Sie sind auf Seite 1von 11

IADC/SPE

IADC/SPE 19923

Compressive Loading Casing Design


E.M. Kocian and R.N. Mefford, Exxon Co. U.S.A., and L.B. Hilbert and I.A. Kalil,
Exxon Production Research Co.
SPE Members

Copyright 1990, IADC/SPE Drilling Conference.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1990 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference held in Hou!!ton, Texas, February 27-March 2, 1990.

This paper was selected for presentation by an IADC/SPE Program Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the
paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors and are subject to correction by the author(s).
The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the IADC or SPE, its officers, or members. Papers presented at IADC/SPE meetings are subject to publication
review by Editorial Committees of the IADC and SPE. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. lllu!!trations may not be copied, The abstract should
contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Publications Manager, SPI;:, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083·3836. Telex, 730989 SPEDAL.

ABSTRACT As listed in Figure 1, a variety of sources


combine to contribute to the overall compressive
This paper provides compressive loading design 1oad. One of the major sources is derived from
guidelines for the provision of safe, economic the combined tensile 1oads imposed by the inner
casing for any type of onshore well. Compressive strings 1anded in the we 11 head. Liners hung off
loading design is analyzed by looking at the be 1ow the outer string cement top, do not con-
nature of compressive loads, casing compressive tribute to the tensile 1oad and can therefore be
failure mechanisms, and load distribution. Field neglected. The weight of the wellhead sections
data verifying such analysis is presented. and BOPs stacked on top of the surface casing must
Lastly, recommended procedures and design factors also be considered although the load is relatively
are offered to reach a final design. sma~ 1.

In addition to the above, the landed tensile loads


INTRODUCTION are affected by mud weight, temperature, and
pressure changes experienced during the 1i fe of
A compressive loading failure can result in severe the well. To counter these, stability ca 1cul a-
subsidence of the wellhead, circumferential tions may indicate additional tensile loading is
bulging of the near surface tubulars, and collapse required when an individual string is initially
or buckling of the inner strings. While an landed. This overpull must be included in summing
abundance of industry 1i terature exists for all loads.
offshore pile and conductor compressive loading
design, very little has been published for onshore Even if no stability overpull is placed on a
locations. Historically, compressive loading has string, additional tension may still be generated
not been a major concern. In fact, it is often with time. As shown in Figure 2, tension can be
neglected, except in extremely deep wells. affected by changes in external pressure. A
Because of the differences in the environment and common example of this is the tension increase as
load constraints between offshore and onshore, and the annulus mud weight decreases with time. 1 If
the ever increasing trend towards deep, expensive external pressure decreases, the resulting in-
wells which will experience high ten- crease in tension is defined by the following
sile/compressive loading in :the wellhead, design formula 2 derived from Hooke's law:
guidelines need to be established for land loca-
tions. (1)

Another increase in tensile loading on a string


CASING COMPRESSIVE LOADS can occur 1ater if a change in i nterna 1 pressure
occurs as shown in Figure 3. Most commonly, this
Before a design procedure can be prepared, one develops when mud weight must be increased d~ring
must first look at the origination of surface drilling after the string is set. Another source
compressive forces to adequately understand the may be a casing or tubing leak. If internal
nature and magnitude of all contributing loads. pressure increases, the resulting increase in
tension is also defined 2 by a derivation of
Hooke's law:
References and illustrations at end of paper.

