SPE/IADC

SPE/IADC 21942
The Critical Buckling Force and Stresses
for Pipe in Inclined Curved Boreholes
F.J. Schuh, Drilling Technology Inc.
SPE Member

Copyright 1991, SPEJIADC Drilling Conference.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1991 SPEJIADC Drilling Conference held in Amsterdam, 11-14 March 1991.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPEJIADC 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 International Association of Drilling Contractors or 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 SPE or IADC, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPEJIADC meetings are subject to publication
review by Editorial Committees of the SPE and IADC. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should
contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Publications Manager, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, 1)( 75083-3836. Telex, 730989 SPEDAL.

ABSTRACT

Pasl ey and Dawson l publ i shed the first paper

concerned with hori zonta1 drill stri ng des ign requirements. In this paper they presented a method
for calculating the critical bucking force and
selecting drillstring tubulars for drilling in
straight, inclined or horizontal boreholes.

A number of papers have been presented that define

the critical buckl ing force in incl ined straight
holes. This paper presents a method for calculating the critical buckling force in vertically and
laterally curved and inclined boreholes.

The horizontal well designer is also interested in

selecting tubulars for the curved portions of the
borehole, especially for the high curvature build
curve areas. To select tubulars for these areas
we need:

The paper includes methods for computing the bending stress of buckled pipe with tool joints. It
also includes a method for computing if the deflection of the pipe at midspan will cause the pipe
body to touch the wall of the hole. This approach
resolves the question of how tool joints affect
the critical buckl ing force, the curvature of the
pipe, and maximum bending stresses.

1.

A method for determi ni ng the crit ical buckling force in curved boreholes.

2. A method for determining the maximum bending

stress of both buckl ed and nonbuckl ed pipe
in straight and curved boreholes.

The paper includes plots of the critical buckling

force versus hole curvature for common sizes of
drillpipe and Heviwate. We also include plots of
the maximum bending stress versus axial force and
hole curvature for several sizes of drillpipe and
Heviwate.

3. A method for determi ni ng when the pi pe body

of the drillstring component will be in contact with the wall of the hole.

INTRODUCTION

This paper presents another useful building block

for designing drillstrings for high curvature and
horizontal holes.

The optimum drillstring design for horizontal

wells must meet the following objectives:

BUCKLING IN CURVED BOREHOLES

1. Provide the required axial bit loads and

torsional steering control for oriented
drill ing.

The industry needs an experimentally verified analytical expression for the critical buckling
force, lateral contact force, and the maximum bending stresses of tool jointed pipe in three dimensionally curved boreholes.
Unfortunately, all
that we have available are two conflicting derivations for the critical buckl ing force of smooth
pipe in straight incl ined boreholes. Neither of
the authors have defi ned the pi tch, the curvature
of the buckled pipe, the lateral contact force, or
analyzed how tool jointed pipe should behave when
buckled. Although this paper falls short of this
requirement, we have utilized a collection of

2. Provide the required bit loads, torsional

strength and fatigue resistance for rotary
drilling.
3. Provide adequate overpull.
4. Minimize the weight of the drill string components without exceeding operating limits.
References and figures at end of paper
403

CRITICAL BUCKLING FORCE AND STRESSES FOR

PIPE IN INCLINED CURVED BOREHOLES

angle, we can combine the relationships for pitch

developed by LubinskP with the Pasley/Dawson
critical buckling force equation to develope a
relationship between the vertical build rate and
the critical bucking force.
In Appendix A this
relationship is shown to be:

published buckling relationships and some simple

engineering concepts to estimate most of the required information.
The first dilemma facing a designer interested in
buckling phenomena is selecting the appropriate
equation to define the critical buckling force.
We have selected the Pasley/Dawson relationship
over the Cheatham's2 derivation by evaluating
the pi pe to wall contact force that exi sts at the
top of the hel ix at the critical force condition.
As is shown in Appendix C, the application of
Pasley/Dawson critical buckling force in a horizontal hole produces a positive net lateral contact force at all points along the helix except at
the top of the he1i x where the contact force is
found to be exactly zero.
With the Cheatham's
critical buckling force, the contact force is much
higher and pushes the pipe against the top of the
hole with a load equal to twice the weight of the
pipe for a net contact force equal to the buoyant
weight per foot of the pipe. It seems intuitively
obvious that the Pasley/Dawson equation provides a
more rational definition of the critical force
because minor reduction in the axial force would
decrease the contact force to a load that would be
unabl e to hold up the wei ght of the pi pe across
the top of the arch.
The Pasley/Dawson equation
is:

Fe

4 E . I . W
m . sin 9 ] 1/2

r . 12

SPE/IADC 21942

4
VBR c

r Fe . 5730

12

= --------'1(2

E I

16

Wm sin 9 . 5730

. . . (2)

In a vertically curving borehole that is curving

downward, the dri 11 stri ng can produce three modes
of operations.
For loads less than the critical
buckl i ng force, the pi pe wi 11 1ay across the bottom side of the hole. See Fig. 5. For holes with
1arge negat i ve curvatures and loads greater than
the minimum critical buckling force the pipe will
remain on the top side of the hole. See Fig. 6.
For loads above the critical buckling force and
negative curvatures less than the critical, the
pipe will be buckled as is depicted in Fig. 7.
Note that the vertical dimensions of the helix for
negative hole curvatures are greater than the actual dimensions of the curved borehole.
Negative
curvatures increase the effective radial clearance
of the pipe which in turn reduces the critical
buckling force. This is shown in Fig. 8.

. . . . (l)

By adopt i ng a cons i stent sign convent i on for hole

curvature, we can util ize the same equation for
defi ni ng the crit i ca 1 bucki ng force of droppi ng
curvatures as was used to represent the critical
buckling force for positive hole curvatures.

Although curved boreholes have both vert i ca1 and

1atera 1 components of curvature, vert i ca 1 curvature is the more important design consideration.
In a vertically curving borehole, a compressively
loaded drillstring can exhibit two modes of behavior.
See Fig. 1 and 2. For loads less than the
critically buckl ing force, the path of the pipe
will be across the bottom of the hole.
If the
axial load exceeds the critical bucking force, the
pipe will be buckled as is depicted in Fig. 2. In
an angle bUilding interval, the shape of the hole
reduces the height of the helix. This is depicted
in Fig. 3. where the dimensions of a straight inclined hole are superimposed on the helix produced
in a positively curving borehole. The pipe would
actually fit into a hole of an elliptic shaped
cross section where the width of the hole would be
unchanged but only the height would be altered.
However, in light of the apparent relationship
between lateral contact force and the critically
buckl i ng force, it is not unreasonable to assume
that the vertical dimensions dominate the buckling
mechanics.

