Spe 77255

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

108 Aufrufe

Spe 77255

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

- Drilling Assembly Handbook 2011.pdf
- New Drill Pipe Design
- Drill Stem Inspector Training Program
- Drill String Failure
- En 13445-3 Design Rules
- 6. Drill String Design_2
- Drill String Standards.
- Drilling Assembly Handbook
- m.tech 09 Ams Syllabus
- Drilling String Inspection
- Rp-c102_2002-02 Structural Design of Offshore Ships
- rp-c102_2002-02
- SeaTrust HullScan UserGuide Consolidated Rev01
- The Effect of Hole Shape on Fatigue Life
- Assessment of Existing Steel Structures
- EN13445-Tempo de Vida Reservatórios
- Background to Design Rules_Issue 2 (3)
- Corrosion-fatigue a Review of Damage Tolerance Models
- c6meetingattachment2
- Hull-Girder Fatigue Strength.pdf

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 8

Tom Hill, P.E., SPE, Sean Ellis, SPE, Kang Lee, PhD, SPE, Nicholas Reynolds, SPE, Nanjiu Zheng, PhD, T H Hill

Associates, Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference held in Dallas,

Texas, U.S.A., 24 March 2004.

This paper was selected for presentation by an IADC/SPE Program Committee following

review of information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the

paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the International Association of Drilling

Contractors or 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 International

Association of Drilling Contractors or Society of Petroleum Engineers, their officers, or

members. Papers presented at IADC/SPE meetings are subject to publication review by

Editorial Committees of the International Association of Drilling Contractors and Society of

Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper

for commercial purposes without the written consent of the International Association of Drilling

Contractors and Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print

is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The

proposal 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

Fatigue and corrosion fatigue account for the majority of drill

string failures.1,2 The complexity of fatigue and the drill string

designers inability to account for a great many factors

affecting the mechanism make it impractical or impossible to

accurately predict a components fatigue life in cycles to

failure. This paper describes the comparative design approach.

This new approach normalizes many factors affecting fatigue

that are generally unknown to the designer, allowing him or

her to quantitatively compare the fatigue performance of

available alternatives on the basis of what he or she does

know. The method has already proven effective in field use.

Drill string design

In designing a drill string, the designer rarely decides the

attributes of a particular component. Instead, he or she forms

a string by screwing together up to several hundred off-theground items. In this activity, the designer will try to choose

components that balance a number of often-conflicting needs,

including loads, hydraulics, hole cleaning, rate of penetration,

steering, measurement and perhaps most critical, structural

soundness of the drill string itself. In maintaining structural

soundness, the designer faces two separate design challenges.

First, preventing overload failure and second, preventing

fatigue failure. The market for drill string components is

mainly a rental market, in which a single component will be

used and reused a number of times by a number of designers.

Furthermore, it is a market for which components are

specified and purchased primarily for strength under high,

relatively static loads. Resistance to overload failure, not

resistance to fatigue, is the principal focus of standards and

specifications covering drill stem components. Because of

these two factors, the designer is often left in the dark on

design. This is best illustrated by looking at the fatigue

mechanism and at the approaches available to the designer for

controlling it.

Two phases of fatigue

The fatigue life of a component can be divided into two

phases: Crack initiation and crack propagation. The initiation

phase begins when the component first goes into service in

some cyclic stress environment, like rotary drilling. It ends

when a fatigue crack has formed of sufficient size so that

further crack growth is relatively independent of component

geometry and surface finish. The propagation phase is the

service period that follows, during which the crack, unless

detected by inspection, grows until the component fails by

leak, brittle fracture or gross plastic deformation. The relative

duration of the two phases can vary widely depending on the

circumstances of service. Surface finish is very important at

low stress amplitudes, and under these conditions, the majority

of a components fatigue life is spent in crack initiation.3

Fatigue damage is cumulative from one job to the next, but no

economic means are available to determine the extent of

fatigue damage until a crack has formed and grown large

enough to be found by inspection. So when a designer picks

up a component, it will likely have accumulated some prior

damage, the extent of which he or she has no way of knowing.

The problems: Complexity and lack of

specific knowledge

Several approaches to mitigate fatigue have been available for

years, and many attempts have been made to apply them to

drill strings. None of these attempts has yet achieved any

widespread success. These approaches can be grouped into

two broad categories: Those that cover the entire life of a

component, and those that apply only to the crack

propagation phase.

Stress or strain amplitude vs. fatigue life: These two

views can be illustrated by S-N curves, an example of which

is shown in figure 1. The stress or strain amplitude on the yaxis refers to the point of greatest stress or strain amplitude on

the component, not the bulk stress over the entire load-bearing

area. The x-axis represents total fatigue life. This view of

fatigue has the advantage of applying to both initiation and

propagation phases, but has a major disadvantage in that,

during the crack initiation phase, point stress is very sensitive

to component geometry and surface condition. (This is why

laboratory S-N fatigue tests are routinely done with polished

IADC/SPE 87188

(

(FROM) REFERENCE 4)

110

Past life and accumulated fatigue are largely irrelevant as well,

since a components life can be restarted by inspecting it. The

disadvantage of this view is that no account can be made of

component behavior in the crack initiation phase.