145
2 COMPRESSIVE LOADING CASING DESIGN IADC/SPE 19923

~Fa = 0.471 d 2 ~Pi (2) shown in Figure 5. Fortunately, for the classes
of steels used in most conductor and surface
Changes in wellbore temperature over the well life casing designs, the yield stress of the steel in
can also affect tensile loading. A large decrease compression and in tension is, for all practical
in temperature may result in a significant in- purposes, identical. Thus, for casing design
crease in tension as the casing contracts. An purposes, the minimum tensile yield strength as
example would be a fracture or acid stimulation specified in API Standard 5CT 4 can be used as an
workover with a cold fluid. This force can be accurate approximation of the compressive yield
defined 2 by: strength.
~Fa = -58.8 w ~T (3) When casing is subjected to sufficiently large
axial compression, and the casing is not laterally
In summary, all of the above forces contribute to supported by cement or by the well bore, it may
the compressive load on the surface casing and/or deflect laterally, or buckle. Since casing is
conductor. generally confined within a cylindrical bore and
has little or no resistance to bending, the
post-buckled geometry is helical. This ·type of
CASING COMPRESSIVE FAILURE MECHANISMS buckling may occur due to applied compression
(i.e., slacking off weight from the surface), due
Casing may fail due to excessive compressive loads to an increase in i nterna 1 pressure, or due to
or strains in several modes: increased compressive strains when the wellbore
fluid temperature increases. In addition, such
• Casing material yield buckling often· occurs at loads well below the
casing yield stress.
• Columnar or Euler buckling of a joint or
section of casing There are a considerable number of published
studies of casing helical buckling. The methods
• Cross-sectional buckling (i.e., a circumferen- used to calculate the buckling loads can be
tial bulge) complicated. This type of buckling is most
applicable to production and protective casing
• Casing material fracture or splitting strings, in which there may be a considerable
1ength of non- supported casing above the top of
• Shear or fracture of connection threads cement. Conductor and surface strings are in most
cases cemented to the surface, and thus are not
The mode of compressive failure may be one or a allowed to deflect laterally (unless there is a
combination of the above mechanisms, depending on significant portion of washed out hole or cement).
the loading mechanism (strain or load controlled
loading), the load magnitude, and the casing When casing is laterally confined by cement or the
material properties. Casing design is the process wellbore and is subjected to large compressive
of determining the casing size, wall thickness, strains, it is not allowed to relieve the com-
and material strength required to prevent failure. pression deformation by laterally buckling into a
Therefore, knowledge of the failure mechanism and helical shape. Instead, the casing will yield,
a means of quantifying the failure load are and under continued compressive deformation, the
important factors in casing design. casing pipe wall will buckle into a localized,
circumferential bulge. Continued compressive
Although yield of casing material may not be deformation may result in a fracture in the pipe
recognized as a catastrophic failure, yield of the body as the bulge deforms around a threaded
material in a threaded connection may result in a connection, s i nee the bulge forms near the con-
1oss of pressure integrity or a reduction in the nection due to local radial deformations resulting
tensile strength of the casing. The axi a1 com- from makeup. This type· of fa i 1ure occurs under
pressive load required to yield the cross section large axial compressive deformation caused by
of the casing pipe-body or the minimum cross formation compaction, permafrost thaw 5 , or general
section in a threaded connection is usually subsidence.
understood to be the compressive yield load of the
casing. Calculation of the load is simple, since Casing fa i 1ure due to fracture occurs when the
it involves merely calculating the product of the casing steel actually parts or separates. Frac-
cross-sectional area and the compressive yield ture generally occurs in ductile steels after the
strength of the casing. However, the compressive yield stress is exceeded, and is usually associ-
yield stress may not be so simply determined. It ated with high tension loads or stresses. In
cannot always be assumed that the material behaves compression, fracture genera 11 y occurs as a
identically in compression and in tension. secondary failure mechanism subsequent to extreme
material deformation. If the connection thread
For example, many corrosion-resistant alloy (CRA) width or height is insufficient to support the
casing materials used in deep, high-temperature, compressive 1oad, the threads will shear off and
high-pressure, sour gas wells exhibit a signifi- the pin will te 1escope into the coup 1i ng or box.
cant Bausch i nger effect, in which the tension and In some other cases, a connection may permit
compression strengths are quite different. 3 An sufficient radial deformation that results in the
example is shown in Figure 4. Also, a casing steel pin and coupling threads riding over one another
may exhibit significant yield-point behavior in a causing jump-in of the connection. In extreme
11 11

tensile test, but none in a compression test, as cases, tha casing body may fracture .in the tensile

