Mechanical Behavior and Failure Analysis of Oil and Gas Equipment - Research Article

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

2019, Vol. 11(5) 1–16
Ó The Author(s) 2019
Design and experimental study on DOI: 10.1177/1687814019846258
journals.sagepub.com/home/ade
full-metal sealing structure of
mandrel-type casing hanger

Yang Liu1 , Zhanghua Lian1, Changsong Deng2, Qiang Zhang1 and

Yisheng Mu1

Abstract
To avoid the failure of mandrel-type casing hanger, this article provides a new type of metal sealing structure, and the
sealing is achieved through plastic flow of soft metal and elastic deformation of matrix. A finite element analysis model
for sealing performance of mandrel-type hanger is established to study the deformation and contact pressure of sealing
cone. Among the four sealing structures studied in this article, the elliptic surface is the optimal. It is suggested to design
smaller equal cone angle of inner cone angle (b) and outer cone angle (a) in the limited space as far as possible so as to
obtain larger average contact pressure. These findings can provide references for the structural design of the seal area of
the mandrel-type hanger. The sealing test results show that the sealing curve turns to be a straight line under water
pressure and air pressure of 140 MPa. The results of theoretical study and laboratory experiment show that the sealing
structure of full-metal multilevel conical elliptical surface is reliable and can meet the sealing requirements of the oil field
wellhead device under limit working condition of 140 MPa.

Keywords
Ultra-high pressure, hanger, metal seal, finite element, contact pressure

Date received: 4 January 2019; accepted: 3 April 2019

Handling Editor: Yuejian Chen

Introduction
Most of the commonly used hanger sealing systems are
of rubber, which have poor performance in high and
low temperature resistance, corrosion resistance, aging
resistance, and short service life, and cannot meet the
sealing requirements of wellhead under high tempera-
ture and pressure. Failure of wellhead seals will lead to
production reduction and maintenance cost increase of
oil and gas wells and will also cause enormous safety
and environmental problems. According to statistics,
up to 18% of offshore oil and gas wells in the world
have problems in wellhead sealing integrity.1 The eccen-
tricity of casing sting will further result in cumulative
wear failure of casing inevitably.2
The conventional hanger is mainly composed of
metal and rubber sealing structure (as shown in
Figure 1). The annular space between the cross joint
and the mandrel is sealed through squeezing the H-type
rubber and X-type metal sealing rings by the pressure
of upper plug and the suspension load of casing string,
where the downhole casing string is suspended by the
pressure of upper top ring and the lower threading. In
order to avoid the failure of mandrel-type casing
1
State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and
Exploitation, Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu, P.R. China
2
Tarim Oilfield Company, Korla, P.R. China
Corresponding author:
Zhanghua Lian, State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology
and Exploitation, Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu 610500, P.R.
China.
Email: lianzh1964@sina.com

