SPE/IADC 39258
Soxaty of Petleun Enger
ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION OF DYNAMIC KILL FOR THE CONTROL OF
MIDDLE-EAST SURFACE BLOWOUTS
Dhafer A. Al-Shehri, SPE, Saudi Aramco
ony 187, SPEAADC Mi Ea Oi Tesrey Coren
‘Th ge na puedo grsrian hw 1897 SPEAADC Mid Eat Ding
Tec Caine hls Bar 25°25 Noe
‘he ae etn SPER Pg Gren ag
‘pr harass ri Se pe See rt
SSee cee ae ee
Bae ce ceaentrmeria mesan Cation
SSH iy ete secre ace
‘Sreavutde an abaet ovat mare hon eraion may nt be capos he
Roe
Brana Sas
Abstract
This paper presents some results from research
work!, The purpose of this work was to investigate and
assess the potential of dynamic kill as a method for
controlling blowouts from producing gas and oil wells. Only
scattered and little previous work was done on dynamic kill,
particularly in the areas of gas kicks and blowouts during
drilling. Blowouts of oil and gas wells after completion and
starting production have received much less investigation.
In this work, a new dynamic kill model was
developed for controlling surface induced blowouts of oil and
{gas wells, The model simulates multiphase flow in a blowout
and relief wells. Dynamic simulation is performed for both
Kill through a relief well and through in-well surface
injection.
The simulator makes use of proven multiphase flow
‘models. Several assumptions and improvements are added or
included in these models
to account for flow geometry, temperature variation in the
flow conduits and the effect'of sonic flow closer to the
The simulator predicts and links the expected
reservoir performance with wellbore hydraulics, The effects
Of introducing the kill fluid into the well stream are also
simulated,
Relief well dynamic kill simulations can predict the
minimum injection flow rate into the relief and blowout
wells, initial and final kill fluid densities, size and type of
drilling string requirement for achieving the required kill
125
rate(s) in the relief well(s),_ and horse power requirements.
‘Simulations can also check for ability to inject at the desired
rate through the formation. In the case of in-well kill, the
‘model can be used to determine the optimum location of the
point of kill fui injection.
‘The model results were in agreement with data
presented in the literature and from Kuwait field
measurements
‘The simulator leads to a much better level of
understanding of blowout behavior and the potential of
dynamic kill to bring gas and oil blowouts under contro.
Background and Introduction
A blowout can have catastrophic consequences
including loss of lives, environmental pollution, loss of
irreplaceable petroleum reserves, combat costs and other
direct and indirect costs to fight the fires and bring the
blowout wells under control. Such costs could measure in
billions of dollars. Events of the year 1991 in The Middle
East and the huge magnitude of the blowouts in Kuwait have
focused attention on the seriousness ofthis problem.
‘The dynamic kill method has been used in many
cases as a successful way to control a blowing well
Different aspects of dynamic kill and field cases are found in
the literature.20-45
‘The method involves injecting a fluid, such as water,
whose density is less than that required to control the
downhole pressure hydrostatically. The fluid flow rate must
be high enough so that the frictional head of the dynamic kill
fluid and blowout fluids, plus hydrostatic pressure of the
‘mixture, exceed the static formation pressure. Thus, the well
is dead as long as a sufficiently high injection flow rate is
maintained.
‘fer the formation stops flowing and the blowout
wellbore is swept of blowout fluids «fluid of suficent
density to statically control formation pressure is pumped
into the wellbore. Dynamic coniol is maintained unl the
final Kil Mid statically controls the well
There are two main options available for injecting2 hater A. Al-Sheh
\ADCISPE 39258
kill fluid into the blowing well (see Fig. 1). The kill fluid can
either be introduced from the surface directly into the
blowing well or by injecting the kill fluid through one or
‘more relief wells when the in-well kill is impractical
‘The dynamic kill as a method of controlling blow=
out wells is a promising one. It can have a wide range of
application. Assessing the technique and investigating the
range of application are primary motivations for this research.
‘The Mathematical Approach and Methodology
For any successful kill operation, the bottomhole
pressure must be greater than the sandface pressure for any
reservoir fluid rate. In graphical terms, the system intake
(wellbore hydraulics) curve must lie above or tangent to the
Inflow Performance Relationship (IPR) curve (see Fig. 2).
For a kill fluid of any selected density, a stable flow
condition would result if the wellbore hydraulics performance
curve intersects the reservoir performance curve. That is, the
reservoir would continue to produce at the rate corresponding
to the point of intersection, and the well would not be killed.
