentional (applied) pressures
Stimulation pressures during fracking, surges while drilling, pressure testing, pressure
actuated annular valves, these loads are controlled from surface
• Pressures from equipment failures
tubing leaks, failures, shearing of flowing pipe

Burst Load
Design Assumptions:
• Based on well-control condition assumed to occur

while circulating out a large kick
• The burst design should ensure that the formation
fracture pressure should be exceeded before the
burst pressure of the casing is reached
p • The formation fracture pressure is used as a safety
pressure release mechanism
• The design pressure of the casing seat is equal to
the fracture pressure plus a safety margin
• The pressure inside the casing is calculated
assuming that all of the drilling fluid in the casing is
lost to the fractured formation, leaving only
formation gas in the casing (total evacuation)
PB  pore pressure * Design Factor
• The external pressure (backup pressure) outside the
 6,000 psi *1.1 casing is assumed to be equal to the normal
PB  6,600 psi formation pore pressure
• A safety factor is assumed

Collapse Design
Collapse loads occur when the external pressure exceeds the internal
pressure. This normally results from a loss of fluid height inside the
casing or an intentional reduction in fluid density:
• Lost returns cause highest collapse loads

Many companies use a 50% loss in the mud column for the back-up
pressure for its collapse design guidelines
• Intentional Evacuation
Gas lift operations evacuate the fluid level to a pre-defined point
• Accidental Evacuation
A leak in the tubing can result in a loss of packer fluid to a certain
depth. The evacuation can occur quite suddenly.
• Salt loading can cause severe collapse loads
Salt loading results in a point load to the casing, which is different
from hydrostatic loading
• Floating in casing: casing is empty inside
• Cementing: Fluid density outside > Fluid density inside
Collapse Load
External pressure Design Assumptions:
• The most severe lost circulation problem

after cementing and continuing to drill the
next section
• The most severe collapse loading
anticipated when the casing is run
p p • For both cases, the maximum possible
external pressure results from the drilling
fluid in the hole when the casing is placed
and cemented
• The beneficial effect of cement is ignored
• A safety factor is assumed

Tension Design
Tension loads may cause structural failures in the pipe body or

connection or cause a leak in connections due to eparatio of the
load flanks. Tension failure will result from the combination of one
of more of the following:
• Self-weight of the casing M

F
• Pressure end area loads
• Temperature loads
• Acceleration, deceleration loads
Ten- Compres Ben-
• Drag sion sion ding
• Bending due to doglegs or buckling

• Overpull on casing to set slips
F
• Pulling on stuck casing

Mechanical Loads
Torsion
Usually small during casing

M running, mostly in specialty
cases (e.g. Casing Drilling)

Design Factors
Design Factors (DF)
Where
DF = design factor (the minimum acceptable safety factor), and

SF = safety factor.
Hence, by multiplying the load by the DF, a direct comparison can be made with the pipe rating.
As long as the rating is greater than or equal to the modified load (which we will call the design
load), the design criteria have been satisfied.
Example for typical API Design Factors:
pipe rating

Load Diagrams
Physical loads
display opposite
trends and drive
complexity of
casing selection
Burst: Assume the full reservoir pressure along the wellbore

Collapse: The Hydrostatic pressure in the annulus rises with
depth
Tension: Tensile stress due to the weight of the string is highest
at the top

Load Cases
Example of required Load Cases (XOM)

Special Load Cases
Special Classes of Wells
 High-Angle Wells – The Running with Overpull calculation may be too conservative for high-
angle, extended-reach wells.
 Subsea Wells – Subsea wells use load definitions different from dry-tree wells, as specially
described.
 Tubingless Wells – Tubingless and cement-packer wells use special load cases. Selecting
the “Tubingless” option in calculation programs usually activates these load cases.
 Injection Wells – Injection wells (including cuttings disposal wells) also have special load
cases.
 Dead-Oil Wells – The Tubing Leak case is not required for artificially lifted oil wells with no
anticipated surface pressure (e.g., rod pumped, progressing-cavity pumped, and some
electric submersible pumped wells). The Tubing Leak case is standard for gaslifted wells.
 Air-Drilled Wells – Casing strings used for air drilling should be designed for future drilling
with zero mud weight.
 Sidetracks or Multilateral Wells – Design requirements may be shifted up or down when

wells are deepened or sidetracked.