146
IADC/SPE 19923 E. M. KOCIAN, R. N. MEFFORD, L. B. HILBERT, I. A. KALIL 3

portion of a bend due to localized cross-sectional of Hooke's Law for the case where the underlying
buckling or columnar buckling. cement is not considered to contribute support and
shows that the ratio of the casings' cross-sec-
It should be noted that the connections between tional areas is equal to the ratio of the distri-
joints of casing have an important role in the bution of 1oad. For ex amp 1e, a conductor casing
compressive failure mode. As mentioned above, with a 4:1 ratio of cross-sectional area to the
jump-in can occur. In many cases, large diameter surface casing, theoretically would be designed to
conductor casing joints are welded together, or support 80% of the compressive load.
weld-on connectinns used. Usually, low-carbon,
line-pipe type casing steels are used that provide The second support mechanism, cement compression,
a weld that is as strong as the pipe body. In may only be considered when a base plate is used
fact, the weld may be stronger than the pipe to transmit 1oad. Very often cement between the
simply because the weld has material properties surface and conductor casing is p1aced to be in
greater than the pipe. On the other hand, higher contact with the base plate, thus providing an
carbon-content steels, such as N-80 and P-110, additional shoulder to support compressive load.
·generally have lower strength welds due to prob- To ca 1cul ate the contribution of the cement in
lems associated with welding on these types of this scenario, Hooke's law is solved a second time
materials (i.e., the heat affected zone around the by utilizing a modulus of elasticity for the
weld has lower strength, or the weld material may cement. Appendi~ B documents the calculation for
be weaker than the pipe material). this case. The contribution of the cement may be
initially significant because, despite its rela-
tively low stiffness, the contact surface area may
LOAD DISTRIBUTION CONSIDERATIONS be large.
Once the calculation of the maximum anticipated The compressive strength of the cement used wi 11
compressive load is completed, the design of a a1so influence it's contribution as a secondary
well head support system can begin. The well head support member. Even if the cement yields in its
support. system is designed based on the compres- secondary support role, it may be assumed to
sive load distribution. Four aspects need to be contribute to the overall compressive load capac-
considered, notably: 1) casing compression, ity because, even at yield, it is confined by the
2) cement compression, 3) cement bond, and 4) soil casings present on either side. However, due to
shear. The first two aspects, casing and cement its low relative stiffness it may be prudent to
compression, represent the capacity of the system ignore the compressive support of cement and
components to resist applied compressive load. assume that the casings must bear the total load.
The final two aspects, cement bond and soil shear,
represent the ability to transfer the applied load The third aspect of system design is cement bond
into surrounding members and/or surrounding soil. which is independent of the compressive support
mechanisms. Cement bond strength is the primary
Casing compression is achieved through the dis- method of vertical load transfer and casing
tribution of wellhead loads to the casing string support. End bearing support can typically be
to which the first wellhead section is attached as ignored because, for normal casing strings, it is
shown in Figure 6. The primary casing string is only a small contributor. The cement bond strength
usually designated "surface" casing and the first is a calculation of the shear resistance developed
wellhead section, or A-Section, is either welded between the casing and the surrounding cement and
or screwed onto the top joint. The first design is considered to be a function of the contact area
calculation involves comparing the total worst and strength of the cement. Cement bond strength
case anticipated compressive load to the connec- is equivalent to approximately 10% of the com-
tion rating and the yield strength of the size of pressive strength. 6 ·
casing desired. The casing size is typically
governed by the drift diameter that will accommo- For example, assume 200 feet of 20-inch casing is
date the desired bit size for drilling the next cemented to surface with cement having a compres-
section of hole. sive strength of 3000 psi. Assuming full contact,
the resulting shear restraining force is 4.5 x 10 7
If the desired casing cannot be located with lbs. It is obvious from this example calculation
sufficient compressive strength, additional that cement bond capacity is typically not the
compressive support components must be designed. governing factor in a well head support system.
The most common second step is to order the Cement/soil bonding will be greater than ce-
A-Section with a base plate or landing base. The ment/casing bonding based on the greater surface
base plate is used as a vehicle to distribute area available and assuming similar contact
compressive load to a member other than the efficiency.
surface casing string as shown in Figure 7. The
most common secondary member is the previously set The 1ast support system to be considered is soil
initial casing string designated "conductor" shear capacity. This represents the ability of
casing, although some of the load may be distrib- the surrounding soil to diffuse compressive load
uted into cement underlying the base plate. from the casing through shear transfer and hence,
reduce the compressive 1oad as the depth be 1ow
The 1oad di stri but ion between the different ground increases.
members is largely governed by stiffness and may
be simplistically estimated by application of The soil shear capacity is a function of the
Hooke's Law. Appendix A documents the derivation cement/soil surface area and the soil shear value.