Creative Commons CC BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
(http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without
further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/
open-access-at-sage).
2 Advances in Mechanical Engineering
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of mandrel-type hanger.
hanger, a new type of metal sealing structure is designed to
solve the contact problems in relevant sealing structures.
In recent years, experts and scholars have done a lot
of research on the structure of metal seal. GR
Murtagian and ZQ Gong3,4 studied the empirical func-
tion relation between sealing performance of static
metal-to-metal sealing surface and sealing contact stress
profile by means of physical experiments and numerical
simulation, which can be used to evaluate the sealing
performance of metal-to-metal. The elastic contact is
extended to the elastic-plastic contact, which changes
the ratio of yield stress to elastic modulus and the strain
hardening rate. The relations among contact area, mor-
phology, pressure distribution, and load are discussed,
and the relation between the wide range of surface and
the material properties is revealed.5 The contact
between rough surfaces is assumed to be an elastic-
plastic contact between a plastic micro-convex body
and a fully elastic plane. The distribution of contact
pressure and the size of contact area are calculated.6 By
establishing the contact statistical model between the
micro-convex body with elastic-ideal plasticity and the
rigid plane, the prediction of contact area and contact
force is realized.7 S Wang and Komvopoulos8 and HK
Müller and Nau9 established a theoretical model of gas
leakage rate in metal-to-metal sealing structure based
on laminar flow theory of incompressible viscous fluid,
which provides a theoretical basis for revealing the
nature of gas flow in metal-to-metal seal gap, quantita-
tively evaluating the sealing performance of metal-to-
metal contact and optimizing the sealing structure para-
meters. A Majumdar and Bhushan10,11 found that the
contour of metal sealing surface can be characterized
by Weierstrass-Mandelbrot function in fractal geome-
try, which is continuous, non-differentiable, and self-
affine everywhere.
L Milberger and Radi12,13 proposed a new type of
wellhead device for full-metal sealing of casing hanger
and gave a sealing test method. In addition, this article
will provide a reference for the analysis of sealing pres-
sure test.
The above scholars have done a lot of research on
the structural reliability and stress analysis of the casing
head, which has important reference value for the
structural design of the casing hanger. However, there
are few literatures in view of the sealing failure caused
by the aging of rubber seal or the erosion of corrosive
medium in the wellhead hanger of ultra-deep, high-
temperature and high-pressure gas wells, as well as
the theoretical research on the metal seal of the
mandrel casing hanger; the papers give the correspond-
ing analysis and solution to the leakage and sealing
failure of gas production wellhead and surface
pipeline, and it provides corresponding measures for
safe operation and environmental protection of natural
gas development.14–17
Therefore, this article provides a 280-type sealing
system for mandrel casing hanger and proposes to
change the rubber sealing structure of the existing cas-
ing hanger into a tapered metal sealing structure. The
simulation and experimental study on mechanical
mechanism of metal contact sealing, and the sealing
structure are carried out to provide a reference for full-
metal tapered sealing structure of mandrel hanger.
Structure of mandrel casing hanger
In China, BT seal (rubber sealing ring) or slip seal fail-
ure of casing hanger has occurred more than 30 times
ultra-high-pressure gas wells in Kuche Piedmont,
Tarim, causing huge economic losses and potential
safety hazards to the oil field. Because the rubber seal-
ing ring is used in the existing mandrel hanger device,
aging will occur after long-term use in the harsh envi-
ronment such as high temperature and high pressure in
the well site, resulting in gas leakage from the sealing
Liu et al.
Figure 2. Structure of mandrel and failure of rubber ring on site.
gap, and high-pressure gas flow will enter the annular
space gap from the bottom of the well, causing safety
accidents.
The sealing structure of conventional mandrel
hanger used in the field is subject to perennial compres-
sion load and drastic temperature change, which makes
the rubber parts easy to aging. In the process of sealing
test, the main seal failure often occurs, as shown in
Figure 2. Rubber seals may perform well in a short
time, while plastic deformation and aging will occur
under the harsh environment of a long time, losing the
sealing effect of rubber seals.
Design of sealing structure for mandrel-
type casing hanger
In order to reduce gas leakage accidents and prevent
rubber aging failure, this article introduces the improve-
ment of the existing sealing structure, proposes different
types of curved-surface sealing structure, and then com-
pares the sealing contact pressure and sealing contact
width of four sealing structures, so as to find a more
reasonable curved surface of sealing structure, and car-
ries out processing and field tests. Therefore, the
research and design of sealing structure of 280-type
mandrel-type casing hanger are mainly described below.
It is proposed that the rubber sealing structure of the
existing casing hanger should be changed into a conical
metal sealing structure.
Design for sealing structure system
The three-dimensional solid structure and local enlarge-
ment of the overall structure are shown in Figure 3(a).
The sealing structure is mainly composed of cross joint,
mandrel, pressing ring, butterfly spring, and seal ring.
Figure 3(b) is a schematic diagram of the structural
dimensions of the sealing cone, which is composed of
the upper seal and the lower seal. Based on the metal
seal of ocean flange and the sealing form of spherical
3
and conical surface in special-thread sealing structure
of fastener,18,19 and investigation of static and dynamic
seal performances of a rubber ring and the sealing form
of spherical surface,20 four sealing structures of linear,
sinusoidal, elliptical, and parabolic surface of mandrel
casing hanger are designed and analyzed in this article.
The geometric parametric equations of sinusoidal, ellip-
tic, and parabolic curves equation are shown in formu-
las (1)–(3)
p
Sinusoidal curve equation : y = a sin x ð1Þ
b
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
(x  b)2
Elliptic curve equation : y = a 1  ð2Þ
b
 
a b 2
Parabolic curve equation : y = 4 2 3 x  +a
b 2
ð3Þ
The key parameters a and b of the above formulas
are shown in Figure 3(b). The main dimensions of the
sealing cone are a, the curve amplitude; b, the curve
width; c, the distance; and d, the groove depth at the
root of the curve. Through finite element analysis and
research, it can be seen that the wider of the sealing sur-
face is, the smaller the contact pressure is, and vice
versa. The structural dimensions of the contact surface
of the linear sealing cone can be adjusted and opti-
mized to ensure adequate sealing pressure.
For curved-surface seals, the structural dimensions
are a = 2 mm and b = 25 mm. The contact curve shape
and contact area are shown in Figure 4. When a and b
are the same, the elliptic contact area is the largest, fol-
lowed by the parabola, and the sinusoidal contact area
is the smallest. Therefore, to obtain the widest contact
area, the elliptic curve is the optimal. If the maximum
contact pressure is considered, the opposite is true.
Comparing these three kinds of sealing curves, the sinu-
soidal curve structure can be used if the contact pres-
sure is the greatest, and the elliptic curve structure can
4 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Figure 3. (a) Structure of mandrel-type hanger and (b) dimensions of sealing cone.

