Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Finite Element Analysis Couples Casing and Cement Designs for HP/HT Wells in
East Texas
J. Heathman, Halliburton, and F.E. Beck, Gastar Exploration
Copyright 2006, IADC/SPE Drilling Conference
This paper was prepared for presentation at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference held in Miami,
Florida, U.S.A., 2123 February 2006.
This paper was selected for presentation by an IADC/SPE Program Committee following
review of information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the
paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the International Association of Drilling
Contractors or Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s).
The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the IADC, SPE, their
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the International Association of Drilling
Contractors and Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print
is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The
abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was
presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A.,
fax 1.972.952.9435.
Abstract
Wells drilled into the deep Bossier formations of the east
Texas Hilltop Field encounter low-permeability, gas-bearing
formations at over 15,000-psi pressure and 400F
temperatures. The wells require high-pressure fracture
stimulations and extreme production drawdown to produce at
economic rates. Wellbore temperature variations occurring
between stimulation and production operations are extreme.
The gases in these formations are also highly corrosive. Two
of the first three wells completed in this area failed from
casing collapse during completion operations or within the
first few weeks of production.
Finite element analysis (FEA) modeling coupled with logderived formation properties confirmed that the extreme
stresses applied to these wells rendered previous casings and
cement sheaths under-designed. Using an approach that
combined formation, casing, and cement mechanical
properties into a system, the wells were redesigned. Detailed
thermal and mechanical modeling of all wellbore operations
resulted in redesigned casings and a cement sheath more
applicable to the extreme loads being exerted. Minor changes
were also implemented to the job placement procedures to
lessen the loads placed on the cement sheath.
High-strength, corrosion-resistant casings and specialty
cement designs were successfully used on the first two wells.
Since those wells have been on production, additional wells
have been drilled and completed using incrementallysimplified designs. All the wells have withstood multiple
stimulations at treating pressures exceeding 14,000 psi,
production test drawdowns at the perforations of over 13,000
psi, and temperature changes estimated at more than 300F.
The wells have withstood these extreme pressure and
temperature changes without failure of either the casing or
cement sheath.
IADC/SPE 98869
IADC/SPE 98869
IADC/SPE 98869
IADC/SPE 98869
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the management of Halliburton and First
Source Gas, LP, and Gastar Exploration, Ltd for permission to
publish this paper. They are also thankful for the hard work
and dedication from all the technical and operations personnel
that made this project a success.
References
1. Bosma, M., et al.: Design Approach to Sealant Selection
for the Life of the Well, paper SPE 56536 presented at
the 1999 ATCE, Houston, TX, October 3-6.
2. Ravi, K.R., et al.: Safe and Economic Gas Wells through
Cement Design for Life of the Well, paper SPE 75700
presented at the 2002 SPE Gas Technology Symposium,
Calgary, Canada, April 30May 2.
3. Ravi, K.R., et al.: Cement Sheath Design for Deepwater
Applications, paper presented at the 2003 Offshore West
Africa Conference, Windhoek, Namibia ,March 11.
4. Griffith, J.E., and Tahmourpour, F.: Use of Finite
Element Analysis to Engineer the Cement Sheath for
Production Operations, paper presented at the 2004
Canadian International Petroleum Conference, Calgary,
Canada, June 8-10.
5. Information from Current Methods for Analysis and
Remediation of Sustained Casing Pressure, by Staurt
Scott and Adam T. Bourgoyne, Jr., Petroleum
Engineering Department and Louisiana State University.
6. Dealy, S.T., Morgan, R.G., and Johnson, J.W.:
Viscometer for Multi-Phase Slurries, paper presented at
the 2005 DEA/IADC Workshop, Galveston, TX, May 2425.
7. Harris, P.C., Morgan, R.G., and Heath, S.J.:
Measurement of Proppant Transport of Frac Fluids,
paper SPE 95287 presented at the 2005 ATCE, Dallas,
TX, October 9-12.