Either of two equations may be used to predict crack

growth: The Paris equation, documented in reference 8 and

shown as equation 1 below, or the Forman equation, from

reference 9 and shown in equation 2. We consider the Forman

equation superior for use as a design tool, as it takes into

account the ratio of minimum stress to maximum stress (R).

LOG CRACK GROWTH RATE (da/dN) (in/cycle)

concentrators that are built into drill string components, like

internal upsets on drill pipe and thread roots on BHA

connections, and the hundreds of superficial cuts, notches and

pits that will accumulate during service, make the

determination of maximum point stress or strain essentially

impossible for the designer. Without this knowledge, there is

no way for him or her to enter the plot and determine expected

fatigue life. Another major disadvantage of this approach is

its sensitivity to environmental corrosiveness, particularly at

low stress/strain amplitudes. This is also illustrated in figure

1, which shows the S-N performance of identical steel test

specimens in benign and corrosive environments.4 Not only

does a corrosive mud create more stress concentrators

(corrosion pits), but also accelerates crack growth and

precludes the designers use of fatigue endurance limit as a

design tool.5 A final disadvantage of the S-N approach is that

the designer has no way of knowing the extent of accumulated

fatigue when a rental component is picked up. In spite of its

disadvantages however, the strain vs. cycle life approach can

be very useful for comparing crack initiation behavior in

components of different but known geometries, as discussed

further below and in reference 6.

10

REGION 2

Stable Growth Region

(Forman or Paris equations)

10

-5

REGION 1

(NEGLIGIBLE

REGION 3

(RAPID,

GROWTH)

10

UNSTABLE

GROWTH)

-6

CRACK

GROWTH RATE

10

100

-4

-7

SPECIMENS IN AIR

90

80

OPERATING POINT

70

60

10

SPECIMENS IN

SEAWATER

-8

LOG STRESS INTENSITY RANGE (K)

K IC

50

40

30

20

10,000

100,000

1,000,000

10,000,000

CYCLES TO FAILURE

da

= CK n

dN

general approach to fatigue design is illustrated by figure 2.

With this approach, the designer can negate many of the

disadvantages of the S-N approach by assuming that a crack

just too small to have been found during inspection is already

present in every component. When a component goes into the

designers well, the growth per cycle of every hypothetical

crack can be estimated based on the severity and duration of

service that the component is experiencing in the hole. When

any hypothetical crack has (hypothetically) grown enough to

present a problem, the component can be taken out of service

and inspected. Thus, any real crack that had indeed been

present initially will be found before it causes a problem. If

no crack is found, then none existed initially, and the

component is placed back into service with a re-zeroed

hypothetical crack. The use of this approach on drill strings

was first suggested by Dale.7 Advantages of this view of

fatigue are that component geometry and surface finish are

much less relevant, since a crack has already formed (at least

hypothetically). Thus, stress concentrators like slip cuts and

da

C K n

=

dN (1 R)K IC K

Where:

da/dN

K

KIC

R

C

n

=

=

=

=

=

=

Stress intensity factor range ( ksi in )

Critical stress intensity factor ( ksi in )

Stress ratio

Crack growth equation coefficient

Crack growth equation exponent

used with success in many fields, most conspicuously

aerospace. But a requisite is that material must be thoroughly

(and expensively) tested to establish values for material

constants C, n, and KIC, inputs to the above equations. Also,

the cost of a failure must be great enough to justify

extraordinary efforts to ensure that production material

consistently duplicates tested material for these properties.

IADC/SPE 87188

Failure costs for drill strings, while high in dollar terms, do not

approach failure costs in applications that involve risk to

humans. Thus, values for the material constants C, n, and KIC,

which our designer needs to accurately estimate crack growth,

do not exist for the vast majority of material thats already in

the market and available for him or her to use. Neither do the

economics of the rental drill string market justify the huge

expenditure it would take to control these properties for newly

manufactured material as it enters the market.

Comparative Design or Other things equal

Because of the issues discussed above, making an accurate

forward estimate of absolute fatigue life in cycles to failure is

not practical in everyday drill string design. The designer

simply does not know all the necessary variables to plug into

the formulas. Yet he or she does know many of them, and

what is known can form the basis for quantitative comparison

between alternatives. The approach introduced in this paper is

called comparative design. The drill string designers job is

essentially choosing between competing alternatives to

balance many issues, only one of which is fatigue. Thus, the

comparative design approach is to quantitatively express the

relative fatigue performance of the alternatives the designer is

likely to be considering, based only on variables the designer

is likely to know or is able to assume with some certainty.

