You are on page 1of 160

Casing Design

By Jimmy Wang

University of Petroleum,China
Content

section 1 functions of casing


section 2 casing types
section 3 strength properties
section 4 casing specification
section 5 casing design
section 6 other considerations
The general picture of casing

Purpose

After this topic, we should know the


following:
1 the functions of oil well casing

2 the various types of casing strings

3 the procedure used in the design of


casing strings
Technical words

Casing Tensile force


Casing string Collapse strength
Surface casing Collapse pressure
Intermediate casing Collapse resistance
Production casing Burst strength
Liner Burst pressure
Drilling liner Burst resistance
Tube Compression load
Formation Pressure coefficient
section 1 Functions of Casing
Can you give
some functions?

1 to keep the hole open and to provide a


support for weak, or fractured formations;

2 to isolate porous media with different


fluid/pressure regimes from contaminating the
pay zone;

3 to prevent contamination of near-surface


freshwater zones;
4 to provide a passage for hydrocarbon
fluids;

5 to provide a suitable connection for


the wellhead equipment ;

6 to provide a hole of known diameter


and depth to facilitate the running of
testing and completion equipment.
section 2 Casing Types

1 the necessity of classification

(1) the presence of high-pressured zones at


different depths;
(2) the presence of weak, unconsolidated
formations or sloughing shaly zones
2 the classification of casing
(1) Stove pipe
A. Functions
a. To prevent washout of near-surface
unconsolidated formations ;
b. To provide a circulation system for the
drilling mud ;
c. To ensure the stability of the ground surface
upon which the rig is sited.
B. Size
from 26 in to 42 in

C. feature
a. cannot carry any wellhead equipment
b. can be driven into the ground with a pile
driver.
(2) Conductor pipe
A. Functions

a to protect nearsurface unconsolidated


formations;
b to seal off shallow-water zones;
c to provide a circuit for the drilling mud ;
d to protect the foundations of the
platform(offshore).
B. Size

from 18 5/8 in to 30 in
C. Setting depth
from the surface to some shallow depth

D.Features

a one or more BOPs may be mounted on this


casing;
b always cemented to the surface;
c either to support the subsequent casing
strings and wellhead , or simply cut at the
surface after setting the surface casing.
(3) Surface casing
A. Functions
a to prevent caving of weak formations that
are encountered at shallow depths.
b to ensure that the formations at the casing
shoe will not fracture at high hydrostatic
pressures which maybe used later.
c to prevent shallow blowouts as drilling
process.
B. Size
13 3/8 in(in the Middle East)
18 5/8 in or 20 in (in North Sea)
C. Setting depth

chosen to protect troublesome formations, thief


zones, water sands, shallow hydrocarbon zones
and build-up sections of deviated wells.

D. Feature

BOPs are connected to the top of the string


(4) Intermediate casing

A. Functions
a to seal off a severe-loss zones;
b to protect problem formations,such as
salt sections or caving shales;
c to prevent communication behind the
casing between the lower hydrocarbon
zones and upper water formations.

B. Size
the most common size is 9 5/8 in
C. Setting depth
usually set in the transition zone below or above an
over-pressured zone

D. Feature
a good cementation of the casing must be ensured
b multistage cementing may be used to cement long
strings of intermediate casing
(4) Production casing
A. Functions
a to isolate producing zones;
b to provide reservoir fluid control
c to permit selective production in mutizone
production.
B. Size
the normal size is 7 in
C. Feature
a the last casing string;
b the well will be completed through the
string.
(4) Liner casing
A. Introduction of liner casing
a not to reach the surface;
b hung on the intermediate casing
B. Setting depths
set at the bottom and hung from the intermediate casing
C. Advantages:
a total costs of the production string is reduced;
b running and cementing times is reduced ;
c the length of reduced diameter is reduced.

D Disadvantages:
a possible leak across a liner hanger;
b difficulty in obtaining a good primary cementation due
to the annulus between the liner and the hole.
section 3 Strength properties
Strength
properties
Casing strength properties are normally
specified as:

(1) yield strength


(2) collapse strength
(3) burst strength
Strength
1 yield strength
properties
Ultimate strength
Load B
C
A
Fracture strength
Yield strength

O Elongation
Load-elongation graph

(1) O-A-B
This part is a straight line and can be called as the
“elastic range”.
Hooke’s law is only applicable to this portion:
σ=Eε (3-1)
Where σ=applied stress=load/cross-section area
E = Young’s modulus
ε=deformation=elongation/original length

A. to result in no damage to the internal structure;


removal of the load will resume its original shape and
length.
Strength
properties B. Point B is defined as yield strength.
(2) B-C
to result in a change in the internal structure and in a
loss of strength;
removal of the load will not resume its original shape
and length.

Strength
properties
Note:
① when quoting the strength of the casing, it is
customary to use the yield strength of casing.
② API define the yield strength as the tensile stress
required to produce a total elongation of 0.5% of the
gauge length.
(3) Axial tension
Strength
properties

Ften= σyieldAs (3-2)


Ften=(π/4) σyield(dn2-d2) (3-3)
Example
Compute the body-yield strength for 20-in, K-55 casing with
a nominal wall thickness of 0.635 in and a nominal weight
per foot of 133 lb/ft.
Solution. This pipe has a minimum yield strength of 55,000
psi and an ID of
d=20.00-2(0.635) = 18.730 in.
Strength
properties Thus, the cross-sectional area of steel is
As=(π/4)(202-18.732)=38.63 sq in.
and minimum pipe-body yield is predicted by at an axial
load of
Ften =55,000(38.63)=2,125,000 lbf.
2 collapse strength
Strength
properties (1) Concept
Collapse strength is defined as the
maximum external pressure to
collapse a specimen of casing.
(2) Types
A. Elastic collapse: specimen fails
before it deforms.
B. Plastic collapse: specimen
deforms before it fails.
Strength
properties
(3) Elastic collapse

The elastic collapse pressure Pc, can be determined


from the following formula:

2E 1
Pc   bar
1  2 2 (3-4)
Strength
DD 
properties
  1
t t 
Where E: Young’s modulus of steel;

ν: Poisson’s ratio;
t: casing thickness;
D: the outside diameter of casing
In Imperial units, E=30×106psi and ν=0.3; hence the
equation (3-4) simplifies to
46.95 106
Pc  2
psi (3-5)
DD 
  1
t  t 
In metric units, the equation (3-4) becomes
Strength
2.198  10 6
Pc 
properties
2
bar (3-6)
DD 
  1
t  t 
(4) Plastic collapse

The minimum collapse pressure Pp in the plastic range may


be determined from the following equation :

 A 
Strength
Pp  Y   B  C (3-7)
 D/t 
properties

Where A,B and C are constants depending on the grade of


steel used and Y is yield strength.
(5) Transition collapse pressure

The collapse behavior PT, in the transition zone between


elastic and plastic failure is described by the following
formula:

Strength
 F 
PT  Y   G  psi
properties
(3-8)
 D/t 

Where F and G are constants can be given by A,B and C.