Figure 4. Shapes of different contact curves and contact areas.

be used if the contact width and pressure of the sealing Which act over the region bounded by the ellipse
surface are larger.
r 2 = ðe  x Þ2  ð h  y Þ2 + z2 ð5Þ

Pressure applied to an elliptical region The classical approach, using the potential function
of Boussinesq, is usually followed. Thus, by equation
Two non-confirming bodies loaded together make con-
(6)
tact over an area which is elliptical in shape, so that the
stresses and deformation due to pressure and traction ðð
∂H ∂c
on an elliptical region are of practical importance.21 We c= = 1= p(j, h)r1 djdh ð6Þ
∂z ∂z
are led to consider pressure distributions of the form s

 ðð  x 2  y 2  n
 x2  y2 n
c(x, y) = 1  r1 djdh ð7Þ
p(x, y) = p0 1   ð4Þ a b
a b s

where p is the contact pressure of sealing surface, MPa; where r = (e  x)2  (h  y)2 + z2 . The normal dis-
2

p0 is the load collection degree, MPa; a is the elliptical placement of the surface is then given by equation (8),
long axis, mm; b is the elliptical short axis, mm. viz
Liu et al. 5

 
1  n ∂c1 1n pP0 ab
uz =
 = (c)z = 0 ð8Þ N=
2pG ∂z z = 0 2pG 2
ð‘
1n dw pP0 ab
ux (x, y) = ð c Þz = 0 ð9Þ = fK(e)  E(e)g
2pG fða2 + wÞðb2 + wÞwg 1=2 e2 a2
0

where  uz is the normal displacement of sealing surface,

and
mm;  ux is the tangential displacement of sealing surface,
mm; n is Poisson’s ratio; G is the Shear modulus, MPa. ð‘
It then follows from potential theory that for a gen- pP0 ab dw
L= = pP0 abK(e)
eral point in the solid 2 fða + wÞðb2 + wÞwg1=2
2
0
iX
=m
p(x, y) = p0 (ab)m C 0 i x2i y2(m1) The total load acting on the ellipse is given by
i=1
 ð10Þ 2pabp0
 x 2 y2 1=2 P=
1  3
a b
The epileptic integrals F(f, e) and E(f, e) are tabu-
Hertz pressure (n = 1/2). lated. With in the surface of contact, along the x-axis
In this important case, the pressure is
sx b
 x2 y2 1=2 = 2ng  (1  2n) 2
p0 ae
p = p0 1   ð11Þ     ð15Þ
a b bg x 1 ex
1  2 th
a ae a + bg
Thus
sy b
1 = 2ng  ð1  2nÞ 2
c(x, y, z) = pabp0 p0 ae
2     ð16Þ
ð‘   ag x ex
2
x y z 2 2
dw  1  2 th1
1   3 b ae a + bg
a2 + w b2 + w w f(a2 + w)(b2 + w)wg1=2
l1
and along the y-axis
ð12Þ
sx b
and on the surface, within the loaded region = 2ng  ð1  2nÞ 2
p0 ae
    ð17Þ
1 bg y aey
c(x, y, 0) = pabp0 1  tg1
2 a ae b(a + bg)
ð‘  2

x y2 dw sx b
1 2  3 = 2ng  ð1  2nÞ 2
a + w b2 + w f(a + w)(b2 + w)wg1=2
2 p0 ae
0     ð18Þ
ag y aey
ð13Þ  1 + tg1
b ae b(a + bg)
where w is the contact width of sealing surface, mm.
where g = f1  (x=a)2  (y=b)2 g1=2 , e is the elliptical
The surface displacement within the loaded region
centrifugation, mm.
may then be written as
At the center (x = y = 0)
1  n2 sx b
ux =
 L  Mx2  Ny2 ð14Þ = 2n  ð1  2nÞ ð19Þ
pE p0 a+b
where E is the modulus of elasticity (MPa) sy b
= 2n  ð1  2nÞ ð20Þ
pP0 ab p0 a+b
M=
2 where sx , sy is the contact stress component of sealing
ð‘  
dw pP0 ab a2 surface, MPa.
= 2 2 K(e)  E(e) Outside the loaded ellipse, the surface stresses are
fða2 + wÞðb2 + wÞwg1=2 e a b2
0 equal and opposite, that is, there is a state of pure shear
6 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Figure 5. Sealing structure diagram of elliptical to conical surface: (a) initial contact and (b) final contact.

