ENI - Casing Design Manual

A RPO
ENI S.p .A.

Ag i p Di vi si on
ORGANISING
DEPARTMENT
TYPE OF
ACTIVITY'
ISSUING
DEPT.
DOC.
TYPE
REFER TO
SECTION N.
PAGE.
1
OF 134
STAP P 1 M 6110
The present document is CONFIDENTIAL and it is property of AGIP It shall not be shown to third parties nor shall it be used for
reasons different from those owing to which it was given
TITLE
CASING DESIGN MANUAL
DISTRIBUTION LIST
Eni - Agip Division Italian Districts
Eni - Agip Division Affiliated Companies
Eni - Agip Division Headquarter Drilling & Completion Units
STAP Archive
Eni - Agip Division Headquarter Subsurface Geology Units
Eni - Agip Division Headquarter Reservoir Units
Eni - Agip Division Headquarter Coordination Units for Italian Activities
Eni - Agip Division Headquarter Coordination Units for Foreign Activities
NOTE: The present document is available in Eni Agip Intranet (http://wwwarpo.in.agip.it) and a CD-
Rom version can also be distributed (requests will be addressed to STAP Dept. in Eni -
Agip Division Headquarter)
Date of issue:
Issued by P. Magarini
E. Monaci
C. Lanzetta A. Galletta
28/06/99 28/06/99 28/06/99
REVISIONS PREP'D CHK'D APPR'D
28/06/99
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 2 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
INDEX
1. INTRODUCTION 5
1.1. PURPOSE OF CASING 6
2. CASING PROFILES AND DRILLING SCENARIOS 7
2.1. Casing Profiles 7
2.1.1. Onshore Wells 7
2.1.2. Offshore Wells - Surface Wellhead 7
2.1.3. Offshore Wells - Surface Wellhead & Mudline Suspension 7
2.1.4. Offshore Wells - Subsea Wellhead 7
2.2. Drive, Structural & Conductor Casing 8
2.2.1. Surface Casing 8
2.2.2. Intermediate Casing 9
2.2.3. Production Casing 10
2.2.4. Liner 11
3. SELECTION OF CASING SEATS 12
3.1. Conductor Casi ng 15
3.2. Surface Casing 15
3.3. Intermediate Casing 15
3.4. Drilling Liner 16
3.5. Production Casing 17
3.6. CASING AND relative HOLE SIZES 17
3.6.1. Standard Casing and Hole Sizes 21
4. CASING SPECIFICATION AND CLASSIFICATION 22
4.1. CASING SPECIFICATION 22
4.2. API CASING CLASSIFICATION 23
4.3. NON-API CASING 25
5. MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF STEEL 28
5.1. General 28
5.2. Stress-Strain Diagram 28
5.3. Heat Treatment Of Alloy Steels 30
6. TUBULAR RANGE LENGTHS & COLOUR CODING 36
6.1. Range lengths 36
6.2. api tubular marking and colour coding 38
6.2.1. Markings 38
6.2.2. Colour Coding 39
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 3 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
7. APPROACH TO CASING DESIGN 41
7.1. WELLBORE FORCES 42
7.2. DESIGN FACTOR (DF) 42
7.2.1. Company Design Factors 44
7.2.2. Application of Design Factors 45
8. DESIGN CRITERIA 46
8.1. BURST 46
8.1.1. Design Methods 46
8.1.2. Company Design Procedure 47
8.2. COLLAPSE 50
8.3. TENSION 54
8.3.1. General 54
8.3.2. Buoyancy Force 54
8.3.4. Example Hook Load During Cementing 59
8.4. BIAXIAL STRESS 62
8.4.1. General 62
8.4.2. Effects On Collapse Resistance 62
8.4.4. Example Collapse Caclulation 65
8.5. BENDING 67
8.5.1. General 67
8.5.2. Determination Of Bending Effect 68
8.5.4. Example Bending Calculation 70
8.6. CASING WEAR 72
8.6.1. General 72
8.6.2. Volumetric Wear Rate 73
8.6.3. Factors Affecting Casing Wear (Example) 76
8.6.4. Wear Factors 80
8.6.5. Detection Of Casing Wear 86
8.6.6. Casing Wear Reduction 86
8.6.7. Wear Allowance In Casing Design 87
8.7. SALT SECTIONS 89
8.7.1. General 89
8.7.2. External Loading Due To Salt Flow 89
9. CORROSION 96
9.1. General 96
9.1.1. Exploration and Appraisal Wells 96
9.1.2. Development Wells 96
9.1.3. Contributing Factors to Corrosion 97
9.2. Forms Of Corrosion 98
9.2.1. Sulphide Stress Cracking (SSC) 98
9.2.2. Corrosion Caused By CO
2
And Cl
-
105
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 4 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
9.2.3. Corrosion Caused By H
2
S, CO
2
And Cl
-
107
9.3. Corrosion Control Measures 108
9.4. Corrosion Inhibitors 109
9.5. Corrosion Resistance of Stainless Steels 109
9.5.1. Martensitic Stainless Steels 109
9.5.2. Ferritic Stainless Steels 110
9.5.3. Austenitic Stainless Steels 110
9.5.4. Precipitation Hardening Stainless Steels 110
9.5.5. Duplex Stainless Steel 111
9.6. Casing For Sour Service 113
9.7. Ordering Specifications 114
9.8. Company Design Procedure 114
9.8.1. CO
2
Corrosion 114
9.8.2. H
2
S Corrosion 115
10. TEMPERATURE EFFECTS 118
10.1. High Temperature Service 118
10.2. Low Temperature Service 119
11. LOAD CONDITIONS 120
11.1. SAFE ALLOWABLE TENSILE LOAD 120
11.2. CEMENTING CONSIDERATIONS 120
11.2.1. Casing Support 120
11.2.2. Cementing Loads 121
11.3. PRESSURE TESTING 122
11.4. BUCKLING AND COMPRESSIve loading 122
11.4.1. Buckling 122
11.4.2. Compressive Loads 123
12. PRESSURE RATING OF BOP EQUIPMENT 126
12.1. BOP selection criteria 126
12.2. Kick tolerance 129
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 5 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
1. INTRODUCTION
The selection of casing grades and weights is an engineering task affected by many factors,
including local geology, formation pressures, hole depth, formation temperature, logistics and
various mechanical factors.
The engineer must keep in mind during the design process the major logistics problems in
controlling the handling of the various mixtures of grades and weights by rig personnel without
risk of installing the wrong grade and weight of casing in a particular hole section. World-wide,
experience has shown that the use of two/three different grades or two/three different weights
is the maximum that can be handled by most rigs and rig crews.
After selecting a casing for a particular hole section, the designer should consider upgrading
the casing in cases where:
Extreme wear is expected from drilling equipment used to drill the next hole
section or from wear caused by wireline equipment.
Buckling in deep and hot wells.
Once the factors are considered, casing cost should be considered.
If the number of different grades and weights are necessary, it follows that cost is not always
a major criterion.
Most major operating companies have differing policies for the design of casing for exploration
and development wells, e.g:
For exploration, the current practice is to upgrade the selected casing,
irrespective of any cost factor.
For development wells, the practice is also to upgrade the selected casing,
irrespective of any cost factor.
For development wells, the practice is to use the highest measured bottomhole
flowing pressures and well head shut-in pressures as the limiting factors for
internal pressures expected in the wellbore. These pressures will obviously place
controls only on the design of production casing or the production liner, and
intermediate casing.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 6 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
1.1. PURPOSE OF CASING
Casing tubulars are placed in a wellbore for the following reasons:
a) Supporting the weight of the wellhead and BOP stack.
b) Providing a return path for mud to surface when drilling.
c) Controlling well pressure by containing downhole pressure.
d) Isolating high pressure zones from the wellbore.
e) Isolating permeable zones from the wellbore which are likely to cause differential
sticking.
f) Isolating special trouble zones which may cause hole problems e.g.:
Swelling clay, shales.
Sloughing shales.
Plastic formations (evaporites).
Formations causing mud contamination e.g. gypsum, anhydrite, salt.
Frozen unconsolidated layers in permafrost areas.
Lost circulation zones.
g) Separating different pressure or fluid regimes.
h) Providing a stable environment for packers, liner hangers, etc.
i) Isolating weak zones from the wellbore during fracturing.
j) Isolating permeable productive formations, reducing the risk of underground
blowouts.
k) Confining produced fluid to the wellbore and providing a flow path to surface.
Production casing must perform a number of critical functions as follows:
a) Providing internal pressure containment when the tubing system leaks or fails.
b) Preventing wellbore fluids from contaminating production.
c) Providing protection for completion equipment.
d) Providing access to producing formations for remedial operations.
e) Providing cement integrity across producing formations.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 7 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
2. CASING PROFILES AND DRILLING SCENARIOS
2.1. CASING PROFILES
The following are the various casing configurations which can be used for onshore and
offshore wells.
2.1.1. Onshore Wells
Drive/structural/conductor casing
Surface casing
Intermediate casings
Production casing
Intermediate casing and drilling liners
Intermediate casing and production liner
Drilling liner and tie-back string.
2.1.2. Offshore Wells - Surface Wellhead
As in onshore above.
2.1.3. Offshore Wells - Surface Wellhead & Mudline Suspension
Surface casing and landing string
Intermediate casings and landing strings
Production casing
Intermediate casings and drilling liners
2.1.4. Offshore Wells - Subsea Wellhead
Surface casing
Intermediate casings
Production casing
Intermediate casing and drilling liners
Intermediate casing and production liner
Refer to the following sections for descriptions of the casings listed above.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 8 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
2.2. DRIVE, STRUCTURAL & CONDUCTOR CASING
The purpose of this first string of pipe is primarily to protect incompetent surface soils from
erosion by drilling fluids. Where formations are sufficiently stable, this string may be used to
install the full mud circulation system.
It also serves the following purposes:
Guide the drilling string and subsequent casing into the hole. The conductor in
offshore drilling may form a part of the piling system for a wellhead jacket or piled
platform.
Provide centralisation for the inner casing strings which limits column buckling.
They do not carry direct axial loads except during initial installation of the surface
casing.
Reduce wave and current loadings imposed on the inner strings.
Provide sacrificial protection against oxygen corrosion in the splash zone.
Minimise the transfer of stresses to the inner casings resulting from the
settlement and rotational movement of gravity platforms.
The conductor casings are usually driven completely to depth or, alternatively, run into a
predrilled or jetted hole and cemented. If they are driven, they must be designed to withstand
hammering loads.
Conductor casings, in offshore drilling with subsea BOP's, are usually either jetted into place
or cemented in a predrilled hole. They support a Temporary Guide Base which
accommodates and aligns all future wellhead installations for both the drilling and production
phases. They directly carry both the axial and bending loads imposed by the wellhead, but are
rigidly connected to the next casing with centralisers and cement in order to dissipate loading
and minimise resulting stresses.
2.2.1. Surface Casing
The surface casing is installed to:
Prevent poorly consolidated shallow formations from sloughing into the hole.
Enable full mud circulation.
Protect fresh water sands from contamination from the drilling mud.
Provide protection against hydrocarbons found at shallow depths.
The surface casing string is cemented to surface or seabed and is the first casing on which
BOPs can be mounted. It is important to appreciate that the amount of protection provided
against internal pressure will only be as strong as the formation strength at the casing shoe,
hence it may be necessary to vent any influx taken through the surface string, rather than
attempt containment.
The surface string usually supports the wellhead and subsequent casing strings.
In offshore wells, above the top of the cement, the surface casing must be centralised to limit
column buckling.
The annulus between the conductor and surface string is usually left uncemented above the
mudline to minimise load transfer and bending stresses in the surface string.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 9 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
2.2.2. Intermediate Casing
These are used to ensure there is adequate blow-out protection for deeper drilling and to
isolate formations or hole profile changes, that can cause drilling problems.
The first intermediate string is the first casing providing full blow-out protection. Its setting
depth is often chosen so that it also isolates troublesome formations, loss zones, shallow
hydrocarbons, water sands, or the build-up section of deviated wells. It is usually cemented
up into the shoe of the conductor string and in some cases all the way to surface.
It is essential to install an intermediate casing string whenever there is a risk of experiencing a
kick which could cause breakdown at the previous casing shoe, and/or severe losses in the
open hole section.
An intermediate casing string is, therefore, nearly always set in the transition zone above or
below significant overpressures, and in any cap rock below a potential severe loss zone.
Similarly, it is good practice when appraising untested or deeper horizons, to case off the
known hydrocarbon bearing intervals as a contingency against the possibility of encountering
a loss circulation zone. Obviously the latter is intended primarily for massive reservoir
sections rather than sand-shale sequences with numerous small reservoirs and sub-
reservoirs. An intermediate string may also be set simply to reduce the overall cost of drilling
and completing the well by isolating intervals which have been found to cause mechanical
problems in the past.
For example it may be desirable to isolate:
Swelling gumbo shale.
Brittle caving shale.
Creeping salt.
Over-pressured permeable stringer.
Build-up or drop-off section.
High permeability sand.
Partly depleted reservoir that causes differential sticking.
The designer should plan to combine many of these objectives when selecting a single
casing point. A liner may be used instead of a full intermediate casing and difficult wells may
actually contain several intermediate casings and/or liners. Caution should be taken when
using liners as it is necessary to ensure the higher casing is designed for the pressures at
lower depths.
The cement should cover all hydrocarbon zones and any salt or other creeping evaporites.
Zones containing highly corrosive formation waters are also often cemented off, especially
where there may be aquifer movement which replenishes the corrosive elements around the
wellbore.
Longer cement columns are sometimes required to prevent buckling of the casing during
deeper drilling. Many operating companies cement up inside the previous casing shoe for this
reason and is legislated on by some regulatory authorities.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 10 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
2.2.3. Production Casing
This is the string through which the well will be completed, produced and controlled
throughout its life.
On exploration wells this life may amount to only a very short testing period, but on most
development wells it will span a significant number of years during which many repairs and
recompletions may be performed. It is essential therefore that production casing retains its
integrity throughout its life.
In most cases, the production casing will serve to isolate the productive intervals, to facilitate
proper reservoir maintenance and/or prevent the influx of undesired fluids. In other cases,
accumulation conditions are such that the well can be cased with an open hole section below
the casing for an open hole completion (Refer to the completion design manual). The size of
the production casing should be selected to meet with the desired method of completion and
production.
On production wells the drilling engineer must design the casing in conjunction with the
completion engineer to ensure the optimum completion design is obtained. This usually
impacts on the production casing design with regard to:
Well flow potential, i.e. tubing size.
The possibility of a multiple tubing string completion.
The space required for downhole equipment e.g. safety valves, artificial lift
equipment etc.
The geometry required for efficient through-tubing well intervention operations.
Potential well servicing and recompletion requirements.
Adequate annular clearances to permit circulation at reasonable rate and
pressures.
It is also possible that the casing itself could be used as a conduit for maximising well
deliverability (casing flow), for minimising the pressure losses during frac jobs, for chemical
injection or for lift gas. Consideration must be given to production operations which will affect
the temperature of the production casing and impose additional thermal stresses. Annulus
thermal expansion can cause production casing collapse when it is cemented up into the
intermediate casing. The loads to which a production casing is subjected are, therefore, quite
different from those imposed during drilling.
It is very important that the selection of the steel grade and connections for the production
string are made correctly.
Special considerations are required where the production casing will be drilled through and
may therefore suffer some damage e.g.: open hole (barefoot) completions, open hole gravel
packs, liner completions, deep zone appraisal.
In a liner completion, both the liner and casing form the production string and must be
designed accordingly.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 11 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
2.2.4. Liner
A liner is a string of pipe which is installed but does not extend all the way to surface. It is
hung a short distance above the previous casing shoe and is usually cemented over its entire
length to ensure it seals within the previous casing string.
Drilling liners may be installed to:
Increase shoe strength.
Meet with rig tensional load limitations.
Minimise the length of reduced diameter and the possible adverse effects on
drilling hydraulics.
Production liners may be installed to:
Reduce costs.
Minimise the length of reduced diameter production tubing and the consequent
adverse effect upon well flow potential.
Meet with rig tensional load limitations on occasions on deep wells.
Either type of liner may subsequently be tied-back to surface with a string of pipe stabbed into
a liner hanger Polished Bore Receptacle (PBR).
There are a number of disadvantages to installing liners, including:
The risk of poor pressure integrity, either across the liner lap due to poor
cementation or as a result of wear to the casing from which the liner is hung off.
The risk of the liner running equipment being cemented in the hole.
The difficulty of obtaining a good cementation due to smaller liner to hole and liner
to production casing clearances.
The need to set a retrievable bridge plug above the liner lap if the BOP stack
needs to be removed. (This does not apply to completion operations when a
tubing string has been run and landed.)
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 12 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
3. SELECTION OF CASING SEATS
The selection of casing setting depths is one of the most critical in the well design process
and is based on:
Total depth of well.
Pore pressures.
Fracture gradients.
The probability of shallow gas pockets.
Problem zones.
Depth of potential prospects.
Time limits on open hole drilling.
Casing programme compatibility with existing wellhead systems.
Casing programme compatibility with planned completion programme (production
well).
Casing availability (grade and dimensions).
Economy, i.e. time consumption to drill the hole, run casing and cost of
equipment.
When planning, all available information should be carefully documented and considered to
obtain knowledge of the various uncertainties.
Information is sourced from:
Evaluation of the seismic and geological background documentation used as the
decision for drilling the well.
Drilling data from offset wells in the area. (Company wells or scouting
information).
The key factor to satisfactory picking of casing seats is the assessment of pore pressure and
fracture pressures throughout the well.
As the pore pressures in a formation being drilled approach the fracture pressure at the last
casing seat then installation of a further string of casing is necessary.
figure 3.a and figure 3.b show typical examples of casing seat selections.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 13 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 3.A - Example of Idealised Casing Seat Selection
Notes to figure 3.a above:
a) Casing is set at depth 1, where pore pressure is P1 and the fracture pressure is
F1.
b) Drilling continues to depth 2, where the pore pressure P2 has risen to almost
equal the fracture pressure (F1) at the first casing seat.
c) Another casing string is therefore set at this depth, with fracture pressure (F2).
d) Drilling can thus continue to depth 3, where pore pressure P3 is almost equal to
the fracture pressure F2 at the previous casing seat.
This example does not include any safety or trip margins, which would, in practice, be taken
into account.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 14 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 3.B - Example Casing Seat Selection
(for a typical geopressurised well using a pressure profile).
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 15 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
3.1. CONDUCTOR CASING
Setting depth is usually shallow and selected so that drilling fluid may be circulated to the mud
pits while drilling the surface hole. The casing seat must be in an impermeable formation with
sufficient fracturing resistance to allow fluid circulation to the surface.
Where working with subsea wellheads, no there is no circulation through the conductor string
to the surface. It is set deep enough to assist in stabilising the guide base to which guide lines
are attached.
Large sizes are required (usually 16ins to 30ins diameter) as necessary to accommodate the
size of all subsequently required strings.
3.2. SURFACE CASING
Setting depths should be in an impermeable section below any fresh water formations.
In some instances, near-surface gravel or shallow gas may need to be cased off shallower.
The depth should be great enough to provide a fracture gradient sufficient enough to allow
drilling to the next casing setting point and to provide reasonable assurance that broaching to
the surface will not occur in the event of BOP closure to contain a kick.
In hard rock areas the string may be relatively shallow, but in soft rock areas deeper strings
are necessary.
3.3. INTERMEDIATE CASING
The most predominant use of intermediate casing is to protect normally pressured formations
from the effects of increased mud weight needed in deeper drilling.
An intermediate string may be necessary to case off lost circulation zones, salt beds, or
sloughing shales.
In cases of pressure reversals against depth, intermediate casing may be set to allow
reduction of mud weight.
When a transition zone is penetrated and mud weight increased, the normal pressure interval
below surface pipe is subjected to two detrimental effects:
The fracture gradient may be exceeded by the mud gradient, particularly if it
becomes necessary to close-in on a kick The result is loss of circulation and the
possibility of an underground blow-out occurring.
The differential between the mud column pressure and formation pressure is
increased, increasing the risk of stuck pipe.
To ensure the integrity of the surface casing seat, leak-off tests are necessary and must be
specified in the Drilling Programme.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 16 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Sometimes it is necessary to alter the setting depth of the intermediate casing during drilling
under certain circumstances such as when:
Hole problems prohibit further drilling.
Pore pressure changes occur substantially shallower or deeper than originally
calculated or estimated. For this reason the Geological Drilling Programme should
state the pore pressure requirement at which casing should be set when setting
casing into a transition zone.
3.4. DRILLING LINER
The setting of a drilling liner is often an economically attractive decision in deep wells as
opposed to setting a full string. Such a decision must be carefully considered as the
intermediate string must be designed for burst as if it were set to the depth of the liner.
If drilling is to be continued below the drilling liner then burst requirements for the intermediate
string are further increased which increases the cost of the intermediate string. Also, there is
the possibility of continuing wear of the intermediate string that must also be evaluated.
If a production liner is planned, then either the production liner or the drilling liner should be
tied back to the surface as a production casing.
If the drilling liner is to be tied-back, it is usually better to do so before drilling the hole for the
production liner. By doing this, the intermediate casing can be designed for a lower burst
requirement, resulting in considerable cost savings. Also, any wear to the intermediate string
is spanned prior to drilling the producing interval.
If increasing mud weight will be required, while drilling hole for the drilling liner, then leak-off
tests must be conducted and specified in the casing programme for the intermediate casing
shoe within the Geological Drilling Programme (Refer to the Drilling Procedures Manual).
Insufficient fracture gradient at the shoe may limit the depth of the drilling liner.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 17 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
3.5. PRODUCTION CASING
Whether production casing or a liner is installed, the depth is determined from the geological
objective. Depths, hence the casing programme, may have to be altered accordingly if depths
come in too high or too low.
The objective and the method of identifying the correct production casing depth should also
be stated in the programme.
To cater for some completion operations, a sufficient amount of sump is required for fill during
production or well intervention operations, run out for logging tools and to accommodate lost
tools or dropped TCP guns, etc. Drilling extra hole, for dropping TCP guns or similar reasons,
may be costly and the effectiveness of such considerations should be seriously evaluated
before commitment.
3.6. CASING AND RELATIVE HOLE SIZES
In general, it is good practice to run standard bit sizes but in deep wells, thick walled casing
may be necessary to provide sufficient strength. The designer can sometimes solve this
problem by specifying special drift casing which will allow running of bits with diameters
approaching the casing inside diameter rather than being limited to drift diameter.
Manufacturers produce oversize casing in several sizes providing strength comparable to API
sizes, but with clearances to suit standard bit sizes. A typical well may have 30ins drive/
structural/conductor casing, 20ins surface casing, 13
3
/
8
ins and 9
5
/
8
ins intermediate casing
and 7ins production casing/liner.
Although the above is one of the most common arrangements, there is a multitude of different
combinations of casing sizes which the operator may choose to use if he desires, and if the
casing design allows.
For a normal exploration well, it is recommended that an 8
1
/
2
ins hole be the smallest diameter
planned because of drilling and evaluation difficulties encountered with 6ins. A 6ins hole size
should only be planned as a contingency.
figure 3.c shows the choice of casing and bit sizes available to engineers.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 18 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 3.C - Casing and Bit Selection Chart
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 19 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
The chart in figure 3.c can be used to select the casing bit sizes required to fulfil many drilling
programme options.
To use the chart:
1) Determine the casing or liner size for the last size pipe to be installed.
2) Enter the chart at that point.
3) The flow of the chart then indicates hole sizes that may be required to set that size pipe
(i.e., 5 Liner inside 6 or 6
1
/
2
hole).
Solid lines indicate commonly used bits for that size pipe and can be considered to
have adequate clearance to run and cement the casing or liner (i.e., 5
1
/
2
Casing inside
7
7
/
8
hole).
The broken lines indicate less common optional hole sizes used (i.e., 5 inside 6
1
/
8
hole, etc.).
The selection of one of these broken paths requires special attention be given to the
connection, mud weight, cementing and doglegs.
Large connection ODs, thick mud cake build-up, problem cementing areas (high water
loss, lost returns, etc.) and doglegs all aggravate the attempt to run casing and liners in
low clearance situations.
Once the hole size has been selected. a casing large enough to allow passage of a bit
to make that hole can be selected. The solid lines are commonly required casing sizes.
encompassing most weights (i.e., 6
1
/
2
bit inside 7
5
/
8
casing).
The broken lines indicate casing sizes where only the lighter weights can be used
(i.e. 6
1
/
8
inside 7 casing).
This selection process is repeated until the anticipated number of casing sizes has
been reached.
Note: Some drilling programmes can require special tools and operations to
obtain the wellbore size for the casing to be installed. An underreamer is
a drilling tool, used to enlarge section of hole below a restriction
(situations where equipment, such as BOP or wellhead size restrictions,
limit the tool entry size).
figure 3.d shows the standard casing programme and figure 3.e the possible alternative.
further standard casing and hole sizes information is shown in table 3.a.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 20 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 3.D - Standard Casing Programme
Figure 3.E - Alternative Casing Programme