3 Burst strength
Strength
properties (1) Concept
defined as the maximum value of internal
pressure required to cause the steel to yield.

(2) The minimum burst pressure for a casing can be


got by the following Barlow’s formula:

 2Yt 
Pbr  0.875  (3-9)
 D 
The coefficient 0.875 can be deduced if the imperial
units are used in the above equation.
Example
Compute the burst-pressure rating for 20-in,K-55
Strength
properties casing with a normal wall thickness of 0.635 in
and a normal weight per foot of 133 lb/ft.
Solution
The burst-pressure rating is computed by use of the
above equation.
Pbr=0.875×2×55000×0.635÷20=3056 psi
Rounded to the nearest 10psi, this value becomes
3060psi. This burst-pressure rating corresponds to the
minimum expected internal pressure at which permanent
pipe deformation could take place, if the pipe is subjected
to no external pressure or axial loads.
E. The types of liner

a drilling liners: to isolate lost circulate or abnormally


pressured zones to permit deeper drilling
b production liners: to replace a full casing to provide
isolation across the producing or injection zones
c tie-back liner: a section of casing extending upwards
from the top of an existing liner to the surface or
wellhead
d scab liner: used to repair existing damaged casing
e scab tie-back liner:a section of casing extending from
the top o fan existing liner.
section 4 Casing specification
Casing
specification
Casing specification is referred to the
following parameters:
a. Outside diameter and wall thickness;
b. Weight per unit length;
c. Type of coupling and thread;
d. Length of joints;
e. Grade of steel.
1 Outside diameter and wall thickness
Casing
specification

Different depths

Different pressure

Economy

Different diameter
and wall thickness
2 Weight per unit length
Casing
specification

API defines three types of casing weight :

(1) nominal weight;


(2) plain end weight;
(3) threaded and coupleded weight.
(1) nominal weight
Casing
specification

Used for the purpose of identification of


casing types during ordering.
Expressed in lb/ft or kg/m.
Not exact weights and normally based on
the calculated, theoretical weight per foot
for a 20ft length of threaded or coupled
joint.
Nominal weight,Wn , is calculated from
the following formula:
Wn=10.68(D-t)t+0.0722D2 lb/ft (4-1)

Casing where D: outside diameter, in;


specification
t: wall thickness, in.
(2) plain end weight
Casing
specification
The plain end weight is the weight is
the weight without the inclusion of
threads and couplings.
The plain end weight can be calculated
by use of the following formula,taken
from API Standards:
Wpe=10.68(D-t)t lb/ft (4-2)
where D: outside diameter, in;
t: wall thickness, in.
(3) threaded and coupleded weight
Casing
The threaded and coupleded weight is the
specification
average weight of a joint including the threads
at both ends and a coupling at one end when
power-tight.
It can be calculated by use of the following formula:

(20-(NL+2J)/24)Wpe+weight of coupling-weight removed in threading two pipe ends


W=
20
(4-3)
Where W=threaded and coupled weight (lb/ft);
NL=coupling length (in);
J=distance from end of pipe to center of coupling in the
power-tight position (in);

Wpe=plain end weight .


3 Types of coupling and thread
Casing
specification
A coupling is a short section of casing and is
used to connect two casing joints.
A casing joint is externally threaded at both
ends. The most common type of coupling is
internally threaded from each end.
API specifies that a coupling should be of the
same grade as the pipe body.
In general, the casing and coupling are specified by the type
of threads (or connection) cut in the pipe or coupling.
API defines three principal elements of thread:
(1) thread height or depth, defined as the distance between
the thread crest and the thread root measured normal to
the axis of the thread;
(2) lead, defined as the distance from one point on a thread
to a corresponding point on the adjacent thread, as
measured parallel to the thread axis;
(3) taper, defined as the change in diameter of a thread
expressed in inches per foot of thread length;
(4) thread form -- most casing threads are squared or V-
shaped.
Casing
specification
The following are the most widely used connections.
(a) API 8 round thread;
(b) Buttress thread; Casing
specification
(c) VAM thread;
(d) Extreme line threaded coupling;
(e) Buttress double seal (BDS) thread.
Casing
specification
Casing
VAM thread configuration
specification
4 Length of joint
Casing
API has the specified three ranges in which a
specification
pipe length must lie.These are as follows:

Range Length (ft) Average


length (ft)
1 16-25 22
2 25-34 31
3 Over 34 42
5 Grade of steel Casing
specification

API lists eight different grades of casing,as


follows:
Casing
6 The failure modes of casing specification
Casing
section 5 Casing design
design

Casing design is influenced by the following factors:


a. The loading conditions during drilling and
production;
b. The strength properties of the casing seat and of
available casing;
c. The degree of deterioration to which the pipe will be
subjected during the entire life of the well;
d. The requirements of completion and production;
e. Safety;
f. Economy;
g. The availability of casing.
1 Design criteria Casing
design

A tensile force

(a) originate from casing-own-weight,bending


forces, and shock loading.

(b) the weakest point is located at the uppermost


joint of the string.
Casing
B Collapse pressure
design

(a) Originate from the column of mud


(b) Collapse pressure
C=ρm gh (5-1)
Where ρm : mud density

h: depth; g: acceleration due to gravity .

(c) the collapse is zero at the top;


the collapse is the highest at the bottom

(d) The collapse pressure never exceeds the


collapse resistance.
Casing
C Burst pressure design

(a) normally based on the maximum formation pressure


that can be encountered during the drilling of next hole
section.
(b) At the top it is the highest.
At the bottom it is the least.

D Compression load
(a) Originate when casings carry inner strings.
(b) Since production casings don not carry inner strings,
they don’t develop any compression load.
E Other loadings Casing
design
(a) bending with tongs during make-up;
(b) pull-up of the joint and slip crushing
(c) corrosion and fatigue failure of the body and
threads;
(d) pipe wear due to running wire line tools and
string assembly;
(e) additional loadings strings treatment operations
such as squeeze-cementing ,acidising and hydraulic
fractures.
Casing
design

F Conclusions
(a) Only tensile force, collapse pressure,burst pressure
and compression load will be considered in the design.
(b) Other loadings,with the exception of (e) cannot be
determined directly and be accounted for through the
use of “safety factors”.
Casing
2 Safety factors design

Casing design is not an exact technique, because of the


uncertainties in the determining the actual loadings and
also because of the change in casing properties with
time,resulting from corrosion and wear.
A safety factor is used to allow for such uncertainties in
the casing design and to ensure that the rated
performance of the casing is always greater than any
expected loading.
Usual safety factors are:
collapse: 0.85---1.125
burst: 1---1.1
tension: 1.6—1.8
Casing
3 combination strings design

Maximum Maximum Maximum


tension Burst pressure collapse pressure
At the top At the top At the bottom
High grade or High grade or High grade or
heavy casing heavy casing heavy casing

From the above table, the requirements for burst and


tension criteria are different from the requirement for
collapse .
Hence a compromise must be reached when designing
for casing.

How to reach the compromise?