147
4 COMPRESSIVE LOADING CASING DESIGN IADC/SPE 19923

The soil shear capacity is related to the type of • Setting of 7- inch OD by 5-1/2- inch OD produc-
soil and the soil properties. For sands, the tion casing
shear value is related to the overburden pressure
and the angle of friction. For clays, the shear During each of the three casing running opera-
value is related to the undrained shear strength. tions, the strain gage data was collected imme-
Undrained soil shear values can range from 25 diately after the hook weight was slacked off and
lbs/ft for very soft clay to 4000 lbs/ft for hard again some eight to ten hours later. The data was
clay. Because the variability in the properties then reduced to indicate an average load supported
of shallow soils is high, an assumption of shear by the 30- inch conductor pipe and summarized in
capacity based on surface conditions is often Table 1.
erroneous. The most accurate method of determin-
ing a wellsite soil shear capacity is with a soil The Table 1 data indicates that, with each suc-
boring. cessive string hung, the support offered by the
conductor pipe is asymptotically approaching some
Soil borings are common to the offshore oil field maximum percentage of the total string weight
structures industry and the onshore construction landed in the wellhead as shown in Figure 9, The
industry, but not the onshore dri 11 i ng industry. compressive load supported by the 30-inch conduc-
A conductor, or surface casing compressive load tor pipe increased from 53%, or 611 kips of the
capacity curve can be generated from evaluation of 1,160 kips landed in the A-section for the
actual field soil properties. An example of this 12-1/16-inch casing, to 71%, or 532 kips of the
is provided later in this paper. As a sidenote, 747 kips landed in the C-Section for the 7-inch x
these same soil borings can be used to develop 5-1/2-inch production casing. Total load sup-
soil bearing capacity for designing drilling rig ported by the 30-inch casing through a summation
foundations. of the incremental measured loads is 1663 kips out
of a total wellhead load of 2647 kips (63%). The
A design factor should be incorporated into the remaining 984 kips of load would then be logically
design procedure to account for tolerances and supported by the cement underlying the base plate
inconsistencies associated with the support system and the 16-inch casing.
components. A 1.33 casing compression design
factor is often used to derate the corflpress i ve Solving Hooke's Law to determine the distribution
yield of casing based on API wall tolerance and of the 2647 kip compressive load results in 1615
potential wear. No factor is typically associated kips (61% of total load) on the 30-inch, 744 kips
with cement compression or bond strength due to (28%) on the cement between the 30-inch and 16-
reasons previously discussed. A soil shear factor inch, and 288 kips (11%) on the 16-inch. The
of 1.5 to 2.0 is the common industry practice to strain gage data therefore compares favorably with
account for uncertainty associ ated with soil the design theory and calculations. The intent of
properties and, when applicable, to 1imit defor- the well head support system to distribute 1oad
mations to acceptable values. without failing cri t i ca 1 members a1so appears to
be substantiated.
COMPARISON OF FIELD DATA TO LOADING PREDICTION
DESIGN PROCEDURE
In January 1989, Exxon instrumented the 30- inch
conductor pipe on an ultra-deep sour gas well to This design procedure provides step-by-step ·
determine the effectiveness of the 1andi ng-base compressive loading design guidelines for the
design. In theory, the weight of the casing provision of safe, economic tubulars. Burst,
strings hung off in the wellhead would be trans- collapse, and tensile design considerations will
ferred from the A-section to the 16-inch surface not be addressed in this ·paper. The design
casing string, the 30-inch conductor casing, and factors used in the design process are values
the cement between the two, via the landing base. frequently employed, but should not to be con-
strued as industry standards which may widely
To verify that the conductor pipe would share in vary.
supporting the compressive loads, Exxon installed
strain gages on the conductor pipe exposed surface To illustrate the design procedure, consider an
and gathered geometrical and dimensional data. example well with the data provided in Tables 2
The dimensional data was needed to determine any through 7 and Figures 10 and 11.
pipe ovality, wall eccentricity, and possible
load-axis misalignment. The orientation of the STEP 1: Calculate the total compressive load due
strain gage locations and sites for data to the hanging weight of the tubul ars
collection, referenced to geographic North, are hung off in the wellhead plus the
shown in Figure 8. stability overpull required.
Strain gage data was collected and analyzed ·on From Table 2, the total load is 2635
three separate occasions. These included the kips.
following:
STEP 2: Calculate additional loads due to
• Setting of 12-1/16-inch OD protective casing changes in i nterna 1 and extern a1 pres-
sure, and temperature versus initial
• Setting of 9-7/8-inch OD protective casing cas1ng setting conditions. Also include
weight of wellhead sections and BOPs.