If the wellbore hydraulics performance curve lies entirely
above the reservoir performance curve, then a stable oil or
gas-lift flow condition would not be possible and the well
would be killed. In the example shown in Fig. 2, a fluid
injection rate between 20 and 30 barrels per minute will kill
the wel
‘The basic approach to dynamic kill modeling will be
based on treating the relief well and the blowout well as one
system. The producing system is the blowing well and the
relief well (if a relief well is used). If in-well injection is
used, the producing system is the blowing well and the in-
well injection sting. The inflow performance relationship
and production string’s flow rates will interact to determine
the conditions at which dynamic killing willbe achieved
A dynamic kil will involve multiphase flow inthe
wellbore “he distibution of gas and liqud phases can be
very complex in multiphase flows making, computations
based on ist principles simost nonexistent
Two different approaches are commonly used to
develop predictive tools for describing complex fluid
mechanics problems. The empirical approach involves
developing Simplified models containing parameters that
must be evaluated with experimental data. Correlating
variables are dimensionless groups determined by performing
dimensional analysis of the phenomena involved. A classic
example of this for a single phase fuid flow is the Moody
diagram, in which fiction factors are correlated as a function
of Reynolds number and relative roughness for turbulent
flows.” The empirical approach does not address why or how
things happen, but can yield excellent results quickly
depending on the proper selection of variables and the quakity
of data used for the correlation. The second approach
involves developing physically based mechanistic models
that describe all important phenomena. ‘This requires much
tore in depth understanding and long term research,
In this research, I modeled the multiphase flow with
the aid of the best available correlation which is credited to
126
Beggs and Brill 46
Improvements to this correlation were suggested and
‘implemented.
Analysis Method
‘The calculation procedure is based on a steady-state
system analysis. In applying this analysis, the
following steps are followed:
1. Determine the inflow performance of the
reservoir (flowing bottom-hole pressure as a
function of reservoir fluids production rate).
2. Determine the wellbore intake flow
performance for various liquid injection rates
taking into account pressure changes due to
elevation, friction, acceleration, and the
possibility of critical (sonic) flow. Hydraulic
pressure drops are related to measured depths,
but fluid heads are related to true vertical
depths.
3. Determine the kill injection rate from the plot as
the line of constant injection rate which is just
above and does not touch the inflow
performance line of the reservoir.
4, Plot the lowing annular pressure as a function
of depth for various liquid injection rates up to
the known kill injection rate,
5. Determine the frictional pressure losses in the
injection string with and without friction
reducers being present, The friction reducers
are assumed t0 affect the pressure losses in the
injection string only,
6 Determine surface injection pressure and
hydraulic power requirements with and without
friction reducers being present.
In this research, the blowout dynamic kill mode! will
take into consideration and investigate the effect of bottom-
hole static pressure, subsurface formations fracture pressures,
deliverability of the well and hydraulic constrains,
‘The simulator determines the following
‘The density of the initial kill fluids.
‘The dynamic flow rate needed inthe blowout
‘The injection flow rate needed in the relief well
Pumping power requirements.
‘Tubular sizes needed in the relief well.
‘The maximum allowable bottom-hole pressure
in the blow out well
‘The ability to inject at desired rate through the
formation.
In the case of in-well kill , determine the
optimum location of the point of kill fluid
injection in order to 1e. most benefit of
available surface pumping equipment, available
2 pee peTADOISPE 39088
MIDDLE-EAST SURFACE BLOWOUTS
ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION OF DYNAMIC KILL FOR THE CONTROL OF
injection fluids, and the strengths of available
tubing
9, Evaluate the mode! and compare results with
available data in literature and elsewhere.
Relief Well Dynamic Kill Application
Regaining control over a blown out well might
necessitate the directional drilling of one or more relief wells
to attempt a kill from within the formation. If the surface
equipment are not intact or if the produced fluids contain
poisonous gases and the fire cannot be safely put out, then
relief well kill approach may become the only solution,
‘The basic approach to dynamic kill is based on
treating the relief well and the blowout well as one system.
Fig. 3 depicts the dynamic kill system and the conditions of
‘Arun blowout 20
‘An ideal dynamic kill procedure through a relief
well would follow this sequence:203
1. Establishing communication between the relief
well and the blowout well by acid worm-hole or
fracturing,
Testing the communication between the two
wells to determine its adequacy for dynamic
kil
3. Injecting the initial kill fluid at the determined
dynamic kill rate or the rate that will give a
bottomhole pressure less than the formation
fracture pressure. If the pressure at which the
tubing of drill string will be ejected is less than
formation fracture pressure but greater than
static formation pressure, then the ejection
pressure will be the limiting pressure,
4. Once dynamic kill is achieved, converting to
intermediate weight mud should start. Injection
of the intermediate weight mud will be at the
same rate as the initial kill mud until the
intermediate mud passes the relief well shoe
and starts up the blowout well.
5. Injection rate is reduced as needed to keep the
relief well bottomhole pressure below the
fracture pressure. The rate, however, should not
be reduced to the extent that the bottomhole
pressure of the blowout well will drop below
the static formation pressure.
6 When the blowout well becomes full of the
intermediate weight fluid, injection of final
heavy kill fluid is started. Injection at the
intermediate weight fluid rate continues until
the final kill mud enters the wellbore of the
blowout well
7. Injection rate is reduced as required to keep the
bottombole pressure in the relief well below the
127
formation fracture pressure and the bottomhole
pressure in the blowout well above the
formation static pressure
8. As the blowout well becomes full with the final
Kail fluid, injection is continued at a low rate for
a few hours while observing the well,
9. When there are no indications of gas or oil
influx , the injection is discontinued while the
blowout well is observed, The kill fluid will
probably flow out the surface slowly for some
{ime because of thermal expansion.