A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 21 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
3.6.1. Standard Casing and Hole Sizes
Outer Casing
Size
Largest Inner
Casing Size
Under-Reaming
Minimum Pilot
Hole Size
Under-reamed
Diameter
Maximum
Tool OD
24 20 18
1
/
2
26 18
20 16 17
1
/
2
22 17
16 13
3
/
8
14
3
/
4
17
1
/
2
14
13
3
/
8
(48-68#) 10
3
/
4
12
1
/
4
15 11
3
/
4
11
3
/
4
8
5
/
8
10
5
/
8
12
1
/
4
10
9
5
/
8
(29.3#) 7
5
/
8
8
3
/
4
11
1
/
2
8
1
/
4
8
5
/
8
(24-32#) 6
5
/
8
7
5
/
8
9
1
/
2
7
1
/
4
8
5
/
8
(36-49#) 6 7
3
/
8
9 7
7
5
/
8
5
1
/
2
6
1
/
4
8
1
/
2
6
7 (17-32#) 5 6 8 5
3
/
4
Table 3.A - Recommended Casing Size Versus Hole Size
Note: Recommendations above are based on:
The minimum clearance of 0.400 on diameter between the outer
string drift diameter and inner coupling diameter.
The clearance between the hole wall and the coupling OD is at least
2 on diameter. Less clearance than this may create a back pressure
which will dehydrate the cement to a point where it cannot be
pumped.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 22 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
4. CASING SPECIFICATION AND CLASSIFICATION
There is a great range of casings available from suppliers from plain carbon steel for
everyday mild service through exotic duplex steels for extremely sour service conditions. The
casings available can be classified under two specifications, API and non-API.
Casing specifications, including API and its history, are described and discussed in sections
4.1 and 4.2. Non-API casing manufacturers have produced products to satisfy a demand in
the industry for casing to meet with extreme conditions which the API specifications do not
meet. The area of use for this casing are also discussed in section 4.1 below.
The properties of steel used in the manufacture of casing is fundamentally important and
should be fully understood by design engineers, and to this end these properties are
described in section 4.2.
4.1. CASING SPECIFICATION
The American Petroleum Institute (API) has an appointed Committee on Standardisation of
tubular goods which publishes, and continually updates, a series of Specifications, Bulletins
and Recommended Practices covering the manufacture, performance and handling of oilfield
tubular goods. They also license manufacturers to use the API Monogram on products which
meet with their published specifications therefore can be identified as complying with the
standards.
The API Forum has been in existence since 1924, and their standardisation of oilfield
equipment and practices are almost universally accepted as the world standard on tubulars.
This does not mean that the published performance data is accepted as the best theoretical
representation of the parameters of tubulars.
It is essential that design engineers are aware of any changes made to the API specifications.
All involved with casing design must have immediate access to the latest copy of API Bulletin
5C2 which lists the performance properties of casing, tubing and drillpipe. Although these are
also published in many contractors' handbooks and tables, which are convenient for field use,
care must be taken to ensure that they are current.
Also a library of the other relevant API publications shall be available and design engineers
should make themselves familiar with these documents and their contents.
It should not be interpreted from the above that only API tubulars and connections may be
used in the field as some particular engineering problems are overcome by specialist
solutions which are not yet addressed by API specifications. In fact, it would be impossible to
drill many extremely deep wells without recourse to the use of pipe manufactured outwith API
specifications (non-API).
Similarly, many of the Premium connections that are used in high pressure high GOR
conditions are also non-API.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 23 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
When using non-API pipe, the designer must check the methods by which the strengths have
been calculated. Usually it will be found that the manufacturer will have used the published
API formulae (Bulletin 5C3), backed up by tests to prove the performance of his product
conforms to, or exceeds, these specifications. However, in some cases, the manufacturers
have claimed their performance is considerably better than that calculated by the using API
formulae. When this occurs the manufacturers claims must be critically examined by the
designer or his technical advisors, and the performance corrected if necessary.
It is also important to understand, that to increase competition, the API tolerances have been
set fairly wide. However, the API does provide for the purchaser to specify more rigorous
chemical, physical and testing requirements on orders, and may also request place
independent inspectors to quality control the product in the plant.
4.2. API CASING CLASSIFICATION
Casing is classified by:
Outside diameter.
Nominal unit weight.
Grade of the steel.
Type of connection.
Length by range.
Manufacturing process
An example of an API table showing the parameters listed above in given in table 4.a.
Reference should always be made to current API specification 5C2 for casing lists and
performances.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 24 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Col 1 Col 2 Col 3 Col 4 Col 5
Size: OD Nominal Wt Grade Wall Thickness Type of Thread
ins mm lbs per ft Grades Inc ins mm Short Long Buttress Extreme Line
8
5
/
8
219.1 24.00 J, K 0.264 6.71 X
8
5
/
8
219.1 28.00 H 0.304 7.72 X
8
5
/
8
219.1 32.00 H 0.352 8.94 X
8
5
/
8
219.1 32.00 J, K 0.352 8.94 X X X X
8
5
/
8
219.1 36.00 J, K 0.400 10.16 X X X X
8
5
/
8
219.1 36.00 C, L, N 0.400 10.16 X X X
8
5
/
8
219.1 40.00 C, L, N, P 0.450 11.43 X X X
8
5
/
8
219.1 44.00 C, L, N, P 0.500 12.70 X X X
8
5
/
8
219.1 49.00 C, L, N, P, Q 0.557 14.15 X X X
9
5
/
8
244.5 32.30 H 0.312 7.92 X
9
5
/
8
244.5 36.00 H 0.352 8.94 X
9
5
/
8
244.5 36.00 J, K 0.352 8.94 X X X
9
5
/
8
244.5 40.00 J, K 0.395 10.03 X X X X
9
5
/
8
244.5 40.00 C, L, N 0.395 10.03 X X X
9
5
/
8
244.5 43.50 C, L, N, P 0.435 11.05 X X X
9
5
/
8
244.5 47.00 C, L, N, P 0.472 11.99 X X X
9
5
/
8
244.5 53.50 C, L, N, P, Q 0.545 13.84 X X X
9
5
/
8
244.5 59.40 C 90 only 0.609 15.47
9
5
/
8
244.5 64.90 C 90 only 0.672 17.07
9
5
/
8
244.5 70.30 C 90 only 0.734 18.64
9
5
/
8
244.5 75.60 C 90 only 0.797 20.24
10
3
/
4
273.1 32.75 H 0.297 7.09 X
10
3
/
4
273.1 40.50 H 0.350 8.89 X
10
3
/
4
273.1 40.50 J, K 0.350 8.89 X X
10
3
/
4
273.1 45.50 J, K 0.400 10.16 X X X
10
3
/
4
273.1 51.00 C, K, K, N, P 0.450 11.43 X X X
10
3
/
4
273.1 55.50 C, L, N, P 0.495 12.57 X X X
10
3
/
4
273.1 60.70 P, Q 0.545 13.84 X X X
10
3
/
4
273.1 65.70 P, Q 0.595 15.11 X X
10
3
/
4
273.1 59.40 C 90 only 0.545 13.84
10
3
/
4
273.1 65.70 C 90 only 0.595 15.11
10
3
/
4
273.1 73.20 C 90 only 0.672 17.07
10
3
/
4
273.1 79.20 C 90 only 0.734 18.64
10
3
/
4
273.1 85.30 C 90 only 0.797 20.24
11
3
/
4
298.5 42.00 H 0.333 8.46 X
11
3
/
4
298.5 47.00 J, K 0.375 9.52 X X
11
3
/
4
298.5 54.00 J, K 0.435 11.05 X X
11
3
/
4
298.5 60.00 J,K,N,C,L,P,Q 0.489 12.42 X X
13
3
/
8
339.7 48.00 H 0.330 8.38 X
13
3
/
8
339.7 54.50 J, K 0.380 9.65 X X
13
3
/
8
339.7 61.00 J, K 0.430 10.92 X X
13
3
/
8
339.7 68.00 C,L,J,K,N,P,Q 0.480 12.19 X X
13
3
/
8
339.7 72.00 C, L, N, P, Q 0.514 13.06 X X
16 406.4 65.00 H 0.375 9.52 X
16 406.4 75.00 J, K 0.438 11.13 X X
16 406.4 84.00 J, K 0.495 12.57 X X
18
5
/
8
473.0 87.50 H, J, K 0.435 11.05 X
18
5
/
8
473.0 87.50 J, K 0.435 11.05 X
20 508.0 94.00 H, J, K 0.438 11.13 X X
20 508.0 94.00 J, K 0.438 11.13 X
20 508.0 106.50 J, K 0.500 12.70 X X X
20 508.0 133.00 J, K 0.635 16.13 X X X
Table 4.A - Example API Casing List
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 25 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
4.3. NON-API CASING
Eni-Agip Division and Affiliates policy is to use API casings whenever feasible. Some
manufacturers produce non-API casings for H
2
S and deep well service where API casings do
not meet requirements. The most common non-API grades are shown in the attached table
figure 4.a shows the API and non-API materials available and the environment in which they
are recommended to be used.
Figure 4.A- Casing Materials Selection
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 26 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Application (Refer to
figure 4.a)
Domain Material
SM
Designation
Notes
Mild Environment Domain A API J 55
N 80
P 110
(Q 125)
SM 95G
SM 125G
Sulphide Stress Corrosion
Cracking (medium pressure
and temperature)
Domain B Cr or Cr-Mo Steel
API L 80
C 90
T 95
SM 80S
SM 90S
SM 95S
Cracking (high pressure and
temperature)
Domain C 1Cr 0.5Mo Steel
Modified AISI 4130
SM 85SS
SM 90SS
SM C100
SM C110
Higher yield
strength for sour
service
Wet CO
2
Corrosion Domain D 9Cr 1Mo Steel SM 9CR 75
SM 9CR 80
SM 9CR 95
Quenched and
tempered
13Cr Steel
Modified AISI 420
SM 13CR 75
SM 13CR 80
SM 13CR 95
Quenched and
tempered
Wet CO
2
with a little H
2
S
Corrosion
Domain E 22Cr 5Ni 3Mo Steel
25Cr 6Ni 3Mo Steel
SM 22CR 65*
SM 22CR 110**
SM 22CR 125**
SM 25CR 75*
SM 25CR 110**
SM 25CR 125**
SM 25CR 140**
Duplex phase
Stainless steels
* Solution Treated
** Cold drawn
Wet CO
2
with H
2
S Corrosion Domain F 25Cr 35Ni 3Mo Steel
22Cr 42Ni 3Mo Steel
20Cr 35Ni 5Mo Steel
SM 2535 110
SM 2535 125
SM 2242 110
SM 2242 125
SM 2035 110
SM 2035 125
As cold drawn
Most Corrosive Environment Domain G 25Cr 50Ni 6Mo Steel
20Cr 58Ni 13Mo Steel
SM 2550 110
SM 2550 125
SM 2550 140
SM 2060 110***
SM 2060 125***
SM 2060 140***
SM 2060 155***
SM C276 110***
SM C276 125***
SM C276 140***
As cold drawn
*** Environment
with free
Sulphur
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 27 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Table 4.B - Example Non-API Steel Grades
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 28 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
5. MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF STEEL
5.1. GENERAL
Failure of a material or of a structural part may occur by fracture (e.g. the shattering of glass),
Yield, wear, corrosion, and other causes. These failures are failures of the material. Buckling
may cause failure of the part without any failure of the material.
As load is applied, deformation takes place before any final fracture occurs. With all solid
materials, some deformation may be sustained without permanent deformation, i.e. the
material behaves elastically.
Beyond the elastic limit, the elastic deformation is accompanied by varying amounts of
plastic, or permanent, deformation, If a material sustains large amounts of plastic deformation
before final fracture. It is classed as ductile material, and if fracture occurs with little or no
plastic deformation. The material is classed as brittle.
5.2. STRESS-STRAIN DIAGRAM
Tests of material performance may be conducted in many different ways, such as by torsion,
compression and shear, but the tension test is the most common and is qualitatively
characteristics of all the other types of tests.
The action of a material under the gradually increasing extension of the tension test is usually
represented by plotting apparent stress (the total load divided by the original cross-sectional
area of the test piece) as ordinates against the apparent strain (elongation between two
gauge points marked on the test piece divided by the original gauge length) as abscissae.
A typical plot for a carbon steel is shown in figure 5.a.
From this, it is seen that the elastic deformation is approximately a straight line defined by
Hooke's law, and the slope of this line, or the ratio of stress to strain within the elastic range,
is the modulus of elasticity E, sometimes called Young's modulus.
Beyond the elastic limit, permanent, or plastic strain occurs.
If the stress is released in the region between the elastic limit and the yield strength (see
above) the material will contract along a line generally nearly straight and parallel to the
original elastic line, leaving a permanent set.
In steels, a curious phenomenon occurs after the elastic limit, known as yielding. This gives
rise to a dip in the general curve followed by a period of deformation at approximately constant
load. The maximum stress reached in this region is called the upper yield point and the lower
part of the yielding region the lower yield point. In the harder and stronger steels, and under
certain conditions of temperature, the yielding phenomenon is less prominent and is
correspondingly harder to measure. In materials that do not exhibit a marked yield point, it is
customary to define a yield strength. This is arbitrarily defined as the stress at which the
material has a specified permanent set (the value of 0.2 percent is widely accepted in the
industry).
For steels used in the manufacturing of tubular goods the API specifies the yield strength as
the tensile strength required to produce a total elongation of 0.5 and 0.6 percent of the gauge
length.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 29 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 5.A - Stress - Strain Diagram
Similar arbitrary rules are followed with regard to the elastic limit in commercial practice.
Instead of determining the stress up to which there is no permanent set, as required by
definition, it is customary to designate the end of the straight portion of the curve (by definition
the proportional limit) as the elastic limit. Careful practice qualifies this by designating it the
proportional elastic limit.
As extension continues beyond yielding, the material becomes stronger causing a rise of the
curve, but at the same time the cross-sectional area of the specimen becomes less as it is
drawn out. This loss of area weakens the specimen so that the curve reaches a maximum
and then falls off until final fracture occurs. The stress at the maximum point is called the
tensile strength (TS) or the ultimate strength of the material and is its most often quoted
property.
The mechanical and chemical properties of casing, tubing and drill pipe are laid down in API
specifications 5CT and 5C2.
Depending on the type or grade, minimum requirements are laid down for the mechanical
properties, and in the case of the yield point even maximum requirements (except for H 40).
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 30 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
The denominations of the different grades are based on the minimum yield strength, e.g.:
Grade Min. Yield Strength
H 40 40,000psi
J 55 55,000psi
C 75 75,000psi
N 80 80,000psi
etc.
In the design of casing and tubing strings the minimum yield strength of the steel is taken as
the basis of all strength calculations
As far as chemical properties are concerned, in API 5CT only the maximum phosphorus and
sulphur contents are specified, the quality and the quantities of other alloying elements are left
to the manufacturer.
API specification 5CT Restricted yield strength casing and tubing however, specifies the
complete chemical requirements for grades C 75, C 95 and L 80.
5.3. HEAT TREATMENT OF ALLOY STEELS
The structure of a metal or alloy and its mechanical and corresponding physical properties
are strongly dependent on the chemical composition of the material and heat treatment
applied. In the heat treatment process, the temperature reached and the rate of cooling are
the essentials of obtaining the physical properties.
Comparison of the chemical composition shows that in general there is little difference
between the various grades of steel and the difference in mechanical properties is achieved
mainly through the variation heat treatment process.
Rapid cooling of the steel from above the crystallisation temperature by quenching provides a
hard, brittle type steel. Slow cooling provides a soft low-strength steel.
The hardness of a specific alloy steel is directly proportional to the strength of that steel.
The various methods of heat treatment are as follows:
Annealing In this process the steel is heated above a critical temperature
and cooled very slowly, usually in the furnace. Annealing
accomplishes the following:
Refines grain structure.
Makes structure more uniform.
Improves machinability.
Normalising This is an identical process to annealing except that the steel is
air cooled. As an example API grades J and K55 are heated to
about 860C (1,580F) before cooling.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 31 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Tempering Consists of re-heating a quenched or normalised steel to a
specified temperature below the critical temperature, between
600C and 680C (1,110F and 1,260F) depending on the
grade for a specific time and cooling back to room temperature.
This process makes the steel tougher with only small loss in
strength.
Stress relieving Is similar to the tempering process but is done to relieve
internal stresses set up during the manufacturing process
(such as in upsetting).
Quenching Is the same procedure as normalising but has rapid cooling,
usually done in water, salt water or oil. un-tempered quenched
steels are very hard and brittle.
See the following tables for process of manufacturing, heat treatments, chemical composition
and mechanical properties of API tubulars.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 32 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Tempering
Temperature Min.
Group Grade Type
Process of
Manufacture
Heat
Treatment
o
F
o
C
H 40 - S or EW None - -
J 55 - S or EW None
Note 1
- -
1 K 55 - S or EW None
Note 1
- -
N 80 (Casing) - S or EW None
Note 1
- -
N 80 (Tubing) - S or EW Note 1 - -
C 75 1 S or EW N&T 1,150 621
C 75 2 S or EW Q&T 1,150 621
C 75 3 S or EW N&T 1,150 621
C 75 9 Cr S Q&T* 1,100 593
C 75 18 Cr S Q&T* 1,100 593
2 C 90 1 S Q&T 1,150 621
C 90 2 S Q&T 1,150 621
C 95 - S or EW Q&T 1,000 538
L 80 1 S or EW Q&T 1,050 566
L 80 9 Cr S Q&T* 1,100 593
L 80 13 Cr S Q&T* 1,100 593
3 P 105 - S Q&T or N&T** - -
P 110 - S Q&T or N&T** - -
Q 125 1 S or EW*** Q&T - -
4 Q 125 2 S or EW*** Q&T - -
Q 125 3 S or EW*** Q&T - -
Q 125 4 S or EW*** Q&T - -
Note:
Full length normalised, normalised and tempered (N&T) or quenched and tempered (Q&T) at the
manufactures option or if so specified on the order.
Type 9 Cr and 13Cr grades may be air quenched
** Unless otherwise agreed between purchaser and manufacturer/processor
*** Special requirements unique to electric welded Q 125 casing are specified in SR11. When
welded Q 125 casing is furnished, the provisions of SR11 automatically in effect.
S = Seamless pipe
EW = Electric welded Pipe
Table 5.A - API Process of Manufacture and Heat Treatment
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 33 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Group Grade
Type
Carbon Maganese Molybdenum Chromium
Nickel Copper Phos-
phorous
Sulphur Silicon
min max. min max. min max. min max. max. max. max. max. max.
1 H - 40 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 ...
J - 55 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 ...
K - 55 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 ...
N - 80 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 ...
2 C - 75 1 ... 0.50 ... 1.90 0.15 0.40 *** *** *** *** 0.040 0.060 0.45
C - 75 2 ... 0.43 ... 1.50 ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 0.45
C - 75 3 0.38 0.48 0.75 1.00 0.15 0.25 0.80 1.10 ... ... 0.040 0.040 ...
C - 75 9Cr ... 0.15 0.30 0.60 0.90 1.10 8.0 10.0 ... ... 0.020 0.010 1.0
C - 75 13Cr 0.15 0.22 0.25 1.00 ... ... 12.0 14.0 0.5 0.25 0.020 0.010 1.0
L - 80 1 ... 0.43* ... 1.90 ... ... ... ... 0.25 0.35 0.040 0.060 0.45
L - 80 9Cr ... 0.15 0.30 0.60 0.90 1.10 8.0 10.0 0.5 0.25 0.020 0.010 1.0
L - 80 13Cr 0.15 0.22 0.25 1.00 ... ... 12.0 14.0 0.5 0.25 0.020 0.010 1.0
C90 1 ... 0.35 ... 1.00 ... 0.75 ... 1.20 0.99 ... 0.030 0.010 ...
C90 2 ... 0.50 ... 1.90 ... NL ... NL 0.99 ... 0.030 0.010 ...
C95 ... ... 0.45* ... 1.90 ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 0.45
3 P -105 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 ...
P -
110
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 0.040 0.060 ...
4 Q -125 1 ... 0.35 ... 1.00 ... .75 ... 1.20 0.99 ... 0.020 0.010 ...
Q -125 2 ... 0.35 ... 1.00 ... NL ... NL 0.99 ... 0.020 0.020 ...
Q -125 3 ... 0.50 ... 1.90 ... NL ... NL 0.99 ... 0.030 0.010 ...
Q -125 4 ... 0.50 ... 1.90 ... NL ... NL 0.99 ... 0.030 0.020 ...
Note:
*** For Grade C - 75, Type 1, Chromium, Nickel and Copper combined shall not exceed 0.50%.
* The Carbon contents for L - 80 may be increased to 0.50% max. if the product is oil
quenched.
* The Carbon contents for C - 95 may be increased to 0.55% max. if the product is oil
quenched.
NL No Limit. Elements shown must be reported in product analysis.
Table 5.B - Chemical Composition of API Tubulars
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 34 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Yield Strength Tensile
Strength
Hardness Specified Wall
Thickness
Allowable
Hardness
Variation
Group Grade min. max. min. max.*
psi MPa psi MPa psi MPa HRC BHN Inches HRC
1 H -40 40,000 276 80,000 552 60,000 414 ... ...
J - 55 55,000 379 80,000 552 75,000 517 ... ...
K - 55 55,000 379 80,000 552 95,000 655 ... ...
N - 80 80,000 552 110,000 758 100,000 689 ... ...
2 C - 75 1,2,3 75,000 517 90,000 620 95,000 655 ... ...
C - 75 9Cr 75,000 517 90,000 620 95,000 655 22 237
C - 75 13Cr 75,000 517 90,000 620 95,000 655 22 237
L - 80 1 80,000 552 95,000 655 95,000 655 23 241
L - 80 9 Cr 80,000 552 95,000 655 95,000 655 23 241
L - 80 13 Cr 80,000 552 95,000 655 95,000 655 23 241
C - 90 90,000 620 105,000 724 100,000 690 25.4 255 0.500 or less 3.0
C - 90 90,000 620 105,000 724 100,000 690 25.4 255 0.501 to 0.749 4.0
C - 90 90,000 620 105,000 724 100,000 690 25.4 255 0.750 to 0.999 5.0
C - 90 90,000 620 105,000 724 100,000 690 25.4 255 1.000 and
above
6.0
C - 95 95,000 655 110,000 758 105,000 724 ... ...
3 P - 105 105,000 724 135,000 931 120,000 827 ... ...
P - 110 110,000 758 140,000 965 125,000 862 ... ...
4 Q -125 125,000 860 150,000 1035 135,000 930 ... ... 0.500 or less 3.0
Q -125 125,000 860 150,000 1035 135,000 930 ... ... 0.501 to 0.749 4.0
Q -125 125,000 860 150,000 1035 135,000 930 ... ... 0.750 and
above
5.0
* In case of dispute, laboratory Rockwell C hardness tests shall be used as the referee
method.
Table 5.C - API Tensile and Hardness Requirements
A
R
P
O
E
N
I