This approach, while it cannot tell him or her how long a

component will last in a given set of circumstances (because

many factors are still unknown), will give, in quantitative

terms, how one alternative under consideration compares to

another, other things equal. In this way, relative fatigue

performance becomes one of the many criteria upon which

one design alternative is preferred over another, very much

like relative hydraulic performance in some circumstances

might cause a designer to choose 6-5/8 inch drill pipe over 5inch pipe.

To provide the data needed for this approach, we use the

Forman Model to calculate normalized fatigue life for a

variety of cases, varying the factors which the designer will

know, and holding constant the variables which he or she is

not likely to know. We express relative fatigue performance

with two dimensionless indices, Curvature Index for drill pipe

tubes, and Stability Index for BHA components. (The

derivations of the two indices are given in Appendix A.)

Normalized fatigue life

The fatigue life determined by the Forman crack growth

model for a given component in a given set of circumstances,

we call normalized fatigue life. Its actually the period,

expressed in stress cycles, that is required to grow an existing

fatigue crack from an assumed size to failure.

It is

normalized in the sense that when we calculate crack

propagation life for a different set of circumstances to

compare against the first set, all the factors that the designer is

not likely to know are held constant for both calculations, so

should be known to the designer. For example, consider a

joint of drill pipe rotating in a dogleg. Several Forman model

inputs are probably either known by the designer, easily

calculated from known quantities, or may be assumed with

reasonable certainty. These include:

Axial stress

Bending stress

Stress ratio (R)

Minimum stress intensity factor (Kmin)

Maximum stress intensity factor (Kmax)

Stress intensity factor range (K)

Component geometry correction factor (F)

Crack shape correction factor (Q)

Maximum size of an existing crack (a)

Other important factors however, will not be known with

reasonable certainty, including:

Forman crack growth coefficient (C)

Forman crack growth exponent (n)

Critical stress intensity factor (KIC)

Effects of mud corrosiveness on crack growth rate.

By running a series of calculations for normalized

fatigue life under a variety of circumstances, varying those

factors in the first group and holding constant those in the

second, it is possible to make meaningful comparisons

between design alternatives. The remaining task is to express

the results in terms both understandable and usable by the drill

string designer.

Curvature Index (CI)

For drill pipe tubes, translating calculation results into usable

terms is done with Curvature Index (CI) plots, examples of

which are shown as figures 3 and 4. Curvature Index is a

dimensionless number defined by equation 3.

Because its simply a restatement of Forman fatigue life

from one set of circumstances to another, CI enables the

designer to make quantitative fatigue life comparisons

between two or more sets of circumstances. Any two sets of

circumstances with the same CI would be expected to have the

same rate of fatigue damage per cycle, and the ratio of

Curvature Indices represents the degree that two sets of

circumstances will vary one from another, unknown variables

equal. For example, figure 3 shows that rotating 5-inch, 19.50

ppf, grade S, premium class pipe in a seven degree/100 foot

dogleg with 210,000 pounds tension is equivalent to rotating

the same pipe in a three degree/100 foot dogleg with 440,000

pounds tension. Furthermore, both would grow existing

fatigue cracks at twice the rate of 5-7/8 inch, 23.40 ppf, grade

G, premium class pipe in a five degree dogleg with 215,000

pounds tension beneath (figure 4).

IADC/SPE 87188

28

10

DLS (Deg/100ft)

15

24

20

20

25

30

16

12

4

3

0

0

100

200

300

TENSION (KIPS)

400

500

For BHA components such as drill collars and HWDP, the

problem is more complicated. First, we assume that fatigue

will occur in the BHA connection, so the calculation must be

connection-specific. But connection stress and strain will be

proportional to the bending moment from lateral columnar

deflection, which will be determined by properties of the

column and the hole. Furthermore, the geometry of a rotary

shouldered connection is considerably more complex than for

a drill pipe tube, and the loading situation is also more

complex, since makeup torque becomes involved. Therefore,

the method for calculating normalized fatigue life in BHA

connections, as described in Appendix A is considerably

different than for drill pipe tubes. Once calculated however,

normalized fatigue life is used in much the same way to

determine Stability Index, as shown in equation 4.

Class Drill Pipe

5 7/8-inch, 23.40 ppf, G105, Premium Class

10

15

14

12

The designer will use SI in much the same way as CI, that is,

to compare one design alternative to another.

The purpose of equations 3 and 4 is to reduce the

numbers to more manageable sizes, and to discourage

designers from using normalized crack propagation life as an

absolute measure of how long a component will last in service.

20

25

10

30

8

6

2

0

0

5 10 8

(4)

number of cycles to failure

DLS (Deg/100ft)

16

1650

4 3/4-inch x 2-inch DC, NC38 Conn.