Afier the well is dead, the capping operations
are stated.
Blowout Flow Rate Determination
As explained earlier, it is possible to calculate and
plot both inflow and tubing performance relations. When at a
specific rate these two pressures are equal, the flow system is,
‘equilibrium and flow is stable. ‘The intersection of the IPR
id tubing intake curves determines the rate of stable flow
from a particular well. The equilibrium rate and pressure
constitute the natural flow point. If the two relations do not
intersect, then production is impossible from the well
exhibiting these relations.
Mathematically, the stable point of natural flow
exists when the two performance relations intersect with
slopes (i.c., derivatives) of opposite signs. If the two curves
hhave slopes of similar signs when they intersect, at a lower
rate, then only a small change in the rate will cause the
system to change its state of equilibrium, either killing the
‘well or moving it toward the stable point of natural flow.
Fig. 4 is a flow chart of the algorithm used to
determine the dynamic kill rate in this work.
Relief Well Dynamic Kill Rate Variables Simulation
Derivations and details of relief well dynamic kill
rate variables used in this model are given in reference |.
‘These parameters include the minimum injection flow rate
into the relief and blowout wells, the intial and final kill luid
densities, the size and type of drilling string requirement for
achieving the required kill ratc(s) in the relicf well(s), and
horse power requirements. Simulations can also check for
ability to inject at the desired rate through the formation.
Surface Momentum and Off-Bottom Dynamic Kill
‘Applications
A surface dynamic Kill ( top kill ) to control a
blowout by pumping or circulating fluid into the well is often
attempted. This approach accounts for a majority of all
successful well control operations *
The surface momentum kill is possible only if thea Dhater A. AlShehri
IADCISPE 39258
lifting capacity of the blowout can be overcome without
exceeding the strength of the tubular being pumped through.
Itis sometimes possible to kill the well with a heavy brine or
mud. Brines have lower viscosity allowing for higher
pumping rates.>
again, derivations and details of relief well dynamic
kill rate variables used in this model are given in reference |
‘There are some applications when the Kill fluids
may have to be injected some distance from the bottom of the
blowout well. In this case, the volume fraction of kill fluid
below the point of injection (POL) needs toe estimated
Injection of the kill luid at the POI does not insure that the
kill fluid will displace the reservoir fluids below the POL
Special Features of Model
Fluid physical properties correlations are used to
predict fluid properties in this work. ‘These properties are
‘evaluated at the pressures and temperatures of interest in the
wellbore.
‘The Swamee-Jain’® equation is used in this work to
predict the friction factor for Newtonian fluids:
[ 1 eae + as) i
NRe
Drilling muds and other drag reducing fluids may be
used as kill fluids.232* These fluids will exhibit non-
‘Newtonian behavior
A simple volumetric weighting rule for, two-phase
liquid-liquid viscosity has been found inadequate.*667
To predict the frictional pressure losses, the power
law model is used in this work to characterize the theological
behavior of non-Newtonian fluids
For the case of flow in the annulus, Kouba‘? pointed
cout that an equivalent arca diameter, dye, defined below, is a
more meaningful alternative as the fully eccentric tubing
diameter gets smaller relative to the casing diameter
dae = VR - A
Calculating he friction factor using dag gave
excellent agreement with Cactano’s”! friction factor data for
single phase flow in a fully eccentric annulus.
In this dynamic kill model, heat transfer is assumed to be at
steady state, hence the heat transfer across each clement in
the wellbore must be constant, This assumption allows us to
write the rate of heat transfer across each element in terms of.
the temperature difference across the element and the
resistance offered by the element
Evaluation of the overall heat transfer coefficient,U,
is a difficult and critical step in finding an accurate solution,
Also accounting for both the Joule-Thompson and the kinetic
128
energy effects is important, We made several assumptions in
order tg simplify the expression for U and make use of Sagar
et al. ” correlation for the Joule-Thompson and the kinetic
nergy effects
‘The model also took in consideration the critical
flow conditions and in these cases gas flow can be estimated
using an equation for an adiabatic frictionless flow of an ideal
gas through an orifice,
Results and Discussion
In this section, I will summarize the different aspects
of the dynamic kill simulator "DK". The results from two
dynamic simulated kills for a gas and an oil well blowout are
presented. The model results will be tested by comparing
them to available field and literature data. Finally, I will
show how the model results can be used to improve the
design and the practical application of a dynamic kill
‘operation,
‘The most important parameter in evaluating the
potential of a dynamic kill for a blowout control is the kill
fluid rate needed. A gas well blowout as well as an oil well
blowout are discussed
Laswell case: (Arun Blowout).