Example for Casing Load Cases
Casing: Production Casing
Collapse + Axial Load + Burst
Collapse load: In view of later well manipulations, tests, depleted reservoir, losses with mud
level below shoe, the casing string has to be designed for full evacuation. The cementing
operation must also be taken into account.
Axial load: The total loads resulting from the landing loads of the individual casing strings
(including the tubing), the wellhead and BOPs must be recorded and considered with regard to
the thread compressive strength and the cross-section of pipe (yield strength). The running-in
and pressure testing loads must also be considered.
Burst load: The expected maximum wellhead (surface) pressure corresponds to the reservoir
pressure less the weight

Internal Fluid Profiles (Burst)
Burst Load Cases
1. Kick during Drilling (40-50% of Reservoir pressure)

2. Large Gas Kick (Frac at Shoe and Gas above)
3. Gas Kick Profile (Max. pressure = Frac-Pressure at shoe)
4. Full Gas Column
5. Pressure test
6. Tubing leak (Production, Stimulation)
7. Gas Migration

Burst Loading
1. Kick during Drilling
Description:
This load case represents pressures that may

occur during a shut in while taking a kick. It
assumes the expansion of a gas bubble while
a similar mud volume is bled off at surface.
The pressure of the expanded gas is equal to
40 or 50% of the hydrostatic column of the
mud. The gas column is assumed to be
weightless. If the next section drills through a
gas reservoir, the 50% shall be used otherwise
the 40% shall be used.
This load case only arises during drilling

operations.
p  0,4    g  TVDnext sec tion

TVD = max. vertical depth of casing

Burst Loading
2. Large Gas Kick (Frac at shoe with gas above)
Description
This load case represent a shut-in well after

taking a large kick. The internal pressure
profile is based on a gas or mud gradient
and the fracture pressure at the shoe above
the open hole TD.
This load case only arises during drilling

operations.
The lowest frac pressure in the open hole:
pFrac = GFrac * TVDFrac
From this we obtain an internal pressure load for the casing from the wellhead to the shoe:
For mud:
pI = pFrac  g * mud * (TVDFrac  TVD( n) )

TVD = max. vertical depth of this casing
For gas:
TVDfrac = the vertical depth with the
pI = pFrac  g * Gas * (TVDFrac  TVD( n) ) lowest frac pressure (=well integrity) of
the open hole section
Burst Loading
3. Gas Kick Profile (max. pressure = Frac pressure at shoe)
Description:
This case simulates the circulating out

of a kick using the drillers method. The
expected maximum pressures for each
depth are calculated. The intensity and
the kick volume can be varied.
Methodology:
The bottom hole pressure must remain

constant when circulating out the influx.
Bottom Hole Pressure pS = g * (  mud + Kick intensity)* TVDinf lux
Pressure at top of Influx ptop inf lux  ps  g *  inf lux * (TVDinf lux  TVDtopifnlux)
Wellhead pressure: p K ( n)  pTopinf lux( n)  g *  mud * TVDTopinf lux( n)

Burst Loading
4. Full Gas Column
TVD res  TVD


p  p Res
TVDres = reservoir TD
Description:
We assume that the well is shut in and that the entire casing string is filled with gas. This
load case may occur during drilling operations and during production.
Methodology:
This results in the following internal (burst) pressure load for the casing from the wellhead
p  pRe s   GAS  g  TVDres  TVD 

to the shoe:

