SPE 74490
Multistring Casing Design for Deepwater and Ultradeep HP/HT Wells: A New Approach
G.Robello Samuel, Adolfo Gonzales, Scot Ellis, Issa Kalil: Halliburton-Landmark Graphics Corporation
Copyright 2002, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference held in Dallas,
Texas, 26–28 February 2002.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
Drilling operations in deep water and ultra-deep water are
increasing around the world. The development of these
substantial prospects is very challenging and requires
integration of knowledge with prudent designs at different
stages of the well development. However the cost premium
imposed by deep water and ultra deep wells are higher and
many of the discoveries are marginal in terms of the
commercial viability. With the increase of developing and
operating costs, there is a growing need to reduce the cost of
drilling and other allied operations. The casing program
constitute a significant portion of the well cost and this calls
for an alternate approach to the casing design criterion
particularly relevant to high temperature and high pressures
are encountered in ultra deep wells. Challenges associated
with extreme depth, pressures and temperatures where annular
fluid expansion is a problem translate to additional problems
in casing design. It is therefore required to align design
objectives closer to the changed requirements, which
necessitates changes in traditional casing design methods. The
design implemented should be without sacrificing the safety
and integrity of the well.
This paper presents a study on the new approach and the
alterations proposed to the casing design to adapt to the new
criterion for the deep water and ultra deep high-temperature
high-pressure wells. This paper will examine some of these
proposed changes, while asserting that it is necessary to
integrate this new approach, so that cost effective solutions
can be derived as a result. This new design encapsulating
annular fluid expansion and pressure provides a simple,
practical way to view the severity of the composite well
system during the course of drilling as well as the production
phase of the well. The practical usefulness of the theory,
backed by the fundamental analysis is demonstrated with three
numerical examples.
Introduction
With the increase in operating cost and to withstand the cyclic
swing of the oil prices, there is a growing need of cost
effective casing design. The technological challenges are
significant to survive when the oil price is low. There are
many references in the reports that have sought to quantify the
design of the casing and the different loads that have been
subjected during the life of the well. Comparatively little
research has assessed the effect of the casing design as a
whole system including all the casings in a complete well. A
detailed investigation in this direction was presented by
Samuel, Gonzales(1). The Wellhead Growth Index(2) proposed,
comprising of annular fluid expansion(3,4) and wellhead growth
provides a simple practical way to view not only the casing
movement but also the fluid expansion in the annuli during the
course of drilling and production. However this index did not
provide an option to study the pressure behavior of the casing
system. Due to increased deep-water operations and drilling
high temperature high-pressure ultra deep wells it has become
necessary to increase the scope of the casing design by
encompassing the annulus pressures into the analysis.
Consequently, numerous variables can be taken into account
along with the pressure and volume within the design
spectrum. In the casing design envelop it is imperative to
include the study of the behavior of the whole casing system
by quantifying the amount of work done by the system.
The aim of the present work is to build on the earlier work
done to quantify the effect of the annulus heat up and the
wellhead growth. The work done by the system provides a
more efficient approach for making decisions between
different designs. In this approach, the amount of work done
by the composite system is a practical way to enumerate the
strain experienced by the system that satisfies the selection
criteria within the design constraints. The conventional
process of multistring design calls for the calculation of the
annulus expansion by selecting a particular design at the
development stage of the well planning. This does not put any
restriction of the whole casing design for all the phases of the
drilling and there is no reliable scale to estimate the strain
experienced by the whole composite casing design. So a
benchmark is proposed by gauging the work done by the
whole casing system under various load condition. Casing
2 Samuel, Gonzales, Ellis, Kalil
design safety factors may be recalculated based on axial load
redistribution through the system proposing the convenience
of redesigning the casings string.
Casing Design
The ability to obtain the complete casing design depends on
the availability of alternate means of meeting the wellplan
requirements and objectives. These alternatives include
