SPE 76711
Resolving the Completion Engineer's Dilemma: Permanent or Retrievable Packer?
M.T. Triolo, BP; L.F. Anderson, SPE, M.V. Smith, SPE, Baker Oil Tools
Copyright 2002, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Western Regional/AAPG Pacific Section
Joint Meeting held in Anchorage, Alaska, U.S.A., 20–22 May 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
Traditionally, completion engineers have faced a dilemma
when deciding whether to run a large bore, hydraulic set,
permanent, or retrievable packer. Thanks to advances in
cutting technology, this decision is no longer an
either/or proposition. The innovative alternative is the
removable packer.
This paper will address the development of a removable
packer that combines the best features of both permanent and
retrievable packers: large bore, high performance, simple
design, and flexible retrieving options. The paper will trace the
development of the technique from stack-up testing to the
maiden run and retrieval of the first removable packer in the
Milne Point field, Alaska. Through analysis of this case
history, the paper will address challenges faced, problems
solved and lessons learned that are now being applied to future
enhancements of the removable packer technique.
Introduction
Historically, the selection of a completion’s production packer
has been an either or proposition — either a permanent or
retrievable packer. In practical applications, there is
considerable overlap in which either option is acceptable, but
determination of the boundaries of that overlap continues to be
debated. There are, however, application considerations
that should provide the engineer with a general guideline
for selection.
The permanent packer has long been thought of as the
most reliable option for extreme conditions. As milling is its
only means of removal, consideration of reservoir life
expectancy versus the costs of removal will usually weigh
heavily in the choice of options. By definition, the permanent
set offers simplicity, requiring few moving parts. The lack of
any retrieval mechanism, or internal pressure equalizing
system, permits a larger internal diameter, while maintaining
high differential pressure ratings. Hostile environments are
typically addressed with permanent packers, both for
management of cost and concerns for the long-term integrity
of the retrieval mechanism.
The retrievable option offers the most flexibility and
potential economy in cases where the removal is anticipated in
the short term, or repeatedly in the life of the well.
Performance characteristics in terms of differential pressure
ratings, as well as the reliability of retrieval, have improved
dramatically in recent years. Some of the current retrievable
designs actually rival permanent packer performance in some
size ranges. Despite performance enhancements, retrievable
packer models still dictate limitations in their internal diameter
specifications, associated with the internal bypass and
retrieval mechanisms.
In recent years, a niche has evolved for a third option,
driven by the use of larger diameter production tubulars. The
required packer bore diameters, relative to the available cross-
section, exceed the possibility of conventional retrievable
technology. At the same time, all of the flexibility of a true
retrievable packer is not required. The combination of
permanent packer performance, with a means to facilitate
removal without a costly milling operation, has led to a new
platform of “removable” packer design. This option provides
for the removal of the packer through advanced chemical or
mechanical cutting technologies (Figure 1).
Removable Packer
Application
The removable packer was designed for prolific reservoirs
that employ large-diameter tubulars for high-volume
production. Often these developments are high-profile
monobore wells, which are found in remote or offshore
environments, many in deepwater or subsea wells or involving
horizontal or extended reach wells. The packer will function
as either a production packer or an isolation packer, above a
liner top or run in tandem as a straddle (Figure 2).
Benefits
Given the high profile and varied applications for a large-
bore packer, the four main removable packer design
2 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH
drivers were saving rig time, product reliability, flexibility,
and removability.
Save Rig Time: (Figure 3)
1) One-trip, flanged up, no tubing manipulation, no-
movement required during hydraulic setting.
2) Multiple interventionless setting options to further
reduce installation costs and risk.
3) Removal of packer on the production string in event
of pre-set while running in the well.
4) Optional contingency removal methods using thru-
tubing and workstring methods.
Reliability: (Figure 3)
1) Simple robust design similar to permanent packer
with no integral retrieving mechanism to complicate
the design.
2) Use of proven non-deforming slips and element
system with retrievable extrusion barriers to ensure
removability.
3) Design verification illustrated using permanent
packer performance envelope, according to highest
ISO 14310, Level V0 specifications for production
packer testing.
4) System verification by means of a stack-up test from
a drilling rig.
Flexibility: (Figure 4)
1) Modular design based on three components: “head”,
packer, “tail”.
2) Head configurable for tubing connection — floating
seals, anchored seals, or no seals.
3) Head configurable for removal: thru-tubing or
workstring cut-to-removal options.
4) Tail configurable for setting — hydraulic, hydrostatic
or via remote actuated plugging device.
Removability: (Figure 5)
1) On production string
a) Thru-tubing chemical cut
b) Thru-tubing mechanical cut
c) Straight-pull shear release (low service only).
2) On workstring
a) Removing tool
b) Milling tool.
Operations
Running. The removable packer was designed to be run
and set as with traditional hydraulic set packers. Once at
setting depth, land the tubing into the wellhead hanger and
install the plugging device below the packer. Slowly apply
internal pressure to the tubing string to the calculated setting
pressure. Hold the pressure for 15 minutes to ensure all
components of the packer are fully deployed. Bleed off tubing
and test the packer. Remove plugging device from tubing by
appropriate means.
SPE 76711
The removable packer was designed to be compatible with
existing alternative setting modules — hydrostatic setting
module or various disappearing plug modules. These
alternative setting modules would allow the packer to be set
without wireline intervention (Figure 4).
Removal. Equalize pressure above and below the packer
by opening sliding sleeves or perforating the tubing. To
retrieve the packer and tailpipe, the packer mandrel must be
cut. Two methods of removal are available, depending on
the geometry of the completion: 1) removal on the completion
string using a thru-tubing chemical or mechanical cutter,