sx sy b 2. Cross joint (or mandrel) and seal ring are small

= = ð1  2nÞ 2
p0 p0 ae ð21Þ strain deformation;
n x 1 ex y aeyo
1  th  tan1 2 3. Cross joint (or mandrel) and sealing ring struc-
ae a ae b tures are considered as elastic half-space bodies;
4. Ignore friction between cross joint (or mandrel)
and and sealing ring contact surface.
b n y 1 ex x  o
1 aey
t xy = ð1  2nÞ th  tan Assuming the radius of the ellipse is Rs , so when the
ae2 ae a ae b2
ð22Þ initial contact occurs, the directional clearance between
the ellipse surface and the cone surface is
where t xy is tangential of stress sealing face, MPa.
1 2
h(x) = x ð23Þ
2Rs
Contact stress of conical and elliptic seals
where h is the normal clearance of the initial contact
The sealing structure of elliptical to conical surface has between the elliptic and conical surfaces, mm; Rs is
non-conforming contact mechanics. When the pressing elliptical radius, mm.
ring excites the upper seal ring, the elliptical and coni- After normal interference contact, the cross joint (or
cal surfaces of the seal ring first contact with the cir- mandrel) and the seal ring squeeze each other to pro-
cumferential line (with the initial contact point) as the duce normal contact pressure, which makes the contact
radius. With the further injection of high-pressure gas, surface of the cross joint (or mandrel) and sealing ring
the elliptical and conical surfaces will generate normal displace along oy, the size of which is uyp (x), uyc (x).
interference, the normal extrusion contact force. When From the displacement coordination relation
injecting high-pressure gas, the contact surface can
reach a certain contact seal width, thus realizing the 1 2
uyp (x) + uyc (x) = dsN  x ð24Þ
seal performance.19,21 2Rs
In order to obtain the normal contact stress, the con-
tact sealing surface is cut through the cross section of where uyp (x) is the normal displacement of elliptic sur-
the cross joint (or mandrel) and the seal ring axis. Then, face along contact point, mm; uyc (x) is the normal dis-
the sealing structure of elliptic to conical surface can be placement of cone surface along contact point, mm; dsN
simplified as a two-dimensional contact mechanics is the normal interference, mm.
problem between the cylinder and the plane, as shown The derivation of equation (24) is obtained as
in Figure 5. Solving normal contact stress psN according follows
to contact mechanics theory, tangential friction has lit-
∂uyp (x) uyc (x) 1
tle effect on contact force, so we can ignore tangential + = x ð25Þ
friction and assume that contact meets Hertz contact ∂x ∂x Rs
condition,21 namely:
When the tangential friction force is ignored, the
contact mechanics theory shows that
1. Cross joint (or mandrel) and sealing face of seal-
ing ring are continuous and uncoordinated;
Liu et al. 7

8 ða
>
> ∂uyp (x) 2(1  n2p ) psN (s)
>
> = ds
>
> pEP xs
< ∂x
a
ð26Þ
>
> ða
>
> ∂uyc (x) 2(1  n2c ) psN (s)
>
> = ds
: ∂x pEc xs
a

Substitute formula (26) into formula (25)

ða
psN (s) pE
ds = x ð27Þ
xs 2Rs
a

where E is the equivalent modulus of elasticity of cross

joint (or mandrel) and sealing face of sealing ring, MPa

1 1  np 2 1  nc 2
= + ð28Þ
E Ep Ec

Formula (28) is a singular integral equation of the

first kind concerning psN (s), whose general solution is

ðw pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 w2s  s2 pE pt
psN (x) = pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi sds + pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
p2 w2s  x2 x  s 2Rs p w2s  x2
w

ð29Þ

where ws is contact width of sealing surface; pt is the

total normal load on contact surface.
The total load pt on the contact surface is determined
by the following formula Figure 6. (a) Mechanical model of seal system and (b) grid
division of sealing system.
ðw
pt = psN (x)dx ð30Þ
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
w E2 2Rs dsN  d2sN  4x2
psN ð xÞ = ð33Þ
where pt is the normal load of elliptical surface to coni- 8Rs Eð1  n2 Þ
cal surface
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
E Finite element analysis of sealing
psN (x) = w2s  x2 ð31Þ
2Rs structure of mandrel hanger
According to the theory of contact mechanics, the Establishment of finite element model
relation between the contact width ws on the sealing
surface and the normal interference can be approxi- The sealing structure of mandrel hanger mainly con-
mately satisfied sists of three parts: mandrel, sealing cone, and cross
joint. For the sealing structure of mandrel hanger, its
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi geometric structure and load are axisymmetric. Based
2Rs dsN  d2sN  4x2 on elasticity and finite element theory, the stress prob-
ws = ð32Þ
2 lem of mandrel hanger sealing system can be simplified
to axisymmetric finite element model. The finite ele-
Taking formulas (28) and (32) into formula (31),
ment model and grid division are shown in Figure 6.
considering that the elastic modulus and Poisson’s ratio
The dimensions of mandrel hanger are shown in
of cross joint (or mandrel) and the sealing ring vary lit-
Figure 6(a), where conical seal of cross joint and seal-
tle, it can be approximated that Ep = Ec = E,
ing conical surface (linear, sinusoidal, elliptical, and
np = nc = n; then the normal contact stress of the
parabolic) are marked. The grid division of the man-
elliptic-face conical seal is obtained
drel, cross joint, and its different sealing cones is shown
8 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Table 1. Basic structural parameters of sealing cone.