Fig. 9 depicts the negative hole curvature that is

required to place the full drillstring on the top
of the hole and preclude helical buckling. This
relationship is derived in Appendix A and is included as follows.

-4 . 5730 . 12
VBR L

r .

FL

--------'1(2

5730 . Wm . sin 9

. . . (3)

FL
There is a single vertical build rate and compressive axial force for which the pipe is on the
verge of being buckled or positioned on either the
top or the bottom of the hole. This point represents the minimum possible axial force that can
buckle the pipe and the maximum negative curvature
at that load that the pi pe wi 11 not ri se to the
top of the hole. The solution of this point represents the minimum axial force for which Eq. 2 and
3 apply. This point is defined as:

The Pasl ey/Dawson equation can be modified to

predict the critical buckl ing force for curving
boreholes by replacing the radial clearance in the
Pasley/Dawson equation with an effective radial
clearance which accounts for the curvature of the
borehole. Fig. 4 is a sketch that shows the relat i onshi p between borehol e curvature, the di fference in radi al cl earance, Ar, and the pitch
length of the buckled pipe.
Assuming that the
pitch of buckl ed pipe is independent of hole

404

SPE/IADC 21942

FRANK J. SCHUH

solution from Roark 4 to the compressively loaded drillpipe situation.

We have also chosen to
neglect the gravity forces as the gravity load
deflections are small compared with the tool joint
clearance. Fig. 17 is a sketch of a compressively
loaded joint of pipe in a curved borehole.
The
maximum bending stress occurs at the center of the
span between tool joints.
The maximum bending
stress for tool jointed pipe under compression is
given by:

(4)
and the corresponding hole curvature is:
4
5730
12 r . Fcb
VBRcb - - - - - - - - 1(2

E I

16

5730 Wm . sin 9

TBR . L . E OD
Sm .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 5730 12 . j . sin(57.3 . L/j)
(6)
(5)

This equation only appl ies to loading conditions

where the pi pe body at the center of the span is
not laterally supported by the wall of the hole.
The maximum hole curvature for which Eq. 6 applies
is defined by the loading conditions where the
center of the pipe body just touches the wall of
the hole but is not supported by it. This condition is depicted in Fig. 18 and occurs when:

Fig. 10 is a plot of the critical buckling force

equations for 5 in. 19.50 lb/ft nominal grade E
drillpipe in an 8 1/2 in. hole. The minimum possible buckling force is shown to be about 22,000 lb
with the vertical hole curvature of -6 deg/l00ft.
The bucking force rapidly increases with increasing hole curvature to 49,000 lb for a straight
hole to nearly 100,000 lb at 5 deg/l00 ft.
The
plot shows the combinations of vertical hole
curvature and axial load for which the pipe will
be buckled.
For hole curvatures to the left of
this area the pipe will be positioned across the
top of the hole. For combinations of axial compressive load and vertical curvature less than and
to the right of the buckling curve, the pipe will
be positioned along the bottom of the hole. Fig.
11 compares the critical buckling force curvature
and curvatures for 5 in. 19.50 1b grade E drillpipe in 45 and 90 deg boreholes.
Note that the
lower hole angle reduces the critical buckling
forces although the effect is not highly sensitive
to hole angle.
Fig. 12 and 13 show the critical
buckling force relationships for 4 1/2 in. drillpipe in an 8 1/2 in. hole and 3 1/2 in. drillpipe
in a 6 1/8 in. hole. Fig. 14-16 show the critical
buckling forces for 5 in. and 4 1/2 in. Heviwate
in 8 1/2 in. holes and 3 1/2 in. Heviwate in
6 1/8 in. holes.

For combinations of hole curvature and axial load

where a portion of the pipe body must be touching
the wall of the hole, the maximum bending stress
must be calculated by an iterative procedure. For
such conditions, Eq. 7 must be solved by trial and
error to determine a pipe joint length that would
just touch the wall of the hole at the center of
the span for the defined conditions of total build
rate, axial load, and other dimensions.
If this
value of pipe joint length is then substituted in
Eq. 6, the maximum bending stress calculated represents the maximum stress on the pipe. The difference between the above determi ned 1ength and the
actual pipe length represents the amount of pipe
touching the wall of the hole.

MAXIMUM BENDING STRESSES FOR COMPRESSIVELY LOADED

NONBUCKLED PIPE

MAXIMUM BENDING STRESSES OF BUCKLED PIPE IN CURVED

BOREHOLES

The use of tool jointed pipe in curved boreholes

produces two effects.
One good and the other
bad. The good effect is that the surface area of
contact subject to wall sticking forces is minimized.
The bad effect is that the tool joints
increase the maximum bending stresses produced by
the tensile or compressive loads on pipe in curved
boreholes.
Lubinski first derived the relationship for determining the maximum bending stress of
tensilely loaded drillpipe in curved boreholes.
His solution represents the drillpipe as a
tensilely loaded beamed column that neglects the
effect of gravity forces.

The maximum bending stress for buckled pipe in

curved boreholes can be cal cul ated us i ng the fo1lowing procedure.

2 . 5730 . 12 . rc
TBR = - - - - - - - - - - - - - - m j . L . [tan(57.3 . L/4
j) - (L/4 . j]
. (7)

1.

Determine if the pipe is buckled.

2.

Determine the maximum curvature of the

hel i x.

3.

Using the curvature of the hel ix determine

if the pipe body of the tool jointed pipe
will touch the wall of the hole.

4A. If the pipe body does not touch, use the

curvature of the helix and the actual pipe
joint length to determine the maximum bending stress of the buckled pipe.

Appendix B includes a similar solution for the

compressively loaded tool jointed pipe used in
horizontal drilling applications.
We were quite
fortunate in that we could adapt a beam column
405

CRITICAL BUCKLING FORCE AND STRESSES FOR

PIPE IN INCLINED CURVED BOREHOLES

In the plot of 5 in. dril1pipe in an 8 1/2 in.

hole, buckling only occurs in a straight hole or a
hole with negative curvature. The conditions for
when the pipe body touches vary from 50,000 1b in
a 4 deg/100 ft build to 26,000 1b in a 12 deg/
100 ft build curvature.
The plot for 4 1/2 in.
dri11pipe in an 8 1/2 in. hole shows slightly
lower loads for both buck1 i ng and the condi t ions
for which the pipe body touches the wall of the
hole.
The plot of 3 1/2 in. dri11pipe in a
6 1/8 in. ho1 e shows a very limited area of
acceptable axial loads and stress for high hole
curvatures.
Fig. 22-25 are similar plots for 5,
4 1/2 and 3 1/2 in. Heviwate dril1pipe in curved
boreholes.
The center span support pad on
Heviwate reduces the span length L to 1/2 the
joi nt 1ength.
Thi s improves the performance in
high curvature holes. For the conditions covered,
none of the Heviwate pipe will be buckled nor will
the pipe body touch the wall of the holes.

