3 views

Uploaded by Ahmed Ali Alsubaih

design

- SPE 138798 Frac con Sand Jetting.pdf
- TCA
- Geothermal Drilling
- casing design
- Micro piling
- Design of Deep Geothermal Wells
- 03. EXPLORATION.doc
- 59356080 Etabs Flowchart v 9
- Project Light Pole
- Stud Welding
- Rr210102 Strength of Materials i
- Oil Drilling Overview
- fishing-tools.pdf
- Wellhead Requirements.pdf
- 401 Final 2004-05[1]
- Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete - HK - 1987
- Structural Performance of Perforated Steel Beams with Novel Web Openings and with Partial Concrete Encasement
- 92-s06
- En Novatop Element
- MRP1_2_3000_data

You are on page 1of 160

By Jimmy Wang

University of Petroleum,China

Content

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

following:

1 the functions of oil well casing

casing strings

Technical words

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?

support for weak, or fractured formations;

fluid/pressure regimes from contaminating the

pay zone;

freshwater zones;

4 to provide a passage for hydrocarbon

fluids;

the wellhead equipment ;

and depth to facilitate the running of

testing and completion equipment.

section 2 Casing Types

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

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

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

zones, water sands, shallow hydrocarbon zones

and build-up sections of deviated wells.

D. Feature

(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:

(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

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=(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

from the following formula:

2E 1

Pc bar

1 2 2 (3-4)

Strength

DD

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)

DD

1

t t

In metric units, the equation (3-4) becomes

Strength

2.198 10 6

Pc

properties

2

bar (3-6)

DD

1

t t

(4) Plastic collapse

be determined from the following equation :

A

Strength

Pp Y B C (3-7)

D/t

properties

steel used and Y is yield strength.

(5) Transition collapse pressure

elastic and plastic failure is described by the following

formula:

Strength

F

PT Y G psi

properties

(3-8)

D/t

3 Burst strength

Strength

properties (1) Concept

defined as the maximum value of internal

pressure required to cause the steel to yield.

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

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

(2) plain end weight;

(3) threaded and coupleded weight.

(1) nominal weight

Casing

specification

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)

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:

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);

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:

length (ft)

1 16-25 22

2 25-34 31

3 Over 34 42

5 Grade of steel Casing

specification

follows:

Casing

6 The failure modes of casing specification

Casing

section 5 Casing design

design

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

forces, and shock loading.

joint of the string.

Casing

B Collapse pressure

design

(b) Collapse pressure

C=ρm gh (5-1)

Where ρm : mud density

the collapse is the highest at the bottom

collapse resistance.

Casing

C Burst pressure design

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

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

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

tension criteria are different from the requirement for

collapse .

Hence a compromise must be reached when designing

for casing.

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

Well hole

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)

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

collapse-pressure rating and a beneficial

effect on burst-pressure rating.

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.

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

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)

Gm=the gradient of mud.

(3) Tensile forces Casing

A determined as follows: design

(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

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.

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

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)

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

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

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

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

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.

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)

Casing σ=Ey/(L/ θ)=E θy/L (5-13)

design

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)

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

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)

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 1780v (5-20)

Δv: ft/sec.

Casing

design

Casing

Casing Design Example design

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),

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)

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

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

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)

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

(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.

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

Burst at surface = Pf – TD×G

= 2883 – 6200×0.465

= 0

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

= 4992 - (10 400 - 6200)×0.1

= 4572 psi (315 bar)

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 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#

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.

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

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

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

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:

Casing

( × 1000 lb) by top joint of each

design section

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

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

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

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:

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

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

- SPE 138798 Frac con Sand Jetting.pdfUploaded byMauro Catano
- TCAUploaded byTiffany Dacino
- Geothermal DrillingUploaded byPablo Martinez Berenguer
- casing designUploaded byHeris Sitompul
- Micro pilingUploaded bydstv2005
- Design of Deep Geothermal WellsUploaded byAnonymous xFfZQi
- 03. EXPLORATION.docUploaded byNikhil Allenki
- 59356080 Etabs Flowchart v 9Uploaded bySushil Dhungana
- Project Light PoleUploaded byThahir Shah
- Stud WeldingUploaded byJuan Ormachea
- Rr210102 Strength of Materials iUploaded bySrinivasa Rao G
- Oil Drilling OverviewUploaded byvanessa_dea23
- fishing-tools.pdfUploaded byjardelbruno
- Wellhead Requirements.pdfUploaded byKHALEDFEKAIR
- 401 Final 2004-05[1]Uploaded byOguzhan Bakan
- Code of Practice for Structural Use of Concrete - HK - 1987Uploaded bynebojsadj6411
- Structural Performance of Perforated Steel Beams with Novel Web Openings and with Partial Concrete EncasementUploaded byKonstantinos Daniel Tsavdaridis
- 92-s06Uploaded byUcok Dedy
- En Novatop ElementUploaded byLucian Ciprian
- MRP1_2_3000_dataUploaded bysajithv78
- EN 3-2005 Example 001Uploaded byAnitha Hassan Kabeer
- Wellheads Xmas Trees ValvesUploaded byAbdul Hameed Omar
- Average Well SummaryUploaded byCarla Alvarado Choque
- Kick ToleranceUploaded byHafiz Othman
- course outline.docxUploaded bySõłę Ęý
- Emano Beam Conc - CopyUploaded byEmanoAce
- Structural Performance of Steel Concrete Composite Deck for Steel Box Girder BridgesUploaded byDedy Dharmawansyah
- water wellUploaded byyyamid
- Experimental And Analytical Modeling Of Concrete Filled FRP TubesUploaded byfoad

- OTC-18513-MSUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- Upstream Technology ClariantUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- shizawi2011Uploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- Introduction.pdfUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- Fahim 2005Uploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- Osha Rode 2010Uploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- helaly2013Uploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- ARMA-11-356Uploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- Hysys 8.8 Download & InstallationUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- IntroductionUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- OTC-18513-MSUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- Well Control Exercises.pdfUploaded byal7assany
- Ge Numerical 2014Uploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- 20simulator.PDFUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- 20simulator.PDFUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- shizawi2011.pdfUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- shizawi2011.pdfUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- 00003733 dumpfloodUploaded byhifni98
- Alg Amber 2000Uploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- 19335webtocUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- SPE-7590-MSUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- quttainah2005.pdfUploaded byahmalisha2
- quttainah2005.pdfUploaded byahmalisha2
- SPE-106570-MSUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- 4000 Essential English Words 3 KeyUploaded byLee
- SPE-163128-MSUploaded bysaeed65
- 9_keysUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- 3 Rock Mass ClassificationUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- OTC-18513-MSUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih
- SPE-7590-MS.pdfUploaded byAhmed Ali Alsubaih

- API CODESUploaded bysnthesis
- Drilling and Completion egy petroleum engineer.pdfUploaded byRahma Mejri
- 08PO_PF_1_3.pdfUploaded byMarcelo Varejão Casarin
- i Geothermal Drilling Problems and Their Impact on Cost Sand82Uploaded byAde Oktavia Rhaisya
- Applications of Acoustic Liquid Level Measurements in Gas WellsUploaded byBruno S. Rivas
- Well costUploaded byfirmanpratama
- BambangUploaded byYessy Yasmaralda
- Actualización Compañía: PetromineralesUploaded byDiego Correa Giraldo
- ABEL Profile 25Jun07 Rev4Uploaded byWaleed Barakat Maria
- 14_CCOP Reserve DefinitionsUploaded byPepe Navia
- Lower Completion - Juan Tovar.pdfUploaded byMahmoud Ahmed Ali Abdelrazik
- 02. Total Subsea SolutionsUploaded byJavier Alvarado
- Assessing Mud PenetrationUploaded byAnonymous JMuM0E5YO
- Fracture GradientUploaded byMuhammad Ali
- Paper Casing DrillingUploaded bySatria Putra Samudra
- IPR MethodsUploaded byndlr81
- Indice de Especificaciones InternacionalesUploaded bymarcanoau
- A Real Picture in Oil Base Muds CompositeUploaded byMussawer Hasnain
- Saudi Aramco - Operational Geology ManualUploaded byAdnan Khalid
- Chapter 09 Air and Gas DrillingUploaded byAbrar Hassan
- Long Term Well IntegrityUploaded byRasa Rasa
- Summary Report Drilling OperationsUploaded byFarahKhanJamali
- HYBRID ROTARY STEERABLE SYSTEMUploaded byJaime A Polanco
- 01 Plan of DevelopmentUploaded byRay Yuda
- Complete ReportUploaded byShalihan Mustafa
- CompleteUploaded byHuy Lâm
- One PetroUploaded byBagus Panuntun
- Drilling Ins PerceptionUploaded byMinesh Shah
- SPE-68639-MSUploaded byRamanamurthy Palli
- MI-Swaco - Drilling_Solutions_Catalog 2008Uploaded byRadu Teodor Goran