and/or 2) removal on the workstring using a removing or
milling tool. In either case, once the mandrel is cut, upward
movement of the tubing will release and stretch out the slips
and element of the packer (Figure 5).
1) Removal on Completion String.
Using Thru-Tubing Chemical Cutter.
In non-restrictive ID completions, chemical cutting is the
primary method of removing the packer. This cutting method
is applicable only when the OD of the pre-determined cutting
assembly can pass through all the restrictions above
the packer.
Care should be given when running the completion
bottomhole assembly to take accurate length, ID and OD
measurements of the packer, pipe and crossover connections.
One should allow enough space below the desired cutting area
for the collar locator or correlation device to pass below the
packer to ensure accurate depth correlation. The use of a
radioactive tag run on the original completion is recommended
as a means of locating the cutting zone of the packer.
A Chemical Cutter should be run on an appropriately
designed wireline tool string consisting of weight bars, collar
locator and/or gamma ray correlation device, firing sub, upper
propellant sub, slip sub, lower propellant sub, chemical
cylinder, cutting head and bull plug. The chemical cutter is
anchored by a button type slip sub, which anchors the tool
during the cutting operation. Once the cutting operation is
completed, the slips retract and the tool is free to be pulled
from the well.
Once activated, the chemical cutter will cut cleanly
through the packer mandrel, allowing the packer and tailpipe
to be retrieved. In stacked packer applications, all the packers
can be retrieved on the production tubing simultaneously,
simply by cutting all the packer mandrels.
Using Thru-Tubing Mechanical Cutter.
In restricted ID type completions, coiled tubing conveyed
mechanical cutting allows retrieval of the removable packer
on the completion string. This cutting method must be pre-
designed into the original completion as it requires the use of a
Thru-Tubing Cutting Extension (TCE). The TCE, placed
above the removable packer, allows the cutting BHA to locate
and position itself across the cutting zone of the packer.
Care should be given when running the completion
bottomhole assembly to take accurate length, ID and OD
SPE 76711 RESOLVING THE COMPLETION ENGINEER'S DILEMMA: PERMANENT OR RETRIEVABLE PACKER?
measurements of the packer, pipe and crossover connections.
One should allow enough space above the desired cutting area
for the adjustable no-go locating sub to locate and still provide
sufficient distance for the motor and the underreamer.
An underreaming tool should be run on an appropriately
designed coiled tubing tool string, consisting of a connector,
dual-flapper back pressure valve, hydraulic disconnect, dual-
actuated circulation sub, adjustable no-go locating sub, and
mud motor.
Upon reaching the TCE, the adjustable no-go sub will
position the underreamer across the cutting zone of the packer.
Gradually bring the pump rate up to the flow rate determined
by the service company representative on site. Continue the
cutting process until a positive pressure drop has been
observed. This will indicate that the cut has been made.
Once the cutting operation is completed, the cutting knives
retract into the underreamer and the entire cutting bottomhole
assembly is removed from the well. Upward movement of the
production tubing will release and stretch out the slips and
packing element system. The packer and tailpipe can be
pulled out of the well with upstrain.
2) Removal on Workstring
Using Workstring Conveyed Removing Tool (WCRT).
This method of removal can only be used when the
removable packer is run with an alternative upper sealbore.
To use the WCRT, the anchor type seal assembly must be
removed from the upper sealbore of the packer.
The WCRT is run in on an appropriately designed
workover string consisting of jars, drill collars, or if rotation of
the pipe is not possible, a downhole motor.
Upon reaching the upper sealbore receptacle, the tool
enters the packer bore and is automatically positioned for
mechanical cutting. Applying set-down weight at this point
will ensure that the anchor latch positively engages the left-
hand thread in the sealbore receptacle. Gradually, bring the
pump rate up to the flow rate and RPMs, which was
determined by the service company representative on site.
Continue the cutting process until a positive pressure drop has
been observed. This will indicate that the cut has been made.
Once the packer mandrel is cut, upward movement of the
workstring will release and stretch out the slips and packing
element system. The packer and tailpipe can be pulled out of
the well with upstrain.
Using Milling Tool.
In the event the packer can not be removed using standard
removal procedures, the packer can be milled over
and retrieved.
A milling tool can be used in conjunction with a washover
assembly to burn over and retrieve the removable packer in
one trip. Run in the hole with washover assembly with
appropriately sized milling shoe. Mill down to the slips or
until the packer moves downhole. Pull out of the hole with
washover assembly and recovered packer.
3
Design Concept
Performance. The removable packer concept utilized
proven retrievable components taken from both mechanical
and hydraulic set packers. A slip-element-slip with positive
debris barrier design was chosen over conventional element-
slip or the unconventional slip-element design for its ability to
emulate the permanent packer in performance and simplicity.
Having a slip on either side of the element reduces tri-axial
stresses, both in the casing and the body of the packer; the
casing, as the load (holding slip) is separated (by the packing
element) from the pressure; the body, as the load path doesn’t
extend past the slips on the body, thus permitting use of
standard yield strength materials and reduced cross section to
enable more reliable cutting and removal of the packer.
Removability. The cut-to-remove concept is based on the
premise that the cross-section of the packer’s cut zone is
similar to that of the production tubing. Thus, as long as the
operator can chemically cut his tubing and no major
restrictions exist above the packer, then the packer body
should be able to be cut. Mechanical cutting would be much
the same, requiring no new tool developments, though the
travel of the knives would need to be controlled so the cut did
not extend past the body. The workstring retrieving tool
would combine a proven retrieving tool with a mechanical
cutter. In summary, no new technology development or
characterization of cutters was planned using this cut-to-
remove design concept.
Design Validation
The design concepts covering the packer performance and
its removability would be validated analytically by component
in the laboratory, systemically on a test rig, and operationally
in the field.
1) Equipment Validation: Lab Tests
Performance. Extensive component testing was