4B. If the pipe body touches for the buckling

curvature and actual joint length, determine an equivalent joint length that would
just touch the wall of the hole and using
it and the helical curvature, calculate the
maximum bending stress for the buckled
pipe.
The maximum curvature of the helically buckled
pi pe ina curved borehole is as deri ved in the
Appendix B to equal:
5730 . 12
r F .2. TBR
Bbuc ,. - - - - - - - + - - 2 E
8

SPE/IADC 21942

. (8)

The curvature for which the center of the pipe

body will just touch the wall of the hole is given
by:

CONCLUSIONS
2 . 5730 . 12

B
c

rc

We conclude that:

=--------------j . L . [tan(57.3 . L/4

1. the Pasley/Dawson critical buckling equation

is the best representation of that
phenomenon.

j) - L/4 j]

. . . (9)

If the curvature due to buckling (Eq. 8)

than the curvature required for the pipe
touch (Eq. 9), then the pipe body is not
and the maximum bending stress for the
pipe is given by Eq. 10.

is 1ess
body to
touching
buckled

2. That the Pasley/Dawson equation can be extended to curved boreholes by adjusting the
geometry to account for the shape of the
buckled pipe in the curved borehole.
3. The maximum bending stress for compressively
loaded pipe with tool joints can be computed
from beam column theory.

Bbuc
L E OD
5mb ,. - - - - - - - - - - - - 45730 . 12
j
sin(57.3. L/j)

4. The beam column re1ati9nships also allow us

to predict another useful design limit which
is the conditions for which the pipe body
will touch the wall of the hole.

(10)

If Bc is less than Bbuc then Eq. 9 must be

so1ve<l by tri a1 and error for a value of L that
makes BL equal to Bhuc'
The maximum bending
stress tor the buck1 eo pi pe wi th the pi pe body
touching is then computed using above defined
value of L in Eq. 10.

5. The maximum bending stress of buckled pipe

in curved boreholes can be computed from the
curvature of the helix and the maximum bending stress for compressively-loaded too1jointed pipe in curved boreholes.

The relationships for critical buck1 ing force and

bending stress can be combined to determine the
maximum bending stress for compressively loaded
pipe in curved boreholes. Fig. 19, 20 and 21 are
plots of the maximum bending stress versus axial
load and vertical hole curvature for 5, 4 1/2 and
3 1/2 in. dril1pipe in curved boreholes. For the
curvature selected, the pipe will either lie on
the low side of the hole or be buck1 ed. For the
very low curvatures, the maximum bending stress
increases gradually until the critical buckling
force occurs.
The bending stress then increases
dramatically as the pipe is buckled and the bending stress continues to increase as additional
axial load is placed on the pipe. The plots also
ref1 ect whether or not the pi pe body is touchi ng.
I f the pi pe body does not touch the wall of the
hole, the curves are plotted with solid lines. At
the point where the pipe body touches, the remainder of the curves are plotted with dashed lines.

RECOMMENDATIONS
We recommend that the industry's buck1 i ng experts
direct their attention to the needs for analytical
solutions to the critical bucking force, the
pitch, the curvature and lateral contact force of
buckled pipe in three dimensionally curved boreholes, the effect of tool joints on the maximum
curvature and stresses of buckled pipe, and the
experimental measurements need to confirm the
solutions.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to acknowledge the significant contributions of those that have worked to provide
the industry with a better understanding of
buck1 i ng phenomena and drill stri ng stresses. The
most significant of those are: John B. Cheatham,

406

SPEjlADC 21942

FRANK J. SCHUH

Rapier M. Dawson, David L. Garrett, Hans C. Junkam

Wa1d, Edward Lindsley, Arthur Lubinski, Robert F.
Mitchell, Carey Murphey, and Paul R. Pasley.

VBRL Maximum negative hole curvature with

which the pipe will be buckled with FL,
(deg/lOO ft).

We hope that these individuals will continue to

work in this area and will eventually derive and
experimentally verify exact solutions to the cases
covered by this paper.

Buoyant weight of pipe, (lbjft).

= Hole angle from vertical, (deg).

REFERENCES

NOMENCLATURE
z

Bbuc

1.

Curvature at which the pipe body would just

touch the wall of the hole, (degjl00 ft).
Maximum helical curvature of buckled
pipe in a curved borehole, (degjl00 ft).

Dawson, Rapier; Pasley P.R.: "Drillpipe

Buckling in Inclined Holes," JPT, (Oct. 1987)
1734.

2. Chen, Yu-Che; Lin, Yu-Hsu; and Cheatham, John

B.: "Tubing and Casing Buck1 ing in Horizontal
Wells," SPE, Rice U., JPT, (Feb. 1990) 140.

Young's modulus 29.6 x 10 6 psi for

steel, (psi).

= Axial compressive force, (lbf).

3. Lubinski, Arthur; Althouse, W. S.; Logan, J.

L.: "He1 ica1 Buck1 ing of Tubing Sealed in
Packers," JPT, (June 1962) 655 .

Critical bucking force (minimum) for

curved borehole, (lbf).

4. Roark, R. J., "Formulas for Stress and Strain,"

4th Edition, McGraw Hill, (1965) 150.

= Minimum buckling force in a curved

5. API RP7G IIRecommended Practice for Drill Stem

Design and Operating Limits," 14th edition,
API, 1220 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 2005
(Aug. 1, 1990).

borehole, (lbf).

Critical buckling force limit associated

with the limiting minimum vertical
curvature, (lbf).

6. Mitchell, R. F., IINew Concepts of He1 ica1

Buck1 ing," SPEDE, (Sept. 1988) 303.

= Moment of inertia of pipe body, (in. 4 ).

j

= (E . IjF)1/2, (in.).

APPENDIX A

= Average length between centers of tool

joints on dri11pipe or from the center of
a tool joint to the center of the support
pad on Heviwate, (in.).

Critical Buckling Force in Curved Boreholes

00

= Outside diameter of pipe body, (in.)