Burst Loading
5. Pressure Test (Casing Shoe Integrity Test, Leak-off Test)
Description:
This load case generates an
internal pressure profile based on
mud weight applied pressure at the
wellhead, and an optional
plug/packer. If a plug/packer depth
is specified, the applied pressure is
only seen above it.
Methodology:
From the wellhead to the plug/
packer depth:
p I = ptest + g *  mud * TVD( n)
From the packer to the casing shoe:

p I  = g *  mud * TVD( n)
Burst Loading
6. Tubing leakage Description:
This case models a shut-in pressure applied to

the top of the production annulus due to a tubing
leak near the wellhead. The internal pressure
profile is based on production and pore pressure
data. Above the production packer, the internal
pressure profile is based on a surface pressure
equal to the reservoir pressure minus the
reservoir fluid´s hydrostatic pressure applied to
a selected packer fluid density. From the
production packer down to the perforation depth,
the internal pressure profile corresponds to a full
displacement of this section to the reservoir fluid
(i.e., reservoir pressure minus the reservoir
fluid´s hydrostatic pressure). From the
Surface pressure: p wellhead = pres - g *  oil / gas * TVDPerf perforation depth down to the well TD, the
internal pressure profile is based on reservoir
pressure applied to a selected packer fluid
Pressure from the wellhead to the packer:
density
p I = pwellhead + g *  Packerfl * TVD( n)
Pressure from the packer to the perforation:
p I = pres - g *  oil / gas * (TVDPerf - TVD( n) )

Burst Loading
7. Gas Migration Description:
This case models a gas bubble migrating

upward in the annulus between the production
casing and the protective casing. Because the
bubble is not allowed to expand unless the
fracture pressure at the protective casing
shoe is exceeded. (i.e., the pressure is not
bled off at the wellhead). The bubble´s
pressure and volume do not change as it
migrates upward. This “gas bubble inversion”
results in reservoir pressure at the wellhead
and can occur in a subsea completion where
the outer annuli are permanently sealed at the
wellhead, allowing the operator no means to
Methodology: monitor or relieve pressure. Gas migration is
normally caused by channels in the cement
The internal pressure at the previous casing shoe is between the production casing and a
derived from the reservoir pressure and the pressure of permeable reservoir.
the mud column in the annulus.
This load case is only used for intermediate
casing.

External Fluid (Collapse)
Collapse Load Cases
1. Partial or full empty casing

2. Single fluid column
3. Multiple fluids column
4. Moving formation
5. Gas migration (Collapse)

Collapse Loading
1. Partial empty casing

Collapse Loading
2. Single fluid column
Description:
Behind the casing there is a fluid
column with a particular density.
Methodology
The external pressure profile is
calculated as follows:
pe  g *  Fl * TVD(n)

Collapse Loading
3. Multiple fluids column
Description:
Behind the casing there
are several fluid
columns with different
densities.
This load profile is
predominantly used for
cementations.

Collapse Loading
4. Moving/squeezing formation (e.g. salt)

Axial Loading
Axial Load Cases
1. Weight in air
2. Weight in mud
3. Drag Loads (POOH with casing)
4. Pretension (PU force to compensate for thermal)
5. Thermal Loads
6. Bending
7. Shock Loads

Casing Design
Steps to consider in casing design considerations:
1. Design Process
• Selection of casing sizes
• Selection of setting depths
• Definition of design properties
• Calculation of magnitude of properties
2. Design Properties
• Collapse strength or loading (i.e. pressure)
• Burst strength of loading (i.e. pressure)
• Yield strength-tensile and compressive
• Biaxial loading considerations
• Bending load considerations
3. Design Procedure
• Collapse pressure calculation
• Burst pressure calculation
• Tensile/compressive strength calculation
4. Safety Factors
• Deterministic  apply safety factors (API, company defined)
• Probabilistic (need to have data, i.e. ExxonMobil’s LRFD)
 Apply load distribution functions (i.e. kick intensity, loads, pressures, etc.)
 Apply material property distribution functions (i.e. E-Module, Compr. Strength, etc.)
Casing Design
Worst Possible Conditions:
Unless otherwise specified in a particular

problem, we shall also assume the following:
Worst Possible Conditions

1. For Collapse design, assume that the casing is
empty on the inside (p = 0 psig)
2. For Burst design, assume no “backup” fluid on the

outside of the casing (p = 0 psig)

Casing Design
Worst Possible Conditions (Cntd.)
3. For Tension design,

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

Casing Design Methodology
Worksteps Workflow
1. Select the casing sizes
and setting depths;
2. Define the operational

scenarios which will result
in burst, collapse and axial
loads (load cases);
3. Calculate the magnitude

of these loads, apply
appropriate design factors,
and select an appropriate
weight and grade of
casing to withstand these
loads.