performed on both the slip mechanism and packing element
system to ensure removability.
Packer performance was verified using a ratings
performance envelope (Figure 6). The rating envelope was
originally developed to describe the performance of permanent
packers and their failure modes.3 The rating envelope has
evolved through the International Standards Organization, ISO
14310, as a standard means to illustrate the combined loading,
i.e., applied pressure and axial load, which a packer sees
during design validation testing. ISO 14310 sets six standard
design validation grades (V6 to V1) and one special grade
(V0). These standardized grades allow the user/purchaser to
match the appropriate level of validation testing to the actual
well application requirements. Design validation grade V6 is
the minimum grade where the validation method has been
defined by the supplier/manufacturer. The complexity and
severity of the validation testing increases as the grade number
decreases. (Table 1). Full-scale testing of the removable
packer was performed according to the most stringent ISO
14310, level V0 validation testing criteria. V0 validation
testing requires testing in gas, in maximum rated casing ID.
4 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH
This is a test inclusive of all intersection points of the rated
performance envelope, with temperature cycles, and with no
leaks- holding gas pressure bubble tight. 4
Additional testing was performed to verify the no body
movement was required during setting specification so the
packer would qualify for straddle packer and liner top
isolation completions.
Removability. To speed up development, the two aspects
of the cut-to-remove technique were tested separately in the
laboratory: 1) cut and 2) remove.
Cutting ability was tested, both on the mechanical cutter
and chemical cutter. Sample targets, cylinders of same cross-
section and metallurgy of the body of the packer, were
furnished to the cutting service providers. The mechanical
cutter was qualified using a mud motor in a flow loop, while
the chemical cutter was qualified in an environmental test cell
that could simulate temperature and hydrostatic pressure.
Special non-destructive, laboratory-based removal
procedures were developed to test the ability of the packer to
be removed after full ISO 14310 V0 verification testing.
2) Operations Validation: Stack-up Tests
There were two main objectives in the stack-up system
tests performed from a drilling rig based in Bossier City,
Louisiana. The first objective was to determine the ability of
the packers to perform in a drilling environment and in a
stacked packer application. The tools were set and then
pressure tested to ascertain the seal integrity. The second
objective was to remove the packers using four different
removal methods: thru-tubing chemical cut, workstring
conveyed retrieving tool, milling, and thru-tubing mechanical
cut with mud motor.
Performance. Two removable packers were run in
stacked, about 90 ft (27 m) apart. The tools were set at the
same time. After they were set, pressure was applied between
them, below the bottom packer, and then above the top packer.
Removability. Once the pressure test was completed, the
bottom packer was chemically cut on wireline. Then the top
packer was cut on workstring using the retrieving tool. Both
packers were retrieved together (Photos 1 & 2).
A third packer was run in and set by itself. After a push-
pull test, the tool was milled over and retrieved using standard
procedures. The packer and sealbore head were milled over in
3½ hours, which is similar to the time required to mill over a
permanent packer (Photo 3).
A fourth packer was set and tested in the same manner as
the third. It was cut through tubing on small OD pipe
(simulating coiled tubing) using a mechanical cutter powered
by a mud motor (Photo 4).
All well tests validated our original design concepts. The
testing also led to design enhancements to the mechanical
cutter and workstring retrieving tools that led to more
efficient operations.
3) Application Validation: Case Histories
The first two installations with removable packers were in
the remote areas of northern Alaska (Figure 7). These two
SPE 76711
installations put the removable packer’s design concepts to the
test immediately: 1) removability: ability to remove the
packer by multiple methods, and 2) performance: operate in
a drilling/workover environment and in a stacked
packer application.
Case History #1 (Figure 8)
Design concept tested & proven: Multiple removable
methods
Application: Single packer, frac,
produce & remove
Well Reference: BP MPF-86
Date of Packer Setting: August 8, 2001
Casing Size: 7 in. 26 ppf
Tubing Size: 4½ in. 12.6 ppf
Number of Packers: 1
Packer Setting Depth (MD): 10,806 ft (3294 m)
Max. Deviation: 64º
Well Type: Oil Producer
The Milne Point F-86 well was drilled and completed
initially with a removable packer, sliding sleeve and jet pump
installation to allow formation fracturing of Kuparuk A2
sands. The jet pump was placed after the frac treatment was
completed and the well was preproduced and tested. At a later
date, the frac tubing and packer installation were removed and
the A1 and A3 sands perforated. An electrical submersible
pump was installed after the A2/A3 sands were perforated.
The well was then brought on production.
Performance. Removable packer was set by dropping a
ball onto the seat in a plug below the packer. Packer set with
applied pressure and the tubing was tested. Bled pressure on
tubing, and applied pressure to annulus for backside test of the
packer. The well was fraced using 205,200 lb (76,588 kg) of
carbolite treatment over a 3½ hour time period. Maximum
surface treating pressure was 5260 psi (387 bar) with an
average flow rate of 25 barrels per minute during the job.
Calculated combined loads at the packer were 6789 psi (468
bar) and 64,000 lb tension (29,205 kg).
Removability. After well testing using a jet pump, rigged
up the chemical cutter with collar locator and attempted to cut
and remove the packer on the production tubing. Pulled up
40,000 lb (18,144 kg) over string weight to free the packer.,
but the packer was still set and would not release. Released
anchor type seal assembly from the packer and came out of
well with the production tubing. Went back in with
workstring conveyed removing tool (WCRT) and tagged
packer at 10,794 ft. (3290 m). Cut the packer mandrel in five
minutes and pulled 25,000 lb. (11,340 kg) over string weight
and the packer came free. Pulled two stands and saw only
minimal drag at the first two casing collars. Continued out of
the well bore with no signs of drag or sticking for the
remainder of the trip.
Subsequent examination of the packer revealed that the
chemical cut was 2.5 in. too low and was placed across the
bottom guide. The workstring removal tool cut the mandrel in
SPE 76711 RESOLVING THE COMPLETION ENGINEER'S DILEMMA: PERMANENT OR RETRIEVABLE PACKER? 5