1500

50

100

150

TENSION (KIPS)

350

400

450

500

Premium Class Drill Pipe

5 10 8

............... (3)

CI =

number of cycles to failure

1350

STABILITY INDEX

18

SI =

1200

1050

900

750

600

450

300

Field Application

Clark, et al, in reference 2, reports the field application of

Curvature Index for designing a drill string. In the case cited,

the operator had experienced repeated drill string failures in

one hole interval, with one failure occurring on pipe having

fewer than ten rotating hours since inspection. Though the

directional survey (taken at 100-foot intervals) showed a

maximum dogleg severity of one degree/100 feet, a gyro

survey run at five-foot spacing through the problem interval

identified a dogleg having a severity of some 20 degrees/100

feet. Under these circumstances, the ability to drill the well to

target depth was cast into doubt. The designers employed

Curvature Index to design a drill string that was some 230

percent more fatigue resistant than the designs that had been

failing. The resulting drill string configuration, along with

several other improvements, allowed the operator to

successfully complete the well without further incident.

150

0

5

11

13

15

17

19

HOLE SIZE (IN)

21

23

25

27

29

Obviously, the calculation effort to determine Curvature Index

and Stability Index for a number of design alternatives is

substantial. Therefore, we have pre-calculated Curvature

Index covering 183 cases for normal weight and thick-walled

drill pipe, and Stability Index for 7 common cases of BHA

components. The results are reduced to curves similar to those

in this paper, and are available for design purposes in DS-1

Third Edition.

Advanced use of the concept

No tools other than charts are required for the designer to

manually apply comparative fatigue design methods.

However, suppose our designer did know the material

constants necessary, and wanted to track fatigue crack

propagation according to the method proposed by Dale.7 As

IADC/SPE 87188

drill string will vary widely with the characteristics of the

hole, the location of the component at any moment, and the

time and speed at which it rotates at every location. Therefore,

component identity must be maintained and fatigue history

accumulated by component or component group as each

passes through the various curves and straight sections in each

hole. Making sense of all this seems dauntingly complicated,

yet software programs that will accomplish it are available.

Means for keeping identity in these programs can be as simple

as manually entering a components serial number. This level

of attention will require more involvement and effort than

using the comparative design charts above, but may be

justified in critical cases.

Caution: Other things are not always equal

Fatigue crack initiation will often take longer than crack

propagation, and the geometry and surface finish of any

component can play huge roles during crack initiation. The

reader is reminded that the approach given in this paper is

much simplified in that it applies only during the propagation

phase.

Yet, many choices our designer makes will

significantly affect fatigue behavior during the initiation

phase. Thus, the designers decisions will help determine

whether all those cracks being analyzed by the Forman model

remain purely hypothetical or become all too real. What these

design choices will have in common is that the alternatives

will differ in some known and predictable geometrical way.

For example, reference 6 shows that 6-5/8 Regular

connections in 8-inch drill collars will form cracks and fail far

more rapidly than will NC56 connections operating under

identical conditions. The reason cited is that the 6 5/8 Regular

geometry promotes crack initiation more readily than the

NC56, due to differences in taper and thread form. So even

though a crack, once formed, will grow about as quickly in

either connection, the NC56 is a far better choice because it

performs better in the crack initiation phase. Reference 6 uses

the same approach to establish optimum dimensions for stress

relief grooves in BHA pins, and reference 10 applies this

rationale to estimate how slip cuts of various depths promote

crack initiation. Since component geometry only figures

prominently during the initiation phase, an S-N approach

called the Morrow Strain Life Model, described in reference 6

and 12, is used to compare components having

different geometries.

Conclusions

1. The calculation of absolute fatigue life is not practical for

a drill string component owing to the complexity of the

fatigue mechanism and the number of unknowns facing

the drill string designer.

2. Two dimensionless indices, Curvature Index and Stability

Index, have been developed to allow drill string designers

to quantitatively compare design alternatives on the basis

of normalized fatigue crack propagation life, for the

purpose of selecting the one with the best

fatigue performance.

3. The two design indices will not give meaningful values of

absolute fatigue life, but will provide a quantitative

comparison of the relative fatigue lives of components

4.

factors equal.

Curves that the designer can use for these comparisons

are available in Volume 2 of DEA 74, DS-1 Drill String

Design and Operation.

Acknowledgment

The authors wish to thank the thirty-seven sponsor companies

of DEA 74, DS-1 Third Edition, for their sponsorship and

support in the development of these design indices.

References:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

Approach to Drillstem Failure Prevention, SPE 22002, 1991.

Clark, J., Reynolds, N., Ellis, S., Stuart, J.: Advances in

Fatigue Design: Curvature Index Theory and Case Study,

World Oil (Oct. 2003) 29.

Dowling, Norman E.: Mechanical Behavior of Materials:

Engineering Methods for Deformation, Fracture, and

Fatigue, Prentice-Hall, Inc. (1993) 633.

Rollins, H.M.: Drill Pipe Fatigue Failure, Oil and Gas

Journal (February 1966).

Boyer, Howard E. ed., American Society for Metals: Atlas of

Fatigue Curves, ASM (1986) 37.

Ellis, S., Reynolds, N., Lee, K.: Use NC56 Connections on

8 Drill Collars and Cut 1 or Pin Stress Relief Grooves on

Rotated BHA Connections NC38 and Larger,

SPE 87191 (2004).