number of casing strings, casing seats, or techniques such as
landing procedure, pumping compressible fluid as backup
annular fluid, top of the cement (TOC) that can be employed
and achieved to meet the objectives within the constraint
specified. For high pressure and high temperature wells it is
essential to perform a multi-string annular pressure build-up
analysis to assess annulus pressures and annulus fluid
expansion caused by fluid heat-up during production
operations.
Relational specifications to a single string analysis are
sometimes rather cryptic to the uninitiated, and therefore
investigating and implementing to broader specifications of all
casings simultaneously can be useful. This also allows a better
factorization of the design process. The results of this analysis
generate additional casing and tubing load cases which
accounts for the interaction between heat-up pressures and
stresses. This causes the main technical challenges to construct
a casing design solution that can withstand a loading scenario
that includes heat-up annular pressures and further, analyze
the possibility of limiting the annular fluid expansion loading
conditions to a given well casing configurations. So a detailed
study on the thermal analysis of the drilling, circulating and
cementing, completion and production activities are required
for any particular casing design. The results obtained out of
the thermal analysis to be incorporated as “working loads” on
the stress analysis.
Methodology
The intricate nature of relational expressions can also be a
hindrance to compare different designs under certain
conditions. The whole system can be considered as steady
flow machinery on an overall basis for the purpose of
obtaining the work equation. Thus the work done as obtained
from the conventional pressure-volume diagram will be given
by
p2
W = ∫vdp (1)
p1
In the above expression p1 is taken as the initial pressure and
p2 is taken as the final buildup pressure. In order to quantify
the severity of the casing design the work done during the
venting of the trapped pressure and volume is a reliable option
to be considered. This will encapsulate the expanded annular
fluid volume and pressure. This provides a simple practical
way to view the work done as a result of the annulus
expansion, which includes the unconstrained volume change
and the annulus pressures.
The work done during venting is given as
74490
w = p2 v 2 (2)
With the circumferential and lateral strain, the total volume of
the expansion of all casing strings for all casing segments is
given by
∑ 4 (2d∆dl + )
m n
π 
∆v = ∑
d 2 ∆l + v a  (3)
j=1 i =1 i , j
The total heat up pressure change in the casing strings are
given by
n
∆p = ∑ [
p a ]i
(4)
i =1
Case Studies
The stress analysis consisted of a casing analysis based on
standard loads, working loads (drilling and production thermal
loads) and annular pressure buildup thermal loads. The case
studies were aimed at exploring the sensitivity of various
parameters on the proposed approach. The plots were given to
provide guidance in interpretation of the results.
The specific loads investigated for the analysis are: Burst:
full gas displacement, gas kick, water flow kick, pressure test,
green cement test, tubing leak. Collapse: cementing, full
evacuation, Axial: overpull force, green cement pressure test.
Thermal: drilling and production working loads and annulus
fluid expansion loads: maximum burst, maximum collapse
loads, full evacuation annular fluid expansion. Completion
and production thermal analysis were performed and the
results at the end of the completion temperature simulations
indicates that wellbore temperature return near to undisturbed,
consequently the use of the undisturbed temperature profile as
initial conditions for the production temperature analysis was
assumed to be accurate enough. The results of the production
operations temperature analysis were used to create thermal
working loads for stress analysis and also to perform multi-
string annular heat-up pressures analysis. The full uniaxial and
triaxial stress and buckling analysis were performed. Finally,
the multi-string annular heat-up pressures occurring during
production operations were carried out. The early production
event for an oil well generated a high temperature profile.
The mid and late production event series for an oil well
generated the highest temperature profile and the highest
annular pressure buildup. Apparently these high temperatures
were consequence of the water production rate that occurs
during these events and due to water thermal properties. The
series of gas production events for the gas well also generated
high temperature and annular fluid expansion pressure but
were not as critical as the above cases.
Case - 1
This example is from OilWell #1 and is a sub-sea deviated well
with 78 feet elevation (RKB), 2790 feet of water depth and total
well depth of 9010 ft. (MD). The undisturbed temperature profile
was, 80 degrees F surface ambient, 40 degrees F at mudline and
158 degrees F well TD static (8500 ft TVD).
74490 Multistring Casing Design for Deepwater andUltradeep HP/HT Wells: A New Approach 3