the exact location as planned (Photo 5). This case history Additional Case Histories
validated the benefit of having multiple methods of removing The field experience validated our original design
the packer. concepts. The removable packer has proven to save rig time
by being stackable, reliable in drilling/workover
Case History #2 (Figure 9) environments, flexible and removable. Additional runs have
been recorded in Alaska, the Middle East and Caspian
Design concept tested & proven: drilling/workover Sea areas.
environment & stacked
packer application Benefits/Limitations/Enhancement Opportunities
Application: Triple-straddle isolation
completion Benefits. The current removable packer and cutting
Well Reference: BP Prudhoe Bay, S-107 technology provides the following significant benefits for
Date of Packer Setting: August 8, 2001 high-profile monobore wells, which are found in remote or
Casing Size: 7 in. 26 ppf offshore environments, many in deepwater or subsea wells or
Tubing Size: 4½ in. 12.6 ppf involving horizontal or extended reach wells:
Number of Packers: 3 1) Saves rig time - using one-trip, flanged-up hydraulic,
Top Packer, MD: 11,718 ft (3572 m) with no-mandrel movement during setting procedures, greatly
Measured Depth (MD), simplifying space-out procedures.
6635 ft +(2022 m)- True 2) Reliability - simple robust design similar to the
Vertical Depth (TVD) permanent packer’s slip-element-slip configuration.
Middle Packer, MD: 11,823 ft (3604 m) MD, 3) Flexibility - modular design using head, packer, and
6680 ft +(2036 m)- TVD tail adds flexibility to cover a wide range of applications,
Bottom Packer, MD: 12,223 ft (3726 m) MD, allowing multiple removal and setting methods.
6850 ft + (2088 m)- TVD 4) Removability - non-deforming slips and attached
Max. Deviation: 97.6º extrusion barrier proven to be retrievable.
Well Type: Horizontal H2O Injection
Limitations. Current removable packer and cutting
The dual purpose of this triple-packer completion was to technology limitations are as follows:
selectively capture two seawater injection targets in the 1) Metallurgy - limited experience in cutting high-nickel
Kuparuk C-sands ~3700 ft. (1128 m) apart and isolate an old alloy CRA tubulars.
set of perforations above the injection target zones. The old 2) Restricted ID completions - limited to workstring
perforations were isolated between the top packer at 11,720 ft retrieving tool and thru-tubing mechanical cutting
(3572 m) MD and the middle packer at 11,825 ft (3604 m) removal options.
MD. Current desirable injection zones were perforated for 3) Thru-tubing cutters - only as good as the means to
placement between the middle packer and the bottom packer locate the cutting zone of the packer mandrel. Use of
at 12,226 ft (3226 m) MD. A sliding sleeve was installed no-go or selective locating profiles above the packer
between the middle packer and bottom packer at 11,967 ft are recommended, and where applicable, a
(3648 m) MD to provide injection selectivity between radioactive tag for locating the chemical cutter.
subzones of the Kuparuk C sands. The main area of
injectivity below the lower packer was cased behind solid pipe Enhancements. Enhancements of removable packer and
from a liner top packer at 12,259 feet to an external casing cutting technology under development, or that are being
packer at 15,127 ft (4611 m) MD with slotted uncemented sought, include:
liner from the external casing packer to 15,938 ft MD (4858 1) Cutting technology for high-grade corrosion resistant
m) plug back total depth of the well. alloys - development of industry accepted and
Performance. Three removable packers were run everyday usage of cutters for high- nickel
immediately following clean-out trip where a cast iron bridge alloy tubulars.
plug was drilled up. During the run-in with the packers, the 2) Through tubing release methods - development of
string stopped multiple times as the packers encountered cast industry accepted and everyday usage of lower cost
iron plug debris. At one point, circulation was stopped due to thru-tubing releasing methods.
the debris in the wellbore. At setting depth, all three packers 3) Commercialization/standardization - opportunity to
were hydraulically set using standard procedures. The tubing develop universal and standard thru-tubing locating
and backside were pressure tested successfully to 3,500 psi methods for use in restricted and non-restricted
(241.3 bar). This case history validated the removable completions. Efficient solutions exist, though they
packer’s application in drilling/workover environments and in tend to be operator and well specific.
stacked packer applications.
6 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH SPE 76711