Dale, B.A.: An Experimental Investigation of Fatigue Crack

Growth in Drillstring Tubulars, SPE 15559 (1986).

Campbell, J.E., Gerberich, W.W., and Underwood, J.H.:

Application of Fracture Mechanics for Selection of Metallic

Structural Materials, ASM (1982) 17.

Campbell, Gerberich, Underwood, 35.

T H Hill Associates, Inc.: DS-1, Drill Stem Design and

Operation, third edition, T H Hill Associates, Inc.

(Jan. 2004).

Lubinski, Arthur: Maximum Permissible Dog-Legs in

Rotary Boreholes, SPE (1960 revised 1961).

Dowling, 621-637.

Wu, Jiang: Drill Pipe Bending and Fatigue in Rotary

Drilling of Horizontal Wells, SPE 37353, 1996.

The Forman Crack Growth equation (A.1), from reference 9,

was used for determining Curvature Index and Stability Index.

The equation relates crack growth rate (da/dN) to stress

intensity factor range (K). The equation is an empirical

formula in which values for constants C, KIC and n are

back-calculated from experimental measurements of da/dN vs.

K for the material in question. The formula can be used to

predict the number of stress reversals that will grow an

existing crack in the subject material from a given size

to failure.

C K n

da

(for K > 0)........... (A.1)

=

dN (1 R ) K IC K

da

= 0 (for K 0)

dN

IADC/SPE 87188

R=

a b ................................................... (A.4)

a +b

K max = (

+b)

K min = ( a b )

Where:

da/dN

K

Kmax

Kmin

KIC

R

C

n

a

a

b

F

Q

a

Q

F ...... (A.5)

a .... (A.6)

F

Q

= Stress intensity factor range, ( ksi in )

= Maximum stress intensity factor, ( ksi in )

= Minimum stress intensity factor, ( ksi in )

= Critical stress intensity factor (material

property), ( ksi in )

= Stress ratio

= Forman equation coefficient (determined

empirically)

= Forman equation exponent (determined

empirically)

= Crack depth, (in)

= Axial stress (ksi)

= Bending stress (ksi)

= Component geometry correction factor

= Crack shape correction factor

calculate crack growth rate, an initial crack size is assumed

and used to calculate the stress intensity factor range for the

first cycle. The crack growth increment for that cycle is

calculated, and the crack growth increment is added to the

previous crack size to obtain the new crack size. This process

is repeated until the crack has grown enough so that the

critical stress intensity factor is reached.

TENSION

the drill pipe tube caused by bending (b) as it rotates in a

dogleg. This calculation is based in part on the work of Arthur

Lubinski.11 Equations A.9 and A.10 were obtained from

Lubinskis work; however, the forms of these equations were

derived to suit this application. Equation A.9 is used to test

whether or not contact is occurring between the drill pipe tube

and the hole wall for a given hole curvature and axial tensile

load. Equation A.10 is used to calculate Mo for cases in which

wall contact does not occur between the drill pipe tube and the

hole wall. In the case of wall contact, equation A.10 will not

apply. Therefore, it was necessary to derive equation A.11 to

handle the wall contact case. This derivation was assisted by

the work of Wu,13 who solved a similar problem for pipe

under compressive loads. Since including the derivations of

these equations here may confuse the reader who is trying to

follow the calculation of Curvature Index, the derivations for

equations A.9, A.10 and A.11 are given separately in

Appendix B.

Calculate c:

1 ...... (A.8)

c=

RC

Calculate cc:

Curvature Index

Consider figure A.1, which shows a drill pipe tube rotating in

a dogleg while its in simultaneous tension. Curvature Index

D TJ D

cc =

L2

( KL ) sinh( KL )

+

2 2 cosh( KL ) + ( KL ) sinh( KL )

w b L 2 sin( )

EI ( KL ) 2

.... (A.9)

If c is less than cc, then the pipe does not contact the hole

wall and Mo is given by equation A.10. If c is greater than or

equal to cc, then the pipe does contact the hole wall and Mo is

given by equation A.11.

Mo =

TENSION

D

M o .... (A.7)

2I

b =

KL

[ EIc b

]+

tanh( KL)

( KL) 2

( KL) 2

tanh (KL 2 )

( KL ) 2

( KL ) 2

2

2 (KL 2 ) tanh (KL 2 ) EI rc

........ (A.11)

(KL 2 ) tanh (KL 2 ) L 2

w b L 2 sin( )

K=

T ........ (A.12)

EI

rc =

2

T

a = ...... (A.14)

A

A = 0 . 7854 ( D 2 d 2 ) ...... (A.15)

IADC/SPE 87188

The calculated axial and bending stresses are input into the

Forman Crack Growth model to obtain the number of cycles

to failure. The number of cycles to failure is then converted to

Curvature Index using equation A.16.