BB (mm) H (mm) b1 (mm) b2 (mm) a (mm) b (mm) c (mm) a (°) b (°)

36 90 20 15 2 25 20 3 9

Figure 7. Contour of contact pressure of sealing cone: (a) liner, (b) sine, (c) ellipse, and (d) parabola.

Table 2. Yield strength of three metal materials.
Name Steel grade Material
Sealing cone 316L 022Cr17Ni12Mo2
Mandrel 718 3Cr2NiMo
Cross joint 4130 30CrMo
in Figure 6(b). The sealing contact area has denser grid
division to improve the accuracy of calculation.
Various parameters include outer conical angle of
seal (a), inner conical angle of seal (b), upper seal width
(b1), lower seal width (b2), the seal spacing of upper
and lower (c), the maximum width of sealing cone (BB),
the height of sealing cone at different positions (H and
h1), and long and short half axles of sealing conical sur-
face (b and a, respectively). The data of the initial struc-
tural parameters are shown in Table 1. The structural
parameters of the sealing cone are optimized and ana-
lyzed in a finite space based on these parameters.
According to formulas (1)–(3), the annular space
structure size between the mandrel and the cross joint
is calculated as shown in Table 1. In this article, the
sealing system of mandrel hanger is mainly composed
of mandrel (718), sealing cone (316L) and cross joint
(4130). The elastic modulus and Poisson’s ratio of the
three parts are 2.1E5 MPa and 0.3; the yield strength of
the three materials is shown in Table 2. The mandrel
and cross joint are of high-strength alloy steel, and the
Yield sealing ring is of soft metal. Its sealing principle is rea-
strength lized through plastic flow of soft metal and elastic
(MPa) deformation of matrix.
310
965
655 Finite element analysis of sealing structure
According to the finite element model of the full-metal
sealing system established in this article, five contact
seals located in Pc1, Pc2, Pc3, Pc4, and PC5 are shown
in Figure 6(a), respectively. Fixed displacement con-
straints are imposed on A1B1 at the lower end of the
cross joint connection. P1 is the casing hanger applied
to E at the lower end of the mandrel, and P2 is the
pressing ring applied to CD surface at the upper end of
the sealing cone. In the model, the inner cone angle, a,
is 9° and the outer cone angle, b, is 3°. In the process
of simulating the loading process of actual working
conditions in the field, the maximum casing hanger
weight P1 = 400t is applied to E of the mandrel.
Relation between contact pressure and path of seal cone
surface. When the exciting pressure P2 applied on the
sealing cone is 10t according to Figure 6(a), the maxi-
mum contact pressure of the linear cone, sinusoidal
surface, elliptic surface, and parabolic surface is 150.5,
429, 307.3, and 389.4 MPa, respectively, through finite
element simulation calculation, as shown in Figure 7.
Liu et al. 9

Figure 8. Relation curves between contact pressure and path of different seal cones: (a) liner, (b) sine, (c) ellipse, and (d) parabola.

Table 4. Average contact width of contact sealing surface

Table 3. Average contact pressure of contact sealing surface
(mm).
(MPa).
Sealing surfaces Pc2 Pc3 Pc4 Pc5
Sealing surfaces Pc2 Pc3 Pc4 Pc5
Linear 8.93 8.93 8.99 8.33
Linear 35.81 20.45 33.04 20.49
Sine 0.98 0.79 0.79 0.98
Sine 250.16 229.71 267.61 174.42 Ellipse 1.29 1.11 1.21 1.09
Ellipse 223.59 197.68 215.94 186.83 Parabola 0.98 0.98 0.79 0.79
Parabola 249.45 191.68 268.13 210.56