Conclusion
1) Removable packers resolve the completion
engineer’s dilemma when deciding between
retrievable and permanent large-bore packers.
2) Removable packers offer value in high-profile
monobore wells, which are found in remote or
offshore environments, deepwater or subsea wells, or
involve horizontal or extended reach completions.
3) The removable packer design concept was validated
by performance testing in the laboratory, system
testing at a rig, and application testing in the field.
4) Enhancements in cutting technologies will continue
to offer additional value in using removable packers.
5) Wider usage and experience with removable packers
will lead to improved and standardized thru-tubing
locating and cutting techniques.

Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank the management of BP and Baker
Oil Tools for the permission to publish this paper, and thank
the various other operators for their investment in removable
packer technology. This development would not have been
successful without the many synergistic efforts of Baker Oil
Tools’ Packer group and Fishing Group with their
Metal Muncher technology, and Baker Atlas’ chemical
cutting technology.

References
1. Bradley, W.B. (ed): Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Third
Printing, Richardson, TX (1992), Chapter 4, pgs. 1-11.
2. Economides, M. J., Watters, L.T., Dunn, S. (ed): Petroleum
Well Construction, John Wiley & Sons, West Sussex, England,
1998, pg. 381-387.
3. Hopmann, M., and Walker, T.: “Predict Permanent Packer
Performance,” Petroleum Engineering International (1995)
35-39.
4. ISO/DIS 14310, “Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries -
Downhole Equipment - Packers and Bridge Plugs,” 18
January 2001.
5. Jones, R. D.: SPE 68349, “Developing Coiled-Tubing
Techniques on the Karachaganak Field, Kazakhstan”, presented
at SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Roundtable, Houston, TX, 7-8
March 2001.
SPE 76711 RESOLVING THE COMPLETION ENGINEER'S DILEMMA: PERMANENT OR RETRIEVABLE PACKER? 7