5 10 8

....... (A.16)

CI =

number of cycles to failure

Nomenclature for CI calculations:

A = Drill pipe tube cross sectional area, (in2)

CI = Curvature Index

D = Drill pipe tube outer diameter, (in)

DTJ = Drill pipe tool joint outer diameter, (in)

d

= Drill pipe tube inner diameter, (in)

E

= Youngs modulus, (psi)

I

= Moment of inertia of drill pipe tube, (in4)

L

= Half the drill pipe tube length, (in)

Mo = Bending moment on the drill pipe tube at the tool

joint, (in-lbs)

(radians)

T

= Axial tensile load, (lbs)

Rc = Radius of curvature of hole wall, (in)

c

= Curvature of hole wall, (in-1)

cc = Critical curvature of hole wall, (in-1) (hole wall

curvature required for the middle of the drill pipe tube

to just contact the hole wall for a given axial tensile

load)

wb = Buoyed weight per unit length, (lb/in)

a = Axial stress, (psi)

b = Bending stress, (psi)

Stability Index (SI)

Consider the buckled BHA column shown in figure A.2.

Assume that enough compressive force has been applied to the

column to force it into contact with the hole wall. The

locations of fatigue cracks (if they occur) will be at the points

of highest stress and strain in a made-up connection, and will

occur at the root of some pin or box thread.

To evaluate connection fatigue life under these

circumstances, its necessary to select a specific connection

and place it in a specific column, then perform two separate

finite element analyses. First, the buckled column is modeled

without connections to determine the maximum moment (M)

created when it is buckled into wall contact. This moment is

then applied to the connection in question in a second finite

element evaluation. In the second analysis, the bending stress

in the connection due to buckling is superimposed on the

stress from connection makeup. The combined stresses are

then input into the Forman Crack Growth Model to calculate

normalized fatigue life under the given circumstances.

Fatigue life is converted to Stability Index using equation

A.17. The process is repeated for various column sizes,

connections and hole sizes to generate curves like figure 5.

CONNECTION

BUCKLED

COLUMN

Figure A.2

SI =

5 108

..... (A.17)

number of cycles to failure

Where:

SI

Stability Index

HWDP. It is useful for comparing one design alternative with

another to select the alternative most favorable from a fatigue

standpoint. Assumptions in this calculation include:

a. The bottomhole assembly is slick (no stabilizers).

b. The connections involved did not employ stress

relief features.

c. The connections were tightened to API

makeup torque.

d. The bottomhole assembly section is assumed to be

operating under just enough bit weight to be buckled

and in contact with the sides of the wellbore. Hole

contact on HWDP occurs at the tool joint.

Appendix B Formula Derivations

For drill pipe under axial loads in a curved wellbore, the

bending moment varies along the drill pipe tube. The

maximum bending moment on the drill pipe tube occurs at the

tool joint when the drill pipe is in tension. This is in contrast

to the case of compressive loads where the maximum bending

moment occurs in the middle of drill pipe tube.

For drill pipe under tension in a curved hole, the elastic

deflection is given by equation B.1, reference 11.

y ( x) =

wb sin( )

S

1

)[cosh( Kx ) 1] + o [sinh( Kx ) Kx ] +

( M o

K

EIK 2

K2

wb sin( )

( Kx) 2 .(B.1)

2K 2

force at tool joint (x = 0) and are determined by the boundary

conditions at the middle of the drill pipe tube (x = L). K is

defined by the following equation:

K=

T

EI

IADC/SPE 87188

that the first derivative of elastic deflection at the midpoint of

the tube is equal to the tangent direction of the hole wall at

that point. This is given by equation B.2.

1

EIK

d 3 y ( L)

= 0 .........(B.3)

dx 3

After the middle of the drill pipe tube touches the hole

wall, the deflection in the middle of the tube is restricted by

the hole wall. This boundary condition is given by equation

B.4. This equation implies that the drill pipe makes a single

point contact with the hole wall at the middle of the tube, or

the curvature of the deflection line at the middle of the tube is

smaller than that of hole wall.

L2c

(B.4)

y ( L) = rc +

2

Where:

rc =

DTJ D

2

1

EIK

w b sin( )

sinh

K 2

(KL ) + S 0

K

[cosh (KL ) 1 ] +

wb L sin( )

= L cc .(B.5)

K

wb sin( )

1

K sinh (KL ) + So cosh (KL ) = 0 .. (B.6)

M o

2

EI

K

w sin( )

S

1

M o b 2 [cosh(KL) 1] + o [sinh(KL) KL] +

2

K

EIK

K

wb sin( )

2K 2

L2 c c

( KL ) 2 = rc +

... (B.7)

2

yields equation A.9, which is repeated below:

DTJ D

( KL ) sinh( KL )

wb L2 sin( )

cc =

L2

1

EI

2 2 cosh( KL ) + ( KL ) sinh( KL )

EI ( KL ) 2

For hole curvature (c) less than cc, the equation for Mo is

derived by substituting equation B.1 into equations B.2 and

B.3. This results in the following,:

w b sin( )