This compromise is achieved in the form of a combination
string. In other words,casing of various grades or different
weights are used at different depths of a hole.
top Strong and heavy casing

middle Light yet heavy casing

bottom Heavy casing


Well hole

The combination string method represents the most


economical way of selecting casing consistent with safety.

Casing
design
4 Biaxial effects Casing
design
(1) Concept
The combination of stress due to the weight of the
casing and external pressure are referred to the
“Biaxial stresses”.
(2) The ellipse of plasticity
Holmquist and Nadia in 1939 give the equation
about the relationship for the effect of axial stress on
collapse or burst .

( t   r )2  ( r   t )2  ( z   r )2  2 yield (5-2)

Where σr ,σt ,and σz are the radial, tangential ,and vertical


stresses, respectively.
From the above equation and other equation and we can
deduce the following equation :
2
  t  pi  3   z  pi  1   z  pi 
    1     
   4    2   (5-3)
 yield   yield   yield 

Casing
design
Casing
design

Conclusion

• Axial tension has a detrimental effect on


collapse-pressure rating and a beneficial
effect on burst-pressure rating.

• Axial compression has a detrimental effect


on burst-pressure rating and and a beneficial
effect on collapse-pressure .
5 Graphic method for casing design
The method is first described in 1965 in a series of articles by
Goins et al and has been adopted by many oil companies.

(1) Collapse line


A determined as follows:
(a) calculate the external load due to the mud column,H;
(b) calculate the internal load due to the mud inside the
Casing casing, H1;
design (c) calculate the collapse pressure C, as the difference
between H and H1,
C=H-H1 (5-4)
B Join the zero coordinates at the surface with the
value of C at the casing shoe to get the pressure---
depth graph.
(2) Burst line Casing
A determined as follows: design

(a) calculate the external load due to an assumed mud


column of 0.465 psi/ft.
(b) calculate the internal load to the formation pressure.
(c) calculate the burst pressure as the difference
between (a) and (b).
B
Casing
a at the shoe design

external pressure=CSD×Gm
internal pressure=Pf-(TD-CSD)G
burst = internal pressure - external pressure
= Pf-(TD-CSD)G - CSD×Gm (5-5)
b at the surface
external pressure=0
internal pressure=Pf-TD × G
burst = Pf-TD × G (5-6)

Where G=gradient of formation fluid;


Gm=the gradient of mud.
(3) Tensile forces Casing
A determined as follows: design

(a) calculate the weight of casing in air;


(b) calculate the buoyancy force;
(b) to calculate total tensile loads and compare them
with the joint or pipe body yield values when the casing
is finally chosen.
(c) calculate the bending force in deviated wells;
(d) calculate shock loads due to arresting casing.
B considerations in selection of casing
(a) to check that the casing can carry its own weight
in mud in the initial selection;
(b) to calculate total tensile loads and compare them
with the joint or pipe body yield values in the final
selection.
Example 1 Casing
design

Question: The following three grades of 133/8 in (340 mm)


casings are available in a company store. It is required to run a
combination string based on collapse and tension only. The casing is
run in 67 pcf (1.0734 kg/l) mud to 6200 ft (1890 m). Safety factors
are 1.8 for tension and a minimum of 0.85 for collapse.

Grade Weight Collapse Yield strength


lbm/ft psi 1000 lb
body coupling
K55 54.5 1130 853 636
K55 68 1950 1069 1300
L80 72 2670 1661 1693

Joint type: LTC for K55, 54.5 lb/ft and BTS for remaining grades.
Solution
Casing
(1) Collapse design

Collapse pressure=67×6200/144=2884.7 psi


On a graph of depth against pressure draw a collapse
pressure line between zero at surface and 2885 psi at 6200
ft. Draw the collapse resistances of the three grades as
vertical lines, as shown in the next Figure .
From the Figure, selection based on collapse is as shown
in the next page table. (Note: Minimum safety factor in
collapse=collapse resistance of casing divided by collapse
pressure of mud column.)
Note that the last grade was only suitable down to a depth of 5400 ft for
a safety factor of 1.However, since a minimum safety factor of 0.85 is to
be used, this grade is suitable down to 6200 ft,with the lowest safety
factor being 0.93 at TD. Above 6200 ft the safety factor value in
collapse increases and assumes a maximum value of

1950
=1.7
(2500*67/144)

Depth Grade and weight Length of section Minimum safety factor

0-2500 ft K55, 54.5 Ibm/ft 2500 ft 1


2500-4200 ft K55, 68 Ibm/ft 1700 ft 1
4200-6200 ft L-80, 72 lb/ft 2000 ft 184/(1840*0.1053)=0.93
Casing
design
Casing
(2) Tension design
Casing-carrying capacity must be checked from the bottom joint to the
surface. Two values of yield strength are given in the table of strength
properties. One specifies the yield strength of pipe body and the other the
yield strength of the coupling. The lower of these two values is used for the
calculation of the safety factor in tension. Therefore, starting from the
bottom, see table below.
Since a minimum safety factor of 1.8 is to be used in tension,
the K55, 54.5 lbm/ft (81.2 kg/m) may be used if it is designed
to carry a maximum weight, W, given by:
1.8=6.36*1000/W
W=353.33 lb
Hence, usable weight of section of 54.5# = (Total weight which
can be carried)-(weight of lower casing grades)
weight of section of 54.5#=353 333-259 600=93 733 lb
and
length of usable section of K55,
54.5#=93733lb/(54.5lbm/ft)=1720ft
Casing
design
Casing
design
Remaining top length = 2500 - 1720 = 780 ft
A heavy casing must be used for the top 780 ft. Try K55,
68#(next heavy casing).
Total weight that can be carried by the top joint of K55 is:
= 353 333 + 780×68 = 406 373 lb
SF in tension for K55, 68# at top joint Casing

=1069*1000/406373=2.6 design

Hence, the final casing selection, based on collapse and tension,


is as follows:
In exploration wells the designer often discards grades which give a
marginal safety factor. In fact, the above selection could well be simplified
further to obtain added safety factors and to eliminate the risk of using the
wrong joint in a critical section of the well. In this example grade K55,
54.5# (81.2 kg/m), is the weakest grade and can therefore be eliminated
from our selection. Hence, final selection can be made as follows:

Casing
design
(4) Buoyancy
Consider a cylinder of 1m (or 1ft) in length, of density
ρs ,which is fully immersed in a fluid of density of ρm, of
outside diameter do and inside diameter of di .
A

Air weight of cylinder =
4
d 2
o 
 d i2 1  m  g

or Wa=As ρs g (5-7)
Casing B

design Buoyancy force of cylinder=
4
d 2
o 
 d i2 1  m  g

or Wm=As ρm g (5-8)
C Casing
design
the effective or buoyant weight of the casing
WB =Wa-Wm
=Wa(1 - ρm / ρs )
=Wa×BF
(5-9)
where BF = (1 - ρm / ρs) and is called buoyancy factor.
Casing
Example 2 design