S
.
p
.
A
.
A
g
i
p

D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
I
D
E
N
T
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N

C
O
D
E
P
A
G
E

3
5

O
F

1
3
4
R
E
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
T
A
P
-
P
-
1
-
M
-
6
1
1
0
0
F
i
g
u
r
e

5
.
B

-

Y
i
e
l
d

S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h
/
T
e
n
s
i
l
e

S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h

R
a
t
i
o
s
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 36 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
6. TUBULAR RANGE LENGTHS & COLOUR CODING
6.1. RANGE LENGTHS
The following tables provide the API tubular length ranges available.
Range 1 2 3
Casing And Liners
** Total range length include 16-25 25-24 24-48
* Range Length for 95% or more of carload
Permissible Variation, max. 6 5 6
Permissible length, min 18 28 36
Tubing
** Total range length include 20-24 28-32 -
Permissible Variation, max. 2 2 -
Permissible length, min 20 28 -
Pup Joint
*** Lengths 2,3,4,6,8,10 and 12ft
Tolerance t3ins
* Carload tolerance shall not apply to orders of less than a carload. For any carload of pipe, shipped
to the final destination without transfer or removal from the car, the tolerance shall apply to each car.
For any order consisting of more than a carload and shipped from the manufacturers facility by rail.
but not to the final destination, the carload tolerance shall apply to the total order, but not to the
individual carloads.
** By agreement between purchaser and manufacturer or processor the total range length for range
1 tubing may be 20-28ft
*** 2ft pup joints may be furnished up to 3ft long by agreement between purchaser and
manufacturer, and lengths other than those listed may be furnished by agreement between
purchaser and manufacturer.
Table 6.A - API Range Length In Feet
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 37 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Range 1 2 3
Casing And Liners
Total range length include 4.88-7.62 7.62-10.36 10.36-14.63
Permissible Variation, max. 1.83 1.52 1.83
Permissible length, min 5.49 8.53 10.97
Tubing
** Total range length include 6.10-7.32 8.53-9.75 -
Permissible Variation, max. 0.61 0.61 -
Permissible length, min 6.10 8.53 -
Pup Joint
*** Lengths 0.61, 0.19, 1.22, 1.83, 2.44, 3.05 and 3.66m
Tolerance t76.2mm
* Carload tolerance shall not apply to orders of less than a carload shipped from the manufacturers
or processors facility. For any carload of pipe shipped from the manufacturers or processors
facility to the final destination without transfers or removal from the car, the tolerance shall apply to
each car. For any order consisting of more than a carload and shipped by rail, but not to the final
destination in the rail cars loaded, the carload tolerance shall apply to the total order, but not to the
individual carloads.
** By agreement between the purchaser and manufacturer or processor the total range length for
range 1 tubing may be 6.10-8.53m
*** 0.61m pup joints may be furnished up to 0.91m long by agreement between purchaser and
manufacturer, and lengths other than those may be furnished be agreement between purchaser and
manufacturer.
Table 6.B - API Range Length in Metres
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 38 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
6.2. API TUBULAR MARKING AND COLOUR CODING
6.2.1. Markings
All API tubulars are marked as per API specification 5CT. The following example shows the
marking code.
Table 6.C - Example Marking Code (Dalmine)
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 39 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
6.2.2. Colour Coding
Group 1, Group 3, Group 4
In addition to the required identification markings as specified in 6.2.1 above, each length of
casing and tubing shall be colour coded by one or more of the following methods.
A paint band encircling the pipe at a distance not greater than 2ft (0.61m) from the
coupling or box.
A paint band encircling the centre of the coupling.
Paint entire outside surface of coupling.
For pup joints shorter than 6ft (1.83m) in length, the entire surface except the threads shall be
painted.
The colour and number of bands shall be as follows:
Grade H 40 No colour marking, or black at the manufacturers option
Grade J 55 One bright green band
Grade K 55 Two bright green bands
Grade N 80 One red band
Grade P 105 White
Grade P 110 White
Grade Q 125 Orange
Group 2
1) A paint band or bands encircling the pipe at a distance not greater than 2ft (0,61m) from
the coupling or box.
Grade C75 One blue band
Grace C75, 9Cr One blue band and two yellow bands
Grade C75, 13Cr One blue and one yellow band
Grade L80 One red band and one brown band
Grade L80, 9Cr One red and one brown and two yellow bands
Grade L80, 13Cr. One red and one brown and one yellow band
Grade C90 One purple band
Grade C95 One brown band
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 40 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
2) A paint band or bands encircling the centre of the coupling.
Grade C75 One blue band
Grade C90 One purple band
Grade C95 One brown band
3) Paint entire outside surface of coupling. The colour shall be as follows:
Grade C75 Blue
Grade C75, 9Cr Blue with two yellow bands
Grade C75, 13Cr. Blue with one yellow band
Grace L80 Red with brown band or longitudinal stripe
Grade L80, 9Cr Red with two yellow bands
Grade L80, 13Cr. Red with one yellow band
Grade C90 Purple
Grade C95 Brown
4) For pup joints shorter than 6ft (1.83m) in length, the entire surface except the threads
shall be painted.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 41 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
7. APPROACH TO CASING DESIGN
Casing design is actually a stress analysis procedure. The objective of the procedure is to
produce a pressure vessel which can withstand a variety of external, internal, thermal, and
self weight loading, while at the same time being subjected to wear and corrosion.
During the drilling phase, this pressure vessel is a composite of steel and in conjunction with
a variety of biaxially stressed rock materials.
As there is little point in designing for loads that are not encountered in the field, or in having a
casing that is disproportionally strong in relation to the underlying formations, there are four
major elements to the casing design process:
Definition of the loading conditions likely to be encountered throughout the life of
the well.
Specification of the mechanical strength of the pipe.
Estimation of the formation strength using rock and soil mechanics.
Estimation of the extent to which the pipe will deteriorate through time and
quantification of the impact that this will have on its strength.
Considering the axial stress (a) in a string of casing, it is obvious that the stress due to the
buoyant weight of the casing below any point of interest will be a major component of the total
axial stress.
Furthermore any changes in the internal and external pressures acting on casing will induce
changes in the axial stress as well as the radial (r) and tangential (t) stresses.
In addition, since the pipe is held or fixed at both ends, changes in all three stresses will occur
due to temperature changes and from the occurrence, and degree, of any buckling effect.
The inter-relationship between these loads can be analysed manually by applying a
combination of Hooke's Law, Lame's Equations and some form of yield criteria. This is
referred to as Triaxial Stress Analysis.
The forces affecting casing design are outlined in section 7.1.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 42 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
7.1. WELLBORE FORCES
Various wellbore forces affect casing design. Besides the three basic conditions (burst,
collapse and axial loads or tension), these include:
Buckling.
Wellbore confining stress.
Thermal and dynamic stress.
Changing internal pressure caused by production or stimulation operations
Changing external pressure caused by plastic formation creep.
Subsidence effects and the effect of bending in crooked holes.
This list above is by no means comprehensive and research in progress may identify some
other effects.
The steps in the casing design process are:
1) Consider the loading factors for burst first, since burst will dictate the design for the
major part of the string.
2) Next, the collapse loading should be evaluated and the string sections upgraded if
necessary.
3) Once the weights, grades and section lengths have been determined to satisfy the
burst and collapse loading, the tensile load can then in turn be evaluated.
4) The pipe can be upgraded as necessary as the loading is determined.
5) From all of the above, the appropriate casing connection can be determined although, if
the well is to be completed and the casing exposed to long term production,
consideration may be given to using a premium connection.
The final step is a check on biaxial reductions in burst strength and collapse resistance
caused by compression and tension loads, respectively. If these reductions show the
strength of any part of the section to be less than the potential load, the section should again
be upgraded.
7.2. DESIGN FACTOR (DF)
The design process can only be completed if knowledge of all the anticipated forces is
available. This however, is idealistic and never actually occurs, therefore some
determinations are usually necessary and a degree of risk has to be present and accepted.
The risk is usually associated with the assumed values and the level of the design factors
applied.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 43 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
The design factors are necessary to cater for:
Uncertainties in the determination of actual loads that the casing needs to
withstand and the presence of any stress concentrations due to dynamic loads or
specific well conditions.
Reliability of listed properties of the various steels used in the industry and the
uncertainty in the determination of the spread between ultimate strength and yield
strength.
Probability of the casing needing to bear the maximum load determined from the
calculations.
Uncertainties regarding the collapse pressure formulas.
Possible damage to casing during transport and storage.
Damage to the pipe body from slips, wrenches or inner defects due to cracks,
pitting, etc.
Rotational wear by the drill string while drilling.
The DF may vary with the capability of the steel to resist damage inflicted from handling and
running equipment.
The company values selected for DFs are a compromise between safety margin and
economics. The use of excessively high DFs guarantees against failure but provides
excessive strength and, therefore, increased cost. The use of low DFs requires accurate
knowledge about the loads to be imposed on the casing as there is less margin available.
Casing is generally designed to withstand stress which, in practice, it seldom encounters due
to the assumptions used in calculations, whereas, production tubing has to bear pressures
and tensions which are known or can be calculated with considerable accuracy.
Furthermore, casing is cemented in place after installation whereas tubing is often recovered
and used again. As a consequence of this, and due to the fact that tubing has to combat
corrosion effects from formation fluid, a higher DF is used for tubing than casing.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 44 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
7.2.1. Company Design Factors
The following table gives the DFs are Eni-Agips specified design factors used in casing
design calculations:
Casing Grade Burst Collapse Tension
H 40 1.05 1.10 1.7
J 55 1.05 1.10 1.7
K 55 1.05 1.10 1.7
C 75 1.10 1.10 1.7
L 80 1.10 1.10 1.7
N 80 1.10 1.10 1.7
C 90 1.10 1.10 1.7
C 95 1.10 1.10 1.7
P 110 1.10 1.10 1.8
Q 125 1.20 1.10 1.8
Table 7.A - Eni-Agip Design Factors
Note: The tensile DF on grade C 95 and below is 1.7, and higher than C 95 is 1.8.
Note: The tensile DF must be considerably higher than the previous factors to
avoid exceeding the elastic limit and, therefore invalidating the criteria
on which burst and collapse resistances are calculated.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 45 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
7.2.2. Application of Design Factors
The minimum performance properties of tubing and casing specified in the API bulletin are
only used to determine if the chosen casing is within the DF. The design factors are applied
as follows:
Burst For the chosen casing (diameter, grade, weight and thread) take the
lowest value from API casing tables, columns 13 through 19. This
value then divided by the applied DF gives the internal pressure
resistance of casing to be used for design calculation.
Collapse Use only column 11 of the API casing tables and divide the value by
the DF to obtain the collapse resistance for design calculations.
Tension Use the lowest value from columns 20 through 27 of the API casing
tables and divide it by the DF to obtain the joint strength for design
calculations.
Note: It should be recognised that the Design Factor used in the context of
casing string design is essentially different from the Safety Factor used
in many other engineering applications.
The term Safety Factor as used in tubing design, implies that the actual physical properties
and loading conditions are exactly known and that a specific margin is being allowed for
safety. The loading conditions are not always precisely known in casing design, and therefore
in the context of casing design the term Safety Factor should be avoided at all times.
Section 8 describes the exact design process in detail including the determination of all the
loading applied.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 46 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
8. DESIGN CRITERIA
8.1. BURST
Burst loading on the casing is induced when internal pressure exceeds external pressure.
8.1.1. Design Methods
The most conservative design for burst assumes the gradient of dry gas inside the casing,
the pressure of which equals the formation pressure of the lowest pressure zone from which
the gas may have originated or, alternatively the fracture pressure of the open hole below the
shoe.
The basis for this design criteria is that a dry gas blow-out is assumed that, when shut-in at
the surface, would either build to the blow-out zone's static shut-in pressure or cause an
underground blow-out once the shut-in pressure reaches the fracture pressure of the
weakest formation exposed in the open hole section.
Most operating companies modify this basic dry gas design concept according to a number
of other influences including:
Casing wear considerations
Amount of open hole section
Depth of the shoe
DF applied
Current BOP rating, etc.
Based on the vast amount of well data which is currently available, a set of key design
considerations are made:
a) Blowouts, especially those which are capable of exerting ultra high surface
pressure (i.e. dry gas blowouts), are very rare.
b) Ultra high surface pressures can only be experienced if an actual dry gas blow-
out does occur.
c) High strength casing, regardless of how overdesigned it may be, has no impact
on the reduction of the blow-out risk.
d) Once a blow-out has occurred, damage to the rig, environment, etc. will have
already commenced, regardless of how strong the casing may be.
e) If there is a blow-out, even a dry gas blow-out, it does not always concur that the
casing will is exposed to high burst pressures.
f) Surface wellheads have an advantage over subsea wellheads during drilling
operations, as there is access to any of the previous casing annuli whereas this is
not available with conventional subsea wellheads.
Access to these annuli could in turn provide a means of applying back-up
pressure to a casing string, thus reducing the net burst pressure being exerted on
that particular string. This feature is not always possible if the annulus may is
either cemented to the surface or not cemented into the previous casing shoe.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 47 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
The key to this problem is to recognise the rare and exceptional well circumstances that may
require or result in a hard dry gas shut-in. The decision process should be based on the initial
adoption of a middle ground design.
The Eni-Agip Drilling Engineering Department evaluated these key design considerations and
have decided to use the most conservative method and to reduce the obtained results by
40%.
8.1.2. Company Design Procedure
To evaluate the burst loading, surface and bottom-hole casing burst resistance must first be
established.
Surface Casing
a) Internal Pressure
1) The wellhead burst pressure limit is arbitrary, and is generally set equal to that of
the working pressure rating of the wellhead and BOP equipment but with a
minimum of 140kg/cm
2
. See BOP selection criteria in section 12.1.
With a subsea wellhead, the wellhead burst pressure limit is taken as 60% of the
value obtained as the difference between the fracture pressure at the casing shoe
and the pressure of a gas column to surface but in any case not less than
2,000psi (140atm).
Consideration should be given to the pressure rating of the wellhead and BOP
equipment which must always be equal to, or higher than, the pressure rating of
the pipe.
When an oversize BOP having a capacity greater than that necessary is selected,
the wellhead burst pressure limit will be 60% of the calculated surface
pressure obtained as difference between the fracture pressure at the casing shoe
with a gas column to surface. Methane gas (CH
4
) with density of 0.3kg/dm
3
is
normally used for this calculation. In any case it shall never be considered less
than 2,000psi (140atm).
The use of methane for this calculation is the worst case when the specific
gravity of gas is unknown, as the specific gravities of any gases which may be
encountered will usually be greater than that of methane.
2) The bottom-hole burst pressure limit can be calculated and is equal to the
predicted fracture gradient of the formation below the casing shoe.
3) Connect the wellhead and bottom-hole burst pressure limits with a straight line to
obtain the maximum internal burst load verses depth.
When taking a gas kick, the pressure from bottom-hole to surface will assume different
profiles according to the position of influx into the wellbore. The plotted pressure versus
depth will produce a curve.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 48 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
b) External Pressure
In wells with surface wellheads, the external pressure is assumed to be equal to the
hydrostatic pressure of a column of drilling mud.
In wells with subsea wellheads:
At the wellhead - Water Depth x Seawater Density x 0.1 (if atm)
At the shoe - (Shoe Depth - Air Gap) x Seawater Density x 0.1 (if atm)
c) Net Pressure
The resultant load, or net pressure, will be obtained by subtracting, at each depth, the
external from internal pressure.
Intermediate Casing
1) The wellhead burst pressure limit is taken as 60% of the calculated value obtained
as the difference between the fracture pressure at the casing shoe and the
pressure of a gas column to the wellhead.
In subsea wellheads, the wellhead burst pressure limit is taken as 60% of the
value obtained as the difference between the fracture pressure at the casing shoe
and the pressure of a gas column to the wellhead minus the seawater pressure.
3) The bottomhole burst pressure limit is equal to that of the predicted fracture
gradient of the formation below the casing shoe.
4) Connect the wellhead and bottom-hole burst pressure limits with a straight line to
obtain the maximum internal burst pressure.
The external collapse pressure is taken to be equal to that of the formation pressure.
With a subsea wellhead, at the wellhead, hydrostatic seawater pressure should be
considered.
c) Net Burst Pressure
The effective burst pressures are obtained by subtracting the external from internal
pressure versus depth.
Production Casing
The worst case burst load condition on production casing occurs when a well is shut-in and
there is a leak in the top of the tubing, or in the tubing hanger, and this pressure is applied to
the top of the packer fluid (i.e. completion fluid) in the tubing-casing annulus.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 49 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
1) The wellhead burst limit is obtained as the difference between the pore pressure
of the reservoir fluid and the hydrostatic pressure produced by a colum of fluid
which is usually gas (density = 0.3kg/dm
3)
.
2) Actual gas/oil gradients can be used if information on these are known and
available.
3) The bottom-hole pressure burst limit is obtained by adding the wellhead pressure
burst limit to the annulus hydrostatic pressure exerted by the completion fluid.
Generally the completion fluid density is equal to, or close to, the mud weight in
which casing is installed.
Note: It is usually assumed that the completion fluid and mud on the outside of
the casing remains homogeneous and retains the original density values
however this is not actually the case, particularly with heavy fluids, but it is
also assumed that the two fluids will degrade similarly under the same
conditions of pressure and temperature.
4) Connect the wellhead and bottomhole burst pressure limits with a straight line to
obtain the maximum internal burst pressures.
Note: If it is foreseen that future stimulation or hydraulic fracturing operations
may be necessary, assume: at the perforation depth the fracture pressure
at that point and at the wellhead the fracture pressure at the perforation
depth minus the hydrostatic head in the casing plus a safety margin of
70kg/cm
2
(1,000psi).
The external pressure is taken to be equal to that of the formation pressure.
With a subsea wellhead, at the wellhead, hydrostatic seawater pressure should be
considered.
c) Net Burst Pressure
The resultant burst pressure is obtained by subtracting the external from internal
pressure at each depth.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 50 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Intermediate Casing and Liner
If a drilling liner is to be used in the drilling of a well, the casing above where the liner is
suspended must withstand the burst pressure that may occur while drilling below the liner.
The design of the intermediate casing string is, therefore, altered slightly:
1) Since the fracture pressure and mud weight may be greater or lower below the
liner shoe than casing shoe, these values must be used to design the
intermediate casing string as well as the liner.
2) When well testing or producing through a liner, the casing above the liner is part of
the production string and must be designed according to this criteria.
Tie-Back String
In a high pressure well, the intermediate casing string above a liner may be unable to
withstand a tubing leak at surface pressures according to the production burst criteria. The
solution to this problem is to run and tie-back a string of casing from the liner top to surface,
isolating the intermediate casing.
8.2. COLLAPSE
Pipe collapse will occur when the external force on a pipe exceeds the combination of the
internal force plus the collapse resistance.
It occurs as a result of either, or a combination of:
Reduction in internal fluid pressure.
Increase in external fluid pressure.
Additional mechanical loading imposed by plastic formation movement.
The design of a string of casing in collapse mode consists of selecting the lowest cost pipe
that has sufficient strength to meet with the desired design criteria and design factor.
If, when making a selection, a choice exists between a lower grade heavy pipe and a higher
grade but lighter pipe, both of which provide adequate strength at similar cost, the higher
grade (lighter) pipe should be chosen due to the reduction of tension loading.
Note : The reduced collapse resistance under biaxial stress (tension/collapse)
should be considered.
Note : No allowance is given to increased collapse resistance due to cementing.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 51 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Surface Casing
For wells with a surface wellhead, the casing is assumed to be completely empty.
In offshore wells with subsea wellheads, the internal pressure assumes that the mud
level drops due to a thief zone.
In wells with a surface wellhead, the external pressure is assumed to be equal to that of
the hydrostatic pressure of a column of drilling mud.
In offshore wells with a subsea wellhead, it is calculated:
At the wellhead - Water Depth x Seawater Density x 0.1 (if atm).
At the shoe - (Shoe Depth - Air Gap) x Seawater Density x 0.1 (if atm).
c) Net Collapse Pressure
The resultant collapse pressure is obtained by subtracting the internal pressure from
external pressure at each depth.
Intermediate Casing
The worst case collapse loading occurs when a loss of circulation is encountered while
drilling the next hole section with the maximum allowable mud weight. This results in the
mud level inside the casing dropping to an equilibrium level where the mud hydrostatic
equals the pore pressure of the thief zone. Consequently it will be assumed the casing
is empty to the height (H) calculated as follows:
(H
loss
-H) x dm = H
loss
x G
p
H = H
l oss
(dm - Gp)/dm
If Gp = 1.03 (kg/cm
2
/10m)
Then H = H
loss
(dm - 1.03)/dm
where:
H
loss
= depth at which circulation loss is expected (m)
dm = mud density expected at H
loss
(kg/dm
2
)
Gp = pore pressure of thief zone (kg/cm
2
/10m) - usually normally pressured
with 1.03 as gradient.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 52 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 8.A - Fluid Height Calculation
When thief zones cannot be confirmed, or otherwise, during the collapse design, as is
the case in exploration wells, Eni-Agip division and associates suggests that on wells
with surface wellheads, the casing is assumed to be half empty and the remaining part
of the casing full of the heaviest mud planned to drill the next section below the shoe.
In wells with subsea wellheads, the mud level inside the casing is assumed to drop to
an equilibrium level where the mud hydrostatic pressure equals the pore pressure of the
thief zone.
The pressure acting on the outside of casing is the pressure of mud in which casing is
installed.
The uniform external pressure exerted by salt on the casing or cement sheath through
overburden pressure, should be given a value equal to the true vertical depth of the
relative point.
The effective collapse line is obtained by subtracting the internal pressure from external
at each depth.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 53 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Production Casing
Assume the casing worst case is being completely empty. It is a fact of life, that during
the productive life of well, tubing leaks often occur and wells. Also wells may be on
artificial lift, or have plugged perforations or very low internal pressure values and, under
these circumstances, the production casing string could be partially or completely
empty. This must be taken into consideration in the design and the ideal solution is to
design for zero pressure inside the casing which provides full safety, nevertheless in
particular well situations, the Drilling and Completions Manager may consider that the
lowest casing internal pressure is the level of a column of the lightest density producible
formation fluid.
Assume the hydrostatic pressure exerted by the mud in which casing is installed.
The uniform external pressure exerted by salt on the casing or cement sheath through
overburden pressure, should be given a value equal to the true vertical depth of the
relative point.
In this case of the casing being empty, the net pressure is equal to the external
pressure at each depth.
In other cases it will be the difference between external and internal pressures at each
depth.
Intermediate Casing and Liner
1) If a drilling liner is to be used in the drilling of a well, the casing above where the liner is
suspended must withstand the collapse pressure that may occur while drilling below
the liner.
2) When well testing or producing through a liner, the casing above the liner is part of the
production string and must be designed according to this criteria.
Tie-Back String
If the intermediate string above the liner is unable to withstand the collapse pressure
calculated according to production collapse criteria, it will be necessary run and tie-back a
string of casing from the liner top to surface.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 54 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
8.3. TENSION
8.3.1. General
Tensile failure occurs if the longitudinal force exerted on a pipe exceeds, either the tensile
strength of the pipe or its connection. Generally, the connection used in a string of casing is
stronger than the pipe body although this must always be confirmed.
For situations where a connection coupling has to be special clearance, (i.e. of a smaller
diameter than the normal) the connection will be weaker or if flush joint pipe must be used in
special circumstances.
Tensile loads are imposed on the casing by:
The weight of pipe itself. The highest tensile stresses will occur at the uppermost
portion of the pipe. The tension is the weight of the pipe in air less buoyancy.
Shock loading:
a) While lowering casing through unstable formations such as cavings where
the casing string may get temporarily stuck before suddenly slipping through
thereby inducing tensile shock loads.
b) When landing casing in a subsea wellhead from a floater.
Upward and downward reciprocating movements carried out where there is a
tendency to become differential stuck, etc. in order to become free. To free the
pipe considerable pull may be necessary.
Bumping a cement plug.
High internal pressure will induce tensional stresses caused by radial expansion
and, hence, axial contraction.
Bending.
Note: The varying parameters which can affect tensile loading leads to the
estimates used for the tensile forces are more uncertain than the
estimates for either burst and collapse. The DF imposed is therefore
correspondingly much larger.
8.3.2. Buoyancy Force
The effect of buoyancy is generally assumed to be the reduction in weight of the casing string
when it is suspended in a liquid compared to its weight in air.
The buoyancy or reduction in string weight, as observed on the block is actually the resultant
of pressure forces acting on all the exposed horizontal faces and in calculations is defined as
negative as it act upwards, hence reducing the pipe weight.
The areas referred to are the tube end areas, the shoulders at point of changing casing
weights and, to a smaller degree, the shoulders on collars (Refer to figure 8.b).
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 55 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
a) Different casing weights b) Shoulders on collars
Figure 8.B - Casing Buoyancy Areas
The forces acting on the areas of collar shoulders (F3) are for practical purposes negligible in
casing design as the upward and downward facing shoulders countered each other over
short distances.
Note: When calculating the tension with regard to buoyancy trends, the
different weights per unit length of the casing must be taken into
account, as they have different cross-sectional areas. In the following
example an average weight value is assumed since this does not
substantially affect the calculations.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 56 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Well Depth
(m)
Casing Data
Casing Weight
(kg)
Size
(ins)
Unit Weight
lbs/ft (kg/m)
Cross Sectional
Area (Af cm
2
)
0-1000
1000-2000
2000-3000
9
5
/
8
9
5
/
8
9
5
/
8
47.0
43.5
40.0
69.9
64.7
59.5
87.6
81.0
73.9
69.900
64.700
59.500
Total Casing Weight 194.100
Well Depth (m)
Hydrostatic Head
(atm (*))
Buoyancy (kg)
1000
2000
3000
150
300
450
150 (87.6-81) = 990
300 (81-73.9) = 2.130
450 (73.9) = 33.255
Total Buoyancy 36.375
Table 8.A - Buoyancy Example Calculation
* Mud density, dm = 1.5kg/dm
3
The average buoyancy for the whole profile is:
S = 194,100 - (194,100 x 0.808)
= 37,267kg
The difference (37,267-36,375) is 892kg and thus negligible in the calculations.
Refer to table 8.b for buoyancy factors.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 57 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Density
Fluid Head
Degrees
API
Specific
Gravity
lbs/gal lbs/cu ft g/cc psi/ft
kg/sp
cm/m
Buoyancy
Factor*
60 0.738 6.160 46.08 0.738 0.320 0.0738 0.905
55 0.758 6.325 47.31 0.765 0.328 0.0758 0.903
50 0.779 6.499 48.62 0.779 0.336 0.0779 0.900
45 0.801 6.683 49.99 0.801 0.347 0.0801 0.897
40 0.825 6.878 51.45 0.825 0.357 0.0825 0.894
35 0.849 7.085 53.00 0.848 0.368 0.0649 0.891
30 0.876 7.304 58.64 0.876 0.379 0.0876 0.688
25 0.904 7.537 56.38 0.904 0.391 0.904 0.884
20 0.933 7.786 58.24 0.933 0.404 0.0933 0.680
15 0.985 8.052 60.23 0.965 0.418 0.0965 0.675
10 1.000 8.337 62.36 1.000 0.433 0.1000 0.872
1.007 8.400 62.63 1.007 0.435 0.1007 0.871
1.031 8.600 64.33 1.031 0.446 0.1031 0.868
1.055 8.800 65.82 1.055 0.457 0.1055 0.865
1.079 9.000 67.32 1.079 0.467 0.1079 0.662
1.103 9.200 68.82 1.103 0.477 0.1103 0.859
1.127 9.400 70.31 1.127 0.488 0.1127 0.856
1.151 9.800 71.81 1.151 0.498 0.1151 .0852
1.175 9.800 73.30 1.175 0.509 0.1175 0.849
1.199 10.00 74.80 1.199 0.519 0.1199 0.846
1.223 10.200 75.30 1.223 0.529 0.1223 0.843
1.247 10.400 77.79 1.247 0.540 0.1247 0.840
1.271 10.600 79.29 1.271 0.550 0.1271 0.837
1.295 10.800 80.78 1.295 0.561 0.1295 0.834
1.319 11.00 82.28 1.319 0.571 0.1319 0.831
1.343 11.200 83.78 1.343 0.581 0.1343 0.828
1.367 11.400 85.27 1.367 0.592 0.1367 0.825
1.391 11.500 86.77 1.391 0.602 0.1391 0.822
1.415 11.800 88.27 1.415 0.612 0.1415 0.819
1.439 12.000 89.76 1.439 0.823 0.1439 0.816
1.463 12.200 91.26 1.463 0.633 0.1463 0.613
1.487 12.400 92.75 1.487 0.644 0.1487 0.810
1.511 12.600 94.25 1.511 0.654 0.1511 0.806
1.535 12.800 95.75 1.535 0.664 0.1535 0.803
1.559 13.000 97.24 1.559 0.675 0.1559 0.800
1.583 13.200 98.74 1.583 0.585 0.1583 0.797
1.607 13.399 100.23 1.607 0.696 0.1607 0.794
s / m 1 BF
BF = Buoyancy Factor
m = Mud Density
s = Steel Density
Fluid Density Pressure and Buoyancy Factors(60
o
F) (Continued Over Page)
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 58 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Density
Fluid Head
Degrees
API
Specific
Gravity
lbs/gal lbs/cu ft g/cc psi/ft
kg/sp
cm/m
Buoyancy
Factor*
1.631 13.600 101.73 1.631 0.706 0.1831 0.791
1.655 13.800 103.23 1.655 0.716 0.1655 0.788
1.679 14.000 104.72 1.679 0.727 0.1579 0.785
1.703 14.200 106.22 1.703 0.737 0.1703 0.782
1.727 14.399 107.71 1.727 0.748 0.1727 0.779
1.751 14.600 109.21 1.751 0.755 0.1751 0.776
1.775 14.800 110.71 1.775 0.768 0.1775 0.773
1.799 15.000 112.20 1.799 0.779 0.1799 0.770
1.823 15.200 113.70 1.823 0.789 0.1823 0.767
1.847 15.399 115.20 1.847 0.799 0.1547 0.764
1.871 15.600 116.89 1.871 0.610 0.1871 0.761
1.895 15.800 118.19 1.895 0.820 0.1895 0.757
1.919 16.000 119.68 1.918 0.831 0.1919 0.754
1.943 16.200 121.18 1.943 0.841 0.1943 0.751
1.967 16.400 122.68 1.967 0.851 0.1967 0.748
1.991 16.600 124.17 1.991 0.862 0.1991 0.745
2.015 16,800 125.67 2.015 0.872 0.2015 0.742
2.039 17.000 127.16 2.039 0.863 0.2039 0.739
2.063 17.200 128.66 2.063 0.893 0.2063 0.736
2.087 17.400 130.18 2.067 0.903 0.2087 .0733
2.111 17.600 131.65 2.111 0.914 0.2111 0.730
2.135 17.800 133.15 2.135 0.924 0.2135 0.727
2.159 18.000 134.54 2.159 0.935 0.2159 0.724
2.183 18.200 136.14 .2183 0.945 0.2183 0.72
2.207 18.400 137.64 2.207 0.955 0.2207 0.718
2.231 18.600 139.13 2.231 0.955 0.2231 0.715
2.255 18.800 140.63 2.255 0.976 0.2255 0.712
2.278 19.000 142.12 2.278 0.987 0.2278 0.708
2.326 19.400 145.12 2.326 1.007 0.2326 0.792
2.350 19.600 146.61 2.350 1.018 0.2350 0.699
2.374 19.800 148.11 2.374 1.028 0.2374 0.696
2.398 20.000 149.61 2.398 1.038 0.2398 0.693
Buoyancy factor is used is used compensate for loss of weight when steel tubulars are immersed in fluid.
Applicable only when tubing or casing is completely filled with fluid.
Apparent Weight = Weight in Air - Buoyant Force
Buoyancy Force =
Density Steel
Density Mud x Air in Weight
Apparent Weight =
,
_