Figure 1. Packer Options

Removable

• Thru-tubing and workstring removal options

• Can be redressed when practical

ent Re
n • Simple slip-element- tri
a slip design ev
m • Destructive removal
•
•
Non-drillable
Uses proven
r

• Non-integral equalizing

ab
retrievable components
Pe

or retrieving mechanism • No milling required for

le
• Can be milled over & removal
recovered
• High performance
w/large ID’s
• Actuate
• Set
• Grip & Seal

• Drillable • Non-destructive removal

• Can not be redressed • Can be redressed easily
• Integral retrieving mechanism
• Integral equalizing mechanism
• Generally not mill friendly
• Moderate performance with
large ID’s
8 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH SPE 76711

Figure 2. Removable Packer Applications

Big bore
monobore

Liner Top Isolation

Extended reach deepwater

SPE 76711 RESOLVING THE COMPLETION ENGINEER'S DILEMMA: PERMANENT OR RETRIEVABLE PACKER? 9

Figure 3. Removable Packer Features

Configurable for floating seals, Configurable for thru-

anchored seals, or no seals tubing and/or workstring
cut-to-removal

Positive, element-type
debris barrier

Field proven,
non-deforming
retrievable slip
system

Slip-element- Retrievable
slip: gripping sealing system
slips isolated
from high
pressure

No mandrel
movement during
setting

Configurable for
traditional or
interventionless setting
10 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH SPE 76711

Figure 4. Removable Packer Components

HEAD

Seals Seals No Seals Disconnect Thru-Tubing

Anchored Floating Premium Premium Cut Extension

PACKER

Removable
Packer

TAIL

Intervention-to-Set Interventionless Interventionless Interventionless

Disappearing Plug Module Hydrostatic Setting Moddule Tubing Tester/
Packer Setting
Module
SPE 76711 RESOLVING THE COMPLETION ENGINEER'S DILEMMA: PERMANENT OR RETRIEVABLE PACKER? 11