= Radial clearance between the tool joints

and wall of the hole, (in.).

rc

Pasley and Dawson define the critical buckling

force for straight inclined borehole as:

Fc

4.E l
r

sin 9 ] 1/2.
12

. . . (A-I)

= Radial clearance between the tool joint 00

and the pipe body 00, (in.).

This equation has been modified to estimate the

critical buckling force for vertically curved boreholes by adjusting the radial clearance to account
for the effect of hole curvature on the upper half
of the helical buckle. Fig. 4 shows the effect of
curvature on the radi a1 c1 earance for pi pe ina
build interval (increasing curvature).
Fig. 8
shows the effect of curvature on the radial clearance for pipe ina dropp ing i nterva1 (decreas i ng
curvature). The critical buckling force for vertically curving borehole becomes:

Maximum bending stress, (psi).

=

Maximum bending stress of buckled tool

jointed pipe, (psi).

TBR

= Total hole curvature, (degjl00 ft).

TBRm

Critical hole curvature at which the pipe

body just touches the wall of the hole at
the center of the span, (degjl00 ft).

Ljj

VBRc = Vertical hole curvature for which F is

the critical buckling force, (degjI60ft).
VBRcb

=[

Fc

Critical vertical build rate hole

curvature for buckling, (degjl00 ft).

= [

4 . E. I W
m . sin 9 ] 1/2.
. . . (A-2)
12 (r - Ar)

Where Ar is positive for positive or building

curvatures and negative for negative or dropping
curvatures.

407

CRITICAL BUCKLING FORCE AND STRESSES FOR

PIPE IN INCLINED CURVED BOREHOLES

For holes with low curvature and high

Fig. 5.
axi a1 forces. the pi pe can be buckl ed as is shown
in Fig. 7; and for high loads and high curvatures.
the pi pe will be forced against the top of the
hole as is shown in Fig 6. Fig. 9 is a sketch
that shows the curvature that will prevent pi pe
from buckl ing in a hole with high negative curvature. As is indicated in the sketch. the critical
condition occurs when Ar r which will prevent the pipe from buckl ing. This critical loading occurs when the lifting force due to the compressive load on the upward curving pipe just
equals the buoyant downward gravity force. This
occurs when:

The value of Ar can be calculated from the

pitch length of the buckled pipe and the curvature
of the hole. Lubinski (Eq. 2) defines the pitch
length for helically buckled pipe as:

= .. [ 8 E I ] 1/2.
R

(A-3)

Since his derivation was for weightless pipe. the

solution should apply to buckling at any hole
angle.
From the geometry of the curved borehole Ar
can be defined as follows:
b . p

Ar

FL . B
--------L = Wm sin 9
5730

~=

VBR
] p
12. 5730 32

From the geometry:

. . . . (A-4)

1(2

1(2

E . I . VBR ]

=
[

(A-8)

Combining Eq. A-3 and A-4. Ar becomes:

Ar

SPE/IADC 21942

4 . 5730 . 12 . F

ArL

BL E I

4 . 5730 . 12 . FL

4 . E . I .Wm . sin 9 / 12
Fc = -------------------------1(2 E . I . VBR
r - ------------------4 . 5730 . 12 . Fc
. . . . (A-6)

'J(2

Ar =

VBR . E

W
m . sin 9 . 5730

(A-9)

previously de-

4 . 5730 12

I
Fc

(A-II)

'J(2

16

Combining Eq. (A-9). (A-I0) and (A-II) we get:

r . Fc . 5730 12

E I

and from the geometry:

A more convenient form of Eq. A-6 is achieved by

solving for the critical hole curvature in terms
of the buckling force:

'J(2

. . . . . . . . . . (A-I0)

ArL = -r -Ar

VBRc =

In terms of rand Ar using the

fined sign convention:

. . . . . . (A-5)

Substituting equation A-4 for Ar in A-2 gives:

4 . 5730 . - 12 . FL

VBR . E

-r - -----------------

5730 12

FL

. . . . (A-12)
Solving for BL gives:

(A-7)

BL =

In a borehole with positive hole curvature and

compressive loads on the drillstring there are two
modes of behavior. The drillstring can lie across
the bottom of the hole as is depicted in Fig. 1 or
the dri 11 st ri ng wi 11 be buckl ed as shown in
Fig. 2.
Fig. 4 shows the relationship between
vertical build rate and axial force that separate
the two areas.

-4

5730 12
'J(2

r F
L -VBR

. . (A-13)

Substituting A-12 for BL in Eq. A-8 gives:

-4 . 12 . r . FL 2 VBR FL
------------------- = W sin 9
'J(2 E . I
5730
m

In a borehole with negative curvature. a drillstri ng under a compress i ve load can function in
three modes. For low loads the pi pe will 1ay on
the bottom side of the hole as depicted in

Solving for VBR:

408

. . . (A-14)

SPE/IADC 21942
-4

VBR L

FRANK J. SCHUH
Ar r

5730 . 12 r FL

----------=
E I
1(2

. . (A-19)

from Eq. A-I:

5730 Wm sin 9

4 E

. (A-IS)

FL

. . (A-20)

12

Eq. A-IS defines the maximum negative curvature

for which the pipe can be buckled. The previously
derived Eq. A-6 defines the minimum axial force
required to buckle pipe in a decreasing hole curvature. The point at which both equations are equal
defines the minimum axial force for which the pipe
can be buckled. This point is defined by equating
Eq. A-6 and A-IS:

and from the geometry:

1(2

Ar

E I . LBR

4 . 5730 12 . F

. . . . . (A-21)

Substituting Eq. A-I9 and A-20 in A-IS yields:

16 5730 W
m sin 9
LBRcb = -------=:....-_1(

. . . (A-22)

Eq. A-21 defines the maximum lateral curvature

LBRcb at which hel ical buckl ing can occur under
an axial load of F. The equation applies whenever
F exceeds the Fc defined for straight inclined
holes by Eq. A-I.

Equating Fe. and FL gives the desired minimum

axial force tor which pipe can be buckled:

NOMENCLATURE

Fcb. [2 [

E I W
fJ .___
12 r

. 9] 1/2

_m=-_S_ln _

= Hole curvature, (radius/in.).

= Curvature eqUivalent to Arc, (deg/100 ft).

= Young's modulus 29.6 x 10 6 psi for

(A-17)

steel, (psi).

and the corresponding hole curvature is:

Axial compressive load, (lbf).

= Critical bucking force (minimum) for

4

5730

VBRcb =

curved borehole, (lbf).

