Fatigue on drill string conical threaded connections, test results and simulations

L. Bertini, M. Beghini, C. Santus University of Pisa, mechanical dept. Italy A. Baryshnikov ENI S.p.A. Milano. Italy

1/35

Contents
Short introduction to drilling technology
- drill string and drill pipes, fatigue failures on drill pipes - steel heavy construction vs. aluminum light construction

Full scale fatigue tests

- description of test rigs - test results

Finite Element simulations Fatigue models

- FE model dedicated to threaded connection

- classic approach (Gerber, kf , surface effect) - test results correlation

Conclusions

2/35

Short introduction to drilling technology

drill string and drill pipes, fatigue failures on drill pipes

Drill String

3/35

Short introduction to drilling technology

drill string and drill pipes, fatigue failures on drill pipes
Basic nomenclature

Drill string: hundreds of drill pipes connected through threaded connections Drill pipe length ~ 10m Drill string max. length ~ 5km Dog leg segment, for deviated drilling
4/35

Drill bit

Short introduction to drilling technology

drill string and drill pipes, fatigue failures on drill pipes
Fatigue locations along drill string

Rotating bending fatigue, due to dogleg on the upper part of the string

Lateral bending fatigue, due to buckling on the lower part of the string
5/35

Short introduction to drilling technology

drill string and drill pipes, fatigue failures on drill pipes
Fatigue locations along drill string

Fatigue accounts for 70 % of failures Corrosion, Stress-Corrosion, Wear, Static stresses are further detrimental effects in combination with fatigue
6/35

Short introduction to drilling technology

drill string and drill pipes, fatigue failures on drill pipes
Aluminum body pipe Steel pipe Steel thread connection (tool joint pin)

Steel thread connection (tool joint box) Steel pipe Aluminum body pipe

Steel construction

Aluminum construction

7/35

Short introduction to drilling technology

steel heavy construction vs. aluminum light construction
Steel construction fatigue locations Box fatigue location Pin fatigue location Aluminum construction fatigue locations
Fatigue location Fatigue location

alluminum Box side

steel

steel

alluminum Pin side

Last Engaged Thread - Notch effect - Mean stress effect (particularly for pin side)

Conical shoulder Aluminum-Steel interface: - Fretting nucleation (different material stiffness)

8/35

Full scale fatigue tests

description of test rigs
Test rig for steel construction
Rotating masses Bending arms Straingauge Specimen

1m

9/35

Full scale fatigue tests

description of test rigs
Test rig for steel construction

Rotating eccentric masses

F t t

Bending arm

Bending arm
F2 de

Specimen

Zt

The phase between the two couple of eccentric masses control the stress amplitude
10/35

Full scale fatigue tests

description of test rigs
Test rig for steel construction
Device to change the phase

Bending arms

Supporting springs to allow oscillating displacements

Specimen

11/35

Full scale fatigue tests

description of test rigs
Test rig for aluminum construction
Still mass Connection to test

Eccentric rotating mass Connection to test

Electric motor

Rubber wheels

Rubber wheels

Eccentric rotating mass

12/35

Full scale fatigue tests

description of test rigs
Test rig for aluminum construction Aluminum pipe Steel tool joint Strain gauge 0.5 m Fatigue section

Steel tool joint Aluminum pipe Fatigue section

13/35

Full scale fatigue tests

description of test rigs
Test rig for aluminum construction
Y Z X

Undeformed shape Deformed shape

Fix point 1

Specimen prop at fix points

Fix point 2 Eccentric rotating mass

14/35

Full scale fatigue tests

description of test rigs

ResonantTestRig.avi

15/35

Full scale fatigue tests

description of test rigs
The role of resonance
Ideal behavior Bending stress amplitude 0 , MPa Resonance condition true behavior (damping) For different masses or phases

Working frequency window, near the resonance condition. High slope, good for control.

Frequency f , Hz
16/35

Full scale fatigue tests

test results
Steel construction test results

120 100

0 [MPa]

when the smaller crack can be detected through dynamic behavior control. The Exp. Nucleation life includes a large portion of propagation fatigue life. In other words nucleation/propagation can be resolved only when a large fatigue crack appears in the structure. Only pin side failure have obtained in this fatigue test set

Experimental nucleation is fatigue life

80 60 40 20 0 5 10

Exp. nucleation Fatigue life Exp. nucleation t line Fatigue life t line
10
6

cycles

10

10

17/35

Full scale fatigue tests

test results
Steel construction test results
Fatigue fracture section (pin) fatigue crack starting from last engaged thread root High toughness leads to a large wallthrough crack, before brittle fracture (material: AISI 4145H)

2.5 cm

Crack fronts

Detectable size (exp. nucleation)

18/35

Full scale fatigue tests

test results
Aluminum construction test results
140 120 100

Tests Fit line

The aluminum alloy here used shows brittle behavior. Then propagation phase can not be distinguished from dynamic behavior.

0 [MPa]

80 60 40 20 0 5 10

10

cycles

10

10

19/35

Full scale fatigue tests

test results
Aluminum construction test results
Crack surface, showing: - initiation point - brittle behavior Fracture toughness is not enough to allow wall-through crack. (material AA 7014-T6)

2 cm

After reaching this front, brittle fracture happens. Until this condition, dynamic behavior control is almost steady.