‘The Arun blowout was a huge gas well blowout in
Indonesia.!292 "It is considered the Targest gas blowout
ever. Well no, C-II-2 blew out while drilling June 4, 1978,
‘The well caught fire, destroyed the drilling rig and burned for
89 days at an approximate rate of 400 MMscfd,
A tubing was used in the relief (killer) well for
Pressure measurement and acid injection was employed to
establish communication. The acid enlarged the
‘communication channel. Then mud was injected to form a
filter cake on the channel walls to reduce loss of kill fluid to
the formation. The kill fluid was then injected through the
annulus of the killer well
Data is extracted from references 20 and 43. Table
1 summarizes these data,
1. Blowout flow rate:
‘The intersection of the IPR and tubing intake curves
determines the rate of stable flow from a particular well. The
equilibrium rate and pressure constitute the natural flow
point. If the two relations do not intersect, then production is.
Impossible from the well exhibiting these relations,
Mathematically, the stable point of natural flow exists when
the two performance relations intersect with slopes (ie.,
derivatives) of opposite signs.
The intersection of the inflow performance
relationship (IPR) and the wellbore tubing performance
relationship (TPR) determines the blowout flow rate, Fig. 5
indicates that this blowout is producing 447 MMscfd. This
value agrees with data presented in the literature 2049IADOISPE 29058, ASSESSMENT OF API
MIDDLE-EAST SURFACE BLOWOUTS
TION OF DYNAMIC KILL FOR THE CONTROL OF 5
2. Blowout kill rate:
For a kill fluid of any selected density, a stable flow
condition would result if the wellbore hydraulics performance
‘curve intersects the reservoir performance curve. That is, the
reservoir would continue to produce at the rate corresponding
to the point of intersection, and the well would not be killed
If the wellbore hydraulics performance curve lies entirely,
above the reservoir performance curve, then a stable oil or
{gas-lif flow condition would not be possible, and the well
‘would be killed.
Fig. 6 shows that as the injection rate of kill fluid
increases the gas natural flow decreases and finally flow will
stop at an injection rate of 82 barrels/min. This value agrees
‘very well with the value reported in Reference 29.
Fig. 7 presents the dynamic kill rates needed for
controlling the blowout for various densities of the kill fluid.
Required kill rates are 64, 44 and 16 barrels per minute for
Kill uid densities of 10, 12, and 14 ppg respectively
Fig. 8 shows how the bottomhole pressure varies
with the dynamic kill rate, For a specific kill lid density,
the reservoir pressure of 7100 psia will be overcome when
enough kill fluid rate is achieved
Fig. 9 shows the bottomhole pressure versus
‘dynamic kill rate when the equivalent area diameter, dae, oF
the hydraulic diameter are used. Area based equivalent
diameter, which is defined previously. yields more realistic
and conservative dynamic kill rates. When an initial kill
fluid with a density of 10 ppg is used, a kill rate of 64
bbis/min is required. However, if a simulation is performed
‘with the hydraulic diameter defined above a far less realistic
and misleading flow rate of only 45 bbls/min, will be
roquired.
‘The use of an equivalent area diameter, dae, was
found to be a more conservative and meaningful alternative
for the prediction of friction factor for flow in a fully
‘eccentric annulus . The use of the hydraulic diameter results
in overprediction of friction factor and underprediction of kill
rate requirement. Calculating the friction factor using dag
gave excellent agreement with Cactano’s”! friction factor
data for single phase flow in a fully eccentric annulus.
3. In-Well dynamic control:
Fig. 10 indicates clearly that the in-well dynamic
kill rate required to control Arun gas blowout is practically
impossible. Even for kill fluid densities as high as 30 ppg and
epths of several hundreds of feet , kill rates exceeding 110
bbbls/min would have been needed,
Oil well case: (Burgan Blowout).
Figs 11-13 present similar simulation results of a
blowout in an oil well from the Burgan oil field in Saud:
Arabia-Kuwait neutral zone. Data of a typical well is given
in table 2
129
Itis clear that a kill from the surface is the method
of choice to killa blowout in this case. Fig. 11 indicate that a
relief well kill rate of only 5.25 bbls/min. 1s enough to control
the well. However, as Fig. 12 shows, a surface kill rate of
only 4.0 bbls/min, will kill the well and save the cost of
drilling a relief well
Figure 13 presents the kill rates needed when
cquivalent aca diameter, dae, or the hydraulic diameter are
CONCLUSIONS
‘The following conclusions can be made based on the
analysis and the model developed:
1. A dynamic kill model was developed for controlling
surface induced blowouts of oil and gas wells.
Dynamic kill simulation is performed for both kill
through a relief well or through In-Well surface
injection,
2. Relief well dynamic kill simulations can predict the
minimum injection flow rate into the relief and
blowout wells, initial and final kill fuid densities,
size and type of drilling string requirement for
achieving ‘the required kill rate(s) in the relief
well(s), horse power requirements and check for
ability to inject at desired rate through the formation,
3, In the case of in-well kill, the model determines the
optimum locaton of the pointof kil fluid inetion
1m order to gain the most benefit of available surface
pumping equipment, available injection fluids, and
the strengths of available tubing.
4 The model results were in agreement with data
presented in literature and acquired data from
Kuwait
5. Emulsions formation is not significant in affecting
wellbore fluids viscosities during dynamic killing.