Question: 7 in (177.8 mm) casing, 26#(38.7 kg/m), is


to be set at 17 000 ft (5182 m). If the internal diameter
is 6.276 in (159.4 mm), determine the buoyancy force
and buoyancy factor assuming that the mud density is
93.5 lbm/ft3(1.498 kg/l).
Solution
Weight of casing in air = 26 ×17 000 = 442 000 lb

Buoyancy factor =(1-ρm/ ρs)=(1-93.5/489.5)=0.895


where density of steel = 489.5 lb/ft3 (7.85 kg/l)。

Buoyant weight of casing= 0.809 ×442 000 = 357 578 lb

Buoyancy force = 442 000 - 357 578 = 84 422 lb


Casing
(5) Bending force design
Arise when casing is run in highly deviated wells or in
wells with severe dog-leg problems.
Assume:
(1) a beam subjected to pure bending;
(2) plane transverse sections will remain plane after bending;
(3) the radius is large in comparison with the transverse dimensions;

During the pure bending, the upper surface stretches and is in tension,
while the lower surface shortens and is in compression .
NA (neutral axis): a surface exists between the compressed and
stretched surfaces and has no longitudinal deformation.
HJ at a distance y from NA and has the same length as KL at the NA.
After bending the surface HJ deforms to an arc of radius R and included
angle dθ.

Thus the longitudinal strain,e, in the H`J` is


 
H J  HJ ( R  y)d  Rd y
e   (5-10)
HJ Rd R
Casing
design
From Hook’s law, we can get
(5-11)
σ=Ee=Ey/R
If the original length of the beam is L and the total deformation angle is
θ, then
NA=R ×θ=L (5-12)

From the above 2 equations, we can get


Casing σ=Ey/(L/ θ)=E θy/L (5-13)
design

The maximum tensile stress occurs at the upper extreme


end of the beam at y=D/2, where D is the diameter of the
beam. Thus,
σ=E θD/(2L) (5-14)
Also, bending force (FB)= σA Casing
design
where A is the cross-sectional area.
Hence, FB=EDA θ/(2L) (5-15)

When θis expressed in degrees, while the above formula becomes


FB=EDA θ/(2L) *(π/180) (5-16)
Equation (3-19) in field units Casing
design
A imperial units
E=modulus of elasticity of steel:30×106psi;
D=in; A=in2; L=ft; θ=degrees
Therefore, FB=218.17×102DA θ/L (5-17)
In practice, the rate of change θ per 100ft is used to indicate the
degree of dog-leg severity. Hence , replacing L by 100in equation(3-22)
gives FB=218DA θ (5-18)

FB=63DWN θ lb (5-19)

B metric units
FB=63DWN θ lb (5-20)
(6) Shock loads Casing
design

Significant shocks loading can develop if a casing string


is suddenly stopped.
Axial stresses result from sudden velocity changes
changes in a manner analogous to water-hammer in a
pipe caused by a sudden value closure.
Elastic theory leads to the following equation for axial
shock loads resulting from instantaneously stopping the
casing:
 z  v E s (5-19)

Where Δσz is the change in axial stress caused by the shock


load, Δv is the change in pipe velocity, E is Young’s
modulus, and ρs is the density of steel.
After average values for Young’s modulus and steel density
are substituted ,this equation becomes:
 z  1780v (5-20)

Where Δσz : psi


Δv: ft/sec.

Casing
design
Casing
Casing Design Example design

An exploration well is to be drilled to a total depth


of 13 900 ft (4327 m). Relevant data are as follows.
Drilling program:
0-350 ft (107 m), 26 in (660.4 mm) hole
350-6200 ft (1890 m), 171/2in (444.5 mm) hole
6200-10 400 ft (3170 m), 121/4in (3l 1.2 mm) hole
10 400-13 900 ft (4237 m), 81/2in (215.9 mm) hole

Casing program:
20 in(508 mm) casing to be set at 350 ft (107 m)
133/8in(339.7 mm) casing to be set at 6200 ft (1890 m)
91/8in(244.5 mm) casing to be set at 10 400 ft (3170 m)
7 in (177.8 mm) casing to be set at 13 900 ft (4237 m)
The casing head housing will be installed on the 20 in
casing. The 7 in casing will be run to the surface.
Casing
Mud programme: design
Down to 350 ft (107 m),
mud weight is 65 pcf (1.041 kg/l)
Down to 6200 ft (1890 m),

mud weight is 67 pcf (1.073 kg/l)


Down to 10400 ft (3170 m),
mud weight is 73 pcf (1.169 kg/l)
Down to 13 900 ft (4237 m),
mud weight is 87 pcf (1.394 kg/l)

Safety factors:
Burst = 1.1
Collapse = 0.85
Tension = 1.8
Formation fluid gradient:
0-6200 ft (1890 m), Pf= 0.465 psi/ft (0.105 bar/m)
6200-10 400 ft (3170 m),Pf= 0.48 psi/ft (0.1086 bar/m)
10 400-13 900 ft (4237 m), Pf= 0.57 psi/ft (0.1289 bar/m)

The 12 ¼ in hole experiences a maximum dog-leg severity of


3o/100 ft. Other sections of the well experience
negligible deviation. Shock loads are to be included in
Casing the design of 9 5/8 in and 7 in casing strings.
design For collapse, burst and yield strength values referto some
tables.
Design suitable casing strings for the given hole sizes,
taking into consideration the available casing grades and
the maximum expected pressures.
Casing
solution design

1. Conductor pipe (20 in casing)


This pipe is set at 350 ft (107 m) and will be
subjected to formation pressure from the next
hole drilled to a depth of 6200 ft (1890 m). It
will be assumed that no gas exists at this
shallow depth and kick calculations will be
based on a water kick situation in which
formation gradient is 0.465 psi/ft (0.105
bar/m). Note that if gas is known to exist at
shallow depths, it must be included in the
calculations.
Casing
Collapse design
Collapse pressure at surface = 0

mud weight × depth


Collapse pressure at 350 ft =
144
where mud weight is lbm/ft3.
Therefore,
collapse pressure at 350 ft
=65×350/144
= 158 psi (11 bar)

This pressure acts on the outside of the casing


and for the worst possible situation assume that
the casing is 100% evacuated (as is the case in
a complete-loss circulation situation).
Casing
Burst design

Burst pressure = internal pressure - external pressure


(a) Burst at shoe
From Figure 10.11,
formation pressure at next TD = 6200×0.465
or
Pf = 2883 psi (199 bar)
Internal pressure = Pf - (TD - CSD)×G
= 2883 - (6200 - 350)×0.465
= 163 psi (11 bar)
where G = gradient of invading fluid
= 0.465 psi/ft.