Density Steel
Density Mud Density Steel
Air in Wieght
Apparent Weight = Weight in Air x Buoyancy Factors
Steel Density = 7.85 kg/l
Table 8.B - Fluid Density Pressure and Buoyancy Factors(60
o
F)
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 59 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
1) Calculate the casing string weight in air.
2) Calculate the casing string weight in mud by multiplying the previous weight by the
buoyancy factor (BF) in accordance with the mud weight in use.
Example:
Weight of casing in air = 250,000kg
Mud weight = 1.70kg/dm
3
Buoyancy factor = 0.782
Weight of casing in mud = 250,000 x 0.782
= 195,500kg
Buoyancy force = 54,500kg
3) Add the additional load due to bumping the cement plug to the casing string weight in
mud.
Note: This pull load is calculated by multiplying the expected bump-plug
pressure by the inside area of the casing.
Example: 9
5
/
8
" 43.5 lbs/ft casing
Pressure when at bumping plug = 180kg/cm
2
Inside casing area, Ai = 388.39cm
2
Additional pull load = 388.39 x 180
= 69,910kg
A calculation of this kind is an approximation only because the assumption has been
made that:
No buoyancy changes occur during cementing.
The pressure is applied only at the bottom and not where there are changes in
section. As seen with the previous case, the differences in the calculated values
are quite small, which justifies the preference for the simpler approximation
method.
Once the magnitude and location of the forces are determined, the total tensile load line
may be constructed graphically.
Note: More than one section of the casing string may be loaded in compression.
8.3.4. Example Hook Load During Cementing
The following is an example of casing load and therefore hook load when conducting a casing
cement job. This calculation includes the use of temperature data.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 60 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Example Data
Estimated top of cement 2,800m
Cemented length of casing 1,250m
Casing size 7ins
Steel grade P 110
Weight (imperial) 38lbs/ft
Weight (metric) 56.55kg/m
Internal diameter 5.898ins
Casing shoe depth 4050m
Mud weight during cementing operation 1.93kg/l
Average cement slurry density 2.00kg/l
Expected mud weight at end of next phase 2.16kg/l
Estimated bump plug pressure 140kg/cm
2
Next phase total depth 4400m
Calculation of Cross-Sectional Areas
Casing external area 248.28cm
2
Casing internal area 176.26cm
2
Cross-sectional area 72.02cm
2
Input Temperature Data
Average flowing temperature at casing shoe 65
o
C
Average static temperature at casing shoe 95
o
C
Estimated flowing temperature at next phase depth 95.5
o
C
Estimated static temperature at next phase depth 120.0
o
C
Estimated Total Hook Load (at end of cement operation)
Weight of casing in air 229t
Internal fluid weight plus bump plug 162t
Buoyancy effect 196t
Back pressure 0t
Total load at the end of cementing 195t
Total Hang-Off Weight
Weight in air of uncemented casing 158t
Stress due to the variation in internal pressure -3t
Stress due to the variation in external pressure 0t
Delta T m1 at casing shoe 75.4
o
C
Delta T m1 at end of next phase 103.3
o
C
Average delta T 27.9
o
C
Stress due to temperature variations 52t
Critical shock load If negative ignore) -28t
Total required hang-off load 207t
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 61 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Guidelines For Landing The Casing
The load conditions in the casing do not consider the additional axial stress placed in the
casing when it is landed. Casing practices make it difficult to estimated the various stresses
when it is landed in the wellhead. The API have identified four common methods for landing
casing:
In tension which was present when cement displacement was completed.
In tension at the freeze point, which is generally considered to be at the top of the
cement.
In neutral point of axial strength at the freeze point.
In compression at the freeze point.
API recommendation is to land the casing with the same tension at the end of the
displacement in all wells where the mud density does not exceed 12.5ppg (1.50kg/l) in the
next section.
The second option is used when excessive mud weights are anticipated, to prevent any
tendency of the casing to buckle above the freeze point.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 62 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
8.4. BIAXIAL STRESS
8.4.1. General
When the entire casing string has been designed for burst, collapse and tension, and the
weights, grades, section lengths and coupling types are known, the reduction in burst
resistance needs to be applied due to biaxial loading.
The total tensile load, which is tensile loading versus depth, is used to evaluate the effect of
biaxial loading and can be shown graphically.
By noting the magnitude of tension (positive) or compression (negative) loads at the top and
bottom of each section length of casing, the strength reductions can be calculated using the
Holmquist & Nadai ellipse, see figure 8.c
Note: The effects of axial stress on burst resistance are negligible for the
majority of wells.
8.4.2. Effects On Collapse Resistance
The collapse strength of casing is seriously affected by axial load, but the correction adopted
by the API (API Bulletin 5C3) is only valid for D/t ratios of about 15 or less. In principle collapse
resistance is reduced or increased when subjected to axial tension or compression loading.
As can be seen from figure 8.c, increasing tension reduces collapse resistance where it
eventually reaches zero under full tensile yield stress.
The adverse effects of tension on collapse resistance usually affects the upper portion of a
casing string which is under tension reducing the collapse resistance of the pipe.
After these calculations, the upper section of casing string may need to be upgraded.
Note: Fortunately for instances, the biaxial effects of axial stress on collapse
resistance are insignificant.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 63 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 8.C - Ellipse of Biaxial Yield Stress
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 64 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
The value for the percentage reduction of rated collapse strength is determined as follows:
1) Determine the total tensile load.
2) Calculate the ratio (X) of the actual applied stress to yield strength of the casing.
3) Refer to .figure 8.d and curve effect of tension on collapse resistance and find the
corresponding percentage collapse rating (Y).
4) Multiply the collapse resistance by the percentage (Y), without tensile loads to obtain the
reduced collapse resistance value.
This is the collapse pressure which the casing can withstand at the top of the string.
Figure 8.D - Stress Curve Factors
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1
X= Tensile load
Pipe body yield strength
Y
=

C
o
l
l
a
p
s
r
e
s
i
s
t
e
n
c
e

w
i
t
h

t
e
n
s
i
l
e

l
o
a
d

C
o
l
l
a
p
s
e

r
e
s
i
s
t
e
n
c
e

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

t
e
n
s
i
l
e

l
o
a
d

A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 65 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
8.4.4. Example Collapse Caclulation
Determine the collapse resistance of 7", N80, 32lbs/ft (4 kg/m), BTR casing with the shoe at a
depth of 5,750m and a mud weight of 1.1kg/dm
3
.
Collapse resistance without tensile load = 8,610psi (605kg/cm
2
)
Pipe body yield strength = 745,000lbs (338t)
Buoyancy factor = 0.859
Weight in air of casing = t 274
000 , 1
62 . 47 x 750 , 5
Weight in mud of casing = 274 x 0.859 = 235t

695 . 0
338
235
Strength Body Yield Pipe
casing of mud in Weight
x
From the curve or stress curve factors in figure 8.g, if X = 0.695 then Y = 0.445 and the
collapse resistance against tensile load can be determined:
Collapse resistance under load = Nominal Collapse Rating x 0.445
Refer to figure 8.e for a graphical representation of this calculation.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 66 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 8.E - Graphical Representation
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 67 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
8.5. BENDING
8.5.1. General
When calculating tensile loading, the effect of bending must also be considered, if applicable.
The bending of the pipe causes additional stress in the walls of the pipe. This bending causes
tension on the outside of the pipe and in compression on the inside of the bend, assuming the
pipe is not already under tension (Refer to figure 8.f).
Figure 8.F - Bending Stress
Bending is caused by any deviation in the wellbore resulting from side tracks, build-ups and
drop-offs.
Since bending load increases the total tensile load, it must be deducted from the usable rated
tensile strength of the pipe.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 68 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
8.5.2. Determination Of Bending Effect
For determination of the effect of bending, the following formula should be used:
TB = 15.52 x x D x Af Eq. 8.A
where:
= Rate of build-up or drop off (degrees per 30m)
D = Outside diameter of casing (ins)
Af = Cross-section area of casing (cm
2
)
TB = Additional tension (kg)
The formula is obtained from the two following equations:
J 2
D MB

Eq. 8.B
where:
MB = Bending moment (MB = E x J/R) (kg x cm)
D = Outside diameter of casing (cm)
J = Inertia moment (cm
4
)
= Bending stress (kg/cm
2
)
E x J = Bending stiffness (kg x cm
2
)
R = Radius of curvature (cm)
J E
L MB

Eq. 8.C
where:
MB = Bending moment (kg x cm)
L = Arch length (cm)
E = Modulus of elasticity (kg/cm
2
)
J = Inertia moment (cm
4
)
= Change in angle of deviation (radians)
Obtaining
L
J E
MB

from equation 2), equation 1) becomes:
L 2
D E

Eq. 8.D
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 69 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Then, by using the more current units giving the build-up or drop-off angles in degrees/30m,
we obtain the final form of the equation for TB as follows:
L 2
Af D E
TB
Af
TB

Eq. 8.E
30 2 180
Af D E
TB
R
1
L
30 180
R

Eq. 8.F

x 15.52 TB
100 x 30
x Af D x 4) x (25
x
180 x 2
) 10 x (2.1 x x
TB
106kg/cm2 x 2.1 m2 21,000Kg/m E
6
Eq. 8.G
When:
Af = Square inches
= Degrees/100ft
TB = 218 x x D x Af (lbs) or 63 x x D x W (lbs)
W = Casing weight (lbs/ft)
Note: Since most casing has a relatively narrow range of wall thickness (from
0.25 to 0.60ins), the weight of casing is approximately proportional to its
diameter. This means the value of the bending load increases with the
square of the pipe diameter for any given value of build-up/drop-off rate.
At the same time, joint tension strength rises a little less than the direct
ratio. The result is that bending is a much more severe problem with
large diameter casing than with smaller sizes.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 70 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Since bending load, in effect, increases tensile load at the point applied, it must be deducted
from the usable strength rating of each section of pipe that passes the point of bending.
The section which is ultimately set through a bend must have the bending load deducted from
its usable strength up to the top of the bend. From that point up to the top of the section the
full usable strength can be used.
8.5.4. Example Bending Calculation
Data:
Casing: OD 13
3
/
8
", 72lbs/ft (107,14kg/m), C75, BTR
Directional well with casing shoe at 2,000m (MD)
Kick-off point at 300m
Build-up rate: 3/30m
Maximum angle: 30
Mud weight : 1.1kg/dm
3
Pipe body yield strength: 1,558,000lbs (707t)
Design factor : 1.7
Calculation:
1) Casing weight in air (Wa)
Wa = 107.14 x 2,000 = 214t
2) Casing weight in mud (Wm)
Wm = 214 x 0.859 = 184t
3) Additional tension due to the bending effect (TB)
TB = 15.52 x 3 x 13.375 x 133.99 = 83,441kg = 83t
This stress will be added to the tensile stress already existing on the curved section of
hole.
4) Tension in the casing at 300m(TVD)=156 t. 5)
5) Total tension in the casing at 300m = 156 + 83 = 239t
6) Tension in the casing at 600m (MD) =129t.
7) Total tension in the casing at 600m (MD) = 129 + 83 = 212t.
See figure 8.g for the graphical representation of the example.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 71 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 8.G - Bending Load Example
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 72 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
8.6. CASING WEAR
8.6.1. General
There is no reliable method of predicting casing wear and defining the reduction in casing
properties due to the reduction in casing performance through decreases in burst and
collapse values which are proportional to the reduction in wall thickness. However, theoretical
predictions may be made as described in this section.
For most purposes, consideration of wear allowances can be restricted to deviated wells with
the most likely wear spot at the kick-off point where burst reduction will be the greatest
consideration. In a vertical well , casing wear is usually in the first few joints below the
wellhead or intervals with a high dogleg severity. In deviated wells, wear will be over the build-
up and drop off sections.
Figure 8.H - Casing Wear
The major factors affecting casing wear are:
Rotary speed.
Tool joint lateral load and diameter.
Drilling rate.
Inclination of the hole.
Severity of dog legs.
Casing wear factor.
The location and magnitude of volumetric wear in the casing string can be estimated by
calculating the energy imparted from the rotating tool joints to the casing at different casing
points and dividing this by the amount of energy required to wear away a unit volume of the
casing. The percentage casing wear at each point along the casing is then calculated from
the volumetric wear.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 73 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Eni-Agip acceptable casing wear limit is </= 7%.
Volumetric wear is proportional to an empirical wear factor which is defined as the coefficient
of friction divided by the volume of casing material removed per unit of energy input.
The wear factor depends upon several variables including :
Mud properties.
Lubricants.
Drill solids.
Tool joint roughness.
Tool joint hardness.
Note: The chemical action of gases such as H
2
S, CO
2
and 0
2
tends to reduce
the surface hardness of steel and, thus, contributes significantly to the
rate of wear.
8.6.2. Volumetric Wear Rate
The volume of casing worn away by the rotating tool joint equals:
Energy Specific
Foot Per Input Energy
V
Eq. 8.H
where:
V = Wear volume per foot
Specific Energy = The amount of energy required to wear away a unit volume of
casing material.
The frictional energy imparted to the casing by the rotating tool joint equals:
Energy Input Per Foot = Friction Force Per Foot x Sliding Distance Eq. 8.I
where:
Friction Force Per Foot = Friction Factor x Tool Joint Lateral Load Per Foot
Sliding Distance = n x TJ Diameter x Rotary Speed x Contact Time
and
Tool Joint Contact Time =
DPJL
TJL x S Eq. 8.J
where:
S = Drilling distance(ft)
TJL = Tool joint length (ins)
P = Rate of penetration (ft/hr)
DPJL = Drill pipe joint length (ft)
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 74 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
The lateral load on the drill pipe equals:
DPJL
TJL x TJLLPF
L
Eq. 8.K
where:
L = Drill pipe lateral load per foot
TJLLPF = Tool joint lateral load (lbs/ft)
TJL = Tool joint length (ins)
DPJL = Drill pipe joint length (ft)
The Wear Factor controlling the wear efficiency is defined as:
Wear Factor = Friction Factor/Specific Energy Eq. 8.L
Combining eq. 8.h-eq. 8.l shows that the Wear Volume V equals:
P
S x N x D x L x F x x 60
v

