Casing Design Example

PETE 411
Well Drilling
Lesson 18
Casing Design Example
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 1 of 42

Example Problem
API Design Factors
Worst Possible Conditions
Effect of Axial Tension on Collapse Strength
Iteration and Interpolation
Design for Burst, Collapse and Tension
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 2 of 42
Read:
Applied Drilling Engineering, Ch.7
HW #9 - Velocity Profiles
Due 10-15-2001
PETE 411 Lessons can be found at:
http://pumpjack.tamu.edu/~juvkam-wold/
Multimedia Programs can be found at:
Network Neighborhood juvkam-wold/Super Pentium
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 3 of 42

Design a 9 5/8-in., 8,000-ft combination
casing string for a well where the mud wt.
will be 12.5 ppg and the formation pore
pressure is expected to be 6,000 psi.
Only the grades and weights shown are
available (N-80, all weights). Use API
design factors.
Design for worst possible conditions.
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 4 of 42
Casing Design - Solution

Before solving this problem is it necessary to
understand what we mean by Design Factors
and worst possible conditions.
API Design Factors

Design factors are essentially safety
factors that allow us to design safe, reliable
casing strings. Each operator may have his
own set of design factors, based on his
experience, and the condition of the pipe.
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 5 of 42
Casing Design
In PETE 411, well use the design factors
recommended by the API unless otherwise
specified.
These are the API design Factors:

Tension and Joint Strength:
NT = 1.8
Collapse (from external pressure): Nc= 1.125

Burst (from internal pressure):
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Ni = 1.1
Slide 6 of 42
Casing Design
What this means is that, for example, if we
need to design a string where the maximum
tensile force is expected to be 100,000 lbf,
we select pipe that can handle 100,000 * 1.8
= 180,000 lbf in tension.
Note that the Halliburton Cementing Tables
list actual pipe strengths, without safety
factors built in.
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 7 of 42
Casing Design
Unless otherwise specified in a particular
problem, we shall also assume the following:
Worst Possible Conditions
1. For Collapse design, assume that the
casing is empty on the inside (p = 0 psig)
2. For Burst design, assume no backup
fluid on the outside of the casing (p = 0 psig)
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 8 of 42
Casing Design
Worst Possible Conditions, contd
3. For Tension design,
assume no buoyancy effect
4. For Collapse design,
assume no buoyancy effect
The casing string must be designed to stand up to the
expected conditions in burst, collapse and tension.
Above conditions are quite conservative. They are also
simplified for easier understanding of the basic concepts.
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 9 of 42

Burst Requirements (based on the expected pore
PB pore pressure * Design Factor
6,000 psi *1.1
PB 6,600 psi
Depth
pressure)
Pressure
The whole casing string must be capable of

withstanding this internal pressure without failing in
burst.
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 10 of 42

Collapse Requirements
For collapse design, we start at the bottom
of the string and work our way up.
Our design criteria will be based on
hydrostatic pressure resulting from the 12.5
ppg mud that will be in the hole when the
casing string is run, prior to cementing.
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 11 of 42
Depth
Casing Design
Collapse Requirements, contd
Pressure
Pc 0.052 * mud weight * depth * design factor

0.052 * 12.5 * 8,000 * 1.125
Pc 5,850 psi req' d at the bottom.
Further up the hole the collapse requiremen ts
are less severe
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 12 of 42
Casing Design
Reqd: Burst: 6,600 psi
18. Casing Design
Collapse: 5,850 psi
PETE 411 Well
Slide 13 of 42
Casing Design
Note that two of the weights of N-80 casing
meet the burst requirements, but only the
53.5 #/ft pipe can handle the collapse
requirement at the bottom of the hole (5,850
psi).
The 53.5 #/ft pipe could probably run all the
way to the surface (would still have to check
tension), but there may be a lower cost
alternative.
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 14 of 42
To what depth might we

be able to run N-80, 47
#/ft? The maximum
annular pressure that this
pipe may be exposed to,
is:
Depth
Casing Design
Pressure
Collapse pressure of pipe 4,760

Pc
4,231 psi
design factor
1.125
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 15 of 42
Casing Design
First Iteration
At what depth do we see this pressure (4,231
psig) in a column of 12.5 #/gal mud?
Pc 0.052 *12.5 * h1
Pc
4,231
h1
6,509 ft
0.052 *12.5 0.052 *12.5
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 16 of 42
Casing Design
This is the depth to which the pipe
could be run if there were
no axial stress in the pipe
6,509
8,000
But at 6,509 we have (8,000 - 6,509) =

1,491 of 53.5 #/ft pipe below us.
The weight of this pipe will reduce the
collapse resistance of the 47.0 #/ft pipe!
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 17 of 42
Casing Design
Weight, W1 = 53.5 #/ft * 1,491 ft
= 79,769 lbf
This weight results in an axial
stress in the 47 #/ft pipe
weight
79,769 lbf
of S1
5,877 psi
2
end area 13.572 in
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 18 of 42
Casing Design
The API tables show that the above
stress will reduce the collapse resistance
from 4,760 to somewhere between
4,680 psi (with 5,000 psi stress)
and 4,600 psi (with 10,000 psi stress)
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 19 of 42
Casing Design
Interpolation between these values shows
that the collapse resistance at 5,877 psi
axial stress is:
S S1
Pc1 P1
S 2 S1
P1 P2
(5,877 5,000)
Pc1 4,680
* (4,680 4,600) 4,666 psi
(10,000 5,000)
With the design factor,