148
IADC/SPE 19923 E. M. KOCIAN, R. N. MEFFORD, L. B. HILBERT, I. A. KALIL 5

From Table 3, the additional load is 165


kips. STEP 10: Design a landing base that can transfer
the required 1oads from the surface to
STEP 3: Sum the tubular loads and the additional the conductor casing.
loads.
A landing base with a minimum rating of
TOTAL LOADS (WORST CASE) is 2800 kips. 3700 kips would be required to transfer
the 1848 kips of compressive load from
STEP 4: Se 1ect a surface casing size to drift the surface casing to the conductor with
the desired bit size. a 2.0 design factor. The 2.0 design
factor is assumed to account for any
In this example, a 14-3/4-inch hole size deficiencies in the load bearing welds.
is desired to run the 11-3/4-inch
casing. The available 16-inch surface STEP 11: Design the cement required to transfer
casing is shown in Table 4. the compressive loads into surrounding
support members and/or surrounding soil.
STEP 5: Compare joint strength of the available
surface casing to the total load calcu- The 270 feet of 24-inch conductor casing
lated in Step 3. has a surface area of 1696 ft 2 or 244 k
in 2 to support 1848 kips of compressive
None of the 16-inch casing available load. Assuming full cement contact, a
will support the 2800 kips of compres- cement compressive strength of only 152
sive load with a 1.33 design factor. psi would be required to support the
Therefore, select a conductor casing casing with a 2.0 design factor. The
that can offset a portion of the 1oad 180 feet of 16-inch surface casing below
through use of a landing base. the conductor casing has a surface area
of 757 ft 2 or 109 k in 2 to support 952
STEP 6: Select a conductor casing size to drift kips of compressive load. Assuming full
the desired bit size. cement contact, a compressive strength
of 175 psi would be required to support
In this example, a 20-inch hole size is the casing with a 2.0 design factor.
desired to run the 16-inch casing. The
available conductor casing is shown in Note in the tubular design that no con-
Table 5. tribution from the cement under the
landing base was assumed to help support
STEP 7: Compare the joint strength of the the well head system. A cement with a
available conductor casing to the total compressive strength of 3000 psi and a
load calculated in Step 3. landing base/cement surface area of 205
in 2 (22.75-inch x 16-inch), would result
None of the 24-inch casing available in the cement shouldering a total of 615
will support all of the 2800 kips of kips prior to yielding.
compressive load with a 1.33 design
factor. Cement with high early strength and
minimal shrinkage should be specified to
STEP 8: Perform a combination analysis to assure an effective soi 1-cement and
determine if the 16-inch x 24-inch cement-casing bond as soon as possible
combination will adequately support the after cement placement. Use standard
total load calculated in Step 3. industry cementing practices to achieve
good mud displacement.
From Table 6, the third listed combina-
tion is the lowest cost design with STEP 12: Summarize design.
adequate strength.
See Table 7 for summary considering
STEP 9: Eva 1uate soi 1 boring data to determine compressive loading only.
m1 mmum depths to set surface and
conductor casing.
CONCLUSION
From Figures 10 and 11, minimum depth of
24-inch conductor in a 30-inch hole is The field data gathered on instrumented conductor
270 feet to maintain a 2.0 design factor casing closely corroborates with loading predic-
in supporting 1848 kips of compressive tion achieved through the design theory, thus
load. Minimum depth of 16-inch surface substantiating the design accuracy. In general,
casing in a 20-inch hole is 450 feet to the above design procedure can be used to obtain
maintain a 2.0 design factor in sup- safe, economic tubulars for land wells with regard
porting 952 kips of compressive load. to compressive loading. Of course, individual
Any casing run deeper than the mini mum landing-base designs should be verified as suit-
depths is no longer governed by com- able for the load rating prior. to their applica-
pressive loading design assuming that tion in the field.
full cement coverage of minimum depths
has been achieved.