20/35

Finite Element simulations

FE model dedicated to threaded connection
Steel construction FE model
Under bending load the stress state is biaxial at the thread root surface:

z Thread root r

r = 0 z > > 0 r = rz = z = 0 ~ 0
Stress state is similar to plain strain condition. The make up produces a strong presetting, and then a plastic zone around the thread root can be found.
21/35

Thread axis direction

Finite Element simulations

FE model dedicated to threaded connection
Steel construction FE model
Elastic shakedown at the last engaged thread root after presetting: - linear kinematic hardening can be assumed - limited subsequent stress amplitude

Presetting

z
1 1 p ~ 0 zp > 0 rp ~ -zp e ~ 0

za
Subsequent cycles

zm z
22/35

Finite Element simulations

FE model dedicated to threaded connection
Steel construction FE model
Perfect elastic material model ElastoPlastic material model
Elasto-plastic material model, with linear kinematic hardening behavior
Bonded contact condition

Box Axial simmetry Pin

Y Z X

Element discretization at thread root

2D axial symmetry, to avoid cumbersome 3D analysis

Contact is modeled as closed gap since no contact loss is assumed.

23/35

Finite Element simulations

FE model dedicated to threaded connection
Steel construction FE model
Stress path along thread root bisector, after presetting
1500

Stresses [MPa]

1200

pl

0.008

Stress path

900

0.006

600

0.004

300

0.002

0 0

0 4

Stress path coordinate [mm]

24/35

Equivalent plastic strain

z r

0.01

pl

Finite Element simulations

FE model dedicated to threaded connection
Steel construction FE model
Stress path along thread root bisector, after elastic analysis.
1500

Stresses [MPa]

1200 900 600 300 0 0

z /2 /2 r /2

Stress path

Stress path coordinate [mm]

4
25/35

Finite Element simulations

FE model dedicated to threaded connection
Make up plus first cycle
1200

Stresses [MPa]

pl

0.008

900

0.006

600

0.004

300

0.002

za
Subsequent cycles

0 0

0 4

Stress path coordinate [mm]

1500

Stresses [MPa]

1200 900 600 300 0 0

z /2 /2 r /2

zm z

Stress path coordinate [mm]

26/35

Equivalent plastic strain

Steel construction FE model

1500

z r

0.01

pl

Fatigue models
classic approach (Gerber, kf , surface effect)
Steel construction fatigue life prediction model
To propose a valid fatigue model the following issues need to be considered: - reference S-N curve, with plain specimens, to relate load to fatigue finite life - mean stress effect (the strong presetting of the connection induce high tensile stresses) - notch effect (high gradient at the thread root) - surface state effect (the machining to generate thread geometry can play a role in terms of fatigue nucleation)

27/35

Fatigue models
classic approach (Gerber, kf , surface effect)
reference S-N curve
Several plain specimen were extracted from real component to test as close as possible in terms of: - heat treatment, - grain orientation.

Nf

28/35

Fatigue models
classic approach (Gerber, kf , surface effect)
mean stress effect
To take into account mean stress, the Gerber (parabola) model is considered. Gerber parabola shows better fit with plain specimen extracted from real component tested at positive mean stress ratios.

29/35

Fatigue models
classic approach (Gerber, kf , surface effect)
notch effect
To take into account notch effect the following steps were considered: - Same notch radius to determine the fatigue notch factor kf - Also notched specimen are extracted from real component, and the notch bisector has same orientation as thread root bisector

30/35

Fatigue models
classic approach (Gerber, kf , surface effect)
surface effect
Finally particular care is dedicated to the surface effect: - Small scale specimen extracted from thread geometry were tested to reproduce as close as possible surface conditions

31/35

Fatigue models
test results correlation
The correlation is here presented as: - Equivalent stresses against material limit at different cycles (left) - logNpredicted logNExp.Nucl. diagram (right)
500 103 cycles 104 400 300 200 No failures 100 0 Run out 105 5 105 Fatigue limit

Box stresses Failures 0

Exp. nucleation [cycles]

Pin stresses

10 10 10 10

Eq. alternate stress [MPa]

200

400 600 800 Eq. mean stress [MPa]

1000

10 3 10

Tests

10

10

10

10

Model prediction [cycles]

Not so bad in terms of stresses.

Wide discrepancy in terms of cycles.

32/35

Fatigue models
test results correlation
Possible sources of mismatch: - bad assessment of mean stress (uncertainty of make up presetting, possible material cyclic relaxation since it cycles at high mean stress) - big portion of propagation

500
Eq. alternate stress [MPa]

10 cycles 10
4

400 300 200

Box stresses Failures Fatigue limit 0

Exp. nucleation [cycles]

Pin stresses

10 10 10 10

105 5 10
5

No failures 100 0

Run out

10 3 10
1000

Tests

10

10

10

10

Model prediction [cycles]

200

400 600 800 Eq. mean stress [MPa]

33/35

Conclusions
Demanding full scale fatigue tests were proposed along with the description of resonance test rigs. Finite element dedicated to thread geometry was presented - elastic-plastic analysis was needed for the high presetting, - kinematic hardening was able to model elastic shakedown Fatigue model proposed deals with simple tools for fatigue evaluation (Gerber, kf , surface effect) and calibration of the model is based on small scale specimen as close as possible to real component conditions. To improve the correlation fatigue crack propagation should be included, but:

how much is the nucleation/propagation crack length??

34/35

Conclusions
Were expensive full scale fatigue tests necessary ??
YES, because: - Some fatigue issues are hard to be thought a-priori. - From small to full scale, propagation can play an important role. Though prediction is conservative, large mismatch can be found.

If we have to avoid full scale testing:

Specimens, as close as possible to real component conditions, are needed, to calibrate fatigue models.
35/35