Casing Performance Properties
 Knowledge of the performance properties for casing and tubing are essential in selecting adequate tubulars for a
well design.
 For convenience, performance properties have historically been expressed as uniaxial design ratings. These
design ratings are in turn de-rated by design factors to provide a reasonable margin of safety when designing a
well.
 Design ratings have traditionally been established using closed-form calculations that were based on relatively
simple mechanical theory and/or limited test data.
 This approach has proven reasonable for the pipe body in most applications, but is often inappropriate for both
the connections and the pipe body under extreme combined loading. For these cases, design ratings are more
accurately established using a combination of triaxial yield theory, advanced finite-element modeling techniques,
and full-scale physical testing.
 Primary factors that determine performance properties of casing and tubing:

• Materials • Connections • Tubular Size • Coupling Size Dimensions
 The most important mechanical properties of casing and tubing are:

• burst strength • collapse resistance • tensile strength
These properties are necessary to determine the strength of the pipe and to design a casing string
Design Ratings
 Design ratings represent the maximum loads that a tubular may be subjected to without mechanical failure
 Design ratings are normally assumed to be established based on each type of load being applied uniaxially (i.e.,
not in combination with one another)
 API has published a number of specifications, standards, bulletins, and recommended practices establishing
minimum manufacturing requirements and performance properties for the oil industry
 The following design ratings constitute the five principal performance properties used to select tubulars for wells:
1. Collapse Pressure  calculate

2. Internal Yield Pressure  calculate
3. Leak Resistance (of connections)  manufacturer info + testing
4. Pipe Body Yield Strength (tensile strength)  calculate
5. Joint Strength (of connections)  manufacturer info + testing
 Failure criteria for casing and tubing vary with the type of loading and are dependent on the method that most
accurately predicts the onset of failure. In general, failure is either defined as the onset of material yield or
material fracture

 The internal yield pressure of a tubular is the lower of the minimum pressure required to yield the
pipe body or the coupling
 For steel tubulars, both of these pressures are calculated by using the Barlow equation which is
based on thin-wall pressure vessel theory. For the pipe body, a minimum allowable wall thickness
(i.e., equal to 87.5% of nominal for API casing and tubing) is assumed.
 The internal yield pressure of a tubular is the lower of the minimum pressure required to yield the
pipe body or the coupling
 Burst Pressure Calculation (Barlow Equation)
The burst pressure resistance of a pipe depends on the applied internal pressure, the OD of the
pipe and its wall thickness:
pi  D
S
2t
 Collapse pressure design ratings are calculated by considering one of five tubular collapse pressure
failure modes described by API
 The four collapse pressures are defined as:

(1) Yield Strength Collapse Pressure,
(2) Plastic Collapse Pressure,
(3) Transition Collapse Pressure, and
(4) Elastic Collapse Pressure
 Each of these collapse pressure modes is defined by a separate formula. The collapse regime
governing a particular pipe size, weight, and grade is primarily a function of the ratio of pipe OD to
specified wall thickness
 With the exception of the Elastic Collapse Pressure formula, each is also a function of the minimum
material yield strength
 The D/t ratio (pipe OD over wall thickness) is used to determine which equation to use
 The collapse pressure resistance of a pipe depends on the axial stress (bi-axial stress). A fifth
equation defines collapse pressure under axial stress.