S

sinh (KL ) + o [cosh (KL ) 1] +

2

K

K

wb sin( )

K sinh (KL ) + S o cosh(KL ) = 0 ....(B.9)

M o

2

yields equation A.10, which is repeated below:

Mo =

wb L2 sin( ) wb L2 sin( )

KL

EIc

+

tanh(KL)

( KL) 2

( KL) 2

derived by substituting equation B.1 into equations B.2 and

B.4. This results in the following,:

1

EIK

w b sin( )

S

sinh (KL ) + o [cosh (KL ) 1] +

2

K

K

wb L sin( )

= L c .. (B.10)

K

1

EIK 2

A.9, is defined as the hole curvature required for the middle of

the drill pipe tube to just come in contact with the hole wall

under a given axial tensile load. For this condition only,

equations B.2, B.3 and B.4 are satisfied simultaneously.

Substituting equation B.1 into equations B.2, B.3 and B.4 and

replacing c with cc results in the following:

wb L sin( )

= L c ...... (B.8)

K

dy ( L )

= L c ...(B.2)

dx

Before the middle of the drill pipe tube touches the hole

wall, the shear force in the middle of the tube is assumed to be

zero as shown in equation B.3 due to the symmetry.

wb sin( )

S

[cosh( KL ) 1] + o [sinh( KL ) KL ] +

M o

2

K

K

wb sin( )

L2 c

( KL) 2 = rc +

2

2

2K

. (B.11)

yields equation A.11, which is repeated below:

M

(KL 2 ) [ EIc

tanh (KL 2 )

( KL )

2

2 (KL 2 ) tanh (KL 2 ) EI rc

(KL 2 ) tanh (KL 2 ) L 2

w b L 2 sin( )

2

w b L 2 sin( )

( KL ) 2

]+

y

= Elastic deflection of drill pipe tube, (in)

x

= Length along drill pipe tube from the tool joint, (in)

D = Drill pipe tube outer diameter, (in)

DTJ = Drill pipe tool joint outer diameter, (in)

E

= Youngs modulus, (psi)

I

= Moment of inertia of drill pipe tube, (in4)

L

= Half the drill pipe tube length, (in)

T

= Axial tensile load, (lbs)

Mo = Bending moment on the drill pipe tube at the tool

joint, (in-lbs)

So = Shear force on the drill pipe tube at the tool joint, (lbs)

(radians)

c

= Curvature of hole wall, (in-1)

cc = Critical curvature of hole wall, (in-1) (hole wall

curvature required for the middle of the drill pipe tube

to just contact the hole wall for a given axial tensile

load)

wb = Buoyed weight per unit length, (lb/in)

- Drilling Assembly Handbook 2011.pdfHochgeladen vonjohngoff
- New Drill Pipe DesignHochgeladen vonModebelu Ebube
- Drill Stem Inspector Training ProgramHochgeladen vonahmmush
- Drill String FailureHochgeladen vonUsama Bin Sabir
- En 13445-3 Design RulesHochgeladen vonMaikel de Vries
- 6. Drill String Design_2Hochgeladen vonTarek Hassan
- Drill String Standards.Hochgeladen vonbhuvanchaudhari
- Drilling Assembly HandbookHochgeladen vonAdil Aytekin
- m.tech 09 Ams SyllabusHochgeladen vonNagendra Babu Vanamala
- Drilling String InspectionHochgeladen vonrais ridha
- Rp-c102_2002-02 Structural Design of Offshore ShipsHochgeladen voncaic351b
- rp-c102_2002-02Hochgeladen vonmaneco10
- SeaTrust HullScan UserGuide Consolidated Rev01Hochgeladen vonbong2rm
- The Effect of Hole Shape on Fatigue LifeHochgeladen vonLukita Wahyu Permadi
- Assessment of Existing Steel StructuresHochgeladen vonAris
- EN13445-Tempo de Vida ReservatóriosHochgeladen vonbighead_o2
- Background to Design Rules_Issue 2 (3)Hochgeladen vonIsabel López Tresgallo
- Corrosion-fatigue a Review of Damage Tolerance ModelsHochgeladen vonJohn Wood
- c6meetingattachment2Hochgeladen vonMayur Patel
- Hull-Girder Fatigue Strength.pdfHochgeladen vonphantom29
- Caso Analisis de Falla 380Hochgeladen vonzerimar333
- Modelling the Effect of Climate Change Induced Soil Settling on Drinking Water Distribution PipesHochgeladen vonIonut Patras
- 3D Fracture Analysis of Cold Lap Weld.pdfHochgeladen vonJames Phillips
- 15-02115_AlexanderErikssonRapportHochgeladen vonvb_pol@yahoo
- 5_French Experience From EC4-2_Laurence DavaineHochgeladen vonDiogo Godinho
- Fea sr couplingsHochgeladen vonAna Isabel Aguilar Reyes
- journal-linear damage rules.pdfHochgeladen vonBalaji Suganya
- 9979355Hochgeladen vonالعلم نور
- IPC2012-90565Hochgeladen vonMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- Girder 1 - ELM-72.pdfHochgeladen vongigih92