149
6 COMPRESSIVE LOADING CASING DESIGN IADC/SPE 19923

NOMENCLATURE
6) Smith, D. K.: "Cementing", SPE Monograph
A = Area Series, Second Edition, 1976.
d = Casing inside diameter 7) Popov, E. P.: "Mechanics of Materials",
Second Edition, 1952.
D = Casing nominal diameter
!J. = Deformation APPENDIX A
!J.Fa = Change in axial force DERIVATION OF HOOKE'S LAW FOR DISTRIBUTION OF
COMPRESSIVE LOAD BETWEEN CASINGS
!J.pe = Change in external pressure
For axially loaded rods, the total deformation
!J.pi = Change in internal pressure between two given points (A' and 8') is 7
!J.T = Change in temperature !J. = JB' d!J. = JB' P(x) dx (A-1)
A' A' A(x) E
E = Elastic modulus
For a tubular of constant cross-sectional area
L = Length with 1ength L, a constant 1oad P, and one fixed
and one free end, the deformation equation becomes
P = Force
!J. = ___fL
Pt = Total force AE
Pc = Force on conductor casing Assuming the base plate is in simultaneous contact
with both the conductor and surface casing, and
Ps = Force on surface casing th~t the bottom of each casing is immobile,

Pcmt = Force on cement IJ.c = IJ.s


a = Stress and therefore,
w = Casing weight per foot Pc Lc = Ps Ls
Ac Ec As Es
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Unlike two independent springs, both the conductor
and surface casings are concentrically .cemented,
The Authors wish tn express their appreciation to and therefore, compressive 1oad is assumed to be
Exxon Company, U~S.A. and Exxon Production Re- distributed along an equivalent length (or depth)
search Company for permitting the publication of of each string. Thus,
this paper. Individual acknowledgements are
accorded to M. J;t Morrison and D. J. Broussard who Lc = Ls
contributed to the development and verification of
this well design technique. Additionally, both the conductor and surface
casings are manufactured from carbon steel and
thus have the same modulus of elasticity, so
REFERENCES
1) Cooke, C. E., Kluck, M. P., and Medrano, R.: Ec = Es
"Annular Pressure and Temperature Measure- The remaining equation becomes
ments Diagnose Cementing Operations",
IADC/SPE. Paper 11416, February 1983.
2) Bourgoyne, A. T., Millheim, K. K., Chenevert,
M. E., and Young, F. S.: "Applied Drilling
Engineering", First Edition, 1986. or
3) Dieter, G. E., Jr.: "Mechanical Metallurgy",
1961.
4) API Specification 5CT: Specification for Ac and As can be calculated for selected casings,
Casing and Tubing, American Petroleum Insti- and the maximum load, Pt, is equal to Pc + Ps.
tute, March 15, 1988. Thus two equations with two unknowns can be solved
for Pc and Ps.
5) Hirshberg, A. J., Moyer, M. C., Rickenbach,
R. M.: "Surface Casing Strain Capacity for
North Slope Operations", SPE Drilling Engi-
neering, September 1988.