Collapse Pressure Formulas
 D  
   1
 2 Yp  
t  
1. Yield Strength Collapse: PY P
  D 2 
   
  t  
 
 A 
2. Plastic Collapse: Pp  Y p   B  C
 D  
  t  
 
3. Transition Collapse  F 
PT  Yp   G
 D  
 
  t  
4. Elastic Collapse PE 
46.95 X10 6
2
 D   D  
     1
 t   t  
 2

1/ 2

  SA   S A 
5. Collapse under axial stress YPA  YP 1  0.75     0.5  
  YP    YP 

YPA = yield strength of axial stress
equivalent grade, psi
YP = minimum yield strength of pipe, psi
SA = Axial stress, psi (tension is positive)
Collapse Pressure Calculation
If Axial Tension is Zero:
Increasing (D/t) ratio

Yield Strength Plastic Transition Elastic
J-55 14.81 >25.01 >37.31
N-80 13.38 >22.47 >31.02
P-110 12.44 >20.41 >26.22

Collapse Example
Determine the collapse strength of 5 1/2” O.D., 14.00 #/ft

J-55 casing under zero axial load.
1. Calculate the D/t ratio:
D 5.500
  22.54
t 1
5.500  5.012
2

Collapse Example (Cnt.)
D
2. Check the mode of collapse for a  22.54
t
Table shows that, for J-55 pipe, with 14.81 < D/t < 25.01
the mode of failure is plastic collapse.

The plastic collapse is calculated from:
 A 
Pp  Yp   B  C
D/t 
 2.991 
 55,000   0.0541  1,206
 22.54 
Halliburton Tables
Pp = 3,117 psi round off to 3,120 psi
Collapse under axial load
Determine the collapse strength for a 5 1/2” O.D., 14.00 #/ft, J-55 casing under
axial load of 100,000 lbs. The axial tension will reduce the collapse pressure as
follows:
 2 
  SA   SA 
YPA  1  0.75    0.5   YP
 Y  Y 
  p   p 

Need to calculate Axial Stress SA first:
FA 100,000
SA    24,820 psi
Area  5.52  5.012 2  
4
The axial tension will reduce the collapse pressure rating to:
 2 
  24,820   24,820 
YPA  1  0.75    0.5   55,000
  55,000   55,000 
 
 38,216 psi
The axial load has decreased the J-55

rating to an equivalent “J-38.2” rating

 A 
 Pp  YPA   B  C For plastic collapse
D/ t 
 2.945 2 
 38,216   4.557 x10   700.43  2,551
 22.54 
Pp  2,550 psi
Axial stress has reduced J55 casing to J38 casing,

and burst pressure reduced from 3117 psi to 2550 psi

Conclusions
 Casing Design is one of the wells most critical factors

 HPHT wells and deepwater wells require numerous casing strings, increase
wells complexity
 Window between Pp and Fg (Drilling Margin) drives number of casing strings
 Selection of the right load cases is paramount

 Kick (gas to surface)
 Collapse (gas to surface)
 Tubing Leak

Conclusions
 The choices and technical options seem to be overwhelming
 Open Hole / Casing sizes
 Casing Weights and Grades
 Connection Type
 Addressed by the industry via standardization

 24”, 18-5/8”, 13-3/8”, 9-5/8”, 7”, 5” casing scheme
 Several standard gas-tight connections (e.g. Vam, Hydril)
 Risk of a Black-Box approach for young DEs

 Standardized software (Stress-Check, WellCat, etc…)
 Need to do calculations by hand
 Addressed by companies through in-house training

Contents List
 Casing Functions & Technology
 Tubular Design Considerations
 Casing Strings and their Functions Part I
 Casing and Tubing Pipe Technology
 Connection Selection
 Casing Design Methodology
 Casing Setting Depth & Size
 Load Cases / Load Calculation Equations
Part II
 Design & Safety Factors
 Mechanical Property Calculations
 Materials Qualification and Testing
 Manufacturing Specifications
 Testing Methods & Equipment Part III
 Connection Evaluation and Qualification
Casing & Connection Testing
 Large economic impact of tubing and casing failures

 Strong incentive for inspecting oilfield tubulars prior to running them into the wellbore.
 For new tubulars, reject rates of 10% or more are not uncommon (based on inspecting to
API criteria after the manufacturer has approved shipment)
 Quality of new tubulars varies significantly with the manufacturer since API specifications
governing the manufacture generally do not include adequate inspection or testing
requirements
 In used tubulars, a variety of service-induced flaws can occur downhole
 These flaws may be caused by corrosive fluids, wireline tools, power makeup tongs, pipe
slips, sucker-rods, and drill pipe, to name a few.