Eq. 8.M
where:
V = Wear volume per foot (in
3
/ft)
F = Wear factor (ins
2
/lbs)
L = Lateral load on drill pipe per foot (lbs/ft)
D = Tool joint diameter (ins)
N = Rotary speed (RPM)
S = Drilling distance (ft)
P = Penetration rate (ft/hr)
The tool joint and drill pipe lengths do not appear in Equation 6 because they do not
effect the amount of casing wear in the linear model.
Note: Wear volume increases non-linearly against wear depth, because
grooves become wider as the wear depth increases.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 75 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 8.I - Wear Rate
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 76 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
8.6.3. Factors Affecting Casing Wear (Example)
Figure 8.J - Example Well
Figure 8.K - Factors Affecting Casing Wear
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 77 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 8.L - Wellbore Displacement
Figure 8.M - Factors Affecting Casing Wear
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 78 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 8.N - Affect of Tool Joint Diameter on Casing Wear
Figure 8.O - Casing Wear
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 79 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 8.P - Lateral Tool Joint Loads in Smooth Ideal Well
Figure 8.Q - Lateral Forces in Actual Well
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 80 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
8.6.4. Wear Factors
Drilling Fluid Tool Joint Wear Factor (F) (10
-1
psi
-l
)
Water+Betonite+Barite Smooth 0.5 to 1
Water+Betonite+Lubricant (2%) Smooth 0.5 to 5
Water+Betonite+Drill Solids Smooth 5 to 10
Water Smooth 10 to 30
Water+Betonite Smooth 10 to 30
Water+Betonite+Barite Slightly Rough 20 to 50
Water+Betonite+Barite Rough 50 to 150
Water+Betonite+Barite Very Rough 200 to 400
Table 8.C - Typical Casing Wear Factors
When tool joints are smooth, casing wear is minimised when the mud consists of water,
bentonite and barite, (F = 0.5 to 1.0).
The small particles of barite appear to act as ball bearings and prevents the tool joint and
casing materials from coming into intimate contact.
Casing wear is increased tenfold when the mud is weighted with drill solids instead of barite,
(F = 5 to 10). This shows the importance of having good solids control when running heavily
weighted muds.
Water (without solids) causes high wear, (F = 10 to 30) because there are no solids to
prevent the sliding metals surfaces from coming into contact and causing galling wear. In
extreme cases, the surface can weld together resulting in chunks of metal being torn from the
surfaces.
When tool joints have rough hardbanding, the wear is controlled primarily by the roughness of
the tool joint and is almost independent of the mud properties. In this case, the rough tool
joints tend to machine away the casing in even larger pieces (similar to the cutting action of a
mill) resulting in rapid failure of the casing. table 8.d gives comparisons of casing wear with
twelve different hardmetal materials tested in the DEA-42 project.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 81 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Tool Joint
Tool Joint Wear
(Open Hole)
Casing
Wear, %
Wear
Factor
Friction
Factor
Remarks
Smooth Steel 0.043 18.2 5.6 0.21 AISI Steel 4145
Rough Tungsten
Carbide
75 1417 0.29
Mesh size 14/24 (20
min test)
Smooth Tungsten
Carbide
0.014 27.8 10.8 0.20
Mesh size 14/24
(field worn surface)
Hughes Smooth X
21.8 7.6 0.15
Tungsten Carbide
(spherical granules)
Drilco Sphere
7.6 1.95 0.21
Tungsten Carbide
(spherical)
Agip Tungsten
Carbide
17.2 5.5 0.19 Low vibration
Agip Austenite 14.6 4.3 0.18 Low vibration
Aluminium
Bronze
9.5 2.3 0.32 High friction
Armacor-M 0.027 5.9 1.1 0.15 Amorphous material
Arnco-200X 0.018 7.0 1.43 0.14 Chromium Carbide
Colmonoy 5 0.016 5.9 1.06 0.15 Nickle base
Triboloy-800 0.020 4.2 0.65 0.12
Cobalt Molybdenum
Duocor 9.7 2.24 0.24 Titanium Carbide
Stellite 6 9.7 2.19 0.17 Cobal base
Polished Chrome
6.6 1.27 0.15 Sensitive in salt
mud
BP-1 10.2 2.53 0.19
Steel machine
ground smooth
BP-2 18.6 6.74 0.21
Steel hand ground
finish
Table 8.D - DEA-42 Comparable Tool Joint Hardmetal Test Results
(N 80 with 3,000ft/lbs load and Water Based Mud)
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 82 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
figure 8.r below shows casing wear versus tool joint passes.
Figure 8.R - Effect of Hardmetal Roughness on Casing Wear
Drilling Fluid Tool Joint Wear Factor (10
-1
psi
-l
)
Water+Betonite+Barite Rubber Protector 1 to 2
Water Rubber Protector 4 to 10
Table 8.E - Typical Casing Wear Factors (Shell-Bradley, 1975)
The data given in table 8.c and table 8.e show that drill pipe rubber protectors (F= 1 to 10) will
reduce casing wear under all conditions except when using smooth tool joints with water
base mud weighted with barite, (F = 0.5 to 1.0).
In applications where very rough hard metal tool joints (F= 200 to 400) are being used, the
rubber protectors (F = 1 to 10) can reduce casing wear by 95 to 99 percent.
Limited casing wear data for oil based muds is also available. These limited tests indicate that
casing wear rates are nearly identical for oil based and water based muds.
Shell (Bol. 1985) found that the addition of barite to the mud significantly reduces casing wear
(Refer to figure 8.s).
The barite apparently acts as ball bearings and keeps the sliding metal surfaces from coming
into contact with each other and causing galling wear as already described in the previous
section.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 83 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 8.S - Effect of Barite on Casing Wear (Bol, 1985)
The barite reduced the wear factor from 25 using no barite to 1 to 2 with barite.
Shell (Bol, 1985) conducted tests which showed that a 10ppg mud weighted with drill solids
produced significantly more casing wear then a 10ppg mud weighted with barite (Refer to
figure 8.t below).
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 84 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 8.T - Effects of Barite on Casing Wear
With lateral loads of 900 to 1,800lbs (4 to 8kN), the wear factor ranged from 5 to 10 with drill
solids compared to 0.5 to 1.0 with barite. Apparently the small diameter of the barite
contributed to this reduced wear.
Shell (Bol, 1985) conducted tests with muds weighted with different weighting materials and
found that weighting materials significantly reduce casing wear.
Figure 8.U - Effect of Weighting Materials on Casing Wear (Bol, 1985)
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 85 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Drilling Fluid
Mud Weight
(lbs/gal)
Tool Joint
Weighting
Material
Wear Factor
(10
-l0
psi
-1
)
Oil+Bentonite 10 Smooth Barite 0.9 to 1.2
Water+Bentonite 10 Smooth Barite 0.8 to 1.6
Water+Bentonite 10 Smooth Iron Oxide 3 to 4
Water+Betontite 10 Smooth Drill Solid 5 to 11
Water+Betontite 10 Smooth Sand 11 to 13
Water+Betontite 8.8 Smooth None 22 to 27
Table 8.F - Effect of Weighting Material on Casing Wear Factor (Bol, 1985)
Weighting materials were found to reduce casing wear in all cases. Wear was greatest (F=
22 to 27), when no weighting material was present to act as a buffer between the tool joint
and the casing. The addition of silica sand to the bentonite and water reduced the casing
wear in half, (F = 11 to 13).
Drill solids (F = 5 to 11) produced less wear than silica sand.
Iron oxide (F = 3 to 4), which is often considered very abrasive, produced less wear than all of
the other weighting materials except barite. This is apparently due to the small size of the iron
oxide weighting particles.
These tests indicate that the size of the weighting particles may be more important than the
composition of the particles.
Oil based and water based muds weighted with barite produced minimal wear (F = 0.8 to
1.6). This shows the importance of having good solids control when using heavily weighted
muds.
Shell (Bol, 1985) found that the addition of 2% lubricant to an unweighted mud consisting of
water and bentonite significantly reduced casing wear refer to figure 8.v.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 86 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 8.V - Effect of Lubricant on Casing Wear
The addition of 2% lubricant reduced the wear factor with the bentonite mud from between 30
to 5 with 1,800lbs lateral load (8kN) on the tool joint to between 30 to 0.5 with 900lbs load
(4kN).
These tests show that lubricants may be useful in wells where casing wear may be a
problem.
8.6.5. Detection Of Casing Wear
Detecting casing wear can be achieved by two methods:
Use of magnets in the mud flow return.
Running a caliper survey after setting the casing to provide a base log. A wear log
can then be run at any time throughout the life of the next section.
8.6.6. Casing Wear Reduction
If there are fears about casing wear, it stands to reason practices to reduce it should be
considered, including:
Using down hole motors and turbines.
Using rubber drill pipe casing protectors.
Using drill pipe without hard facing.
Keeping doglegs to a minimum.
Keeping sand content low.
Using oil based mud.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 87 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
8.6.7. Wear Allowance In Casing Design
With the design loads recommended it is highly unlikely that a reduction in collapse
resistance due to wear will be critical at shallow depths or similarly that the reduction in burst
resistance will be critical at the lower end of the casing string.
The most likely wear points in a deviated wells are at the kick-off point and near surface in the
vertical portion where buckling may occur (particularly at the top of cement).
In the vertical wells, wear points may also develop at the top of cement if buckling occurs but
unless there are known sudden changes in formation dip, which could cause a large drilled
dogleg, wear is likely to be small and uniformly spread over the entire length of the string.
For most purposes, consideration of wear allowances can be restricted to deviated wells,
with the most likely wear point at the kick-off point where burst reduction will be the prime
consideration.
Since wear estimates are order of magnitude calculations, it is recommended that wear
allowances be considered only in cases where the burst (or collapse) resistance of the
casing at the wear point will be approached during the anticipated operating time in the string.
In marginal cases, it may well prove cost effective to run a base caliper survey to re-survey
the casing prior to entering a hydrocarbon bearing zone (or pressure test the casing to the
equivalent of the burst pressures anticipated from the zone) than to run heavy walled casing
through all the anticipated wear sections.
The recommended procedure is therefore:
1) Conduct the casing design.
2) At the wear points, calculate the allowable reduction in wall thickness so that the burst
(or collapse) resistance of the casing just equals the burst (or collapse) load, including
the appropriate Design Factor applied.
3) Estimate the wear rate in terms of loss of wall thickness per operating day.
4) Calculate, from the allowable loss in wall thickness and the rate of wear, the allowable
operating time in the string.
If the allowable operating time is less than the anticipated operating time, use heavier casing
(or increases the grade) 100m above and to 60m below the wear point until the allowable
operating time exceeds the anticipated operating time.
If the allowable operating time is greater than the anticipated operating time (say estimated 50
days allowable versus estimated 20 days operating) do not include a wear allowance. If the
allowable operating time and the anticipated operating time are about the same, either:
a) Include a wear allowance
or
b) Monitor casing wear during drilling, and commission an intermediate string if the
worn casing strength approaches the design loads.
In any given situation whether option a) or b) is exercised will be dependent upon a number of
factors, many of which are beyond the scope of routine casing design.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 88 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Option a)
Is the conservative approach, but it may be too high, given the gross uncertainties inherent in
wear estimations. However, in rank wildcats, particularly in remote locations, it may be
justified.
Option b)
Requires a base caliper survey to be run immediately after installing the casing string,
followed by runs at discrete intervals during the drilling phase.
If wear is proven to have occurred, and an intermediate string has to be commissioned early,
the deeper objectives of the well may not be reached. However, conditions as drilling
proceeds may indicate that the design loads assumed are not going to be encountered and
the reduction in casing strength is acceptable.
In any event, valuable data on casing wear in the area will be obtained and field practices may
be improved as result of the attention paid to wear, eventually leading to a reduction in overall
wear rates.
In most cases, option b) is preferred.
There is no reliable method of predicting casing wear and defining the corresponding
reduction in casing performance. Because the reduction in burst and collapse rating is
directly proportional to wall thickness the revised theoretical value may be calculated.
The normal procedure to cater for possible wear when designing casing is to select the next
casing grade or wall thickness, therefore, in a vertical well, casing wear is usually in the first
few joints below the wellhead or intervals with a high dog-leg severity.
Consideration should be given to increasing the grade or wall thickness of the first few joints
below the wellhead.
In deviated wells, wear will be over the build-up and drop-off sections. Again the casing over
these depths can be of a higher grade or heavier wall thickness.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 89 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
8.7. SALT SECTIONS
8.7.1. General
Salt formations often exhibit plastic flow properties which can cause exceedingly high loads
on casing. The rate of salt flow is a function of its composition, temperature, depth or
overburden pressure and also probably influenced by how it is bedded or interbedded with
other formations.
The problem of salt formations has to be assessed on an individual well to well and/or area to
area basis.
The objectives for drilling through salt zones should be:
a) To achieve trouble free drilling.
b) Prevent casing collapse during the drilling and the production life of the well.
With regards to trouble free drilling, sticking due to salt flow, mud problems from salt
contamination, hole enlargement and the well's overall casing programme, are the prime
factors to be considered.
There are other factors that have to not be under evaluated such as:
Control of gas flows from porous zones interbedded in the salt, differential sticking
in porous zones.
Abnormal pressure due to entrapment of pressure by salt.
Shale sloughing from interbedded or boundary shales.
To prevent casing collapse, the designer should plan for non-uniform salt loading, obtaining
the best possible cement job, using casing with higher than normal collapse ratings and
possibly two strings of casing through the salt section.
Running casing in salt sections is rather a cementing problem than a casing design problem.
In some cases, two strings may be more advantageous as experience has demonstrated that
it is not practical to design a casing string to resist collapse. This technique is probably the
most reliable and safest approach for preventing casing collapse but is probably not
necessary for the majority of salt sections.
8.7.2. External Loading Due To Salt Flow
Traditional analyses of casing response to external loading are not adequate when
considering all of the possible effects caused by salt formation flow.
Three additional factors have to be analysed for casing design in areas where there is salt
flow:
a) Uniform external loading.
b) Non-uniform or non symmetric external loading.
c) Asymmetrical formation loading.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 90 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Uniform External Loads
Figure 8.W - Uniform External Loading
If there is a possibility of salt loading, several remedial actions may be taken. The first group
of precautions may be classified under the general heading of filling the casing internally,
either, with gravel, other solids or a fluid. For production casing, such actions are usually not
possible.
The alternative is to run a scab liner inside the casing opposite the suspect formation and
cement the annulus between the two casing strings refer to figure 8.x.
The benefits gained from running such a liner are substantial.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 91 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 8.X - Casing With Liner Installed and Cemented
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 92 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Another source of non-uniform loading is bending of the casing as a result of curvature of the
wellbore. Consider an initially straight casing length under external pressure and axial loads
that are insufficient to result in collapse. Now assume that the casing is gradually bent by an
additional external force as for example due to salt flowing (Refer to figure 8.y below).
Figure 8.Y - Non-Uniform Loading
In the lower portion of the figure, the flowing formation has come in contact with the casing
thus restricting its movement. Above this point of contact, additional flow of the formation is
depicted as being in progress. Subsequent formation movement above the frozen point will
cause severe bending loads and, thus, reduce the casing cross-sectional integrity.
Problems may be observed before final catastrophic failure of the cross section e.g. the
ovality of the cross section may be sufficient enough to result in restrictions in the casing that
will prohibit the passage of bits or production equipment.
However, even in the presence of non-uniform external loads, the structural benefits of using
concentric casing strings are substantial.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 93 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Asymmetrical Formation Loads
For straight casing the most severe loading situation that could be expected from the salt
environment is 'point loading.
If for some reason cement placement results in only a partial sheath around the casing, the
remainder of the annulus being filled with mud, subsequent movement of the salt formation
will result (Refer to figure 8.z below).
The result of point loading is devastating leading to complete casing collapse. In fact, no
casing is strong enough to resist point loading in its extremist form.
Figure 8.Z - Point Loading
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 94 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
In designing casing for any application, the accepted design load is the one for which the
casing is subjected to the greatest conceivable loads.
In the particular case of casing design opposite salt formations, certain guidelines can be
considered:
For production casing exposed to salt formations, assume the casing will be
always evacuated at some point during the well life.
The uniform external pressure exerted by salt on the casing (or cement sheath)
due to overburden pressure should be given a value equal to the true vertical
depth to the point in question.
Proper cement placement opposite a salt section is often difficult due to washout.
Any beneficial effects of the cement sheath should be ignored during design of the
casing.
If the wellbore is deviated, additional axial forces due to hole curvature should be
considered when determining the collapse resistance of the casing.
Conclusions:
Running casing in salt sections is rather a cementing problem than a casing
problem.
If the pipe is well cemented, it is sufficient to design for collapse load in the
traditional mode (overburden pressure/design factor).
If the casing is poorly cemented the collapse effect may be very high. In this case,
it may help to run heavier wall casing (Refer to figure 8.aa).
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 95 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 8.AA - High Collapse Resistance Casing For Deep Wells
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 96 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
9. CORROSION
9.1. GENERAL
A production well design should attempt to contain produced corrosive fluids within tubing.
They should not be produced through the casing/tubing annulus.
However, it is accepted that tubing leaks and pressured annuli are a fact of life and as such,
production casing strings are considered to be subject to corrosive environments when
designing casing for a well where hydrogen sulphide (H
2
S) or carbon dioxide (CO
2
) laden
reservoir fluids can be expected.
During the drilling phase, if there is any likelihood of a sour corrosive influx occurring,
consideration should be given to setting a sour service casing string before drilling into the
reservoir.
The BOP stack and wellhead components must also be suitable for sour service.
9.1.1. Exploration and Appraisal Wells
Routine measures to be taken during drilling include:
Use of casing and wellhead equipment with a metallurgy suitable for sour service.
Use of high alkaline mud to neutralise the H
2
S gas.
Use of inhibitors and/or scavengers.
These measures will provide a degree of short term protection necessary to control corrosion
of the casing in the hole during the drilling phase.
9.1.2. Development Wells
Casing corrosion considerations for development wells can be confined to the production
casing only.
Internal corrosion
The well should be designed to contain any corrosive fluids (produced or injected) within
the tubing string by using premium connections.
Any part of the production casing that is likely to be exposed to the corrosive
environment, during routine completion/workover operations or in the event of a tubing
or wellhead leak, should be designed to withstand such an environment.
External corrosion
Where the likelihood of external corrosion due to electrochemical activity is high and the
consequences of such corrosion are serious, the production casing should be
cathodically protected (either cathodically or by selecting a casing grade suitable for the
expected corrosion environment).
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 97 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
9.1.3. Contributing Factors to Corrosion
Most corrosion problems which occur in oilfield production operations are due to the presence
of water. Whether it may be present in large amounts or in extremely small quantities, it is
necessary to the corrosion process. In the presence of water, corrosion is an electrolytic
process where electrical current flows during the corrosion process. To have a flow of
current, there must be a generating or voltage source in a completed electrical circuit.
The existence, if any, of the following conditions alone, or in any combination may be a
contributing factor to the initiation and perpetuation of corrosion:
Oxygen (O
2
)
Oxygen dissolved in water drastically increases its corrosivity potential. It can cause
severe corrosion at very low concentrations of less than 1.0ppm.
The solubility of oxygen in water is a function of pressure, temperature and chloride
content. Oxygen is less soluble in salt water than in fresh water.
Oxygen usually causes pitting in steels.
Hydrogen Sulphide (H
2
S)
Hydrogen sulphide is very soluble in water and when dissolved behaves as a weak acid
and usually causes pitting. Attack due to the presence of dissolved hydrogen sulphide is
referred to as sour corrosion.