External pressure=casing setting


depth×mud gradient
external pressure = (350×65)/144 Figure 10.11
= 158 psi (11 bar)
Burst at shoe = internal pressure- external pressure
= 163 - 158 Casing
= 5 psi (0.4 bar) design

(b) Burst at surface


Burst at surface = Pf – TD×G
= 2883 – 6200×0.465
= 0

It should be noted that the zero values were


obtained as a result of the fact that a salt-water
kick is considered. If instead a gas kick is
considered, the burst pressure values at the shoe
and surface will be 2135 psi and 2140 psi,
respectively.
Selection
A graph is not normally required and selection is determined
by comparing the strength properties of available casing with
existing pressures.
From Table 10.4 it can be seen that all the available grades
have collapse and burst values above those calculated above.
Hence, select grade K555, 94#,having collapse pressure= 520
psi (36 bar), burst pressure=2110 psi (145 bar) and yield
strength= 1 479 000 lb (6579 kN). It should be noted that
Casing
grade K55, 94# is the lightest and the cheapest of the three
available grades.
design
Since the casing head housing is installed on the 20 in casing,
the latter will be subjected to compression forces resulting
from the weights of subsequent casing strings.
This casing will be checked later to determine whether it is
capable of carrying other casing strings.
Casing
2. 133/8 in casing design
This string is set at 6200 ft and will be subjected, in the event of a
kick, to formation pressures from the next hole drilled to a TD of
10 400 ft.
Collapse
Collapse pressure at surface = 0
Collapse pressure at 6200 ft(1890m)=67×6200/144
=285psi(199 bar)
The collapse line is drawn between 0 at the surface
and 2885 psi at 6200 ft, as shown in Figure 10.12.
Casing
design
From Table 10.5 the collapse resistances of the
available grades as adjusted for a safety factor of
0.85 are as follows:
The collapse resistance values are plotted as
vertical lines, as shown in Figure 10.12

Casing
design
Casing
Burst design
Formation pressure from next TD= 10 400×0.48
= 4992 psi (344 bar)
(see Figure 10.13).
Burst at shoe = internal pressure- external pressure

Internal pressure = Pf - (TD - CSD)×G


= 4992 - (10 400 - 6200)×0.1
= 4572 psi (315 bar)

( where G = gradient of invading


fluid, assumed to be gas having a
0.1 psi/ft gradient)
External pressure = CSD x 0.465
where 0.465 psi/ft is the gradient of mud outside the
casing. Therefore,
external pressure = 6200 x 0.465
= 2883 psi (199 bar)
Thus,
Burst at shoe = 4572 - 2883
Casing = 1689 psi (116 bar)
design Burst at surface = internal pressure
- external pressure
External pressure = 0
Internal pressure = Pf - (TD)× G
Therefore,
burst at surface = Pf - (TD)×G
= 4992 - 10 400×0.1
= 3952 psi (273 bar)

The burst line can now be drawn between 1689 psi at


the shoe and 3952 psi at the surface; see Figure
10.12.
From Table 10.5, of casing properties, the burst
Casing resistances of the available grades are given
design below,together with adjustment for SF = 1.1.
Selection
Selection should consider the lightest weights
first, as these grades are the cheapest. On the
basis of collapse only, Figure 10.12 indicates
that the given grades are suitable for the
following depths:
0-3050 ft K55, 54.5#

Casing 3050-4950 ft K55,68#


design 4950-6200 ft L80, 72#
On the basis of burst only, Figure 10.12 gives
the following selection:
0-2400 ft L80, 72#
2400-4200 ft K55, 68#
4200-6200 ft K55, 54.5#
When selection is based on both collapse and
burst,Figure 10.12 indicates that grade K55,
54.5#does not satisfy the burst requirement from 0
to 4200 ft. Also,grade K55, 68# does not satisfy
burst from 0 to 2400 ft.Hence, selection from 0 to
2400 ft is limited to grade L80, 72#.
Below 2400 ft, grade K55, 68# is suitable for
collapse from 0 to 4950 ft and for burst from 2400
Casing ft to 4200 ft. Hence, the middle section consists
design of K55,68#from 2400 to 4200 ft.

The last section of hole can only be satisfied by


grade LB0, 72# in both collapse and burst; see
Figure10.12. Hence, selection based on collapse
and burst is(see table below):
Note that grade K55, 54.5# has been rejected,
since it does not satisfy both collapse and
burst at once along any section of the hole.
Casing
design Tension If bending and shock forces are ignored, the
suitability of selected grades in tension can be checked by
comparing the weight in air carried by each section with its
yield strength. For the 93 in and 7 in casing,effects of
bending and shock loading will be included and buoyant
weight will be considered to reduce the possibility of over-
designing. Hence, starting from the bottom, see table at the
top of next page.
Weight of section grade and weight cumulative weight safety factor
(×1000 lb) (×1000 lb) =yield
strength÷cumul
ative weight

144.0 L80,72# 144.0 1650/144=11.5


122.4 K55,68# 266.4 835/266.4=3.13
172.8 L80,72# 439.2 1650/439.2=3.8

Casing
design Note that yield strength values are obtained from the given
Table as the lowest value of either the body or coupling
yield strength.
The safety factor must, at least, be equal to the required
value of 1.8 if any of the selected grades is to satisfy the
criterion of tension. The table overleaf produces values of
SF of greater than 1.8, which indicates that the grades
satisfy collapse, burst and tension.
Pressure testing After the casing is landed and cemented, it
is the practice to test the casing prior to drilling the
casing shoe. The testing pressure employed by some operating
companies is 60% of the burst rating of the weakest grade of
casing in the string.Hence,testing pressure of 133 in
= 60% x burst pressure of K55, 68//
= 60% x 3450
= 2070 psi (143 bars)
During pressure testing an extra tensile force is exerted on
Casing the casing and the SF should, again, be > 1.8 for the top
joint (or the joint of weakest grade). Hence,total tensile
design force during pressure testing at top joint
= buoyant weight of casing
+ tensile force due to pressure testing
=weight in air×BF + (π/4) (ID)2×testing pressure
BF=(1-ρm/ ρs)=1-67/489.5=0.863
From the given table we can get the inside diameter of L80,
72# as 12.347 in (313.6 mm).
Therefore,
total tensile force = (439.2 x 0.863) ×1000
+ (π/4) (12.347)2 × 2070
= 379 030 + 247 847
Casing
= 626 877 lb
design
SF in tension for top joint = 1 661 000/ 626 877
=2.65
Biaxial effects Check the weakest grade of selected
casing for biaxial effects as follows.
Tensile ratio = weight carried by weakest joint÷
yield strength of body (or coupling)
Weakest grade selected is the K55, 68#, having a body yield
strength of 1 069 000 lb and a coupling strength(LTC) of
835000 lb.
Hence,
Casing tensile ratio =266.4×1000/835000=0.319
design
For a tensile ratio of 0.319, Table 10.8 shows
that the collapse resistance of the casing is
reduced to approximately 80% of its original
(under zero load) value.Hence, collapse resistance
of K55, 68# = 0.8×1950
under biaxial loading = 1560 psi(108 bars)
Collapse pressure due to mud at 2400 ft (i.e. top
joint of grade of the K55, 68#)
=67×2400/144=1117 psi(77bars)
Therefore,
SF in collapse for top joint of K55, 68#
=collapse resistance÷ collapse pressure
=1560/1117
Casing =1.4
design Final selection
Depth Grade and weight
0-2400 ft (732 m) L80, 72#(107 kg/m)
24004200 ft (1280 m) K55, 68#(101 kg/m)
4200-6200 ft (1890 m) L80, 72#(107 kg/m)
3. 9 5/8in casing
The 95/8in casing is set at 10400 ft and will
be subjected, in the event of a kick, to
formation pressures from the next hole drilled
to a TD of 13 900 ft.
Collapse
At surface
Casing
collapse pressure = 0
design
At shoe
collapse pressure =73×10400/144
= 5272 psi (363.5 bars)
Draw a line between 0 and 5272 psi as shown in
Figure 10.14.
From Table 10.6 collapse properties ofavailable
casing are as follows:
Grade Weight (lbm/ft) Collapse pressure
SF = 1 SF = 1.1
C75 43.5 3750 3750/1.1=4412
L80 47.0 4750 4750/1.1=5888
C95 53.5 7330 7330/1.1=8624