Manufacturing Specifications
• Manufacturing specifications consist of two major categories, API specifications and proprietary
specifications.
• The majority of tubulars are purchased to API specifications.
For critical-service applications, proprietary specifications are often warranted to ensure performance
and quality of the product.
API Spec 5CT

• Provides manufacturing specifications for casing and tubing which are adequate for most applications.
• Steelmaking processes, heat treatments, and inspection requirements are provided for each grade.
• API Spec 5CT specifications have evolved over the years and are based on experience and common
usage.
• Standard specifications exist only for products and grades that are high tonnage items for steel mills
• Controls on manufacturing processes and testing are minimal in API 5CT
• For critical-service applications API Spec 5CT should be examined thoroughly to ensure that the
resulting products will be adequate for the intended service

API Certification
 API has published a number of specifications, standards, bulletins, and recommended practices establishing minimum manufacturing requirements and
performance properties for the oil industry.
 Any manufacturer wishing to fabricate or sell products that conform to API publications must obtain a license that authorizes the use of the official API
monogram.
 The exact requirements and guidelines for obtaining and using the monogram are stated in the Appendices of all API standards and specifications. The
following table lists the API publications pertaining to tubulars for casing and tubing applications:
http://www.api.org

Casing Testing (II)
 Visual Inspection
 Drift Testing
 Magnetic Particle Inspection, Special End Area
 Magnetic Particle Inspection, Full-Length Pipe Body
 Electromagnetic Flux Leakage Inspection, Full-length Pipe Body
 Ultrasonic Testing, Full-Length Pipe Body
 Gamma Ray Wall Thickness Inspection
 Eddy Current Grade Verification
 Ultrasonic Thickness Gauging
 Mechanical Dimension Gauging
 Thread Gauging
 Hydrostatic Pressure Testing
Manufacturing Specifications
Proprietary Specification
• Most major mills are capable of manufacturing the full range of grades
covered in API Spec 5CT
• Many mills offer proprietary products that are not large tonnage items
• These products purportedly offer special features that set them apart from a
standard API product which may include higher yield strength, higher
collapse rating, guaranteed toughness, or guaranteed sulfide-stress-
cracking resistance
• To achieve these properties in a consistent manner, more stringent controls
on certain manufacturing processes are employed
All tubular goods must be qualified according to existing standards:
Be sure you own

Edition information
the latest version

Connection Standard
ISO 13679

Connection Test Classes
 ISO 13679 defines 4 different test classes for connections, known as connection
application levels (CALs).
 These test classes relate to increasingly arduous mechanical service conditions in the
application of casing and tubing connections
 These test classes increase in severity by increasing the number of test parameters and
test specimens
 The classes do not include all possible service scenarios. For example, the presence of a
corrosive fluid – which may influence the performance of a connection – is not considered
 The user if this ISO standard shall specify the connection application level based upon the
needs for the particular service intended
 User of the connection should be familiar with trhe defined CALs, the test load envelope
and limit loads

Connection Application Levels
CAL IV (8 specimen): most severe application
 Intended for production and injection tubing and casing for gas service
 Test procedures expose the connection to cyclical test loads including internal pressure,
external pressure, tension, compression and bending
 Test procedures also expose the connection to extensive thermal and thermal/pressure-
tension cycling incurring a cumulative exposure of about 50 hours at an elevated
temperature of 180 deg C (365 deg F)
 Limit load tests to failure are conducted in all four quadrants of the axial pressure load
diagram