18. Casing Design
4,666
Pcc1
4,148 psi
1.125
PETE 411 Well
Slide 20 of 42
Casing Design
This (4,148 psig) is the pressure at a
depth
4,148
h2
6,382 ft
0.052 * 12.5
Which differs considerably from the

initial depth of 6,509 ft, so a second
iteration is required.
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 21 of 42
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 22 of 42
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 23 of 42
Casing Design
Second Iteration
Now consider running the 47 #/ft
pipe to the new depth of 6,382 ft.
W2 (8,000 6,382) * 53.5 86,563 lbf
86,563 lbf
S2
6,378 psi
2
13.572 in
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 24 of 42
Casing Design
Interpolating again,
S S1
1
Pc1
P1
D.F.
S 2 S1
pcc 2
P1 P2
1
6,378 5000

* 4,680 4,600 4,140 psi

4,680
1.125
5000
This is the pressure at a depth of

4,140
h3
6,369 ft
0.052 *12.5
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 25 of 42
Casing Design
This is within 13 ft of the assumed value. If
more accuracy is desired (generally not
needed), proceed with the:
Third Iteration
h3 6,369'
W3 (8,000 6,369 ) * 53.5 87,259 lbf
87,259
S3
6,429 psi
13.572
Pcc3 = ?
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 26 of 42
Casing Design
Third Iteration, contd
1
6,429 5,000
thus Pcc 3
* (4,680 4,600)
4,680
1.125
5,000
4,140 psi Pcc 2
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 27 of 42
Casing Design
Third Iteration, contd
This is the answer we are looking for, i.e.,
we can run 47 #/ft N-80 pipe to a depth of
6,369 ft, and 53.5 #/ft pipe between 6,369
and 8,000 ft.
Perhaps this string will run all the way to the
surface (check tension), or perhaps an even
more economical string would include some
43.5 #/ft pipe?
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 28 of 42
Casing Design
At some depth the 43.5 #/ft pipe would be
able to handle the collapse requirements,
but we have already determined that it will
not meet burst requirements.
NO!
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 29 of 42
N-80
43.5 #/ft?
Depth = 5,057?
5,066?
5,210?
N-80
47.0 #/ft
N-80
53.5 #/ft
Depth = 6,369
6,369
6,382
6,509
8,000
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 30 of 42
Tension Check
The weight on the top joint of casing
would be
(6,369 ft * 47.0# / ft ) (1,631 ft * 53.5# / ft )
386,602 lbs actual weight
With a design factor of 1.8 for tension, a

pipe strength of
1.8 * 386,602 695,080 lbf is required
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 31 of 42
Tension Check
The Halliburton cementing tables give a
yield strength of 1,086,000 lbf for the pipe
body and a joint strength of 905,000 lbf for
LT & C.
47.0 # / ft is OK to surface
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 32 of 42
Casing Design Review

We have 4 different weights of casing
available to us in this case:
1. Two of the four weights are unacceptable
to us everywhere in the string because
they do not satisfy the burst
requirements.
2. Only the N-80, 53.5 #/ft pipe is capable of
withstanding the collapse requirements
at the bottom of the string
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 33 of 42

3. Since the 53.5 #/ft pipe is the most
expensive, we want to use as little of it
as possible, so we want to use as
much 47.0 #/ft pipe as possible.
4. Dont forget to check to make sure the
tension requirements are met; both for
pipe body, and for threads and
couplings
(T&C).
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 34 of 42

The collapse resistance of N-80, 47 #/ft will
determine to what depth it can be run. Two
factors will reduce this depth:
Design Factor
Axial Stress (tension)
Halliburton collapse resistance: 4,760 psi
Apply design factor: 4,760 4,231 psi
1.125
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 35 of 42

To determine the effect of axial stress
requires an iterative process:
1. Determine the depth capability without
axial stress
4,231
depth
6,509 ft
0.052 * 12.5
2. Determine axial stress at this point

18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 36 of 42

3. Determine corresponding collapse resistance
4. Determine depth where this pressure exists
5. Compare with previous depth estimate
6. Repeat steps 2-6 using the new depth
estimate
7. When depths agree, accept answer
(typically 2-4 iterations) (agreement to
within 30 ft will be satisfactory)
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 37 of 42
Linear Interpolation
y mx c
P mS C
(i)
P1 mS1 C
(ii)
P2 mS2 C
(iii)
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 38 of 42
(iii) (ii)
(i ) (ii )
P2 P1 m(S2 S1 )
P2 P1
m
S 2 S1
P2 P1
( S S1 )
P P1 m( S S1 )
S 2 S1
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 39 of 42
S S1
P2 P1
P P1
S2 S1
With design factor:
S S1
1
P1 P2
Pcc
P1
D.F.
S2 S1
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 40 of 42
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 41 of 42
18. Casing Design
PETE 411 Well
Slide 42 of 42

Casing Design Example

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

Casing Design Example

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PETE 411

PETE 411 Well