Only oil in brine emulsions are formed whose
viscosities may be approximated using brine’s
viscosity,
6 Athigh flow rates, the distribution of gas and oil in
‘a dynamic kill is found to be homogencous with no
slippage between the phases. However, neglecting
slippage of the gas relative (o the liquid at moderate
rates will cause underprediction of pressure loss
resulting in overprediction of the kill rate
7. ‘The use of an equivalent arca diameter, dye, was
found to be a more conservative and meaningful
alternative for the prediction of friction factor for
flow in a fully eccentric annulus . The use of the
hydraulic diarncter results in the over prediction of
friction factor and underpredicion of kill rate
requirments. Calculating the frction factor using dye
gave excellent agreement with Cactano's™ ficuos6 Dhater A Al-Shaht
laDcisPE 39258
factor data for single phase flow in a fully eccentric
annulus.
‘Nomenclature
4 diameter, —
doe equivalent area diameter, 4, 45°
t
dei casing or hole size diameter f
diy outside diameter of inner pipe, ft
D? depth ft
Dag the raie-dependent skin, Eg. 38.5
| telative roughness
{fiction factor
Nre Reynolds number, dimensionless
Pwh wellhead pressure, psig
pr pressure, psig
Gg gas low rate, Msct/D
Qo il flow rate, STB/D
dw water flow rate, STB/D
T temperature, °F
U overall heat transfer coefficient, Brw/D-f2-°F,
References
1. Al-Shebri:, D.A"A Study in the Dynamic Kill for the
Control of Induced Surface Blowouis" PhD dissertation,
Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, (1994)
2. Fisk, P.: "Final Blaze Doused in Kuwait
(November/December 1991) 33.
Well Servicing
3. Westergaard, RH: All about Blowout, Norwegian Oil
Review, Oslo, Norway (1987),
4. Hughes, V.MLP., Podio, A.L. and Sepehmoori, K. "A
Computer-Assisted Analysis of Trends Among Gulf
Coast Blowouts,” Jn Situ (lune 1990) 201-228,
5. Dahl, B. and Bern, TJ.: "Risk of Oil and Gas Blowout
fon the Norwegian Continental Shelf-Data from 172
Blowouts,” Project no. 880354.14. Trondheim, Norway.
(Feb. 15,1983).
6 Mundheim, 0, er al: “Offshore Blowout Control,
OTTER Group Report No. STF 88 A81004, Trondheim,
Norway. (1981.)
7. Sayers, B.: "Capping Blowouts from Iran's Eight-Year
War,” "World Oil (May 1991) 44-50
8 Anonymous: "Well Control Team Caps Underwater
Blowout; Part 1- Planning Phase," Petroleum Engineer
International (Nov. 1987) 22-26.
9. Anonymous.: "Well Control Team Caps Underwater
Blowout; Part 2- Execution Phase,” Petroleum Engineer
Intemational (Dec. 1987) 32-38.
10, Adams, NJ, etal: “A Case History of Underwater Wild
130
IL
12,
1B.
4.
15.
16.
9
21
22.
2B.
Well Capping: Successful Implementation of New
Technology on the SLB-5-4X Blowout in Lake
Maracaibo, Venezuela,” paper SPE 16673 presented at
the 1987 Annual Fall Meeting, Dallas, TX, September
27-30, 1987.
Anonymous.: "Controlling and Capping a Prolific
Mexican Blowout," World Oi! (Feb. 1981) 69-71
"Fluid Dynamics Used to Kill
World Oil (April 1989) 47-
Grace, R.D. and Cudd, B.:
South Louisiana Blowout,”
50,
Grace, R.D.: "Fluid Dynamics Kill Wyoming Icicle.”
World Oil (April 1987) 45-53.
Cudd, B. and Grace, R.D.: "Deep Apache Well
Controlled Successfully," Petroleum Engineer
International (March 1985) 52-57.
Grace, R.D.: "Practical Considerations in Pressure
Controt Procedures in the Field Drilling Operations,"
JPT (Aug. 1977) 1031-36,
Leonard, J. and Whipstock, E.: "Single Relief Well Kills
Arun Blowout” Ot! and Gas Journal Jan. 8, 1979) 73-
Leraand, F., Wright, J.W., Zachary, M.B. and
‘Thompson, B.G.: "Relicf-Well Planning and Drilling for
a North Sea Underground Blowout” JPT (March 1992)
Lehner, F. and Williamson, A.S.: "Gas-Blowout Control
By Water Injection Through Relief Wells - A Theoretical
Analysis.” SPE (Aug. 1974) 321-329.
Igrevskii, V.I. and Mangushev, K.L.: "Prevention and
Elimination of Oil and Gas Blowouts,” Translation from
Russian by Addis Translation International, 94 pp., San
Francisco, CA., USA (Sept. 1975)
Blount, E.M. and Soeiinah, E.
Controlling Wild Weils a New Way
1981) 109-26.
Lynch, R.D and er al.: "Dynamic Kill of an Uncontrolled
(02 Well," JPT (July 1985) 1267-75.
Dynamic Kill
World Oil (Oct
Wariner, RA. and Cassity, T.G.: "Relief-Well
Requirements to Kill a High-Rate Gas Blowout From a
Deep Water Reservoir,” JPT (Dec. 1988) 1602-08.
ly, J.W.: "Polymer Use in Blowout
IPT (May 1978) 708-711.