CAL III (6 specimen): severe application

 Intended for production and injection tubing and casing for gas and liquid service
external pressure, tension, compression Bending is an optional load for CAL III testing
 Test procedures for thermal and thermal/pressure-tension cycling are less severe than CAL
IV and incurring a cumulative exposure of 5 hours to gas at an elevated temperature of 135
deg C (275 deg F)
 Limit load tests to failure are conducted in all four quadrants of the axial pressure load
diagram

CAL II (4 specimen): less severe application

 Intended for production and injection tubing and casing, protective casing and for gas and
liquid service with limited exposure to significant external pressure
tension, and compression. Bending is an optional load for CAL II testing and external
pressure is not included
 CAL III test procedures for thermal and thermal/pressure-tension cycling are the same as
for CAL III
 Limit load tests to failure are conducted with internal pressure and axial load

CAL II (4 specimen): less severe application

 Intended for production and injection tubing and casing, protective casing and for gas and
liquid service with limited exposure to significant external pressure
tension, and compression. Bending is an optional load for CAL II testing and external
pressure is not included
 CAL III test procedures for thermal and thermal/pressure-tension cycling are the same as
for CAL III
 Limit load tests to failure are conducted with internal pressure and axial load

CAL I (3 specimen): least severe application

 This level is intended for liquid service
tension, and compression, using liquid test fluid. Bending is an optional load for CAL I
testing and external pressure is not included
 CAL I testing is conducted at ambient temperatures
 Limit load tests to failure are conducted with two quadrants of the axial-pressure load
diagram

CAL Test Requirements
Connection
Application Level
(CAL) Testing
Requirements

Testing Program
 Finite Element Analysis (FEA)

Study structural and sealability performance of the connection
design. Performance envelopes are developed for the connection
through FEA
 Connection sealability performance
 Evaluate Seal Quality
 Structural integrity of the connection
FEA Mesh Example

Testing Program
 Physical Testing
is used to verify the FEA results. Additionally performance
parameters that cannot be studied through FEA are determined
via:
• Make-and-Break test
• Sealability Test
• Internal Quench test
• External Pressure Test
• Thermal Cycle Test
• Liquid Burst Test
• Tensile Failure Test
• Compression Failure Test
Test Specimen Dimensions
Testing Details
Temperature Probe Locations
Thermal Cycles
Four-point bending apparatus

and strain gauge location

Test Facilities
Pressure Autoclave
Make Up/Break Out

Machine
Test Envelope
 A test envelope consists of 4 quadrants:
 Quadrant I: axial tension plus internal pressure with possible bending
 Quadrant II: axial compression plus internal pressure with possible bending
 Quadrant III: axial compression plus external pressure with possible bending
 Quadrant IV: axial tension plus external pressure with possible bending
Pipe body and connection test load

envelopes at specified dimensions
Key:
1 100% VME pipe body yield envelope

2 100% connection test load envelope
3 100% API collapse
Efficiency: 0,64 tension, 0,38 compression
Note: The numbers are illustrative and

do not indicate units.

Real Life Example

CAL Test Program
Connection
Application Level
Testing Program

Testing Program

References (I)
Noteworthy papers in OnePetro
Adams, A.J. and Hodgson, T. 1999. Calibration of Casing/Tubing Design Criteria by Use of Structural
Reliability Techniques. SPE Drill & Compl 14 (1): 21-27. SPE-55041-PA.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/55041-PA.
Adams, A.J. and MacEachran, A. 1994. Impact on Casing Design of Thermal Expansion of Fluids in
Confined Annuli. SPE Drill & Compl 9 (3): 210-216. SPE-21911-PA.
Halal, A.S. and Mitchell, R.F. 1994. Casing Design for Trapped Annular Pressure Buildup. SPE Drill
& Compl 9 (2): 107-114. SPE-25694-PA.
Halal, A.S., Mitchell, R.F., and Wagner, R.R. 1997. Multi-String Casing Design with Wellhead
Movement. Presented at the SPE Production Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma,
USA, 9-11 March. SPE-37443-MS.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/37443-MS.
Hammerlindl, D.J. 1977. Movement, Forces, and Stresses Associated With Combination Tubing
Strings Sealed in Packers. J Pet Technol 29 (2): 195–208; Trans., AIME, 263. SPE-5143-PA.
Klementich, E.F. and Jellison, M.J. 1986. A Service-Life Model for Casing Strings. SPE Drill Eng 1
(2): 141-152. SPE-12361-PA.
Prentice, C.M. 1970. "Maximum Load" Casing Design. J. Pet Tech 22 (7): 805-811. SPE-2560-PA.