The schematic of the well is shown in Fig. 1. The conductor

casings consists of 36” with a shoe depth 3174ft and 26” Production Tubing: 4 ½” OD, 10.50 lbm/ft ,13Cr-95.
casing with a shoe depth at 3997ft. The 20” surface casing is Oil production = 6,000 bbl/day
to a depth of 5082ft with 84ppf, X-56 casings. The 13 5/8” Gas production = 9.6 MMcf/day
intermediate casing from 2894-6809 ft. The fourth production Water production = 120 bbl/day
string consists of a 9 5/8” casing from 2894-9010ft. Wellhead pressure = 1,200 psi
Reservoir Conditions:
Reservoir pressure: 6928 psig @ 9010 ft (MD)
Well Schematic
for initial production start-up operation.
0 ft RKB Perforation depth: 9010 ft MD
78 ft Mean Sea Level Gas gravity: 0.65
Oil gravity: 45 API
2894 ft Mud Line
Work Done Index
3174 ft 36" Structural Drive Pipe
0.9994 0.9995 0.9995 0.9996 0.9996 0.9997 0.9997 0.9998 0.9998 0.9999 0.9999
3997 ft 26" Conductor Casing 6000

5500
5082 ft 20" Surface Casing
KOP 5090 ft 5000 X
13 5/8" Intermediate Casing
4500
Total Pressure

Depth(ft)
4000 Work
6809 ft
3500
9 5/8" Production Casing
3000
7842 ft 4 1/2" Production Tubing
2500
9010 ft
2000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Figure 1 –Well Schematic
Pressure (psi)

Backup Annulus Fluid:

13 5/8” annulus = 9.5 ppg Oil based mud Figure 3 – Multi String TOC Evaluation Chart for Oil
9 5/8” annulus = 10.3 ppg Oil based mud Well
4 ½” Tubing annulus = 9.00 ppg Calcium Chloride Discussion:
Figure 2 shows the change of annular expansion volumes in
5 relation to various annulus heat up pressures for different
9 5/8” TOC 9 5/8” TOC in cased combinations of top of cement depths with two associated
4.5 in Open Hole 5582 ft section close to strings (13 5/8” outer casing string and 9 5/8” internal casing
Mudline string). Each curve represents a constant top of cement for the
4 5082 ft
13 5/8” TOC 13 5/8” string while changing the 9 5/8” casing top of cement
3.5 in Open Hole depths. Also each curve can clearly be marked with distinct
Volume (bbl)

4539 ft
inflection points B and C depicting the effect on heatup
3
pressure and annular expansion volume by the inner string (9
2.5 3997 ft 5/8”) top of cement depths. The section CD represents when
both strings are close to a full cement condition in the annuli
2
B 3497 ft where as interval CB shows the effect of moving down the 9
1.5 5/8” TOC from shallow depth. Finally the interval BA
A illustrates the “effective” top of cement depth represented by
1 2997 ft
the reduction of pressure and volume while moving down the
13 5/8” TOC in cased section C
0.5 close to Mudline D TOC towards open hole. In this case the “effective” top of
2899 ft
cement depth for the 9 5/8” is the mid depth between the prior
0 shoe and the immediate prior casing shoe depth. This effective
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000
Pressure (psi)
depth is found to be constant for all the other similar curves.
Figure 3, shows the total pressure and work done index for
Figure 2 –Pressure vs Volume at variable 13 5/8", 9 5/8" various well depths. The work done index is based on the
TOC - Oil Well difference between the initial work and the additional
4 Samuel, Gonzales, Ellis, Kalil 74490

maximum work done divided by the initial work for the completion with packer. The estimated production data are
annulus of interest. The maximum work done has been given as follows:
obtained for all pressure volume curves (Fig.2) and gives an Production Tubing: 3 ½” OD, 9.30 lbm/ft ,13Cr-95.
estimate of the higher cumulative heatup pressures Oil production = 1,400 bbl/day
encountered. The chart allows identification of the lowest Gas production = 25 MMcf/day
work done index paired with the lowest cumulative pressure. Water production = 50 bbl/day
In this example, the lowest work done index is approximately Wellhead pressure = 3,700 psi
at 4750 ft depicted by the point X, which is the recommended Reservoir Conditions:
top of cement for the 13 5/8” casing. The chart also shows the Reservoir Pressure: 6928 psig @ 10783 ft (MD).
reverse trend toward higher work done indices and Packer fluid density: 9.00 ppg Calcium Chloride
accumulated pressures indicating at one instance a reduction Gravel pack packer depth: 10,370 ft MD
on total cumulative pressure of the system due to moving Perforation depth: 10,783 ft MD
down the 13 5/8” TOC but still with the influence of Gas gravity: 0.65
temperature effects. It also represents the fact of both Oil gravity: 45 API
associated string annulus cement columns approaching the
fully cemented condition. 9
9 5/8” TOC 9 5/8” TOC in cased
8 in Open Hole section close to
Case - 2 13 5/8”
5582 ft Mudline
This example is from the data file of GasWell #2. This casing 7 TOC in
design for an offshore deviated well with a water depth of Open
Hole 5082 ft
2894 ft, incorporates a symbolic task of a complex subsea well 6

Volume (bbl)
problem. The well schematic is presented in Fig.4
5 4539 ft
The initial design calls for a structural drive pipe to a depth
of 3174ft followed by a conductor casing of 26”. to a depth of 4 3997 ft
3997ft. The 20”surface casing is to a depth of 5082ft. The
intermediate 13 3/8” casing to be landed to a depth of 6993ft 3
A B
3497 ft
and followed by 9 5/8” production casing to depth of 9518ft.
The final production liner is with the shoe at 10807 ft. 2
C 2997 ft
1 13 5/8” TOC in cased section D 2899 ft
close to Mudline
W e ll Schematic
0
0 ft 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000
RKB
78 ft Mean Sea Level Pressure (psi)