Ely, J.W. and Holditch, S.A.: "Conventional and
Unconventional Kill Techniques for Wild Wells,” paper
‘SPE 16674 presented at the 1987 Annual Fall Meeting,
Dallas, TX, September 27-30, 1987.
Clark, A.R. and Perkins, T.K.: "Wellbore and Near-
Surface Hydraulics of a’ Blown-Out Oil Well," JPT
(Nov. 1981) 2181-88.TADOISPE 39258 ASSESSMENT OF APPLICATION OF DYNAMIC KILL FOR THE CONTROL OF 7
MIDDLE-EAST SURFACE BLOWOUTS.
26. Gillespie, J.D. et al: “Study of the Potential for an Off- ai the 1989 Annual Fall Meeting, San Antonio, TX,
Bottom Dynamic Kill of a Gas Well Having an
Underground Blowout,” paper SPE 17254 presented at
the 1988 IADCISPE Drilling Conference, Dallas, TX,
February 28-March 2,1988.
27. Voisin, J.A. etal: "Relief Well Planning and Drilling for
SLB-5-4X Blowout, Lake Maracaibo, Venezuela," paper
‘SPE 16677 presented at the 1987 Annual Fall M
Dallas, TX, September 27-30, 1987.
28, Miller, RT. and Clements, R.L.: "Reservoir Engineering
Techniques Used to Predict Blowout Control ducing the
Bay Marchand Fie,” JPT (March 1972) 234-240
29. Nelson, RF. "The Bay Marchand Fire," JPT (March
1972) 225.233.
30. Olberg, T'S. Leraand, F., Gilhuus, T. and Haga, J: "Re-
Entry and Relief Well Drilling to Kill an Underground
Blowout in a Subsea Well: A Case History of Well 2/4-
14," paper SPE 21991 presented at the IADC/SPE
Drilling Conference, Houston, TX, Feb. 27-March 2,
1990,
31. Anwine, L.C.: "Well Control Effort Produced Valuable
Experience,” World Oil (October 1978) 67-70
32. Lewis, 1B: "New uses of Existing Technology for
Controlling Blowouts: Chronology of a Blowout
Offshore Louisiana,” JPT (October 1978) 1473-1480.
33, Suman K- and Nusa. B;"Dynamic Kling Method
as Applied to Well PSI-A," paper presented at the
Indonesian Petroleum Association Fourteenth Annual
Convention, Jakarta, Indonesia, October 8-10, 1985.
34, Grace, RD. et al: "Spindletop Revisited- Operation at a
Deep Relief Wel,” paper SPE 22562_ presented at the
1991 Annual Fali Meeting, Dallas, TX, October 6-9,
1991
35, Davenport, H.H. et al.: "How Shell Controlled Its Gulf
of Mexico Blowouts," World Oil (Nov. 1971) 71-73,
36. Beall, E, and Horler, C.L.: "A Shallow Gas Blowout
Offshore Korea- Another Data Point in Industry's
Learning Curve,” paper SPE/ADC 21994 presented at
the 1991 SPEMADC Drilling Conference , Amsterdam,
Netherlands, March 11-14, 1991.
37. Koederitz, FE. et al.: "Method for Determining the
Feasibility of Dynamic Kill of Shallow Gas Flows
paper SPE 16691 presented at the 1987 Annual Fail
Meeting, Dallas, TX, September 27-30, 1987.
38, Negrao, A.J. and Maidla, E.E.: "Optimization of Flow
Rate Selection for Kick Control in Deep Waters,” paper
SPE 19565 presented at the 1989 Annual Fall Mesting,
‘San Antonio, TX, October 8-11, 1989,
39. Bode, DJ. etal.: "Well Control Methods and Practices in
Smali-Diameter Wellbores," paper SPE 19529 presented
131
4
8.
41.
3,
34.
55.
. Starret, A.D. et al.
5. Beggs, H.D. and Brill, 1P.
. Beggs, H.D. and Robinson, J
October 8-11, 1989,
Rygg OLB. and Gilhuus, T.
Phase Pipe Flow Simulator in Blowout Kill Planning
paper SPE 20433 presented at the 1990 Annual Fall
‘Meeting, New Orieans, LA, September 23-26, 1990.
“Use of a Dynamic Two:
Wiegand, F, and Korbut, R.:
Computers in Well Control
International (May 1989) 20.23,
low to Use Portable
Petroleum Engineer
"A Shallow Gas Kick Simulator
Including Diverter Performance," paper SPE 18019
presented at the 1988 Annual Fall Meeting, Houston,
‘TX, October 2-5, 1988,
Kouba, G.E. ef al: "Advancements in Dynamic Kill
Techniques for Blowout Wells," paper SPE 22559
presented at the 1991 Annual Fall Meeting, Dallas, TX,
October 6-9, 1991,
Anonymous.: "Stinging Procedures Allow Rapid Well
Control,” World Oil (May 1992) 80-81.