- Extraction of ThiopheneHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Selective Extraction of Neutral Nitrogen Compounds Found in Diesel Feed ByHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Zn-Containing Ionic Liquids for the Extractive Denitrogenation of a Model Oil - A Mechanistic ConsiderationHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Selective Adsorption for Removal of Nitrogen Compounds From Liquid HC Streams Over Carbon- And Alumina- Based AdsorbentsHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Are Deep EutecticHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Inhibition Effects of Nitrogen Compounds on the HDS of Dibenzothiophene Part 2aHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Chemical Reviews Volume 99 Issue 8 1999 [Doi 10.1021%2Fcr980032t] Welton, Thomas -- Room-Temperature Ionic Liquids. Solvents for Synthesis and CatalysisHochgeladen vonsushantkadam75
- Seddon 2003Hochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Use of Ab AlgorithmicHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Eutectic Mixtures Based Upon Multivalent Metal IonsHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Deep Eutectic Solvent Concentration in the Room Temperature Ionic Conductivity and Thermal Behavior of Corn Starch Based Polymer ElectrolytesHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Ionic Liquid Analogues Formed From Hydrated Metal SaltsHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Properties and Phase Equilibria of Fluid Mixtures as the Basis for Developing Green Chemical ProcessesHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Electrodeposition of Co, Sm and SmCo From a Deep Eutectic SolventHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Synthesis of Monoclinic Structured BiVO4 Spindly Microtubes in Deep Eutectic Solvent and Their Application for Dye DegradationHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Post-etch Residue Removal Using Choline Chloride–Malonic Acid Deep Eutectic Solvent (DES)Hochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Bacteria Incorporation in Deep-eutectic Solvents Through FreezeHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Electrodeposition of Zinc–Tin Alloys From Deep Eutectic Solvents Based on Choline ChlorideHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Methods for Stabilizing and Activating EnzymesHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Direct Conversion of Inulin to 5-Hydroxymethylfurfural in BiorenewableHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- New synthetic route of polyoxometalate-based hybrids in choline chloride_urea eutectic media.pdfHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Molar Heat Capacities of Choline Chloride-based Deep Eutectic Solvents and Their Binary Mixtures With WaterHochgeladen vonJohnSmith
- Ionothermal Materials Synthesis Using UnstableHochgeladen vonJohnSmith

- A Web-Based Tourist Decision Support System for Agra CityHochgeladen vonDavid D'bayu
- FERC Abandonment Guide.pdfHochgeladen vonjeff_shaw
- 1-s2.0-S2212670814000505-mainHochgeladen vonmichgeb
- 060079 Meridian SurveyorHochgeladen vonebersworld_2011
- course analysis summary mol 623Hochgeladen vonapi-305274538
- מונחה עצמים- הרצאה 9 | Multiple InheritanceHochgeladen vonRon
- JAC-CMRHochgeladen vonZoran Dimitrijevic
- Kyocera Service ManualHochgeladen vonJojo Aritalla
- DALI V1_13Hochgeladen vonirukza
- Davidas de Villanueva v. Villanueva G.R. No. L-29959Hochgeladen vonfg
- M.E Thermal Engg 2016-2017 Syllabus (1ihuiu).pdfHochgeladen vonAnonymous kewC5C30c
- Islam Traders Work OrderHochgeladen vonMohammad Syeduzzaman
- AS1684_UserGuide_8Hochgeladen vonDaudHussain
- Annual+Maintenance+ContractHochgeladen vonallavudeensheik
- CRMP TemplateHochgeladen vonIonut Neacsu
- Lettre de la Diaspora Haïtienne au Secrétaire d'État américain John KerryHochgeladen vonDaniel Daréus
- Www.steelnavy.com NNTB98Hochgeladen vonmark4262
- Exam style questions on crude oilHochgeladen vonBarry Simpson
- Bobcat s650Hochgeladen vonNG
- 185972499 90205 1107DEC FS03N FC03N FW03N InspectionMaintenanceHochgeladen vonNguyen Van Khanh
- Dvp5106k 97 Dfu EngHochgeladen vongeneralstuff18
- ELEC50B Test 1 Study QuestionsHochgeladen vonArjunLohan
- Evaporative Cooler Research PaperFINALLLLHochgeladen vonRolly Tabamo Fernandez
- Resume BatamHochgeladen vonRommy Putra
- AWC-ASCE7-05-SnowProvisions-0607.pdfHochgeladen vonReza Shahsana
- Brief History of Supervision.pptHochgeladen vondahlanbinham
- DLT-0607-322-00-07_T322_D2Hochgeladen vonMSCISD
- UnityAdsWebApp.txtHochgeladen vonWARE WOLF
- 122 Sirj Apbbp Vol 1 Iss 2 June 2014 o (1)Hochgeladen vonar_jain8654
- standard 10 notesHochgeladen vonapi-248438174