References (II)
• Aadnoy, B.S. 2010 Modern Well Design. Rotterdam, The
Netherlands: Balkema Publications. WorldCat eBook or WorldCat
• CIRIA Report 63, Rationalisation of Safety and Serviceability
Factors in Structural Codes. 1977. London: Construction Industry
Research and Information Association. WorldCat Det Norske
Veritas. 1981.
• Rules for the Design, Construction and Inspection of Offshore
Structures. Hovik, Norway: DNV. WorldCat
• Economides, M.J., Waters, L.T., and Dunn-Norman S. 1998.
Petroleum Well Construction. New York City: John Wiley & Sons.
WorldCat
• EUROCODE 3, Common Unified Rules for Steel Structures. 1984.
Commission of the European Communities. WorldCat
• Mitchell, R.F.: “Casing Design,” in Drilling Engineering, ed. R. F.
Mitchell, vol. 2 of Petroleum Engineering Handbook, ed. L. W. Lake.
(USA: Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2006). 287-342.
SPEBookstore and WorldCat
• Mitchell, R. F., & Miska, S. (Eds.). (2011). Fundamentals of Drilling
Engineering. Richardson, TX: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
SPEBookstore and WorldCat
• Rabia, H. 1987. Fundamentals of Casing Design. London: Graham
& Trotman. WorldCat
• Recommendations for Loading and Safety Regulations for
Structural Design. 1978. Report No. 36, Nordic Committee on
Building Regulations, NKB, Copenhagen. WorldCat


3 WellPlan 2018 2019 CasingDesign

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

3 WellPlan 2018 2019 CasingDesign

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Well Planning WS 2018 / 2019

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

“Mistakes are a good investment. If you want to succeed, double your

Tom Watson, IBM

Mistakes are a horrible investment in casing design.

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

1. To prevent the hole from caving in

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

 Provides a means of nippling up BOP

 The surface casing is the first string of casing run on a

 Usually set in the first abnormally pressured zone

 The intermediate casing may be the second casing string that

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

 After reheating, the shell is moved forward over a

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

- Non-Upset Short / Long Round Thread, Buttress Thread

- Short Round Thread Casing

- Non-Upset - Non-Upset Tubng

- External Upset Tubing

CASING Selected connections:

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

1. Outside diameter of pipe (e.g. 9-5/8”)

2. Wall thickness (e.g. 1/2”)

3. Grade of material (e.g. N-80)

4. Type to threads and couplings (e.g. API LCSG)

5. Length of each joint (RANGE) (e.g. Range 3)

6. Nominal weight (avg. wt/ft incl. Wt. Coupling,

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

Special Considerations for Composite Materials Tubulars

Example of Carbonfibre tubular

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

Round-Thread Connections. These connections have

Buttress-Thread Connections. These connections have

Extreme-Line Connections. These connections have

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

API Short / Long

API Buttress Thread Casing

API Extreme Line Casing

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

• Connection threads are machined on two basic pipe end finishes:

Pipe end finishes

May result in an increase in

Integral Joint Connection

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

 Tapered-Threads/Thread Compound Seals

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

If the threads serve as the

• Most API casing and tubing connections utilize tapered threads

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

API thread compounds

Internal Intermediate External Pin to Pin

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp

Dr.-Ing. Juergen Schamp