12 . r Fcb

1(2

E I

16

5730
1(2

Minimum buckling force, (lbf).

= Critical buckling force limit associated

with the limiting minimum vertical
curvature, (lbf).

Wm . sin 9
Fcb

. . (A-IS)

Moment of inertia of pipe body, (in. 4 ).

We can also estimate the effect of lateral hole

curvature on the critical buckling force.

LBRcb = Critical lateral curvature that prevents

helical buckling, (deg/100 ft).

This form of analysis suggests that small values

of lateral hole curvature should not alter the
magnitude of the critical buckl ing force. However, for high curvatures, buckling can be
prevented.

= Pitch length of a helical buckle, (in.).

= Radial clearance between the tool joints

and wall of the hole, (in.).

VBR

Hole curvature + upward- downward,

(deg/100 ft).

We have derived a relationship that defines the

minimum lateral hole curvature that will prevent
buckling.
The critical lateral curvature that
will prevent buckling is depicted in Fig. 25. The
critical condition occurs when the radial clearance equals the radial offset caused by the lateral hole curvature. This occurs when:

VBR c Vertical hole curvature for which Fc

is the critical buckling force,
(deg/100 ft).

409

CRITICAL BUCKLING FORCE AND STRESSES FOR

PIPE IN INCLINED CURVED BOREHOLES

The angl e ; is re1ated to hole curvature b by

the following:

VBRcb - Critical vertical build rate hole

curvature for buckling, (degjl00 ft) .
Buoyant weight of pipe, (lbjft).

b L

;--

- Change in radial clearance due to hole

curvature; + for positive curvature,
- for negative curvature, (in.).

(B- 5)

and

Net pipe deflection for critically

dropping hole curvature, (in.).

b L F j
Mm - - - - - -

- Critical Ar that prevents buckling

in a dropping interval, (in.).
9

SPEjlADC 21942

2 . sin(Uj2)

- Hole angle from vertical, (deg).

. (B-6)

Since the bending stress is

APPENDIX B
Bending Stresses

S = _''10
m
I

The maximum bending stresses in buckled pipe can

be determi ned from the expected curvature of the
helically buckled pipe and the additional bending
induced by the flex of the pipe body between the
tool joints.

b . E . U . 00

These equations are based on beam column equations

that neglect gravity loads.
We have developed
similar equations for bending stresses of drillpi pe in curved boreholes under compress ive loads.
Roark has derived the appropriate basic beam
column equations that apply to the problem of
drillpipe under compressive loads in a curved borehole. Roark's equations are for a simply supported beam column to which are applied equal and
opposite bending moments at the ends. The relevant equations are:
F j

M1 [ 1 - cos(Uj2) ]
cos(Uj2)
H1

Mm = - - -

(B-1)

. . . . . . . . . (B-8)

. . . . . . . . . . (B-9)

= a + rc

; L
a - . 2 2

. . . . . . . . . . (B-I0)

. . . . . . . . . . (B-3)
Substituting (B-5) into (B-I0):
b L2
a=--

These equations can be adapted to the problem of

drillpipe in a curved borehole by equating the
pos it ion of the ends of the beam column to the
ends of the pipe at the tool joints. See Fig.
17.
Equating the unknown end moments M1 in
Eq. (B-1) and (B-3) gives the following equation
for the maximum moment:

(B-11)

and (B-ll) into (B-9) gives:

b L2
Y - - - + rc

; F j

sin(Uj2)

4. sin(Uj2)

from the geometry

. . . (B-2)

cos(Uj2)

Mm =

=-----

The above equation only appl ies if the center of

the pipe span does not touch the wall of the
hole.
The limiting condition is depicted in
Fig. 18 where the center of the pipe just touches
the wall of the hole.
For curvatures or loads
greater than indicated, some portion of the pipe
body would be in contract with the hole. For curvatures or loads equal to or 1ess than depi cted,
the pipe body would not be supported by the wall
of the hole and the stress Eq. (B-8) would apply.
When the pipe body just touches at the center of
the span
y

y. F

. . . . (B-7)

the maximum bending stress for drillpipe under

compressive load in a curved borehole becomes:

API has published 5 equations for computing the

maximum bending stresses of drill pipe in tension
in curved boreholes.

H1
; - ----- tan(Uj2)

00
__

. . (B-4)

410

. . . . (B-12)

SPE/IADC 21942

FRANK J. SCHUH

Combining Eq. B-1 and B-2 and solving for y gives:

y j .

. tan(U/4)

4. If there is pipe body contact, determine by

trial and error a pipe joint length that
would just touch the wall of the hole and
use this pipe length in Eq. B-8 to calculate
the maximum bending stress.

. . . . . (B-13)

Equating (B-12) and (B-13)

The curvature produced by buckl i ng has been defined by lubinski's equation 45:

b l2
j . b . l tan(U/4)
- - + rc - - - - - - - 8
2

4 .

. (B-14)

bb
p2

1(2

+ 4

1(2.

. . . . . . . (B-17)

r2

This simplifies to:

Substituting Eq. A-3 for P and simplifying gives:
2 . rc
b

=--------j . l . [tan(U/4) - U/4]

. . . . (B-15)

Eq. B-15 defines the hole curvature where the pipe

body just touches in the center of the span as
well as the maximum hole curvature for which Eq.
B-8 defines the maximum bending stress.

l U

tan(U/4)
2.

r . F
2

+ r

. . . . . . . . . (B-18)

r . F

. . . . . . . . . (B-19)

In a curved borehole with buckled pipe, the effective radial clearance will range from r + Ar
to r - Ar.
The highest helical curvatures and
bending stresses will occur in the portion of the
curved hole where the radial clearance is
r + Ar.
The maximum curvature will therefore
be:

---+--

b j
4
l=-----

bb

r . F
bb . - - 2 E I

Solving Eq. B-15 by trial and error for a

pipe length that would just touch the
wall of the hole for the defined parameters.
The best form for an i terati ve
solution of lis:

2 . rc

2 . E I

and since

The maximum bending stress for drillpipe for which

a portion of the pipe body touches the wall of the
hole can be calculated by:
1.

. . . . . . . . (B-16)

(r + jArl) . F
2 E

Using that length solve Eq. B-8 for the

maximum bending stress.
r .

In this case, the maximum bending stress would

occur at the two points in the pipe body just beyond the portion touching the wall of the hole.

bbm = - - - 2 E I

The bending stresses on buckled pipe can be determined by the following steps:

. . . . . . . (B-20)

1(2

VBR

8 5730 . 12

. . (B-21)

The maximum curvature that will not allow pipe

body contact becomes:

1. Determine the maximum curvature of the helically buckled pipe.

bc =

2. Determine if the pipe body is touching the

wall of the hole when subjected to a hole
curvature equivalent to the curvature of the
helix.

