|Theme||Visible||Selectable||Appearance||Zoom Range (now: 0)|
The most important mechanical properties of casing and tubing are burst strength, collapse resistance and tensile strength. These properties are necessary to determine the strength of the pipe and to design a casing string. If casing is subjected to internal pressure higher than external, it is said that casing is exposed to burst pressure loading. Burst pressure loading conditions occur during well control operations, casing pressure integrity tests, pumping operations, and production operations. The MIYP of the pipe body is determined by the internal yield pressure formula found in API Bull. This equation, commonly known as the Barlow equation, calculates the internal pressure at which the tangential (or hoop) stress at the inner wall of the pipe reaches the yield strength (YS) of the material.
One of the most exciting developments in the last decade has been expandable tubulars because they offer the potential for a "monoborehole" and drilling to depths no longer limited by initial hole diameter. As a result, the focus on tubulars has concentrated on expandable casing. A key development is the concept of the monodiameter borehole (Figure 1). Production casing can be run inside the expanded form of casing with the same diameter with this concept. It will allow, for the first time, casing to be set at will or as needed without a penalty in completed depth.
To evaluate a given casing design, a set of loads is necessary. Casing loads result from running the casing, cementing the casing, subsequent drilling operations, production and well workover operations. Mechanical loads are associated with casing hanging weight, shock loads during running, packer loads during production and workovers, and hanger loads. In tubing and over the free length of the casing above top-of-cement (TOC), changes in temperatures and pressures will have the largest effect on the ballooning and temperature load components. The incremental forces, because of these effects, are given here.
Bit- and casing-size selection can mean the difference between a well that must be abandoned before completion and a well that is an economic and engineering success. Improper size selection can result in holes so small that the well must be abandoned because of drilling or completion problems. The drilling engineer (and well planner) is responsible for designing the hole geometry to avoid these problems. However, a successful well is not necessarily an economic success. For example, a well design that allows for satisfactory, trouble-free drilling and completion may be an economic failure, because the drilling costs are greater than the expected return on investment.
Contamination of drilling fluids with drilled cuttings is an unavoidable consequence of successful drilling operations. If the drilling fluid does not carry cuttings and cavings to the surface, the rig either is not "making hole" or soon will be stuck in the hole it is making. The drill cuttings that are separated from the drilling fluid on the surface by the soldis control equipment and some quantity of unrecoverable or economically unwanted drilling fluid are a major source of drilling waste. Drilled and formation solids that are sized smaller than can be removed by the solids control equipment are often reported as drill solids. Some quantitiy of drill solids will accumulate in the drilling fluid and must be removed by the solids control equipment or reduced in concentration by dilution.
To arrive at the optimal solution, the design engineer must consider casing as a part of a whole drilling system. A brief description of the elements involved in the design process is presented next. The engineer responsible for developing the well plan and casing design is faced with a number of tasks that can be briefly characterized. While the intention is to provide reliable well construction at a minimum cost, at times failures occur. Most documented failures occur because the pipe was exposed to loads for which it was not designed.
Abstract All wells require casing strings so that the planned operations can proceed. Ensuring a good quality casing set is vitally important. When conducting the calculations for frictional pressure losses the casing couplings are not taken into consideration. In API calculation methodologies for drill pipe the effect of tool joints is not taken into calculation. However, the small clearance between the casing coupling and the hole size is definitely creating an additional frictional pressure drop in comparison to the calculated which under normal circumstances taken into account the nominal casing outer diameter (OD). In this study the effect of casing couplings is taken into consideration when calculating the annular frictional pressure losses to drive the Equivalent Circulating Density (ECD). The generally accepted frictional pressure loss equations are used for a variety of casing running scenarios. The methodology that is introduced in this research study is a step change for automation in drilling operations. The findings are used to compare with the conditions during which the effect of casing couplings is not taken into consideration. The general findings indicate that annular frictional pressure losses are very critical for all wells but especially for the wells with narrow drilling margins. This research study reveals that annular frictional pressure losses are very critical for the successful casing running operations not only during circulations through the casing string but also at the time of the cementing of the same. The introduced methodology that takes into consideration of casing couplings can be used for automation in drilling operations.