150
IADC/SPE 19923 E. M. KOCIAN, R. N. MEFFORD, L. B. HILBERT, I. A. KALIL 7

APPENDIX B Substituting the elastic moduli for cement and


steel changes the equation to
SOLVING HOOKE'S LAW FOR DISTRIBUTION OF COMPRES-
SIVE LOAD BETWEEN CASINGS INCLUDING CEMENT UNPER-
LYING THE BASE PLATE Pt = ac [A c + As + (5 x 106) Acmt
(30 6X 10 )
l
The total load on the casings and cement, Pt, can so
be equated tn the sum of all forces,
Pt = ac [Ac +As+ 0.16 Acmt]
Pt = Pc + Ps + Pcmt
Rearrange the equation to solve for ac
Substituting the deformation equation for Pc, Ps
and Pcmt changes the equation to
ac = - - - - - -Pt= - - - - -
Ac +As+ 0.16 Acmt
Pt . [~~A)/ [~~l + [~~lmt
Then multiply ac by Ac to yield Pc
Isolating the conductor stress and cancelling Pc = ac Ac
identical values based on the same logic as
applied in Appendix A results in Solve for Ps and Pcmt in a like manner. Verify
values against Pt by
Pt - ac [Ac + As + (~:)cmt]
Pt = Pc + Ps + Pcmt

TABLE 1
COMPRESSIVE LOAD SUPPORTED BY 30-INCH CONDUCTOR PIPE

STRING LOAD SUPPORTED INCREMENTAL TOTAL


STRING HOOK WEIGHT BY CONDUCTOR SUPPORT SUPPORT
(kiQS} (kiQS} (%} (%}
12-1/16-inch 1160 611 53 53
9-7/8-inch 740 520 70 60
7-inch x 5-1/2-inch 747 532 71 63

TOTAL 2647 1663

TABLE 2
TUBULAR LOADS (SUSPENDED IN WELLHEAD)

STABILITY
CSG SIZE WEIGHT MW SET IN DEPTH BUOYED WEIGHT OVERPULL TOTAL LOAD
(in} llifL (ppg} illl_ (kips} (kiQS} (kips}
11-3/4 60 10.0 15000 765 150 915
9-5/8 47 12.5 17500 665 100 775
7 41 15.0 20000 635 100 735
3-1/2 12.95 10.5 19500 210 210

TOTAL............................................................ 2635
NOTE: No change in buoyed weight.due to "as cemented" conditions was
considered. Use air weight of tubing if latched into a packer.

151
TABLE 3

ADDITIONAL LOADS (WORST CASE)

LOAD
IT EM ill.l!..tl
Chahges in interha1 pressure (stimulation)............... 50

Temperature effects (stimulation)........................ 100

Weight of wellhead....................................... _lL


TOTAL ••••••••••••.•••••••••••••••••• ,,............ 165

TABLE 4

AVAILABLE 16- It~CH SURFACE CASING

WEIGHT GRADE THREAD JOINT StRENGTH WITH 1.33 OF COST


illfL {kli!S} ilLlli
75 K-55 STC 565 31

84 K-55 STC 650 33

84 N-80 Butt 1427 45

TABLE 5

AVAILABLE 24-INCH CONDUCTOR CASING

WEIGHT GRAOE tHREAD JOINT STRENGTH WITH 1.33 OF COST


illfL {kii!S} ilLlli
156 x~s6 Welded 1932 67

171 B Welded 1326 76

171 X-56 Welded 2122 80

TABLE 6

COMBINATION ANALYSIS

X-SECT X-SECT AREA RATIO LOAD RATIO


16• INCH AREA 24- INCH AREA 16- INCH/24- INCH 16- INCH/24- INCH COMBINATION OK?
SURFACE CSG 1i!l.:L CONDUCTOR CSG 1i!l.:L {%} {kii!S} YLN
75 ppf, K, STC 21.4 156, X-56, W 45.9 32/68 896/1904 N

84 ppf, K, STC 24.1 156, X-56, W 45.9 34/66 952/1848 N

84 ppf, N, Butt 24.1 156, X-56, W 45.9 34/66 952/1848 y

84 ppf, N, Butt 24.1 171, B, W 50.4 32/68 896/1904 N

84 ppf, N, Butt 24.1 171, X-56, W 50.4 32/68 896/1904 y

NOtE: Load ratio is calculated by multiplying total load (2800 kips) times area l"atio percent.