Rhodes, A.F: "The Ultimate Control Problem- A Wild
9¢ Gas Well” Mechanical Engineering Gune 1979) 20-
"A Study of Two-Phase
Flow in Inclined Pipes,” JPT (May 1973) 607-617;
Trans., AIME, 255.
Brown, KE .: The Technology of Anificial Lift Methods,
PennWell Publishing Co,, Ine, Tulsa, OK(I984) 4.18-
Brill, J.P. and Beggs, H.D.: Two-Phase Flow in Pipes,
short course textbook, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK,
Sixth Edition (1991),
Szilas, A.P.: Production and Transport of Oil and Gas;
Part A: Flow Mechanics and Production, Second
Edition, Elsevier Science Publishing Co. Inc. London,
England, (1985).
Taitel, Y., Bornea, D., and Duckler, A.E.: "Modeling
Flow Pattern Transition for Steady Upward Gas Flow in
Vertical Tubes,” AICHE J. (May 1980) 345-354.
Lee, AL. et al.: "The Viscosity of Natural Gases," JPT
(August 1966), 997-1000; Trans., AIME, 237.
"Estimating the
Viscosity of Crude Oil System,” JPT (Sept. 1975) 1140-
4
Vazquez, M. and Beggs, H.D.: "Correlations for Fluid
Physical Property Prediction,” JPT (June 1980) 968-70.
‘Van Wingen: Secondary Recovery of Oil in the United
States, API, Washington, DC, (1980), 127.
Woelflin, W.
iscosity of Crude-Oil Emulsions.” Drill.Dhater A. Al-Shehvi
\ADOISPE 39258
$6.
S1.
58,
8.
61.
63
6.
10.
and Prod. Prac. API, Washington, DC, (1942) 148-153.
Baker, D. and Swerdloff, W.O.: “Finding Surface
Tension of Hydrocarbon Liquids,” Oil and Gas Journal,
(an. 2, 1956), 125,
Hough, E.W., Rzasa, M.J., and Wood, B.B.: "Interfacial
Tensions at Reservoir Pressure and Temperature:
Apparatus and the Water-Methane Systems,” Trans.
‘AIME (1951), 192, 57-61
Brill, LP.
15.
"Multiphase Flow in Wells," JPT (lan. 1987)
Jain, AK, and Swamee, P.K.: “Explicit Equations for
Pipe-Flow Problems." J. Hydraulics Division, ASCE
1976), 102, 657.
Sutton, R.P.: "“Compressibility Factors for High-
Molecular- Weight Reservoir Gases," paper SPE 14265
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Las Vegas, NV, Sept. 22-25, 1985.
Yarborough, L. and Hall, K.R: “How to Solve Equation
of State for Z-Tactor,” Oil and Gas Journal, (February
18, 1974), 86.
Culbertson, O.L. and MeKetta, JJ “Solubility of
Methane in’ Water at Pressures to 10,000 Psia,” Trans.,
AIME (1951), 192, 223-226.
Gould, TL: "Vertical Two-Phase Steam-Water Flow in
Geothermal Wells," JPT (June 1974) 833-38.
Katz, D.L et al : Handbook of Natural Gas Engineering.
McGraw-Hill Book Co., Ine., New York City, (1959)
He-113
Oden, RD. and Jennings, J.W.: "Modification of the
Cullendar_ and Smith Equation for More Accurate
Bottom-Hole Pressure Calculations in Gas Wells,” paper
SSPE 17306 presented at the 1988 Permian Basin Oil and
Gas Recovery Conference, Midland, TX, March 10-
11,1988,
Kumar, S: Gas Production Engineering, Gulf
Publishing Company, Houston (1987).
Martinez, A.E., Arirachakaran, S., Shoham, Q. and Brill,
IP.: "Prediction of Dispersion Viscosity of Oil/Water
‘Mixture Flow in Horizontal Pipes.” paper SPE. 18221
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conferen
Exhibition, Houston, TX, Oct. 2-5, 1988,
Savins, 1.G.: "Generalized Newton
Flow in Stationary Pipes and Annuli,” Trans., AIME.
(1958), 213, 325-332,
Craft, B.C. and Holden, W.R.: Well Design, Drilling and
Production, Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ,
(1962),
Metzner, A.B. and Reed, J.C.: "Flow of Non-Newtonian
Fluids - Corvelation of the Laminar, Transition, and
‘Turbulent-Flow Regions,” AIChE J, (Dec. 1955) 1, n0.4,
434-440,
132
n
B
1.
75
16.
n.
B
p
80.
81
82,
83,
85.
Caetano, E.: "Upward Vertical Two-Phase Flow
‘Through’an Annulus,” PhD Dissertation, University of
Tulsa, Tulsa, OK (1986),
Sagar, RK, Doty, D.R, and Schmidt, Z.: "Predicting
Temperature Profiles in a Flowing Well,” paper SPE
19702 presented at the 1989 Annual Fall Meeting, San
Antonio, TX, October 8-11, 1989.
Willhite, G.P.: "Over-all Heat Transfer Coefficients in
Steam and Hot Water Injection Wells," JPT (May 1967)
607-615.