The combination of H
2
S and CO
2
is more aggressive than H
2
S alone and is frequently
found in oilfield environments.
Other serious problems which may result from H
2
S corrosion are hydrogen blistering
and sulphide stress cracking.
It should be pointed out that H
2
S also can be generated by introduced micro-organisms.
Carbon Dioxide (CO
2
)
When carbon dioxide dissolves in water, it forms carbonic acid, decreases the pH of
the water and increase its corrosivity. It is not as corrosive as oxygen, but usually also
results in pitting.
The important factors governing the solubility of carbon dioxide are pressure,
temperature and composition of the water. Pressure increases the solubility to lower
the pH, temperature decreases the solubility to raise the pH.
Corrosion primarily caused by dissolved carbon dioxide is commonly called sweet
corrosion.
Using the partial pressure of carbon dioxide as a yardstick to predict corrosion, the
following relationships have been found:
Partial pressure >30psi usually indicates high corrosion risk.
Partial pressure 3-30psi may indicate high corrosion risk.
Partial pressure <3psi generally is considered non corrosive.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 98 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Temperature
Like most chemical reactions, corrosion rates generally increase with increasing
temperature.
Pressure
Pressure affects the rates of chemical reactions and corrosion reactions are no
exception.
In oilfield systems, the primary importance of pressure is its effect on dissolved gases.
More gas goes into solution as the pressure is increased, this may in turn increase the
corrosivity of the solution.
Velocity of fluids within the environment
Stagnant or low velocity fluids usually give low corrosion rates, but pitting is more likely.
Corrosion rates usually increase with velocity as the corrosion scale is removed from
the casing exposing fresh metal for further corrosion.
High velocities and/or the presence of suspended solids or gas bubbles can lead to
erosion, corrosion, impingement or cavitation.
9.2. FORMS OF CORROSION
The following forms of corrosion are addressed in this manual:
Corrosion caused by H
2
S (SSC)
Corrosion caused by CO
2
and Cl
-
Corrosion caused by combinations of H
2
S, CO
2
and Cl
-
Corrosion in injection wells and the effects of pH and souring are not included.
The procedure adopted to evaluate the corrosivity of the produced fluid and the methodology
used to calculate the partial pressures of H
2
S and CO
2
will be illustrated in the following sub-
sections.
9.2.1. Sulphide Stress Cracking (SSC)
The SSC phenomenon is occurs usually at temperatures of below 80C and with the
presence of stress in the material. The H
2
S comes into contact with H
2
O which is an
essential element in this form of corrosion by freeing the H
+
ion. Higher temperatures, e.g.
above 80C inhibit the SSC phenomenon, therefore knowledge of temperature gradients is
very useful in the choice of the tubular materials since differing materials can be chosen for
various depths.
Evaluation of the SSC problem depends on the type of well being investigated. In gas wells,
gas saturation with water will produce condensate water and therefore create the conditions
for SSC. In oil wells, two separate cases need to be considered, vertical and deviated wells:
a) In vertical oil wells, generally corrosion occurs only when the water cut becomes
higher than 15% which is the threshold or commonly defined as the critical level
and it is necessary to analyse the water cut profile throughout the producing life of
the well.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 99 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
b) In highly deviated wells (i.e. deviations >80
o
), the risk of corrosion by H
2
S is higher
since the water, even if in very small quantities, deposits on the surface of the
tubulars and so the problem can be likened to the gas well case where the critical
threshold for the water cut drops to 1% (WC >1%).
The following formulae are used to calculate the value of pH
2
S (partial pressure of H
2
S) in
both the cases of gas (or condensate gas) wells or oil wells.
Firstly, the potential for SSC occurring is evaluated by studying the water cut values
combined with the type of well and deviation profile. If the conditions specified above are
verified then the pH
2
S can be calculated.
Gas Or Condensate Gas Well
H
2
S partial pressure is calculated by:
pH
2
S = SBHP x Y(H
2
S)/100
where:
SBHP = Static bottom-hole pressure [atm]
Y(H
2
S) = Mole fraction of H
2
S
pH
2
S = Partial H
2
S pressure [atm]
SSC is triggered at pH
2
S >0.0035 atm and SBHP >4.5 atm.
Oil Bearing Well
The problem of SSC exists when there is wetting water; i.e.:
Water cut >15% for vertical wells
Water cut >1% for horizontal or highly deviated wells (>80
o
)
or if the GOR >800 Nm
3
/m
3
The pH
2
S calculation is different for undersaturated and oversaturated oil.
Undersaturated Oil
In an oil in which the gas remains dissolved, because the wellhead and bottom-hole
pressures are higher than the bubble point pressure (Pb) at reservoir temperature, is termed
undersaturated.
In this case the pH
2
S is calculated in two ways:
Basic method.
Material balance method.
If the quantity of H
2
S in gas at the bubble point pressure [mole fraction = Y(H
2
S)], is not known
or the values obtained are not reliable, the pH
2
S is calculated using both methods and the
higher of the two results is taken as the a reliable value. Otherwise the basic method is used.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 100 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Basic Method
This method is used, without comparison with the other method, when the H
2
S value in the
separated gas at bubble point conditions is known and is reliable or if Y(H
2
S), molar fraction in
the separated gas at bubble point pressure (Pb) is higher than 2%.
The pH
2
S is calculated by:
pH
2
S = Pb x Y(H
2
S)/100
where:
Pb = Bubble point pressure at reservoir temperature [atm]
Y(H
2
S) = Mole fraction in the separated gas at bubble point (from PVT data if
extrapolated)
pH
2
S = Partial H
2
S pressure [atm]
Material Balance Method
This method is used when data from production testing is available and/or when the quantity
of H
2
S is very small (<2,000ppm) and the water cut value from is lower than 5% (this method
cannot be used when the WC values are higher). The value of H
2
S in ppm to be used in the
calculation must also be from stable flowing conditions. Note: H
2
S sampled in short
production tests, is generally lower than the actual value under stabilised conditions.
The following algorithm is used to calculate the pH
2
S:
pH
2
S is calculated at the separator (pH
2
S
sep
):
pH
2
S
sep
= (Psep x H
2
S
sep
)/10
6
Eq. 9.A
where:
P
sep
= Absolute mean pressure at which the separator works (from tests) in
atm
H
2
S
sep
= Mean H
2
S value in the separator gas (generally measured in ppm)
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 101 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
The mean molecular weight of the produced oil, PM :
( )
PM
GOR
d
PM
GOR
res
1000
1000
23 6
29
23 6
.
.
Eq. 9.B
where:
PM
res
= mean molecular weight of the reservoir oil = CiMi
i
n
_
,
1
]
1
1
100 /
Ci = Mole% of the ith component of the reservoir oil
Mi = Molecular weight of the ith component of the reservoir oil
d = Density of the gas at separator conditions referred to air =1
The quantity of H
2
S in moles/litre dissolved in the separator oil is calculated:
[H
2
S]
oi l
= (pH
2
S
sep
/H
1
x ( x 1000)/ PM )
Eq. 9.C
where:
H
1
= Henry constant of the produced oil at separator temperature (atm/Mole
fraction). (See Procedure for calculating Henry constant)
PM = Mean molecular weight of the produced oil
= Specific weight g/l of the produced oil
The quantity of H
2
S in the gas in equilibrium is calculated (per litre of oil):
[H
2
S]
gas
= (GOR/23.6 x H
2
S
sep
/10
6
) Eq. 9.D
where:
GOR = Gas oil ratio Nm
3
/m
3
(from production tests)
23.6 = Conversion factor
The pH
2
S is calculated at reservoir conditions:
pH
2
S = (([H
2
S]
oi l
+ [H
2
S]
gas
)/K ) x H
2
Eq. 9.E
where:
K = ( x 1000/ PM + GOR/23.6) total number of moles of the liquid phase in
the reservoir
H
2
= Henry constant for the reservoir temperature and reservoir oil. (See
procedure for calculating Henry constant)
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 102 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
In general, H
2
S corrosion can occur at either the wellhead or bottom-hole without distinction.
There is SSC potential if pH
2
S >0.0035 atm and STHP >18.63 atm.
Procedure For Calculating Henry Constant
The value of the Henry constant is a function of the temperature measured at the separator.
The mapping method can be applied for temperatures at the separator of between 20C and
200C. Given the diagram in figure 9.a which represents the functions H(t) for the three types
of oils:
Heptane PM = 100
N-propyl benzene PM = 120
Methylnaphthalene PM = 142
Remarks On The H
1
Calculation
Having calculated the molecular weight of the produced oil PM using the formula in eq. 9.b,
the reference curve is chosen (given by points) to calculate the Henry constant on the basis
of the following value thresholds:
If PM > 142, the H(t) curve of methylnaphthalene is used.
If PM = 120, the H(t) curve of propyl benzene is used.
If PM < 100, the H(t) curve of heptane is used.
If 100 <PM < 120, the mean value is calculated using the H(t) curve of propyl
benzene and the H(t) curve of methylnaphthalene.
If 120 <PM < 142 the mean value is calculated using the H(t) curve of heptane
and the H(t) curve of propyl benzene.
Given FTHT, wellhead flowing temperature, the H
1
value is interpolated linearly on
the chosen curve(s). For this purpose the temperature values immediately before
and after the temperature studied are taken into consideration.
Comments On The H
2
Calculation
Having calculated the molecular weight of the reservoir oil PM
res
, using temperature
measured at the separator, H
2
is measured in a similar way as H
1
.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 103 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 9.A - H(t) Reference Curves
Oversaturated Oil
Oil is considered oversaturated when the gas in the fluid separates because the pressure of
the system is lower than the bubble point pressure. Two situations can arise:
Case A
FTHP < Pb
FBHP > Pb
Case B
FTHP < Pb
FBHP < Pb
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200
methylnaphthalene PM = 142
N-propylbenzene PM = 120
heptane PM = 100
T C
Henry
atm/Y[H 2S]
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 104 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Calculation Of Partial Pressure In Case A:
1) Calculation is of the partial pressure in the reservoir:
In this case pH
2
S is calculated in the way described for undersaturated oil.
2) Calculation is of the partial pressure at the wellhead, i.e. when FTHP <Pb:
The data result from the production conditions and only the basic method is used.
Basic Method
pH
2
S = STHP x Y(H
2
S) / 100
where:
STHP = static tubing head pressure [atm]
Y(H
2
S) = mole fraction in separated gas at STHP pressure and wellhead temperature
pH
2
S= partial H
2
S pressure [atm]
The SSC phenomenon is triggered off at the wellhead if pH
2
S >0.0035 atm and STHP >18.63
atm.
Calculation Of Partial Pressure In Case B:
Calculation of partial pressure in the reservoir:
In the reservoir the gas is already separated, FBHP <Pb, calculation of pH
2
S can be
approximated on the basis of the following:
the PVTs are reliable, Y(H
2
S) >0.2%, the partial pressure is calculated as:
pH
2
S = Y(H
2
S)
(1)
x FBHP
where:
Y(H
2
S) = molar fraction in gas separated at FBHP and at reservoir temperature
(from PVT)
the PVTs are not reliable, the material balance method can be used as in the
case of undersaturated oil; these are the worst conditions. The error made can be
high when Pb >FBHP.
Calculation Of Partial Pressure At Wellhead
The calculation method is that used for case A (FTHP <Pb)
(2)
Notes:
(1)
If the percentage (ppm) of H
2
S in the gas under static conditions is not known, the
corresponding value in reservoir conditions is assumed as being partial pressure at the
wellhead.
(2)
If the percentage (ppm) of H
2
S in the separated gas under static conditions is not
known, the corresponding value in reservoir conditions is assumed as being partial
pressure at the wellhead.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 105 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
9.2.2. Corrosion Caused By CO
2
And Cl
-
In the presence of water, CO
2
gives rise to a corrosion form which is different to those
caused by the presence of H
2
S. It also occurs only if the partial pressure of CO
2
exceeds a
particular threshold. As in the case of SSC, the possibility that corrosions exist in water cut
values combined with the type of well and deviation profile, is evaluated. If the conditions
described in section 9.2.1 exist, then the pCO
2
is then calculated.
Gas Or Condensate Gas Wells
The partial pressure is calculated:
pCO
2
= SBHP x Y(CO
2
)/100
where:
SBHP = Static bottom-hole pressure [atm]
Y(CO
2
) = Mole fraction of CO
2
pCO
2
= Partial pressure of CO
2
[atm]
Corrosion occurs if pCO
2
>0.2 atm.
Oil Bearing Wells
The problem exists where there is wetting water; i.e.:
Water cut >15% for vertical wells.
Water cut >1% for horizontal or highly deviated wells (> 80 degrees).
Undersaturated Oil Wells
The partial pressure of CO
2
is calculated:
pCO
2
= Pb x Y(CO
2
)/100
where:
Pb = Bubble point pressure at reservoir temperature
Y(CO
2
) = Mole fraction of CO
2
in separated gas at bubble point pressure (from the
PVTs)
pCO
2
= Partial pressure of CO
2
[atm]
2
>0.2 atm.
The pCO
2
values calculated in this way are used to evaluate the corrosion at bottom hole and
wellhead; i.e. pCO
2
at wellhead is assumed as corresponding to reservoir conditions.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 106 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Oversaturated Oil
The oil is considered oversaturated when the gas separates in the fluid because the pressure
of the system is lower than bubble point pressure. Two situations may arise:
Case A
FTHP <Pb
FBHP >Pb
Case B
FTHP <Pb
FBHP <Pb
Calculation Of Partial Pressure In Case A:
Calculation of pCO
2
in reservoir conditions:
FBHP >Pb pCO
2
is calculated in the same way as undersaturated oil wells earlier in this
section.
pCO
2
= Pb x Y(CO
2
)/100
where:
Pb = bubble point pressure at reservoir temperature
Y(CO
2
) = mole fraction in separated gas at bubble point pressure (from the PVTs)
pCO
2
= partial pressure of CO
2
[atm]
2
>0.2 atm.
Calculation Of PCO
2
At Wellhead:
pCO
2
= STHP x Y(CO
2
)/100
where:
pCO
2
2
[atm]
Y(CO
2
) = mole fraction in separated gas at STHP
(3)
2
>0.2 atm.
Note:
(3)
If the percentage (ppm) of CO2 in the gas under static conditions is not known, the
corresponding value in reservoir conditions is assumed as being partial pressure at the
wellhead.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 107 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Calculation Of Partial Pressure In Case B:
Calculation of pCO
2
at reservoir conditions:
pCO
2
= FBHP x Y(CO
2
)/100
where:
FBHP = flowing bottom-hole pressure [atm]
Y(CO
2
) = mole fraction in separated gas at pressure FBHP (from the PVTs)
pCO
2
2
[atm]
Calculation Of pCO
2
At Wellhead:
The calculation method is the same as the one used in the wellhead conditions in case A:
pCO
2
= STHP x Y(CO
2
)/100
where:
pCO
2
2
[atm]
Y(CO
2
) = mole fraction in separated gas at STHP
(4)
There is corrosion if pCO
2
>0.2 atm.
9.2.3. Corrosion Caused By H
2
S, CO
2
And Cl
-
It is possible to encounter H
2
S and CO
2
besides Cl
-
. In this case the problem is much more
complex and the choice of suitable material is more delicate. The phenomenon is diagnosed
by calculating the partial pressures of H
2
S and CO
2
and comparing them with the respective
thresholds.
Note:
(4)
If the percentage (ppm) of CO
2
in the gas under flowing/static conditions is not known,
the corresponding value in reservoir conditions is assumed as being partial pressure at
the wellhead.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 108 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
9.3. CORROSION CONTROL MEASURES
Corrosion control measures may involve the use of one or more of the following:
Cathodic protection
Chemical inhibition
Chemical control
Oxygen scavengers
Chemical sulphide scavengers
pH adjustment
Deposit control
Coatings
Non metallic materials or metallurgical
Control
Stress reduction
Elimination of sharp bends
Elimination of shock loads and vibration
Improved handling procedures
Corrosion allowances in design
Improved welding procedures
Organisation of repair operations.
Refer to table 9.a below.
Measure Means
Control of the environment pH
Temperature
Pressure
Chloride concentration
CO
2
concentration
H
2
S concentration
H
2
O concentration
Flow rate
Inhibitors
Surface treatment Plastic coating
Plating
Improvement of the corrosion resistivity of the
steel
Addition of the alloying elements micro structure
Table 9.A - Counter Measures to Prevent Corrosion
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 109 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
9.4. CORROSION INHIBITORS
An inhibitor is a substance which retards or slows down a chemical reaction. Thus, a
corrosion inhibitor is a substance which, when added to an environment, decreases the rate
of attack by the environmental on a metal.
Corrosion inhibitors are commonly added in small amounts to acids, cooling waters, steam or
other environments, either continuously or intermittently to prevent serious corrosion.
There are many techniques used to apply corrosion inhibitors in oil and gas wells:
Batch treatment (tubing displacement, standard batch, extended batch)
Continuous treatment
Squeeze treatment
Atomised inhibitor squeeze - weighted liquids
Capsules
Sticks.
9.5. CORROSION RESISTANCE OF STAINLESS STEELS
Stainless steel is usually used in applications for production tubing, however it is occasionally
used for production casing or tubing below the packer depth.
The main reason for the development of stainless steel is its resistance to corrosion. To be
classed as a stainless steel, an iron alloy usually must contain at least 12% chromium in
volume. The corrosion resistance of stainless steels is due to the ability of the chromium to
passivate the surface of the alloy.
Stainless steels may be divided into four distinct classes on the basis of their chemical
content, metallurgical structure and mechanical properties these are:
9.5.1. Martensitic Stainless Steels
The martensitic stainless steels contain chromium as their principal alloying element. The
most common types contain around 12% chromium, although some chromium content may
be as high as 18%.
The carbon content ranges from 0.08% to 1.10% and other elements such as nickel,
columbium, molybdenum, selenium, silicon, and sulphur are added in small amounts for
other properties in some grades.
The most important characteristic that distinguishes these steels from other grades is their
response to heat treatment. The martensitic stainless steels are hardened by the same heat
treatment procedures used to harden carbon and alloy steels.
The martensitic stainless steels are included in the 400 series of stainless steels. The most
commonly used of the martensitic stainless steels is AISI Type 410. The only grade of oilfield
tubular used in this category is 13Cr. As their name indicates, the microstructure of these
steels is martensitic. Stainless steels are strongly magnetic whatever the heat treatment
condition.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 110 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
9.5.2. Ferritic Stainless Steels
The second class of stainless steels, is the ferritic stainless steels, which are similar to the
martensitic stainless steels in that they have chromium as the principal alloying element. The
chromium contents of ferritic stainless steels is normally higher than that of the martensitic,
stainless steel, and the carbon content is generally lower.
The chromium content ranges between 13% to 27% but are not able to be hardened by heat
treatment. They are used principally for their temperature properties.
Ferritic stainless steels are also part of the 400 series, the principal types being 405, 430,
and 436.
The microstructure of the ferritic stainless steels consists of ferrite, which are also strongly
magnetic. Ferrite is simply body cantered cubic iron or an alloy based on this structure.
9.5.3. Austenitic Stainless Steels
The austenitic stainless steels have two principal alloying elements, chromium and nickel.
Their micro-structure consists essentially of austenite which is face cantered cubic iron or an
iron alloy based on this structure.
They contain a minimum of 18% chromium and 8% nickel, with other elements added for
particular reasons, and may range up to as high as 25% chromium and 20% nickel.
Austenitic stainless steels generally have the highest corrosion resistance of any of the
stainless steels, but their strength is lower than martensitic and ferritic stainless steels.
They are not able to be hardened by heat treatment although they are hardenable to some
extent by cold working and are generally non-magnetic.
Austenitic stainless steels are grouped in the 300 series, the most common being 304.
Others commonly used are 303 free machining, 316 high Cr and Ni which may include Mo,
and 347 stabilised for welding and corrosion resistance.
These steels are widely used in the oilfield for fittings and control lines, but due to its low
strength is not used for well tubulars.
9.5.4. Precipitation Hardening Stainless Steels
The most recent development in stainless steel is a general class known as precipitation
hardened stainless steels, which contain various amounts of chromium and nickel.
They combine the high strength of the martensitic stainless steels with the good corrosion
resistance properties of the austenitic stainless steels.
Most were developed as proprietary alloys, and there is a wide variety of compositions
available.
The distinguishing characteristic of the precipitation hardened stainless steel is that through
specific heat treatments at relatively low temperatures, the steels can be hardened to varying
strength levels.
Most can be formed and machined before the final heat treatment and the finished product
being hardened. Precipitation in alloys is analogous to precipitation as rain or snow.
These are most commonly used for component parts in downhole and surface tools and not
as oilfield tubulars. Refer to figure 9.b for the various compositions of stainless steels.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 111 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 9.B- Stainless Steel Compositions
9.5.5. Duplex Stainless Steel
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 112 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
In general, ferritic-austenitic (duplex) stainless steel consists of between 40-70% ferrite and
has a typical composition of 22% Cr-5.5% Ni-3% Mo-0.14% N.
The resulting steel has properties that are normally found in both phases: the ferrite promotes
increased yield strength and resistance to chloride and hydrogen sulphide corrosion cracking;
while the austenite phase improves workability and weldability.
This material is used extensively for tubulars used in severe CO
2
and H
2
S conditions.
As a general note, there is a large gap between the 13CR and Duplex Stainless Steels used
as tubulars for their good anti-corrosion properties. This gap is attempted to be filled with
Super 13CR tubing being developed.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 113 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
9.6. CASING FOR SOUR SERVICE
OCTG Materials For Corrosion By H
2
S Only In Oil Wells
Conditions Material Alternately
0.0035< pH
2
S max < 0.1 FBHT >80
o
C J55, K55, N80, C95, P110 L80-Mod, C90-1, T95-1