Figure 5. Removable Packer Removal Techniques

ON PRODUCTION TUBING ON WORKSTRING

Thru-tubing Thru-tubing Removing Tool Milling Tool

Chemical Cut Mechanical Cut
12 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH SPE 76711

Figure 6. Performance Envelope

Above 0 Below

Tension
Applied Axial Load

Set-Down
Differential Pressure

Figure 7. Geographic Location of Milne Point and Prudhoe Bay, Alaska

Arctic Ocean
ALASKA
CANADA

Beaufor t Sea
Barrow

Teshekpuk Harrison Bay Milne Point Field

Lake Prudhoe Bay-Field
Camden Bay Kaktovik
River

Umiat
k
rk o

Colville River
v ani

ag a
S

NORTH SLOPE

YUKON-KOYUKUK
KOBUK
SPE 76711 RESOLVING THE COMPLETION ENGINEER'S DILEMMA: PERMANENT OR RETRIEVABLE PACKER? 13

Figure 8. Milne Point F-86 Well with Frac, Test and Remove Completion

MPF-86

9-5/8” Csg. 40# - 5517’

L-80, ID=8.835”

10578’ 4-1/2” Gas Lift Mandrel

4-1/2” Tbg.12.6#,
L-80, ID=3.958”

10772’ 4-1/2” Sliding Sleeve

10784’ 7”x4-1/2” Anchor Type Seal

Assembly

10786’ 7”x4-1/2” Removable Packer

w/alternative upper seal bore

10816’ 4-1/2” Nipple

10827’ WLEG

7” Csg. 26#,
L-80, ID = 6.276” 11206’
14 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH SPE 76711

Figure 9. Prudhoe Bay S-107 Well with Triple-Packer Completion

S-107
2277’ 4-1/2” SSSVN, ID = 3.813”

10-3/4” Csg, 45.5#, 4265’

L-80, ID = 9.980”

11654’ 4-1/2” Nipple, ID = 3.813”

RA Tags in Joint # 10 11665’
11718’ 7”x 4-1/2” Removable Pkr, ID= 3.875”

11823’ 7”x 4-1/2” Removable Pkr, ID= 3.875”

11967’ 4-1/2” Sliding Sleeve, ID = 3.812”

12202’ 4-1/2” Nipple, ID =3.813”

12223’ 7”x 4-1/2” Removable Pkr, ID = 3.875”
12250’ 4-1/2” Nipple, ID =3.725”

4-1/2” Tbg, 12.6#, 12262’ 12259’ 7”x 5” Liner Pkr, ID = 5.250”

L-80, ID = 3.958”
12263’ 4-1/2” WLEG, ID =3.958”

7” Csg, 26#, 12274’ 7”x 5” Liner Hanger, ID = 4.430”

12421’
L-80, ID = 6.276”

15019’ 4-1/2” Ext. Csg. Pkr, ID = 3.937”

15274’ Top of 4-1/2” Slotted Liner

15938’ PBTD

4-1/2” Slotted Liner 12.6#, L-80, ID = 3.958” 12274’

4-1/2” Liner, 12.6#, L-80, ID = 3.958” 15980’
SPE 76711 RESOLVING THE COMPLETION ENGINEER'S DILEMMA: PERMANENT OR RETRIEVABLE PACKER? 15

Photo 1. Disassembled recovered packer Photo 2. Disassembled recovered packer showing

showing mandrel severed by chemical cutter mandrel severed by workstring-conveyed removing tool

Photo 3. Recovered packer using milling tool Photo 4. Disassembled recovered packer showing mandrel
severed by mechanical cutter and mud motor
16 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH SPE 76711

Photo 5. Disassembled recovered packer showing both

workstring-conveyed retrieving tool cut on mandrel and
chemical cut in bottom guide

Table 1. ISO 14310 Production Packer Design Validation Grades

Grade V6 Supplier/manufacturer defined test

Grade V5 Liquid pressure test
Grade V4 Liquid performance envelope
Grade V3 Liquid performance envelope with temperature cycling
Grade V2 Gas performance envelope
Grade V1 Gas performance envelope with temperature cycling
Grade V0 Gas performance envelope plus temperature cycling with zero bubble leakage