Shiu, KC. and Beggs, H.D.: "Predicting Temperatures
in Flowing Oil Wells," Journal of Energy Resources
Technology (March 1980) 2-11
Ramey, HJ." Wellbore Heat Transmission,” JPT (April
1962) 427-435,
Chiu, K, and Thakur, $.C.: "Modeling of Wellbore Heat
Losses in Directional Wells Under Changing Injection
Conditions,” paper SPE. 22870 presented at the 1991
Annual Fall Meeting, Dallas, TX, October 6.9, 1991
Hasan, ALR. and Kabir, C.S.: "Heat Transfer During
‘Two-Phase Flow in Welibores: Part I- Formation
Temperature,” paper SPE 22866 presented at the 1991
Annual Fall Meeting, Dallas, TX, October 6-9, 1991
Hasan, A.R. and Kabir, C.S.: "Heat Transfer During
Two-Phase Flow in Wellbores: Part II- Wellbore Fluid
Temperature,” paper SPE 22948 presented at the 1991
Annual Fall Meeting, Dallas, TX, October 6-9, 1991
Coulter, D.M. and Bardon, M.F.: "Revised Equation
Improves Flowing Gas Temperature Prediction,” Oil and
Gas Journai (Feb. 1979) 107-108.
Nind, T.E.W.: Principles of Oil Well Production, 2nd
Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York City,
(198,
Binder, R.C.: Fluid Mechanics, Sth ed., Prentice-Hall,
Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1973).
Whitson, C.H, and Golan, M.: Weil Performance,
Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1986)
Rawlins, E.L. and Schellhardt, M.A. Back-Pressure
Data on Natural Gas Wells and Their Application to
Production Practices, U.S. Bureau of Mines Monograph
7, Washington, DC, (1936),
Vogel, J. ¥.: "Inflow Performance Relationships for
Solution-Gas Drive Wells,” JPT (Jan. 1968) 83-
92;Trans., AIME, 243,
Sukarno,
in Two-Phase and Three-Phase Flow Conditions,
dissertation, U. of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK (1987).
“Inflow Performance Relationship Curves
nD.Re Wa
Blowing We
Ir
ih /j
ig. - Sctemati of blowout well showing the ro posible options of
yam kag be vel well an eet wel injecon
Pigg = BHP- Wate + Py
Pag = BHP Phys +P
5
2 we
a 2
e A
z OH om
go>
a wt
£
24 ot
3
zy
E
°
rr
(GAS PLOW RATE, Qe, sc)
Fig.2, Prete nfo perfomance and system imake curves fr
$svelinecon ts for daniel af well Dawes
Ne Cont
Orbea)
“hye
Fig 3 -tnasclet wel blowout well sytem se
(Gv he aps oe eet wel et Ra tao
‘Slowout wernt
7100
|
L__]
or eyamie il id nected
eommunzatcn and pte
fa
133,TRIGA Row
(<—|
es
T
t
t
Fig. $ Flow cant of yams il ate determination.
‘Table {- Daa for Ana blowout
cara Blowou Wer | CIS Reet Wes
Resear pres i 700 =
Resevoir temperate, dg. F x0 _—
Spec ravi of seri gas 06 _
Casing 1.0 ass i
Dlg 0D, | 500 150
pg Die ans 2992
Pipe roghnest 0 os —
Meas ep, ro2I0 10500
Tra veal ep “0 eal
134,Fig. 5 Ineriecon of te IPR unt TPR indices ta hs lowout i pedcing
{46 MiMi. Tis vale ares with dt presented he tere. 12
ob ye bo mm
|NMECTION FLD KL RATE. BP
Fig. 6 As the jection te oil id ness, he a mature dete ad
Faulyow wisp at inte rate 82 bel
Fig. 7 -Ntua fw rae versus dy il rie, At the Sensi ofthe il i increases
‘be recuved djame ila decease,
135Fig 8 Bouombl ress vero dynam ll re At the density of the il id
‘neces te requred yi kl ate decreases.
fig. 2 Am towout bam pa ee yi te Aredia
ad oN, i: Reser
Fig 10-I.wel dma irae eid 0 cont he Anu 3s blowout
136Garo Rao HS)
Procter
Reser Pressure (Pa)
“ea Depa
Formation Rermeiy (2)
Fest Tacks (7)
‘Welbre mt 1)
Blow ou Wel latiston (Det)
On Spesie Gre)
Rae Specie Gri
Gs Specie Gavi
WatreadTenpentiet
‘Botoole Temperate ()
Production Sing Da
Depa nerement Used
Prous Tubing LD)
Prete Taba O.D da)
Producten Casing a)
Posts Cane te)
Poehie m n)
a =
in Sel) baw
Ee A
5
g
Fig, Ashe ection ao kil iinet he i and gs at fw dress ad
ily fw wil'stop tan nj ae of 353 be
137Fig. 1 -lnwel yam il ae guid cota he Horan ol well oweut
4 : J
oo Af
ole Sue
\
\
13 - Buran Nowoalbouombole ese ves dyzanic il te. Ave sed
‘Siva dee pide ore ec ad conervatve dynamic kl es
138