In the context of formations, sand is specifically a sandstone, but also used in some texts as a general term for the pay zone. Any one of five soil separates, namely very coarse sand, coarse sand, medium sand, fine sand, and very fine sand.(3) In the context of formations, sand is specifically a sandstone, but also used in some texts as a general term for the pay zone. Any one of five soil separates, namely very coarse sand, coarse sand, medium sand, fine sand, and very fine sand.(3)
Grove, Brenden (Halliburton Jet Research Center) | McGregor, Jacob (Halliburton Jet Research Center) | DeHart, Rory (Halliburton Jet Research Center) | Dusterhoft, Ron (Halliburton) | Stegent, Neil (Halliburton) | Grader, Avrami (Ingrain, a Halliburton Service)
Abstract Hydraulically fractured completions dominate industry perforating activity, particularly in North American land basins. This has led to the development of fracture-optimized perforating systems in recent years. Aside from overarching safety, reliability, and efficiency priorities, the main technical performance attribute of these systems is consistent hole size in the casing, driven by limited entry fracture design considerations. While the industry continues to seek further improvements in hole size consistency, attention is also being directed to the perforations more holistically, from a perspective of maximizing the effectiveness of subsequent hydraulic fracturing and ultimately production operations. To this end, this paper presents two related activities addressing the development, qualification, and optimization of perf-for-frac systems. The first is a surface testing protocol used to characterize perforating system performance, in particular casing hole size and consistency. The second is a laboratory program, recently conducted to investigate perforating stressed Eagle Ford shale samples at downhole conditions. This program explored the influences of charge size, formation lamination direction, pore fluid, and dynamic underbalance on perforation characteristics. Casing hole size was also assessed. For the first activity (surface testing), we find that using cement-backed casing can be an important feature to ensure more downhole-realistic results. For the second activity (laboratory program), perforation casing hole sizes for the charges tested were in line with expectations based on existing surface test data, exhibiting negligible pressure dependency. Corresponding penetration depths into the stressed shale samples generally ranged from 3.5-in to 5-in, which is much shallower than might be expected based on surface concrete performance. Dynamic underbalance was found to exhibit some slight effect on the tunnel fill characteristics, while pore system fluid was found to have minimal influence on the results. An interesting feature of the perforated samples was the complex fracture network at the perforation tips, which appeared "propped" to some extent with charge liner debris. Some of these fractures were formation beds which had delaminated during the shot, a phenomenon observed for perforations both parallel and perpendicular to the laminations. The implications of these results to the downhole environment continues to be assessed. Of particular interest is the impact these phenomena might have on fracture initiation, formation breakdown, and treatment stages which accompany subsequent hydraulic fracturing pumping operations.
Abstract Perforation-imaging studies have indicated highly variable results on effectively treating all perforation clusters within a given fracturing stage in horizontal well plug-and-perf applications, even when limited entry designs were used. A field test was executed to trial differing perforating designs and levels of perforation friction for identifying a preferred technique for evenly distributing treatment volume along the lateral. The test was implemented in a horizontal well in the Eagle Ford formation of south Texas. After treatment and plug drill-out operations were completed, a downhole camera was run to visualize perforation entry holes along the entire lateral section. Shaped perforating charges described as equal entry hole charges were used in all stages. The resulting images were analyzed to determine entry hole dimensions and erosion characteristics to determine if alternate perforating strategies provided improved results, as compared to the standard design of multi-phase perforating with 1200 psi of perforation friction. Test results indicate that orienting perforations in a straight line (zero-phase) along the high side of the wellbore significantly improved treatment distribution among perforation clusters. Oriented perforating achieved this benefit without needing to increase initial perforation friction beyond the area standard of 1200 psi. Another result from this project was development of a statistical process for evaluating perforation entry hole erosion data. Entry hole erosion datasets are complex and difficult to analyze. The statistical process presented in this paper demonstrates a clear way to compare the effectiveness of different perforation designs. This paper also covers the operational difficulties encountered during the project which added complexity to analyzing the results. Lastly, this paper offers suggestions for future modifications for oriented perforation designs to further improve limited entry effectiveness.