0.0035< pH
2
S max < 0.1 60
o
C< FBHT >80
o
C J55, K55, N80 L80-Mod, C90-1, T95-1
0.0035< pH
2
o
C L80 L80-Mod, C90-1, T95-1
pH
2
S max < 0.1 L80 Mod, C90-1, T95-1
OCTG Materials For Corrosion By H
2
S Only In Gas Wells
0.0035< pH
2
o
C J55, K55, N80-2, C95 L80-Mod, C90-1, T95-1
0.0035< pH
2
S max < 0.1 FBHT <80
o
C L80 L80-Mod, C90-1, T95-1
OCTG Materials For Corrosion By CO
2
And Cl
-
0.2< pCO
2
S max <100 FBHT <150
o
C Cl
-
<50,000 13% Cr
0.2< pCO
2
S max <100
150
o
C< FBHT <200
o
C
22% Cr
0.2< pCO
2
S max <100
200
o
C< FBHT <250
o
C
25% Cr-SA 25% Cr
OCTG Materials For Corrosion By CO
2
, H
2
S And Cl
-
0.2< pCO
2
S max <100e
0.0035< pH
2
S max < 0.005 FBHT <150
o
C Cl
-
<50,000
13% Cr-80KSI
Max
22% Cr
25% Cr
0.2< pCO
2
S max <100e
pH
2
S max <0.005
FBHT <200
o
C Cl
-
>50,000
22% Cr CW
25% Cr CW
0.2< pCO
2
S max <100e
0.0035< pH
2
S max <0.005
150
o
C< FBHT <200
o
C
Cl
-
<50,000
22% Cr
25% Cr
0.2< pCO
2
S max <100e
0.0035< pH
2
S max <0.005
200
o
C< FBHT <250
o
C
Cl
-
<50,000 25% Cr
0.2< pCO
2
S max <100e
0.0035< pH
2
S max <0.005
200
o
C< FBHT <250
o
C
Cl
-
>50,000 25% Cr CW
0.2< pCO
2
S max <100e
0.005< pH
2
S max <0.1
FBHT <250
o
C Cl
-
<20,000 25% Cr
pCO
2
S max <100e
0.005< pH
2
S max <0.1
FBHT <250
o
C Cl
-
<50,000 25% Cr CW
0.2< pCO
2
S max <100e
0.005< pH
2
S max <0.1
200
o
C< FBHT <250
o
C
Cl
-
<50,000 28% Cr
0.2< pCO
2
S max <100e
0.1< pH
2
S max <1
FBHT <200
o
C Cl
-
<50,000 22% Cr SA
22% Cr, 25% Cr
Incoloy 825
0.2< pCO
2
S max <100e
0.1< pH
2
S max <1
FBHT <250
o
C Cl
-
<50,000 25% Cr SA
28% Cr
Incoloy 825
0.2< pCO
2
S max <100e
0.1< pH
2
S max <1
FBHT <200
o
C Cl
-
>50,000 28% Cr Incoloy 825
0.2< pCO
2
S max <100e
pH
2
S max >1
28% Cr Incoloy 825
Table 9.B - OCTG Materials for Sour Service
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 114 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
9.7. ORDERING SPECIFICATIONS
When ordering tubulars for sour service, the following specifications should be included, in
addition to those given in the above table.
1) Downgraded grade N80, P105 or P110 tubulars are not acceptable for orders for J55 or
K55 casing.
2) The couplings must have the same heat treatment as the pipe body.
3) The pipe must be tested to the alternative test pressure (see API Bulletins 5A and 5AC).
4) Cold die stamping is prohibited, all markings must be paint stencilled or hot die
stamped.
5) Three copies of the report providing the ladle analysis of each heat used in the
manufacture of the goods shipped, together with all the check analyses performed,
must be submitted.
6) Three copies of a report showing the physical properties of the goods supplied and the
results of hardness tests (Refer to step 3 above) must be submitted.
7) Shell modified API thread compound must be used.
Note: Recommendations for casing to be used for sour service must be
specified according to the API 5CT for restricted yield strength casings.
The casing should also meet the following criteria:
The steel used in the manufacture of the casing should have been quenched and
tempered. (This treatment is superior to tubulars heated/treated by other methods
e.g. normalising and tempering).
All sour service casing should be inspected using non-destructive testing or
impact tests only, as per API Specification 5CT.
9.8. COMPANY DESIGN PROCEDURE
9.8.1. CO
2
Corrosion
The following guidelines should be used for the appropriate corrosive environment.
In exploration wells, generally the presence of CO
2
in the formation causes little
problems, and will have no influence on material selection for the casing.
In producing wells, the presence of CO
2
may lead to corrosion on those parts
coming in contact with CO
2
which normally means the production tubing and part
of the production casing below the packer.
Corrosion may be limited by:
The selection of high alloy chromium steels, resistant to corrosion.
Inhibitor injection, if using carbon steel casing. Generally, wells producing CO
2
partial pressure higher than 20psi requires inhibition to limit corrosion.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 115 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
9.8.2. H
2
S Corrosion
In exploration wells, if there is high probability of encountering H
2
S, consideration should
be given to limit casing and wellhead yield strength according to API 5CT and NACE
standard MR-01-75.
In producing wells, casing and tubing material will be selected according to the amount
of H
2
S and other corrosive media present.
Refer to figure 9.c and figure 9.d for partial pressure limits.
Figure 9.C - Sour Gas Systems
Figure 9.D - Sour Multiphase Systems
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 116 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 9.E - Sumitomo Metals
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 117 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Application
(Refer to figure 9.e)
Domain Material
SM
Designation
Notes
Mild Environment Domain A API J 55
N 80
P 110
(Q 125)
SM 95G
SM 125G
Cracking (medium pressure
and temperature)
Domain B Cr or Cr Mo Steel
API L 80
C 90
T 95
SM 80S
SM 90S
SM 95S
Cracking (high pressure and
temperature)
Domain C 1Cr 0.5Mo Steel
Modified AISI 4130
SM 85SS
SM 90SS
SM C100
SM C110
Higher yield
strength for sour
service
Wet CO
2
Corrosion Domain D 9Cr 1Mo Steel SM 9CR 75
SM 9CR 80
SM 9CR 95
Quenched and
tempered
13Cr Steel
Modified AISI 420
SM 13CR 75
SM 13CR 80
SM 13CR 95
Quenched and
tempered
Wet CO
2
with a little H
2
S
Corrosion
Domain E 22Cr 5Ni 3Mo Steel
25Cr 6Ni 3Mo Steel
SM 22CR 65*
SM 22CR 110**
SM 22CR 125**
SM 25CR 75*
SM 25CR 110**
SM 25CR 125**
SM 25CR 140**
Duplex phase
Stainless steels
* Solution Treated
** Cold drawn
Wet CO
2
with H
2
S Corrosion Domain F 25C -35Ni 3Mo Steel
22Cr 42N -3Mo Steel
20Cr 35Ni 5Mo Steel
SM 2535-110
SM 2535-125
SM 2242-110
SM 2242-125
SM 2035-110
SM 2035-125
As cold drawn
Most Corrosive Environment Domain G 25Cr 50Ni 6Mo Steel
SM 2550-110
SM 2550-125
SM 2550-140
SM 2060-110***
SM 2060-125***
SM 2060-140***
SM 2060-155***
SM C276-110***
SM C276-125***
SM C276-140***
As cold drawn
*** Environment
with free
Sulphur
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 118 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
10. TEMPERATURE EFFECTS
10.1. HIGH TEMPERATURE SERVICE
For deep wells, reduction in yield strength must be considered due to the effect on steel by
the temperature.
It no information is available on temperature gradients in the area, a gradient of 3C/100m is
to be used.
Use the values in figure .a10.a for reduction in yield strength.
where:
K
0.2
= Yield strength as per ISO normative with permanent deformation of 0.2%.
Figure .A10.A - Temperature Effects
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 119 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
10.2. LOW TEMPERATURE SERVICE
Operations at low temperatures require tubulars made from steel with high ductility at low
temperatures to prevent brittle failures during transport and handling.
(Refer to figure 10.b below)
Figure 10.B - Arctic Service
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 120 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
11. LOAD CONDITIONS
When running casing, shock loads are exerted on the pipe due to:
Sudden deceleration forces (e.g.: if the spider accidentally closes or the slips are
kicked-in when the pipe is moving or the pipe hits a bridge).
Sudden acceleration forces (e.g.: picking the pipe out of the slips or if the casing
momentarily hangs up on a ledge then freed).
Either of the above will cause a stress wave to be created which will travel through the casing
at the speed of sound.
This effect is quantified as follows:
SL = 150 x V x Af
where:
SL = Shock load (lbs x ins
2
)
V = Peak velocity when running (ins/sec)
Af = Cross-sectional area (ins
2
)
150 = Speed of sound in steel (lbs x sec/ins)
11.1. SAFE ALLOWABLE TENSILE LOAD
A safe allowable pull on the pipe should be calculated, stipulated during the casing string
design process and specified in the Geological Drilling Programme or communicated to the
well site prior to running casing. This is particularly important when reciprocating pipe during
the cementing procedure.
The application of the pulling load should only be considered as an emergency measure to
retrieve the casing string from the wellbore. It is normal to incorporate an overpull contingency
of 100,000lbs (45tons over the weight of the string in the mud as part of the casing string
design).
11.2. CEMENTING CONSIDERATIONS
11.2.1. Casing Support
The cement sheath can protect the casing against several types of potential downhole
damage including:
Deformation through perforating gun detonations.
Formation movement, salt flows, etc. (Refer to previous section 8.7).
The loss of the bottom joint on surface or intermediate strings during drilling.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 121 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
However, the following aspects also need to be noted:
Adding resistance to casing collapse for design purposes is questionable.
In fault slippage zones, doglegs and certain sand control failures, the cement
sheath may contribute to problems.
11.2.2. Cementing Loads
As a cement slurry is pumped into the casing, the weight indicator increases to a maximum
when mud has been displaced from the casing by the full amount of cement.
The maximum weight of the string occurs when the cement reaches the casing shoe or when
the top cement plug is released.
This weight increase can approach the remaining allowable pull margin of the string. If
reciprocation is contemplated, this remaining margin may be so small to prevent
reciprocation and, hence stretching of the pipe. After considering this issue, the design
engineer may decide that a higher allowable pull contingency is required.
For design calculation, the worst case situation is assumed as follows:
The mud weight in the annulus is the lowest planned for the section.
The inside of the casing is full of cement slurry, with mud above.
The shoe instantaneously plugs off just as the cement reaches it and the
pressure rises to a value of approximately 1,000psi before the pumps are able to
be shut down.
The load in this situation is calculated as follows:
CCL = [(Cw - Mw) x D + 1,000] x Ai
where:
CCL = Cementing contribution load (lbs)
Cw = Cement weight (psi/ft)
Mw = Outside mud weight (psi/ft)
D = Length over which Cw & Mw act(ft)
Ai = Internal area of casing (ins
2
)
1,000 = Pressure increment (psi)
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 122 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
11.3. PRESSURE TESTING
Casing pressure tests will be carried out according to the pressure stated in the drilling
programme. The leading criteria for pressure testing will be the maximum anticipated
wellhead pressure.
In all cases the test pressure will be no higher than 70% of API minimum internal yield
pressure of the weakest casing in the string or to 70% of the BOP WP.
When establishing an internal casing pressure test, the differential pressure due to a
difference in fluid level and/or fluid density, inside and outside the casing, shall be taken into
account.
Consideration should be taken on the maximum allowable tensile strength of the casing
thread considering the relevant tensile design factor.
Each casing shall be pressure tested at the following times:
When cement plug bumps on bottom with a pressure stated in the drilling
programme.
When testing blind/shear rams of the BOP stack against the casing.
After having drilled out a DV collar.
A cemented liner overlap will be positively tested applying a pressure greater than the lea-off
pressure of the previous casing. If there is any doubt, an inflow test could be carried out, with
a sufficient drawdown to test the liner top to the most severe negative differential pressure
that will exist during the life of the well.
The test pressure shall be held and remain stable for at least 10-15 mins
The test pressure and method for each well are determined on an individual basis and shall
be included in the Geological and Drilling Programme.
11.4. BUCKLING AND COMPRESSIVE LOADING
The following buckling and compressive loads must also be considered.
11.4.1. Buckling
Buckling is a failure of stability which can occur at stress levels well below the yield stress of
the material. Buckling cannot occur where the casing is supported by cement.
Factors responsible for buckling and the degree of buckling are:
Length of casing, supported by cement.
Hole size and degree of washout.
Tensile loads on the casing string.
Changed pressure conditions across the pipe.
Temperature increases downhole.
All these factors are interrelated but the first three are generally considered major contributors
to buckling, while temperature and pressure changes are primarily the mechanisms that
cause the initial buckling.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 123 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
A buckling potential may exist in the uncemented portion of a string of casing, if the:
Internal mud density is increased.
Internal surface pressure is increased.
Annular fluid removed or its density reduced.
Casing is landed with less than full hanging weight.
Temperature of the casing increases.
Buckling of long, uncemented portions of the casing string, in vertical wells, can be prevented
by:
Cementing the casing up above the neutral point.
Pre-tensioning the casing after landing.
Limiting the increase in mud density used after drilling out the casing.
Rigidly centralising the casing below the neutral point.
Provided that all casing strings can be landed with full hanging weight, the buckling calculation
is only required on the small percentage of deep vertical wells in which the mud density is to
be raised during the drilling of the next open hole section. Thus, for the majority of wells,
buckling is not a major design problem.
11.4.2. Compressive Loads
Compressive loads can occur in casing strings as a result of:
Landing inner strings within or on top of an outer string.
Restricting length changes that would occur as the result of increasing downhole
temperatures. This condition occurs when casing strings are anchored firmly at
both ends with an unsupported interval between.
In most well designs, the total compressive load is the buoyant load of the intermediate
casings, the tubing to production packer overpull and the weight of the wellhead. This
compressive load is carried by the outer casing string. This outer casing is usually the
conductor or surface casing.
When discussing compressive loads it is convenient to consider three types of well where:
a) The wellhead is at ground level or at the seabed.
b) The wellhead is above seabed (i.e.: platform wells).
c) The mudline suspension takes the weight of the casing at the seabed, but the
wellhead is above seabed.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 124 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Wellhead at Ground Level or at Seabed
When the surface casing (i.e.: 20ins or 18
5
/
8
ins) is cemented to the surface or seabed it can
be considered as a rigid foundation capable of carrying the total buoyant weight of the inner
strings, the wellhead and any tubing to packer load.
If the surface casing is not cemented to surface the uncemented portion will compress in the
elastic manner until either the yield is exceeded or buckling occurs (if the unsupported length
exceeds a critical length). From this, it is obvious that surface casing should and must be
cemented to surface. The surface casing string must be designed to carry the compressive
loads placed upon it.
No compressive load is carried by the inner strings.
Buckling may be ignored if the surface casing is completely cemented to the base of the
wellhead.
Wellhead above Sea Level (Platform Wells, No Mudline Suspension)
Compressive loads in surface strings on wells in which the wellheads is above sea level, can
lead to buckling in the free-standing portion of the well.
To prevent buckling, every joint of the surface casing must be centralised within the previous
string (usually a free standing 30ins or 26ins string) or restrained by a wellhead jacket.
The surface casing must be designed for compression loads as outlined in a) above. For
every new platform, a full structural analysis should be commissioned. This analysis must
assess the adequacy of the conductor/surface casing design for buckling resistance.
Mudline Suspension
In this case, the weight of the casing strings is taken at the seabed. The surface casing must
be designed and cemented as outlined in a) above.
The tieback strings above the mudline suspension hanger may be subject to some degree of
buckling.
Most wellhead hook-ups can be safely supported on a 20ins x 133lbs/ft casing string in water
depths up to 300ft (92m). However, if buckling may be suspected to occur in the tied back
surface string a full structural analysis should be commissioned. The structural analysis may
be carried out by companies involved in the supply of conductors.
The analysis is in effect a Riser Tensioner Analysis as is evaluated for semi-submersibles
and it takes into account the effect of waves, current and the weight of the pipe in the free
standing mode.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 125 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Compressive Loads Due to Temperature
Temperature rises in the uncemented portion of a casing string will give rise to axially
compressive forces in the string, if the casing is constrained. However, the compressive
forces will relieve the tensional forces in the casing and need not be considered in the design
unless buckling occurs.
Therefore, except in extreme cases such as thermal recovery wells, temperature loads need
only be assessed in casing strings on which buckling may occur and need only be treated in
this context.
Decrease in Temperature
a) Drilling Phase:
It is highly unlikely that any routine operation (other than extensive reverse circulation)
will cause a long term temperature decrease in the uncemented portion of a casing
string, thus, no loading applies.
b) Production Phase:
Temperature induced stresses are of no consequence in the outer strings of casing
and attention need only be paid to the production string.
Producers are normally subjected to temperature increases under operating conditions
and the compressive load induced should be treated in the context of buckling.
The tensile loads induced by cooling in high volume injection wells, or in producers
during high volume stimulation treatments or emergency squeeze kills, must be taken
into account.
It should be added to the axial load and included in the design load if the occurrence of
such loading is anticipated
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 126 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
12. PRESSURE RATING OF BOP EQUIPMENT
This section includes design criteria for BOP equipment which are extracted from the Well
Control Policy Manual.
The prime considerations, when selecting and procuring pressure control equipment, are the
safety of the personnel, rig and maintaining the integrity of the wellbore. In order to assure this
safety requirement, several factors need to be considered.
Note: It should be realised that each drilling area may have local regulations
unique to that particular area which exceed the general requirements
stated in this section, or indeed the Eni-Agip Well Control Policy Manual.
In addition, the various operating companies and their contractors may
also vary from these general requirements, if dictated by individual
company policy and philosophy providing they are not less stringent than
described herein.
The anticipated formation pressure is the governing parameter which dictates the casing
depth, casing selection, BOP selection and pressure rating of the BOP equipment as
described previously in section 2.
The weakest element within any pressure control system determines the maximum pressure
that can be safely controlled.
Individual elements of the pressure control system may exceed the assembly WP, and
under no circumstances should components be used which are less than the
assembly WP. For instance, a 10,000psi choke may be rigged up with a 2,000psi BOP stack
in anticipation of its later use when the 10,000psi BOP stack is nippled up for a subsequent
string of casing.
The equipment in the well control system which has the lowest pressure rating will set the
rating for entire system e.g. 2,000psi stack and 10,000psi choke manifold would be rated to
only 2,000psi WP.
Since the well control system must be able to contain any anticipated formation pressures
that may be encountered, the maximum anticipated surface pressures must first be
calculated.
Many different methods are available to determine the maximum casing pressures which may
be encountered during a kick as described in section 2.
12.1. BOP SELECTION CRITERIA
Blow-out preventer equipment configurations shall consist of an annular preventer and a
specified number of ram type preventers.
The working pressure of any blow-out preventer shall exceed the maximum anticipated
surface pressure to which it may be subjected.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 127 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
The graph illustrated in the attached figure 12.a has been prepared to enable the first
approximation of the BOP rating necessary for use in drilling an exploration well. To use the
graph, the setting depths of the various casings and the relative pore pressure gradients must
be found or determined during the design phase.
The co-ordinates in the graph are depth and pressure and comprises two groups of lines
respectively, one representing the BOPs to be used while drilling and the other the BOPs to
be used during well testing.
Each group outlines the different solutions available to the various pore pressure gradients.
Example: The casing program assumes that a well test will be carried out at the shoe of 7
casing. From the diagram shown in table 12.a, the maximum test, drilling
pressure values and the size of BOP to be used should be obtained which is
given in table 12.a below.
Casing
(ins)
Shoe
Depth
(m)
Overburden
Gradient
(kg/cm
2
/10m)
Pore Press.
Gradient
(kg/cm
2
/10m)
Fracture
Gradient
(kg/cm
2
/10m)
BOP
Drilling
(psi)
Size
Production
Test (psi)
20 750 2.23 1.03 1.83 2,000 /
13
3
/
8
2.620 2.36 1.30 2.01 5,000 /
9
5
/
8
4.200 2.42 1.70 2.18 10,000 /
7 4.830 2.43 2.00 2.29 / 15,000
Table 12.A - BOP Selection Example Data
The maximum theoretical stress possible at the casing head, Pmax, occurs when the well is
full of gas and the fracture pressure has been reached at the shoe of the last casing run.
This pressure is:
) (Kg/cm ) D - G (
10
H
Pmax
2
g r
where:
H = Casing shoe depth (m)
G
f
= Fracture gradient of the casing shoe (kg/cm
2
/10m)
D
g
= Gas density, assumed = 0.3(kg/dm
3
)
In the case of a well test, this pressure roughly corresponds to the limit value required for
pumping gas into the formation and is thus actually attainable in practice.
This hypothesis however is completely unrealistic in the drilling design, for which 60% of the
pressure Pmax will be used as limit value according to company policy in burst design
criteria, section 8.1. This value is also adopted by many other companies as the realistic
criterion of choice.
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 128 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Figure 12.A - BOP Selection Example
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 129 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
12.2. KICK TOLERANCE
Kick tolerance is the term used to define the maximum kick volume which can be safely
controlled by any well control method with constant BHP without fracturing the formation
below the last casing shoe.
The most dangerous situation is when the top of the kick reaches the casing shoe. This is
calculated with the following formula:
( )
10
H G H G H G
P
m m i i p
top
+
P
top
< P
fr
( )
10
x
10
x
x
10
x
H G H G H H H G
P
s fr i i
i s m
P