2 . rc
j . l . [tan(U/4) - U/4]

. . . . (B-22)

If Bbm is 1ess than be. the maximum bending

stress is calculated directlY from Eq. B-8.

3. If there is no pipe body contact, use Eq.

B-8 to calculate the bending stress using
the buckl i ng curvature in place of the hole
curvature in Eq. B-8.

If bc is less than bbm then Eq. B-22 must be

so1vea by tri a1 and error for a value of l that
makes bc = bbm'
This value of l must be used
in Eq. B-8 to calculate the maximum bending
stress.

411

CRITICAL BUCKLING FORCE AND STRESSES FOR

PIPE IN INCLINED CURVED BOREHOLES

10

You will note that the Cheatham equation differs

from the Pasley equation by the square root of
two. Cheatham presents some impressive evidence
supporting its applicability. These include:

NOMENCLATURE APPENDIX B
a

The deflection of the center of a circular

arc as indicated in Fig. IS.

hole curvature, (rad/in.).

SPE/IADC 21942

1.

Bb Curvature of a helical buckle, (rad/in.).

Bbm = Maximum curvature of helically buckled
pipe in curved borehole, (rad/in.).

That Pasl ey and Dawson merely defined the

axial force at which the pipe would begin
snaking across the bottom of an inclined
hole rather than the force required to raise
the pipe up into a full helix.

bc Curvature that just allows pipe body

contact at center of span, (rad/in.).

2. It matches test data collected by Lubinski

and Woods and an equation attributed to
Lubinski from unpublished works.

Young's modulus 29.6 x 10 6 for

steel, (psi).

3. It is reasonably close to an empirical formula first published by Dellinger of Mobil.

Axial load at end of beam, (lbf).

=

Moment of inertia for pipe body, (in. 4 ).

(E

= Length of beam column (one joint of drillpipe or the distance from a tool joint to
the center support pad of Heviwate pipe),
(in.).

Mm

= Maximum moment in the center of the span,

I/F) 1/2,

Wh il e the author is ne ither inc1i ned nor probably

capable of critically reviewing the derivations,
we have combined the two critical buckl ing equations with other publ ished relationships that re-.
late to buckled pipe and derived some significant
factors that we believe strongly supports the
Pasley Dawson equation as the appropriate value
for critical buckl ing. The key equations are the
Lubinski equations that define the curvature of
buckled pipe and Mitchell's equation 6 that
defines the lateral contact force between the pipe
and the wall in the hole for buckled pipe.
Lubi nski 's equation for the curvature of buckl ed
pipe is as follows:

( in. ) .

(in. lbf).

Ml Moment applied at each end of the beam,

(i n. 1 bs) .

2 E
R = ---r . F

00 = Outside diameter of pipe body, (in.).

= Radial clearance between tool joints and

ho1e ID, (i n. ) .

. . . . (C-2)

and Mitchell's equation for the lateral contact

force of buckled pipe on the wall of the hole is
as follows:

rc = Radial clearance between the tool joint and

pipe body of drillpipe, (in.).
Sm = Maximum bending stress, (psi).
U

= L/j
=

Lcf

Deflection at center of the span, (in.).

VBR Vertical hole curvature, (deg/l00 ft.).

~

APPENDIX C
Critical Byckling for Straight Inclined Holes
One of the dilemmas facing a high angle or horizontal well designer is the selection of the critical
buckling equation for straight inclined holes.
The two most prominent choices are the Pasley/
Dawson equation (see Eq. 1) which has been selected by the author and the Cheatham, Chen and Lin
equation given below.
S.ErI

s;n

B],,2

R 12

(C-3)

If we look at the case for buckled pipe in a horizontal hole just at the critical buckling forces
defi ned by the two authors, we can combi ne the
equations for critical buckling force, buckling
curvature and lateral contact force to define:

= Deflection angle at the end of the

beams, (rad).

Fcc = [

. . (C-l)

412

1. The lateral contact force of buckled pipe on

the wall of the hole just at the critical
buckl i ng force.
2. The net lateral contact force (considering
the effect of the gravity force on the pipe)
between the pipe and the hole at the top of
the arch of the buckled pipe.
3. The ratio of the frictional drag between
buckled pipe and nonbuckled pipe that occurs
at the critical buckling force.

SPE/IADC 21942

FRANK J. SCHUH

The results of this evaluation are included in

Table C-1.

critical buckl ing load. It would appear that one

would have to significantly decrease the axial
force below Cheatham's critical buckling force.
before the net forces would permit the pipe to
begin to fall away from the top of the hole. This
is contrary to the concept of a critical load.

Comparison of Critical Buckling Force Equations

~
~

Cheatham
Chen & Lin

The frictional force of moving buckled pipe is

equa1 to the net 1atera1 contact force of the
buckled pipe on the wall of the hole times the
coefficient of friction. For nonbuckled pipe, the
frictional force is equal to the coefficient of
friction times the buoyant weight per foot of the
pipe. Since the lateral contact force is exerted
outward on the hole and the gravity force is
always downward, it can be deduced that the
decrease in net force on the top half of the hole
due to the gravity force is exactly offset by the
increase in the net contact force in the bottom
half of the hole. Thus the frictional force for
buckled pipe is simply the lateral contact force
due to buckling times the coefficient of frict ion. We can, therefore, compute the change in
frictional force when pipe just buckles by comparing the lateral contact force of the buckled pipe
to the buoyant weight per foot of the pipe. If
the Pasley/Dawson equation is used to represent
the critical buckling force, we find that the frictional force to move buckled pipe at the critical
buckling force is exactly the same as the frictional force of nonbuckled pipe at that same load condition. With the Cheatham equation, we find that
the frictional force for the buckled pipe would be
twice as large as the frictional force for nonbuckled pipe at this same loading condition.