Casing
design The above collapse resistances can be drawn as vertical lines,
as shown in Figure 10.14.
Burst
The 95/8in casing will be subjected in the event of a kick,
to a formation pressure of:
0.57 psi/ft×13 900 ft = 7923 psi (546 bar)
Burst at shoe = internal pressure
- external pressure
Burst at shoe = [Pf - (TD - CSD) x G]
- CSD × 0.465
Casing
A gas kick is considered for this string; thus, G = 0.1
design
psi/ft.
Therefore,
burst at shoe = 7923 - (13 900 - 10 400)
×0.1 - 10 400×0.465
= 2737 psi (189 bars)
(where TD = next hole depth = 13 900 ft).
Burst at surface = Pf – TD×G
Therefore,
Burst at surface = 7923 - 13 900×0.1
= 6533 psi (450.4 bar)
The burst line can now be plotted between 6533 psi at the
surface (i.e. at zero depth) and 2737 psi at 10 400 ft,as
shown in Figure 10.14。
From Table 10.6 burst pressures of available gradesof 9~ in
Casing casing as adjusted for an SF = 1.1 are:
design Grade Weight (lbm/ft) Collapse pressure
SF = 1 SF = 1.1
C75 43.5 5930 5390/1.1=5391
L80 47.0 6870 6870/1.1=6245
C95 53.5 7330 9410/1.1=8555

Burst resistance lines are plotted, as shown in Figure10.14 .


Selection based on collapse and burst
From Figure10.14, selection based on collapse and
burst is as shown at the table.
Buoyant weight of casing = 474.75×BF
BF= 1-73/489.5 =0.851
Buoyant weight of casing = 474.75 ×0.851

Casing = 404.012 ×1000 lb


design
Tension The suitability of the selected grades
intension will be investigated by considering the
total tensile forces resulting from casing buoyant
weight,bending force and shock load. Starting from
the bottom, the weight carried by each section can
be calculated, as follows:

Depth (ft) Weight of each section Weight in air carried


Casing
( × 1000 lb) by top joint of each
design section

10 400--8700 79.90 79.90


8700-3200 239.25 79.90 + 239.25 = 319.15
3200-800 112.80 319.15 + 112.8 = 431.95
800-0 42.80 431.95 + 42.8 = 474.75
By use of the equations
bending force = 63θ × D × WN
drag force = 3200 × WN
where WN is the weight per unit length, Table
10.10 can be constructed. Table 10.10 shows that
all the selected grades satisfy the tension
requirement.
Casing
design
Pressure testing
Testing pressure
= 60% of burst pressure of lowest grade (C75, 43.5#)
= 0.6 × 5930
= 3558 psi (245 bar)
During pressure testing, an extra tensile force is generated
and selected grades with marginal SF should be checked. At
800 ft grade L80, 47# has the lowest SF of 1.8 (see Table
Casing 10.10); hence, this grade should be checked.
design During pressure testing,
total tensile force
= buoyant load
+ tensile force due to pressure testing
From table 10.10,
buoyant force at 800 ft = 361.21(×1000 lb)
Total tensile load at 800 ft
= 361.21 × 100+ (π/4)(8.681)2 × 3558
= 580.623 × 100
SF in tension = 1086/580.623=1.87

Biaxial effects
Check the weakest grade selected.Grade C75, 43.5#
Casing is the weakest grade, carrying a total buoyant
design load of 248.41 × 1000 lb, as shown in Table 10.10.
Tensile ratio = weight carried / yield strength
=248.41/942
=0.264
From Table 10.8 it can be seen that, for a tensile ratio of
0.264, the collapse resistance reduces to 84% of its
original value. Hence,collapse resistance of C75, 43.5#
under biaxial loading
= 0.84 x 3750
= 3150 psi (217.6 bar)
SF in collapse= collapse resistance under biaxial
loading÷collapse pressure at 3200 ft
=3150 ÷(73×3200/144)=1.94
Casing
Final selection
design
Depth Grade and weight
0-800 ft (244 m) C95, 53.5# (79.7 kg/m)
800-3200 ft (976 m) L80, 47# (70 kg/m)
3200-9700 ft (2957 m) C75, 43.5# (64.8 kg/m)
9700-10 400 ft (3170 m) L80, 47# (70 kg/m)
Casing
design
4. 7in casing
This string is set at 13 900 fi (4237 m).Collapse
Collapse pressure at surface = 0
Collapse pressure at 13 900 ft=87×13900/14
= 8398 psi (579 bar)
This pressure acts on the outside of the casing,
Casing
and for the worst possible situation assume that
design there is zero pressure inside the casing. Draw the
collapse pressure line, as shown in Figure 10.15,
between 0 psi at the surface and 8398 psi at 13
900 ft.
Collapse resistances, from Table 10.7, are as follows:
Grade Weight (lbm/ft) Collapse resistance
SF = 1 SF = 0.85
K55 26.0 4320 4320/0.85=5082
L80 29.0 7020 7020/0.85=8259
C95 29.0 7820 7820/0.85=9200

Casing Collapse resistances can now be drawn as vertical


design
lines in Figure 10.15.
Casing
design
Burst
Burst pressure = internal pressure
- external pressure
(a) Burst at shoe
Internal pressure = Pf = 0.57 × 13 900
= 7923 psi (546.5 bar)
External pressure = Gmud ×CSD
Casing For added safety, the external pressure resisting
design internal pressure is assumed to be that of a mud column
outside the casing, even though the casing is cemented.
Also, the mud is assumed to deteriorate so that its
gradient decreases to that of salt water, largely because
of settlement of solids. Hence,
G = 0.465 psi/ft (0.1052 bar/m)
Burst at shoe = 7923 - 13 900× 0.465
= 1460 psi (100 bars)
(b) Burst pressure at surface
= internal pressure - external pressure
= 7923 - 13 900
×gradient of invading fluid (assumed gas)
= 7923 - 13 900× 0.1
= 6533 psi (450.4 bars)
Casing
design
Worst conditions In practice, hydrocarbon
production is carried out through a tubing (single
or dual) sealed in a packer, as shown in Figure
10.16. Thus, under ideal conditions only the
casing shoe will be subjected to burst effects.
However, a situation may arise in practice when
the production tubing leaks gas to the7 in casing.
In this case, the surface pressure (6533 psi) is
now acting on the column of packer fluid between
the casing and the tubing; see Figure 10.16.