2894 ft Mud Line Figure 5 –Pressure vs Volume at variable 13 5/8", 9 5/8"

3174 ft 36" Structural Drive Pipe TOC - Gas Well
3997 ft 26" Conductor Casing Work Done Index
0.9989 0.9990 0.9991 0.9992 0.9993 0.9994 0.9995 0.9996 0.9997 0.9998
5082 ft 20" Surface Casing
KOP 5090 ft 6000
1 3 5 / 8 " I n t e r m e d ia t e C a s i n g

5000 Work Done

6963 ft
Depth (ft)

3 1/2" Production Tubing

9 5/8" Production Casing Total Pressure
4000
9518 ft
7" Production Liner
10807 ft 3000

Figure 4 –Well Schematic

Backup Annulus Fluid: 2000
13 5/8” annulus = 9.5 ppg Oil based mud 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
9 5/8” annulus = 10.3 ppg Oil based mud
3 ½” Tubing annulus = 9.00 ppg Calcium Chloride Pressure (psi)
A potential producing formation is expected to be around a Figure 6 – Multi String TOC Evaluation Chart
depth of 10783ft. Production tubing of 3 ½” needs for the final for Gas Well
74490 Multistring Casing Design for Deepwater andUltradeep HP/HT Wells: A New Approach 5

Discussion: 3 ½” Tubing annulus = 9.00 ppg Calcium Chloride

Figure 5 shows the results for the Gas well case. A similar A potential producing formation is expected to be around a
trend in volume vs. pressure is observed like the previous oil depth of 6803ft. Production tubing of 3 ½” needs for the final
well case. However, the curves show a consistent drop in completion with packer. The estimated production data are
pressure when the 9 5/8” casing top of cement moves down given as follows:
towards open hole resulting in the corresponding volume Production Tubing: 3 ½” OD, 9.30 lbm/ft, 13Cr-95.
increase except towards section AB, where a slight negative Oil production = 400 bbl/day
trend is observed. This behavior indicates that we have Gas production = 1.8 MMcf/day
approached the “effective” top of cement depth, which in this Water production = 2,000 bbl/day
case corresponds to the immediate prior casing shoe depth. Wellhead pressure = 150 psi
Figure 6 shows the work done indices which tend toward Reservoir Conditions:
lower values as total cumulative pressure increases when 13 Reservoir Pressure: 6028 psig @ 8553 ft (MD)
5/8” casing top of cement is moved down, but yet to reach the for initial production start-up operation.
“effective” top of cement depth. It is worthwhile to note that a Packer fluid density: 9.00 ppg Calcium Chloride
high index is observed when full cement conditions for both Perforation depth: 8,120 ft MD
associated casing strings are approached. Although the slope Gas gravity: 0.65
of the combined plots agrees well with the previous Oil gravity: 45 API
investigation of the oil production, the absolute location of the
point varies significantly. 12
9 5/8” TOC B 9 5/8” TOC in cased
in Open Hole section close to
Case - 3 10
A Mudline
C
This example is from the data file of WaterWell #3. This study 13 5/8” 5582 ft
is for an offshore deviated well with a water depth of 2894 ft. TOC in
8 Open Hole
The well geometry is sketched in Fig.7. Volume (bbl)
D
5082 ft
The initial design calls for a structural drive pipe to a depth of
3174ft followed by a conductor casing of 26”. to a depth of 6 4539 ft
3994ft. The 20”surface casing is to a depth of 5003ft. The
intermediate 13 3/8” casing to be landed to a depth of 6823ft 4
3997 ft
followed by 9 5/8” production casing to depth of 8553t.
3497 ft
2
13 5/8” TOC in
Well Schematic cased section
2997 ft
close to Mudline 2899 ft
0 ft RKB 0
78 ft Mean Sea Level 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
Pressure (psi)
2894 ft Mud Line
3174 ft 36" Structural Drive Pipe Figure 8 –Pressure vs Volume at variable 13 5/8", 9 5/8"
26" Conductor Casing
TOC – High Water Cut Well
3994 ft (MD)/(TVD)
Work Done Index
5003 ft (MD)
20" Surface Casing 0.997 0.998 0.998 0.998 0.998 0.998 0.999 0.999 0.999 0.999 0.999
4994 ft (TVD)
6000
13 5/8" Intermediate Casing