Lateral contact force of

buckled pipe at the critical
buckling force, (lbf/ft)
Net lateral contact force
between the pipe and hole at
the top of the arch of the
buckle, (lbf/ft)

Ratio of frictional drag

between buckled pipe and
nonbuckled pipe at the
critical buckling force

11

Table C-l
Combining the equations shows that the lateral
contact force generated by the buckled pipe using
the Pasley/Dawson equation is numerically equal to
the weight per foot of the subject pipe. If the
Cheatham equation is used, one determines that the
lateral contact force at the critical buckling
force is equal to two times the buoyant weight of
the pipe. In a horizontal hole, the net contact
force between the pipe and the wall of the hole is
the vector sum of the 1atera1 contact forces due
to buckling and the gravity forces. See Fig. 26.
Si nee the 1atera1 contact forces due to buckl i ng
are always exerted on the pipe in a direction perpendicular to the wall of the hole and the gravity
forces act vertically downward, the net force is
the radial vector component of these two directional forces. At the very top of the hole where the
buckled pipe has been pushed up to contact the
wa11 of the hole, the net force is the numeri ca1
difference between the lateral contact and the
buoyant weight of the pipe. If the Pasley/Dawson
equation is used to define buckling, the net contact force at the critical buckling load is found
to be exactly zero. With the Cheatham relationship, we find that there is a large net force
which is numerically equal to one times the buoyant weight per foot of the pipe.

The field observations of wells subjected to buckling loads, though somewhat limited, suggests that
there are no noticeable surface effects when one
exceeds the critical buckl ing force. Since the
surface measurements would only be effected by
friction forces, we believe that the field observation is better supported by the Pasley/Dawson
equation than by the Cheatham equation where a
significant change in frictional loads should
occur.
NOMENCLATURE APPENDIX C
E

= Young's modulus 29.6 x 10 6 psi for

steel, (psi).

Fcc = Cheatham derived critical buckling

force, (1 bf).

The most import comparison of the two equations is

in the definition of the net contact force between
the critically buckled pipe and the wall of the
hole at the crest of the arch described by a
helical buckle in a horizontal hole. The Pasley/
Dawson equation suggests that the critical buckling force pushes the pipe up to the top of the
hole with positive net forces along all of the
arch except at the very top where the pipe just
barely contacts the top of the hole.
It seems
reasonable that a decrease below the critical
buckling force would tend to drop the pipe away
from the top of the hole and an increase would
merely cause the contact force to increase. The
Cheatham equat ion suggests that there is a very
large contact force between the pipe at the top of
the arch when the pipe is under the Cheatham

Moment of inertia of pipe body, (in. 4 ).

Lcf = Lateral contact force between pipe or

buckled pipe and wall of the hole,
(lbf/ft).
r

= Radial clearance between the tool joints

and wall of the hole, (in.).

R = Radius of curvature of buckled pipe, (in.).

W
m = Buoyant weight of pipe, (lb/ft).

413

CRITICAL BUCKLING FORCE AND STRESSES FOR

PIPE IN INCLINED CURVED BOREHOLES

12

---

/BOREHOLE

---.

SPE/IADC 21942

---

/ NON-BUClQ.ED PIPE

--IIII!"'~B~OR~E~HOL~E~------

_____
.............

/ NON-BUCIQ.ED

PIP~

Fig 5. - NON-BUCKLED PIPE IN DROPPING CURVE AT LOW LOADS

Fig 1. -

NON-BUCKLED PIPE IN BUILD CURVE

-;::z

, BOREHOLE

BOREHOLE

Fig 6. -

----..... / B U C = : ; :

Fig 2. -

PIPE BUCKLED IN A BUILD CURVE

PIPE BUCKLED IN A DROPPING CURVE

---

---

--

---

\ NON-BUCIQ.ED PIPE
" BOREHOLE

Fig 7. - NON-BUCKLED PIPE IN DROPPING CURVE AT HIGH LOADS

r- EQUIVALENT
./

SIZED STRAIGHT
BOREHOlE

Fig 3. - COMPARISON BUCKLED PIPE IN CURVED WITH STRAIGHT HOLE

Fig 8. -

BUCKLING IN A DROPPING INTERVAL

~R

borehol

Fig 4. -

R+~R
"-----t--~

BUCKLING IN A BUILD INTERVAL

Fig 9. - HOLE CURVATURE THAT PREVENTS BUCKLING

414

SPE/IADC 21942

FRANK J. SCHUH

CRITICAL BUCKLING IN CURVED BOREHOLES

5 in 19.5 Ib/ft. Grade E DRILL PIPE
Range 2 Pipe with 6-3/8 in. Tooljoint.s
100

90

8...

70

60

50

I
~

CRITICAL BUCKLING IN CURVED BOREHOLES

4.5 in 16.6 Ib/ft Grade E DRILL PIPE
Range 2 Pipe with 6-1/4 in. Tooljoints
100

90

II

\
\

80

~UC1 a.Et

:".1:1

ti

1/

"

30

20

8...

70

60

I
1:11

~i

ae
gle
p ill ~:: Ie
pp R M Ild

ti
o

~UC

...g
~

70

./

60

stliJ j

~\

1/ :0

/ I~

40

30

j,""

10

ti

60

50

B~C ~

'I

1\

If

30

V 9(~. 2:_~e~ 11;AI ~~e

1

20

10

1\

~ 40
=
8

r;{",

~~

D 1m
NI)T B1 C

10

II

In

8.~ in he ~e
11 pp g M lid

1\

...

c.

!LEP

10

-1&1+12-10-8-6-4-20 2 4 6 8 101214

VElmCAL BOLE CURVATURE - del/100 ft.

Fig 11. -

80

g 70
0

P1PF.

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2

BUCKLING OF 4.5 in DRILLPIPE

:2

'{OT BU<KLEp

H::

IoRI l.L ] ~IPE

IN01 BI CKl ED

90

"

'IRTI

ueg
~le
8.5 in.
e
10 IPPi Mtd

II:IU

Ih/

20

CRITICAL BUCKLING IN CURVED BOREHOLES

3.5 in 13.3 lb/ft Grade E DRILL PIPE
Range 2 Pipe with 4-3/4 in. TooIjoints
100

Vt'1

In

fi

m 50

Pit

1/

Fig 12. -

-.1:1

J"

VERTICAL BOLE CURVATURE - del/100 ft.

II

:2

-12-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0

BUCKLING OF 5 in. DRILLPIPE

80

j.

10

CRITICAL BUCKLING IN CURVED BOREHOLES

5 in 19.5 Ib/ft. Grade E DRILL PIPE
Range 2 Pipe with 6-3/8 in. TooIjoints
100
90

1/

1/

40

VElmCAL BOLE CURVATURE - del/100 ft.

I~

BU ~ -;{

10

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2

Fig 10. -

20

Pl PF.
~OT BUI KLEp

30

I1RTI.

10

80

m 50

1/

II

1\

:2

40

13

VElmCAL BOLE CURVATURE - del/100 fl.