Casing
design
Hence, burst calculations for production casing should be
modified as follows.
(a) Burst pressure at shoe = surface pressure + hydrostatic
pressure of packer fluid -external pressure.
Normally

ρpacker fluid - ρdrilling mud = 87 pcf (1.394 kg/l)


Burst at shoe = 6533 +87×13900/144- 13 900 x 0.465

Casing = 8467 psi (584 bar)


design (b) Burst at surface = 6533 psi (450 bar)
Note: All these calculations assume that there is no cement
outside the casing.
The burst line is drawn between 6533 psi at the
surface and 8467 psi at 13 900 ft, as shown in
Figure10.15. From Table 10.7 burst resistances as
adjusted for an SF of 1.1 for the available grades
are:

Grade Weight (lbm/ft) Burst resistance

Casing SF = 1 SF = 1.1
design K55 26.0 4980 4980/1.1=4527
LB0 29.0 8160 8160/1.1=7418
C95 29.0 9690 9690/1.1=8809

Adjusted burst lines (for SF= 1.1) can now be


drawn as vertical lines in Figure 10.15.
Selection based on burst and collapse
From Figure10.15 selection based on burst and
collapse is as follows:
Depth (ft) Grade and weight
0-6100 LB0, 29#
6100-13 900 C95, 29#
Casing Tension
design
The suitability of selected grades in tension
can be checked by considering the cumulative
weight carried by each section. Hence, starting
from the bottom, see the table in next page.
The above table considered the weight of casing
sections in air only and a marginal safety
factor of 1.68was obtained. This value is below
the required SF of1.8 and it is instructive to
Casing check the suitability of this grade by adding
design the effects of shock loading (bending effects
are assumed to be negligible) as shown in
Table10.11.
From Table 10.11 it is evident that grade L80
29# is not suitable as a top joint. Further
refinement can be made when pressure testing is
considered.
Pressure testing
Normally, casing is tested to 60% of its mill burst pressure.
Taking the lowest grade (L80),therefore,
test pressure = 0.6 x 8160 = 4896 psi (338 bar)
The weakest joint is the top joint of the lower
grade.Therefore, load at top joint=buoyant weight of casing
+ tensile force, resulting from extra pressure on inside of
casing

Casing
= Wair× BF + (π/4)(di)2 × test pressure

design where di is the internal diameter of the casing = 6.184 in


and BF = 1 -(87/489.5)= 0.822.
Therefore,
total load at surface
= 0.822 x 403.1 × 1000× (π/4)×(6.184)2 × 4896
= 478 400 lb
Therefore,
SF in tension during pressure test
=676000/478400= 1.41
Thus, the top joint of L80 must be replaced by a
higher grade casing if the SF in tension of 1.8
is to be maintained throughout the running and
testing of the casing. Hence, the maximum load, W,
that L80 can carry and still produce an SF = 1.8
Casing is given by
design
1.8=676 000/W
Therefore,
W= 375 556 lb
Hence,
weight of usable L80 section
= total weight carried (W) - air weight of C95, 29#
= 375 556 - air weight of C95, 29#
= 375 556 - 226 200
= 149 356 lb
Casing
and
design
usable length of L80, 29# = 149 356 lb/ (29 lb/ft )
=55150ft
From Table 10.11 the total tensile load at top
joint is still 424.15 × 1000 lb, since the two
different grades have the'same weight per foot of
29. If the weights were different, then
another table should be constructed.
If grade C95 is used as the top section (950 ft
long),then

Casing SF at top joint = 803000、424150= 1.89


design (Note: Yield strength of C95, 29#= 803 000 lb.)
During pressure tests,
SF=803000/478400=1.68
Thus, even with the higher grade, the SF during
pressure testing is still below 1.8. To maintain
an SF of1.8, decrease the test pressure below 4896
psi. Hence,
1.8=803000/(buoyant weight + tensile force due to pressure test )
=803000/(331.348+(π/4)(6.184)2×P)
where P is the required pressure test.

Therefore, P= 3821 psi (263 bar).


Casing
design Hence, the new selection is:
Depth (ft) Grade
0-950 C95, 29#
950-6100 L80, 29#
6100-13 400 C95, 29#
Biaxial effects
Biaxial loading reduces collapse resistance of
casing and is most critical at the joints of the
weakest grade. Two positions will be investigated.
(a) At 950 ft
tensile ratio
Casing =buoyant weight carried by top joint of L80/ yield strength
design tensile ratio (TR)
=(13 900-950)×29×BF/676000
= 0.46
Table 10.8 shows that for a TR =0.46, collapse
resistance reduces to 69% of its original collapse
value(i.e. under zero load). Therefore, actual
collapse resistance of LB0 = 0.69 x 7020 = 4844 psi
SF in collapse at 950 ft
=collapse resistance of casing ÷collapse pressure of mud
=4844 ÷(87×950/144)

Casing =8.4
design
(b) At 6100 ft
tensile ratio =154450/676000 = 0.23
Table 10.8 shows that for a TR=0.23, collapse
resistance reduces to 86% of its original value.
Therefore, adjusted collapse resistance of L80 =
0.86 ×7020= 6037 psi at 6100 ft
SF in collapse at 6100 ft
=6037/(87×6100/144)
=1.6
Final selection
Depth (ft) Grade and weight
0-950 C95, 29#
Casing
950-6100 LB0, 29#
design
6100-13 900 C95, 29#
section 6 other considerations
1 Effect of hydrogen sulfide on casing
A Hydrogen embrittlement

When hydrogen sulfide is present, the rate at which the


hydrogen atoms (H) combine to form hydrogen gas (H2) is
reduced. As a result, atomic hydrogen (H) may enter the
metal at a significant rate before recombining. The presence
of this molecular hydrogen within the steel reduces its
Other ductility and causes it to break in brittle manner rather than
considerations yield. This phenomenon known as hydrogen embrittlement.
The resulting failure is called sulfide cracking.
Water must be present for corrosion reaction to occur, which
generates hydrogen atoms. Dry hydrogen sulfide does not
cause embrittlement.
Other
B temperature effect on hydrogen embtittlement considerations

Hydrogen embrittlement is especially significant high-


strength steels at low temperature. Common carbon steels with
yield strengths below 90,000psi generally not fail by sulfide
cracking for temperature above 100°F.
There is evidence that, as temperature increases, casing with a
higher minimum yield strength than 90,000 psi can be used
safely in wells that contain hydrogen sulfide in the produced
fluids. In deep, abnormally pressured walls, a practical casing
design is difficult to obtain without the use of some high-
strength steel.
Kant and Greer have presented the results of experimental laboratory and
field tests of several steel grades that were exposed to hydrogen sulfide in
varying concentrations, at various temperatures, and at various stress levels.
Shown in Fig. 7. i6 and 7.17 arc the maximum salt stress levels observed
(expressed as percent of minimum yield strength) for various steel grades,
hydrogen sulfide concentrations, and exposure temperatures.
C incubation time
Failure resulting from hydrogen
embrittlement often do not occur
immediately after exposure to
hydrogen sulfide. A time period during
which no damage is evident is
followed by a sudden failure. During
the time period before failure,called
incubation period, hydrogen is
diffusing to points of high stress.
Fig.7.18 shows test results of the time
to failure for different RHN’s
(Rockwell hardness number) and
different applied stresses. Fig. 7.19
shows the effect of hydrogen sulfide
concentration.