( ) [ ]
i m
P m m f r S
i
G G
P 10 H G G G H
H
V
shoe
= C
a
x H
i
V1 x P1 = P2 X V2
V1
bottom
x P
p
= V
shoe
x P
fr
where:
C
a
= Annular capacity below the shoe, m
H = Total depth, m
H
i
= Height of influx, m
H
S
= Shoe Depth
G
fr
= Formation fracture gradient at shoe, kg/cm
2
/10m
G
m
= Mud weight, kg/ltr
P
P
= Formation pressure at total depth, kg/cm
2
G
i
= Density of the influx
P
top
= Top Influx Pressure
G
p
= Pore gradient
H
m
= Hight of the mud below the influx
P
fr
= Fracture pressure
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 130 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Appendix A - ABBREVIATIONS
API American Petroleum Institute
BG Background gas
BHA Bottom Hole Assembly
BHP Bottom Hole Pressure
BHT Bottom hole temperature
BOP Blow Out Preventer
BPD Barrel Per Day
BPM Barrels Per Minute
BSW Base Sediment and Water
BUR Build Up Rate
BWOC By Weight Of Cement
BWOW By Weight Of Water
CBL Cement Bond Log
CCD Centre to Centre Distance
CCL Casing Collar Locator
CET Cement Evaluation Tool
CGR Condensate Gas Ratio
CP Conductor Pipe
CRA Corrosion Resistant Alloy
CW Current Well
DC Drill Collar
DHM Down Hole Motor
DLP Dog Leg Potential
DLS Dog Leg Severity
D&CM Drilling & Completion Manager
DOB Diesel Oil Bentonite
DOBC Diesel Oil Bentonite Cement
DOR Drop Off Rate
DP Drill Pipe
DST Drill Stem Test
DV DV Collar
ECD Equivalent Circulation Density
ECP External Casing Packer
EMS Electronic Multi Shot
EMW Equivalent Mud Weight
EOC End Of Curvature
ESD Electric Shut-Down System
ESP Electrical Submersible Pump
FBHP Flowing Bottom Hole Pressure
FBHT Flowing Bottom Hole Temperature
FPI/BO Free Point Indicator / Back Off
FTHP Flowing Tubing Head Pressure
FTHT Flowing Tubing Head Temperature
GLR Gas Liquid Ratio
GMS Gyro Multi Shot
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 131 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
GOC Gas Oil Contact
GOR Gas Oil Ratio
GPM Gallon (US) per Minute
GPS Global Positioning System
GR Gamma Ray
GSS Gyro Single Shot
HAZOP Hazard and Operability
HHP Hydraulic Horsepower
HP/HT High Pressure - High Temperature
HW/HWDP Heavy Weight Drill Pipe
IADC International Drilling Contractor
ID Inside Diameter
IPR Inflow Performance Relationship
JAM Joint Make-up Torque Analyser
KMW Kill mud weight
KOP Kick Off Point
LAT Lowest Astronomical Tide
LCM Lost Circulation Materials
LCP Lower Circulation Position (GP)
LEL Lower Explosive Limit
LOT Leak Off Test
LQC Log Quality Control
LWD Log While Drilling
MAASP Max Allowable Annular Surface Pressure
MD Measured Depth
MLS Mudline Suspension
MMS Magnetic Multi Shot
MODU Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit
MOP Margin of Overpull
MPI Magnetic Particle Inspection
MSL Mean Sea Level
MSS Magnetic Single Shot
MW Mud Weight
MWD Measurement While Drilling
NACE National Association of Corrosion Engineers
NDT Non Destructive Test
NMDC Non Magnetic Drill Collar
NSG North Seeking Gyro
NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Unit
OBM Oil Based Mud
OD Outside Diameter
OH Open Hole
OIM Offshore Installation Manager
OMW Original Mud weight
ORP Origin Reference Point
OWC Oil Water Contact
P&A Plugged & Abandoned
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 132 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
PBR Polished Bore Receptacle
PCG Pipe Connection Gas
PDC Polycrystalline Diamond Cutter
PDM Positive Displacement Motor
PGB Permanent Guide Base
PI Productivity Index
PLT Production Logging Tool
ppb Pounds per Barrel
ppg Pounds per Gallon
ppm Part Per Million
PV Plastic Viscosity
PVT Pressure Volume Temperature
Q Flow Rate
Q/A Q/C Quality Assurance, Quality Control
RFT Repeat Formation Test
RKB Rotary Kelly Bushing
ROE Radius of Exposure
ROP Rate Of Penetration
ROU Radios Of Uncertainty
ROV Remote Operated Vehicle
RPM Revolutions Per Minute
RT Rotary Table
S (HDT) High Resolution Dipmeter
S/N Serial Number
SBHP Static Bottom-hole Pressure
SBHT Static Bottom-hole Temperature
SCC Stress Corrosion Cracking
SD Separation Distance
SDE Senior Drilling Engineer
SF Safety Factor
SG Specific Gravity
SICP Shut-in Casing Pressure
SIDPP Shut-in Drill Pipe Pressure
SPM Stroke per Minute
SR Separation Ratio
SRG Surface Readout Gyro
SSC Sulphide Stress Cracking
STG Short trip gas
TCP Tubing Conveyed Perforations
TD Total Depth
TGB Temporary Guide Base
TOC Top of Cement
TOL Top of Liner
TVD True Vertical Depth
TW Target Well
UAR Uncertainty Area Ratio
UR Under Reamer
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 133 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
VBR Variable Bore Rams (BOP)
VDL Variable Density Log
VSP Velocity Seismic Profile
W/L Wire Line
WBM Water Base Mud
WC Water Cut
WL Water Loss
WOB Weight On Bit
WOC Wait On Cement
WOW Wait On Weather
WP Working Pressure
YP Yield Point
A RPO
ENI S.p.A.
Agi p Di vi si on
IDENTIFICATION CODE
PAGE 134 OF 134
REVISION
STAP-P-1-M-6110 0
Appendix B - BIBLIOGRAPHY
Document: STAP Number
Drilling Procedures Manual STAP-P-1-M-6140
Drilling Design Manual STAP-P-1-M-6100
Overpressure Manual STAP-P-1-M-6130
Drilling Fluids Manual STAP-P-1-M-6160
Well Control Policy Manual STAP-P-1-M-6150
API Specification 5C
Holmquist & Nadai
Shell (Bol, 1985)
NACE Standard MR-01-75
Sumitomo Metals Literature

ENI - Casing Design Manual

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENI - Casing Design Manual

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A RPO

ENI S.p .A.

Weight in mud of casing = 274 x 0.859 = 235t

You might also like