Fig 13. -

BUCKLING AT 45 AND 90 deg.

415

BUCKLING OF 3.5 in DRILLPIPE

CRITICAL BUCKLING FORCE AND STRESSES FOR

PIPE IN INCLINED CURVED BOREHOLES

14

CRITICAL BUCKUNG IN CURVED BOREHOLES

5 in 49.3 Ib/ft HEVlWATE DRILL PIPE
Range 2 Pipe with 6-1/2 in. Tooljoints
100
P [PE
BU
90

CRITICAL BUCKUNG IN CURVED BOREHOLES

3.5 in 25.3 Ib/ft HEVlWATE DRILL PIPE
Range 2 Pipe with 4-3/4 in. Tooljoints
100

8...

90

80
70

/
I
~

SPE/IADC 21942

80

.,;

:2
0
0
0

...

70

60

~~

tc ppI M ild

20
10

~OT

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2

20

~V

10

NOT Bt CKI ED

10

V
aeg AD. ~le

18~5 in. Ho e

10 ppg MlJd

-12-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0

Vl:RTICAL BOLE CURVATURE - de./l00 ft.

30

BU< KLED

40

8. 5~ ~: fie

1/

\,

':II

50

HE
BU

10

VERTICAL BOLE CURVATURE - de./l00 It.

Fig 14. -jBUCKUNG OF 5 in HEVlWATE

Fig 16. - BUCK!JNG OF 3.5 in HEVlWATE

CRITIC~eKUNG IN CURVED BOREHOLES

4.5 in 4'UJ"lb/ft HEVIWATE DRILL PIPE
Ranle 2c-~lpe with 6-1/4 in. Tooljoints
,.
100

90

...

!Buc ~1

~V

80
70

r /
/
1/

/
I

V/

fig 17. - MAXIMUM BENDING STRESS WITH COMPRESSIVE AXIAL LOAD

/
8~ 5 i~ !riB: :fie
l(

20
10

pp g

M~d

~OT BU( KLED

I
...
1...
1----

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2

10

VERTICAL HOLE CURVATURE - de./l00 ft.

Fig 15. -

L/2----l~1

Fig 18. - CENTER OF PIPE BODY JUST TOUCHING

BUCKUNG OF 4.5 in HEVlWATE

416

SPE/IADC 21942

FRANK J. SCHUH

15

MAX BENDING STRESS IN CURVED BOREHOLES

5 in 19.5 Ib/ft Grade E DRIlL PIPE
Range 2 Pipe with 6-3/8 in. Tooljoints

MAX BENDING STRESS IN CURVED BOREHOLES

3.5 in 13.3 Ib/ft Grade E DRILL PIPE
Range 2 Pipe with 4-3/4 in. Tooljoints

25,...-....,.--.,...-...,,--.....-.,.,-_

25-r----r-~7't'---,.-....,.---.

'"
"Iii

,.

20 +-~~~~~--":=........:J....".~-l---;---::::-"I

Po

..

g
o

In
In

rn
rn

15.

I
III

15

is
10

III

10

90 d~
~le
6.125
. ole
10 pIlg Mud

0
50

40

30
AXIAL COMPRESSIVE LOAD -

60

1000 lb.

30

40

1000 lb.

Fig 21. - STRESSES ON 3.5 in DRIIJ..PIPE

:MAX BENDING STRESS IN CURVED BOREHOLES

MAX BENDING STRESS IN CURVED BOREHOLES

4.5 in 16.6 Ib/ft Grade E DRILL PIPE
Range 2 Pipe with 6-1/4 in. Tooljoints
25 -r---~--~-~":"""'f---,,...-

,.
,."

20

AXIAL COMPRESSIVE LOAD -

Fig 19. - STRESSES ON 5 in DRILlPIPE

""

10

5 in 49.3 lb/ft HEVlWATE DRILL PIPE

Range 2 Pipe with 6-1/2 in. Tooljoints
25

...

"Iii

20

Po

20

g..

..

-....
,..

~O ft..
18 de,.! 1

EST! luTED FATI'" 11:'

bo ft..
14 deg/ 1
bo ft..
10 deg/ 1

lieg/ 1O b ft..

20

30

AXIAL COMPRESSIVE LOAD -

Fig 20. -

40

50

10

20

30

.AXIAL COMPRESSIVE LOAD -

1000 lb.

Fig 22. -

STRESSES ON 4.5 in DRILlPIPE

417

deg/ 00 ft.

+l2 or -

10

.-

on

8.5 .~~ Hoi

10 I IPg Mu

40

50

1000 lb.

STRESSES ON 5 in. HEVIWATE

60

CRITICAL BUCKLING FORCE AND STRESSES FOR

PIPE IN INCLINED CURVED BOREHOLES

16

SPE/IADC 21942

MAX BENDING STRESS IN CURVED BOREHOLES

4.5 in 41.0 Ib/ft HEVIWATE DRILL PIPE
Range 2 Pipe with 6-1/4 in. TooIjoints
25

~
ii~ 20

c
c
c

...

15 --1.4

.--

ESTIlot T1i'n

III

------------

--------~

15\

deg

1.00 ft.

.,.--

MIT

I1nn ft.

L".'

CI

~lEI

10

10

2(

~eg

1(

ppg MId

pr
10

Fig 25. - LATERAL HOLE CURVATURE THAT PREVENTS BUCKLING

AI gle

-2 cl eg/l00 ft.

20

40

30

AXIAL COMPRESSIVE LOAD -

Fig 23. -

50

buckling
contact

1000 lb.

fore.

STRESSES ON 4.5 in HEVIWATE

buckling and gravity vectors

MAX BENDING STRESS IN CURVED BOREHOLES

3.5 in 25.3 Ib/ft HEVIWATE DRILL PIPE
Range 2 Pipe with 4-3/4 in. TooIjoints
25 _r_----,r-----r----.,....--__.

20

...

10 -f----:=:I;;;ooo-=-;----+=_""""''''1

+2

-2 deg/ 00 ft.

o-+-,.....~..,...+_r~..,...,....-Io~..,...,......,.-+..,...,......,.........4
o
10
20
30
40
AXIAL COMPRESSIVE LOAD -

net contact force

Fig 26. - HORIZONTAL BUCKLING FORCES - PASLEY-DAWSON CRITICAL FORCE

LENGTH--~

eg/ 1OO ft..

6 d g/100 t..

+2

III

!i

HALF PITCH

1000 lb.

Fig 24. - STRESSES ON 3.5 in HEVIWATE

418