6823 ft(MD) 5000 Work Done

6600 ft(TVD)
Depth(ft)

4000
3 1/2" Production Tubing
Total Pressure
8518 ft(MD) 3000

8553 ft(MD) 9 5/8" Production Casing

8278 ft(TVD) 2000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Figure 7 –Well Schematic Pressure (psi)
Backup Annulus Fluid:
13 5/8” annulus = 9.5 ppg Oil based mud Figure 9 – Multi String TOC Evaluation Chart for High
9 5/8” annulus = 10.3 ppg Oil based mud Water Cut Well
6 Samuel, Gonzales, Ellis, Kalil 74490

Discussion: • The results from oil, gas and water provide insight into
To demonstrate the general validation of the theory proposed, the complex designs and show that the approach is a
the high water cut production was investigated. powerful tool for the study of the casing designs for high-
Figure 8 shows the results of an oil well with a late production pressure high-temperature wells during the entire life of
of high water cut. Once again consistent volume vs pressure the well.
distribution was observed. Although these curves show a • The analysis provides a means to select “effective” top of
consistent drop in pressure when the 9 5/8” casing top of the cements for all annuli.
cement was moved down towards open hole, it can be
observed that the corresponding volume showed an increasing Acknowledgments
trend away from the “effective” top of cement depth. The authors would like to express their appreciation to
Furthermore, the exception of the analysis occurs when the top Landmark Graphics Corporation for the opportunity to present
of cement for the 13 5/8” is at open hole depth of 5582 ft. The this paper.
curve shows a slight initial negative trend with drop in
pressure and volume indicating the “effective” combined top Nomenclature
of cement depth for the 13 5/8” (5582 ft) and 9 5/8”. d = casing diameter, in
Figure 9 shows the total cumulative pressure and the work i = number of casing sections,
done index and this plot should be used in combination with j = number of annulus,
the previous plot to evaluate “effective” top of cement depths l = segment length of the exposed casing, ft
that will help to alleviate the work done in the system. In this n = number of exposed casing sections,
case although the work done index dropped with depth, the m = number of casings,
corresponding pressure was significantly influenced and kept v = annulus volume, ft3
on increasing due to the effect of wellbore thermal fluid va = volumetric change due to annulus pressures
properties.
∆d = change in the casing diameter, in
Temperature Profile:
The Table 1 gives the temperatures calculated at the surface ∆p = change in the annulus pressure, psi
and at the bottomhole for each of the wells analyzed in this ∆v = change in the annulus volume, ft3
paper.
Table 1 Temperature Details
for Wells SI Metric Conversion Factors
Wells Temperatures deg F ft × 0.3048 E +00 = m
inch × 25.4 E -03= m
Surface Bottomhole
in3/min × 1.6387 E -05 = m3/min
OilWell #1 71.1 102.9
Gal (US) × 3.785 E +00 = liter
GasWell #2 74.3 136.9
psi × 6.8948 E -03 = MPa
WaterWell #3 71.7 126.1
References
Concluding Remarks 1. Samuel, G.R., Gonzales, A.: “Minimum Cost Casing
The present work has produced results of important practical Design” SPE 36448 presented at The SPE Annual
value despite the fact that it has been mainly contained to Technical Conference, Houston, Texas, October 3-6
studying the effects of changing the top of the cement for October 1999.
different well profiles. However, the new approach would 2. Samuel, G.R., Gonzales, A.: “Wellhead growth index aids
benefit from incorporating additional factors such as influence multistring casing design” Oil & Gas Journal, October 20,
of changing the backup fluids, changing holes and casing 2000.
combinations and coupling these with minimum cost 3. MacEachran, A., Adams, A.J.: “Impact on Casing Design
optimization. The proposed framework generally describes for of Thermal Expansion of Fluids in Confined Annuli” SPE
wells producing oil, gas and water. The power of this 21911, presented at the 1991 SPE/IADC Drilling
approach rests on the wells where high temperature or high Conference in Amsterdam, March 1991.
pressure are encountered. Based on the study and analysis of 4. Adams, A.: “ How to Design for Annulus Fluid Heat-Up”
various casing design examples presented in this paper, the SPE 222871 presented at the SPE Annual Technical
following inferences are made. Conference, Dallas, Texas, October 6-9, 1991.
• The severity of the casing design depends on the
expanded volume and the heat up pressure and provides a
relative comparison of various designs by way of
comparing the work done index.
• Implementation of this methodology can be achieved
efficiently in the wells where annular fluid expansion and
pressure is a problem.