TABLE 7

DESIGN SUMMARY BASED ON COMPRESSIVE LOAD REQUIREMENTS

MIN.
CSG SIZE WEIGHT GRADE CONN OEPTH HOLE SET IN
___linL illfL ..llli_ {in}
24 156 X-56 Welded 270 30

16 84 N-80 Butt 450 20

152
IP£ 1992 3

• WEIGHT OF WELLHEAD AND BOP EQUIPMENT


• TENSILE LOADS FROM INNER CASING STRINGS
(EXCLUDE LINERS)
• TENSILE LOAD FROM PRODUCTION TUBING
• TENSILE LOAD FROM STABILITY OVERPULL
• TENSILE LOADS FROM CHANGES IN EXTERNAL
AND INTERNAL PRESSURES
INTERMEDIATE
• TENSILE LOADS FROM CHANGES IN TEMPERATURE
LINER

Figure 1 . Contributors to conductor compressive loading

ALONGATION
_..ALONGATION \, ,..,j
\, ,... J ' •1
I

'- '1
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I Ut

!./
:
I

I
I
I
I I
I I
I I

l/
I

!/
I

)T CONTRACTION .!T CONTRACTION

Figure 2. A decrease in external pressure can cause an increase in tensile loading. Figure 3. A increase in internal pressure can cause an increase in tensile loading.

STRESS, PSI STRESS STRESS


(PSI) (PSI)

STRAIN, IN/IN

TESNILE TEST COMPRESSION TEST

Figure 5. Tension and compression test on same steel

COMPRESSION TEST

Figure 4. Bauschinger effect on CRA materials.

153
SP.E 19 9 2 ~

A-SECTION

A-SECTION
CASING HEAD

WELD

CONDUCTOR PIPE SURFACE CASING

Figure 6. Surface casing compression Figure 7. Base plate distributes load

lOOr------------------------------------------,100

f- (")
:r 0
Q(!) z
ow 0
:rS: c-i
u(!)
~z
~~
30-INCH 61E ~~
CONDUCTOR PIPE Mf- ::!!r
>-CJ) 'tiO
m)>
"'"'
cO
ww
)>O
UlCJ)
f-(!1 'tiC
a:~ m'tl
Of- :lJ'tl
n.z
n.w;#!
::JU *~~
Z-i
Ula: -im
ow l>O
~n. G'lm
oUl m-e
LEGEND ...J~ Ow
(H,A) = (HOOP, AXIAL) ...JW
~!!: ;;;~
f-£L -iZ
Za: 2:1(")
wo z:r
:2f- G'lo
wu
a:::~ ~0
uc
~z Gi
0 :r
u -i

--~--TOTAL

NUMBER OF STRINGS RUN

#5 (H,A)
Figure 9. Percentage of load supported by 30-inch OD conductor pipe vs Total strings
run.
SECTION A-A

Figure 8. Orientation of strain gages

154
1 6-INCH CSG IN 20-INCH HOLE

w
u
<(
LL
a:
:::>
en
~i=
o!:
...J
w
co
I
1-
a..
w
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000

LOAD CAPACITY
(KIPS)

NOTES: 1) CURVE INCLUDES 2.0 SAFETY FACTOR.


2) SURFACE CASING CAPACITY CURVE IS BASED
ON INCREMENTAL LOAD BELOW 2 70'.

Figure 10. Surface casing capacity curve.

24-INCH CSG IN 30-INCH HOLE

w
u 0
<
LL

~ 100
CJ)

~-
oti:
....J-
w
al
I
b:
w
0
0 500 1000 1 500 2000

LOAD CAPACITY
(KIPS)

NOTE: 1) CURVE INCLUDES 2.0 SAFETY FACTOR.

Figure 11. Conductor casing capacity curve.


155