Table 5. Average contact energy of contact sealing surface

The relation curves between contact pressure and (MPa.mm).
paths of different seal cones are shown in Figure 8(a)–
(d). It is found from the figures that the four kinds of Sealing surfaces Pc2 Pc3 Pc4 Pc5
contact seals have the same curve amplitude; the con-
Linear 319.78 182.62 297.03 170.68
tact area of the linear surface is larger than that of the Sine 245.16 181.47 211.41 170.93
non-linear surface, which results in a contact pressure Ellipse 288.43 219.42 261.29 203.64
of the linear contact surface less than that of the other Parabola 244.46 187.85 211.82 166.34
three kinds of curved contact surfaces.
The contact pressure on the four surfaces of the lin-
ear sealing cone is U-shaped, that is to say, the contact
1. In terms of contact pressure, the parabola sur-
pressure in the middle of the four cones is smaller,
face is the maximum, followed by elliptic and
while the contact pressure at the two ends of the con-
sine, as shown in Table 3.
tact surface is larger. For the contact pressure of the
2. In terms of contact width, the elliptic surface is
other three kinds of sealing cones (ellipse, parabola,
the widest, followed by parabola and sine, as
and sine), it can be seen that the contact seal widths
shown in Table 4.
are ellipse, followed by parabola and sine under the
3. In terms of contact energy, the elliptical surface
same conditions. The contact pressure on the inner
is the best, as shown in Table 5.
cone surfaces (Pc2, Pc3) is larger than that on the cor-
responding outer cone, so the inner and outer cones
Among the four sealing structures in this article, the
can be adjusted to ensure the sealing performance. If
elliptic surface is the optimal.
the maximum contact pressure and width are consid-
ered, the sinusoidal curve structure can be used; if the
maximum contact pressure and the width of the con- Analysis of cone angle and contact pressure. It was found
tact surface are considered, the elliptic surface struc- that the inner cone angle and the outer cone angle were
ture can be used. very sensitive to the contact pressure in the previous
Tables 3–5 are the calculation results of average con- finite element model calculations. Therefore, when the
tact pressure, average contact width, and average con- outer cone angle a is 3°, the inner cone angle decreases
tact energy on four contact sealing surface paths Pc2, gradually. The relation between the average contact
Pc3, Pc4, and PC5 in Figure 8, respectively. The contact pressure and the average contact width at different
energy is equal to the product of contact pressure and inner cone angles with the pressure of pressing ring is
contact width. From Tables 3–5, the following conclu- obtained. It can be seen from Figure 9 that the average
sions can be drawn: contact pressure and the average contact width on the
10
Figure 9. Variation of contact pressure and width with the inner cone angle and P2.
sealing contact surface increase with the increase of the
pressure of pressing ring, as shown in Figure 9. When
the outer cone angle a is 3°, the average contact pres-
sure and the average contact width increase with the
decrease of the inner cone angle. Therefore, in order to
obtain a larger contact pressure, a smaller inner cone
angle should be designed as far as possible to improve
the sealing ability.
Based on a large number of finite element simulation
calculations and analysis, it is suggested to design
smaller equal cone angle of inner cone angle (b) and
outer cone angle (a) in the limited space as far as possi-
ble in order to obtain larger average contact pressure in
the limited annular space of cross joint and mandrel.
Therefore, a full-metal sealing ring with equal conical
angle (a = b = 3°) is proposed as the final optimiza-
tion scheme.
Design of sealing structure of elliptical
surface
Four kinds of sealing structures are calculated by the
finite element method in section ‘‘Finite element analy-
sis of sealing structure of mandrel hanger.’’ The results
show that the elliptical metal seal has the best perfor-
mance. Then, the elliptical sealing structure is selected
for trial manufacture. The sealing performance of the
elliptical sealing structure is experimentally studied to
verify the advantages of the elliptical sealing structure
designed in this article. As shown in Figure 10, the seal-
ing parts of the mandrel hanger are mainly composed
of double U-shaped elliptic metal sealing ring (referred
to as double U), single U-shaped elliptic metal sealing
ring (referred to as single U), mandrel, and cross joint.
The sealing mechanism of this structure is that the ellip-
tical metal seal ring is pressed tight to the contact sur-
face by the suspension load and the pressure to the
inlet, so that the two elliptical surfaces of the elliptical
Advances in Mechanical Engineering
metal seal ring are in interference fit with contact sur-
faces of the mandrel and the cross joint, thus realizing