Other
considerations
2 Effect of field handling on casing
A Performance properties that a given joint of casing
will exhibit in the field can be affected adversely by
several field operations. For example, burst strength is
affected significantly by the procedure and equipment
used to make up the pipe.
Tests have shown that burst strength can be reduced
by as much as 70% by combinations of tong marks
that penetrate 17% of the wall thickness and 4% out-
of –roundness caused by excessive torque.

Other
considerations
B Mechanical deformations can also occur while the
casing is transported to location or while it is run into the
hole. Any mechanical deformity in the pipe normally results
in considerable reduction in its collapse resistance. This is
especially true for casing with high dn/t ratios. A thinwall
tube that is deformed by 1% out-of-round will have its
collapse resistance lowered by 25%. Thus, the slightest
crushing by tongs, slips, or downhole conditions diminishes
the collapse resistance by a significant amount.Some of the
special hydrogen-sulfide-resistant casings,such as C—90,
can be stress-hardened by careless handling.If this occurs,
the resistance to hydrogen embrittlement can be lost.

Other
considerations
3 compression in conductor pipe

Since the conductor pipe carries the weight of


other strings, it must be checked for compression
loading.The procedure is to determine the total
buoyant weight of strings carried and then
compare this with the yield strength of the
conductor pipe. A minimum safety factor of 1.1
should be obtained.
In this analysis it is assumed that the tensile
strength of casing is equal to its compressive
strength.
Other
considerations
Other
Example considerations

One submerged weight of 133/8 in, 95/8 in and 7 in strings


in a mud weight of 0.465 psi/ft, so that the worst casing is
taken in account.
Hence, BF=(1-0.465/3.39)=0.863
where 3.39psi.ft is the pressure gradient of steel.

Casing Air weight ×1000lb


133/8 in 439.2
95/8 in 481.25
7in 403.1
Total air weight carried by conductor pipe
=1317050 lb
Total buoyant weight carried by conductor pipe
= 1317050×0.863
=1136614 lb
Yield strength of coupling of top joint of K55,94#
=1479000
Hence ,
1479000
SF in compression= =1.3
1136614

Other
considerations
section 6 other considerations
1 Effect of hydrogen sulfide on casing
A Hydrogen embrittlement

When hydrogen sulfide is present, the rate at which the


hydrogen atoms (H) combine to form hydrogen gas (H2) is
reduced. As a result, atomic hydrogen (H) may enter the
metal at a significant rate before recombining. The presence
of this molecular hydrogen within the steel reduces its
Other ductility and causes it to break in brittle manner rather than
considerations yield. This phenomenon known as hydrogen embrittlement.
The resulting failure is called sulfide cracking.
Water must be present for corrosion reaction to occur, which
generates hydrogen atoms. Dry hydrogen sulfide does not
cause embrittlement.
Other
B temperature effect on hydrogen embtittlement considerations

Hydrogen embrittlement is especially significant high-


strength steels at low temperature. Common carbon steels with
yield strengths below 90,000psi generally not fail by sulfide
cracking for temperature above 100°F.
There is evidence that, as temperature increases, casing with a
higher minimum yield strength than 90,000 psi can be used
safely in wells that contain hydrogen sulfide in the produced
fluids. In deep, abnormally pressured walls, a practical casing
design is difficult to obtain without the use of some high-
strength steel.
Kant and Greer have presented the results of experimental laboratory and
field tests of several steel grades that were exposed to hydrogen sulfide in
varying concentrations, at various temperatures, and at various stress levels.
Shown in Fig. 7. i6 and 7.17 arc the maximum salt stress levels observed
(expressed as percent of minimum yield strength) for various steel grades,
hydrogen sulfide concentrations, and exposure temperatures.
C incubation time
Failure resulting from hydrogen
embrittlement often do not occur
immediately after exposure to
hydrogen sulfide. A time period during
which no damage is evident is
followed by a sudden failure. During
the time period before failure,called
incubation period, hydrogen is
diffusing to points of high stress.
Fig.7.18 shows test results of the time
to failure for different RHN’s
(Rockwell hardness number) and
different applied stresses. Fig. 7.19
shows the effect of hydrogen sulfide
concentration.

Other
considerations
2 Effect of field handling on casing
A Performance properties that a given joint of casing
will exhibit in the field can be affected adversely by
several field operations. For example, burst strength is
affected significantly by the procedure and equipment
used to make up the pipe.
Tests have shown that burst strength can be reduced
by as much as 70% by combinations of tong marks
that penetrate 17% of the wall thickness and 4% out-
of –roundness caused by excessive torque.

Other
considerations
B Mechanical deformations can also occur while the
casing is transported to location or while it is run into the
hole. Any mechanical deformity in the pipe normally results
in considerable reduction in its collapse resistance. This is
especially true for casing with high dn/t ratios. A thinwall
tube that is deformed by 1% out-of-round will have its
collapse resistance lowered by 25%. Thus, the slightest
crushing by tongs, slips, or downhole conditions diminishes
the collapse resistance by a significant amount.Some of the
special hydrogen-sulfide-resistant casings,such as C—90,
can be stress-hardened by careless handling.If this occurs,
the resistance to hydrogen embrittlement can be lost.

Other
considerations
3 compression in conductor pipe

Since the conductor pipe carries the weight of


other strings, it must be checked for compression
loading.The procedure is to determine the total
buoyant weight of strings carried and then
compare this with the yield strength of the
conductor pipe. A minimum safety factor of 1.1
should be obtained.
In this analysis it is assumed that the tensile
strength of casing is equal to its compressive
strength.
Other
considerations
Other
Example considerations

One submerged weight of 133/8 in, 95/8 in and 7 in strings


in a mud weight of 0.465 psi/ft, so that the worst casing is
taken in account.
Hence, BF=(1-0.465/3.39)=0.863
where 3.39psi.ft is the pressure gradient of steel.

Casing Air weight ×1000lb


133/8 in 439.2
95/8 in 481.25
7in 403.1
Total air weight carried by conductor pipe
=1317050 lb
Total buoyant weight carried by conductor pipe
= 1317050×0.863
=1136614 lb
Yield strength of coupling of top joint of K55,94#
=1479000
Hence ,
1479000
SF in compression= =1.3
1136614

Other
considerations