the function of metal seal.
Given that hydraulic cylinder diameter D = 350 mm
and piston diameter d = 200 mm, P is the hydraulic
pressure, MPa. The hydraulic pressure corresponding
to tension F of pull rod can be obtained from the fol-
lowing formula (34)
p 2
F= D  d2  P ð34Þ
4
By substituting the data, the hydraulic pressure of
62 MPa is obtained, corresponding to the pull rod
force of 4015293.6 N, that is, 401.53 ton of downward
pull force. During the sealing test, 62 MPa was loaded
on the hydraulic cylinder, that is to say, 401 ton of
tension were applied to the lower part of the hanger,
and the pressure was pumped from the test port
shown in Figure 10. Pumping pressure of double U
and single U through pressure test port is shown in
Figure 11.
Experimental study on elliptical metal seal
ring
Hydraulic sealing test
After assembling the mandrel and the upper and lower
metal sealing rings according to Figure 12, inject the
pressure oil of about 62 MPa into the flow passage of
the hydraulic cylinder, and then the pressure test pump
is opened. Metal seals can be tested by injecting water
pressure into test ports of double U and single U,
respectively. The measurement range of pressure test
pump and its pressure gauge is 0–250 MPa. The pres-
sure gauge on the pressure test pump should have the
accuracy of 0.5%. The measured pressure ranges from
25% to 75% of the gauge range.
Liu et al.
Figure 10. Schematic diagram of mandrel hanger assembly and metal seal ring.
Figure 11. Sealing test process diagram of double U and single U.
The test results of Figures 13 and 14 show that the
sealing requirements can be met by applying a staged
pressure up to 140 MPa for both double U and single
U sealing rings. For double U, the pressure is injected
from annulus space A with a pressure stabilization of
30 min; for single U, the pressure is injected from its
top with a pressure stabilization of 60 min. Both sealing
rings have no leaks occurred. The results show that the
performance of metal seals under ultra-high water pres-
sure is stable.
11
Pneumatic sealing test
First, a pressure cycling test of 140 MPa is carried out in
the annulus space formed by double U and steel ring,
pressing ring, and upper cross joint. The test pressure is
not less than 140 MPa, and the holding time after each
pressure stabilization should not be less than 15 min.
The test medium is nitrogen. The pressure drop less than
3.45 MPa during the voltage stabilization period is
deemed as qualified. After each test, the pressure should
be released to 0, the rebound should not be less than
12
Figure 12. Sealing test device and pressure gauge.
Figure 13. Test curve of double U under hydraulic pressure.
140 MPa, the pressure should be stabilized for 15 min,
and the pressure drop should not exceed 2.5 MPa. The
test should be terminated in case of leakage. Repeat
these steps 20 times. The pressure test is recorded and 20
test curves are obtained. The pressure test process curve
as shown in Figure 15 is selected. It is observed that the
sealing curve approximately turns to be a straight line,
indicating that the double U sealing ring performs well.
Then, loosen the plug, make the double U sealing
ring in the state of loosening, and apply pressure to the
Advances in Mechanical Engineering
second pressure test hole. The single U and the annulus
space formed by the steel ring, pressing ring, and upper
cross joint annulus space are tested by a pressure
cycling test of 140 MPa for five times. A 62 MPa pres-
sure is applied by a liquid cylinder in the same way.
After pressure stabilization, the holding time should
not be less than 15 min. Figure 16 is a pressure test pro-
cess for five times. The sealing curve approximately
turns to be a straight line, indicating that the single U
seal ring performs well.
Liu et al.
Figure 14. Test curve of single U under hydraulic pressure.
Figure 15. Test curve of double U under nitrogen pressure.
Test analysis and comparison
Through the inspection of the outer and inner sealing
surfaces of double U, it is found that the indentation
width at the upper side of the outer sealing surface is
5 mm, the indentation width at the lower side of outer
sealing surface is 11 mm, the indentation width at the
upper side of inner sealing surface is 6 mm, and the
indentation width at the lower side of inner sealing sur-
face is 9.5 mm, as shown in Figure 17.
13
The outer indentation width of the single U sealing
ring is 14 mm and the inner indentation width is 15 mm,
indicating that the inner and outer sealing surfaces have
sufficient contact width for high-pressure gas seal of
140 MPa, as shown in Figure 18.
Under this working condition, the contact pressure
contour of both double U seal ring and single U seal
ring is obtained by finite element calculation (Figure
19). As shown in Figure 18, the maximum contact
14 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Figure 16. Test curve of single U under nitrogen pressure.

Figure 17. Contact width inspection of double U.

pressure is 590 and 718 MPa, respectively. The pressure
is much higher than the given gas pressure of 140 MPa,
and it is favorable to enhance the reliability of seals.
Based on the measurement of seal width after pressure
test and the calculation results of finite element method,
the comparison is made, as shown in Table 6.
The test results show that the upper and lower width
of the double U seal is 5–6 and 9.5–11 mm, respectively,
and that of the single U seal is 14–14.5 mm. The aver-
age contact pressure of all sealing surfaces calculated
by finite element method is 350–445 MPa, which is
2.5–3.18 times that of 140 MPa. The sealing structure is
reliable and innovative and has been certified by a
third-party type identification test.
Conclusion
1. The water pressure and air pressure tests of the
elliptical metal seal ring show that the upper and
lower sealing structures meet the sealing
Liu et al. 15

Figure 18. Contact width inspection of single U.

Figure 19. Contour of contact pressure of double U and single U.

Table 6. Measurement results of sealing width after pressure test.

Sealing positions Outer seal Inner seal Average contact Safety factor,
width (mm) width (mm) pressure, Pc (MPa) ns = Pc/140

Double U Upper 5.0 6.0 445 3.18

Lower 11.0 9.5 375 2.68
Single U / 14.0 14.5 350 2.5

requirements under the pressure of 140 MPa, so
they can be used under ultra-high pressure.
2. Through the finite element analysis of the con-
tact width and sealing contact energy, it is con-
cluded that the elliptic surface is the optimal
sealing structure, and the sealing performance
of the structure is the optimal under the limit
load.
3. It is concluded that the inner and outer cone
angles are designed as equal cone angles of 3° in
the ring space with the limit of cross joint and
16
mandrel, which has the best sealing
performance.
4. Seal width of surface contact relative to line con-
tact increases, which is helpful to reduce the con-
tact stress and avoid premature creep failure of
metal seals.
5. The water pressure and air pressure tests of the
elliptical metal seal ring show that the upper and
lower sealing structures meet the sealing require-
ments under the pressure of 140 MPa, so they
can be used under ultra-high pressure.
Acknowledgements
Thanks for the efforts of the leaders and technicians of
Chongqing Xintai Machinery Co., Ltd. in China, and they
worked hard for the precision processing of single U and dou-
ble U seals. The experimental devices and instruments
involved in this article are provided by Chongqing Xintai
Machinery Co., Ltd. Thanks for your great help in the
smooth writing of our paper.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial sup-
port for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article: The authors are grateful to financial support from
National Natural Science Foundation of China (nos
51574198 and 51504207). Thanks for the support of project
funds from the leadership of Tarim Oilfield Company of
China National Petroleum Corporation.
ORCID iD
Yang Liu https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0623-9525
References
1. Guo JH. Reseach and application on HTHP sour gas well
integrity. Chengdu, China: Southwest Petroleum Univer-
sity, 2013.
2. Yu H, Taleghani AD and Lian Z. Modelling casing wear
at doglegs by incorporating alternate accumulative wear.
J Petrol Sci Eng 2018; 168: 273–282.
3. Murtagian GR, Fanelli V, Villasante JA, et al. Sealability
of stationary metal-to metal seal. J Tribol 2004; 126:
591–596.
4. Gong ZQ and Komvopoulos K. Effect of surface pat-
terning on contact deformation of elastic-plastic layered
media. J Tribol 2003; 125: 16–25.
Advances in Mechanical Engineering
5. Hyun S, Pei L, Molinari JF, et al. Finite-element analysis
of contact between elastic self-affine surfaces. Phys Rev E
2004; 70: 188–206.
6. Abdo J and Farhang K. Elastic-plastic contact model for
rough surfaces based on plastic asperity concept. Int J
Nonlin Mech 2005; 40: 495–506.
7. Jackson RL and Green I. Astatistical model of elasto-
plastic asperity contact between rough surfaces. Tribol
Int 2006; 39: 906–914.
8. Wang S and Komvopoulos K. A fractal theory of the
interfacial temperature distribution in the slow sliding
regime: part I—elastic contact and heat transfer analysis.
J Tribol 1994; 116: 812–822.
9. Müller HK and Nau BS. Fluid sealing technology: prin-
ciples and applications. New York: Marcel Dekker,
1998.
10. Majumdar A and Bhushan B. Role of fractal geometry in
roughness characterization and contact mechanics of sur-
faces. J Tribol 1990; 112: 205–216.
11. Majumdar A and Bhushan B. Fractal model of elastic-
plastic contact between rough surfaces. J Tribol 1991;
113: 1–11.
12. Milberger L and Radi A. Evolution of metal seal princi-
ples and their application in subsea drilling and produc-
tion. J Cryst Growth 1992; 100: 68–74.
13. Carpenter C. Next-generation HP/HT subsea-wellhead-
system-design challenges and opportunities. J Petrol
Technol 2016; 68: 73–74.
14. Zhang J, Zhang L and Liang Z. Buckling failure of a bur-
ied pipeline subjected to ground explosions. Process Safe
Environ Protect 2018; 114: 36–47.
15. Yu H, Taleghani AD and Lian Z. Impact of the dogleg
geometry on displacement efficiency during cementing;
an integrated modelling approach. J Petrol Sci Eng 2019;
173: 588–600.
16. Zhang J, Xiao Y and Liang Z. Mechanical behaviors and
failure mechanisms of buried polyethylene pipes crossing
active strike-slip faults. Comp Part B: Eng 2018; 154:
449–466.
17. Zhang J, Xie R and Zhang H. Mechanical response anal-
ysis of the buried pipeline due to adjacent foundation pit
excavation. Tunnel Undergr Space Technol 2018; 78:
135–145.
18. Han Y, Li G-H and Yuan L-F. Application of taper-lok
flanges on subsea pipelines. Oil Field Equip 2008; 37:
88–89.
19. Xu H, Shi T, Zhang Z, et al. Loading and contact stress
analysis on the thread teeth in tubing and casing premium
threaded connection. Math Prob Eng 2014; 2014: 287076.
20. Zhang J and Xie J. Investigation of static and dynamic
seal performances of a rubber O-ring. J Tribol 2018; 140:
042202.
21. Johnson KL. Contact mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2003, pp.63–68.