8. Becker, T.E., Morgan, R.G., Chin, W.C., and Griffith,
J.E.: Improved Rheology Model and Hydraulics
Analysis for Tomorrows Wellbore Fluids Applications,
paper SPE 82415 presented at the 2003 Production and
Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, OK, March 2225.
9. Frisch, G., et al.: Advances in Cement Evaluation Tools
and Processing Methods Allow Improved Interpretation
of Complex Cements, paper SPE 97186 presented at the
2005 ATCE, Dallas, TX, October 9-12.
IADC/SPE 98869
IADC/SPE 98869
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Original Second-Generation
Well Design Completion Procedures
Displace cement job with drilling mud.
No specifications on when continued operations
are allowed.
Pressure test casing and wellhead to 15,000 psi.
RIH with workstring and scrapper and circulate
out with KCl water.
Perforate and perform production testing to
maximum drawdown possible.
Perform fracturing treatment down casing,
20 bbl/min and 14,000-psi surface pressure.
Forced-closure flowback and flow to tanks until
cleaned up.
Kill well, run tubing, and put on pipeline.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Proposed Third-Generation
Well Design Completion Procedures
Displace cement job with completion brine.
WOC for minimum specified time to ensure
mechanical property development.
Run cement evaluation log.
Pressure test casing and wellhead to 15,000 psi.
RIH with workstring and circulate out with KCl
water.
Perforate and perform production testing.
Maximum allowable drawdown of 5,500 psi at
perforations.
Perform fracturing treatment down casing,
20 bbl/min and 14,000-psi surface pressure.
Forced-closure flowback and flow to tanks until
cleaned up.
Kill well, run tubing, and put on pipeline.
IADC/SPE 98869
14 lb/gal WBM
o
IADC/SPE 98869
TOC
14,381 ft
14,910 ft
Bossier "C"
18,516 ft
Bossier "D"
18,735 ft
18,833 ft
19,023 ft
Bossier "K"
Bossier "L"
20,022 ft
20,422 ft
20,940 ft
10
IADC/SPE 98869
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
TVD, ft
8,000
9,000
10,000
11,000
12,000
Frac Pressure, lb/gal
13,000
14,000
15,000
Pore Pressure, lb/gal
16,000
17,000
18,000
19,000
20,000
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
IADC/SPE 98869
11
12
IADC/SPE 98869
IADC/SPE 98869
13
Depth
Surface
Casing
24 3/4-in. Wall conductor
F MW FIT Days
70 8.4 10.0
0
Bits
1,000
22-in.
WBM
2,000
3,000
131 9.5
8.3 11.0
4
6
4,000
14 3/4-in.
5,000
2 7/8-in., 8.7-lb Tubing
9.5
6,000
12
WBM
14.5 lb/gal Inhibited packer fluid
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
258 10.0
9.5 14.0
11,000
23
28
10 5/8-in.
12,000
WBM
13,000
14,000
13.5
315 14.5 18.5
56
64
8 1/2-in.
15,000
OBM
16,000
7 5/8-in., 39-lb P-110 liner
18.0
18.0 19.5
75
82
17,000
6 1/2-in.
OBM
18,000
19,000
408 18.5
107/115
14
IADC/SPE 98869
Fig. 9Remaining capacities, new casing and completion loads with conventional cement design. Risk of damage
over load phases; depth along well=18,000 ft; cement material=19.0-lb/gal conventional Class H cement.
IADC/SPE 98869
Fig. 10New casing and optimum completion plan with conventional cement. Risk of damage over load phases; depth along
well=18,000 ft; cement material=19.0-lb/gal conventional Class H cement.
15
16
IADC/SPE 98869
Fig. 11Remaining capacity summary, final HTHP casing and cement sheath design. Risk of damage over load phases;
depth along well=18,000 ft; cement material=19-lb/gal elastic system.
IADC/SPE 98869
17
18
IADC/SPE 98869
Fig. 14Remaining capacities and plastic deformation; original lead cement at 10,500 ft. Risk of damage over load phases; depth along
well=10,550 ft; cement material=12.7-lb/gal water-extended cement.
Fig. 15Remaining capacities and plastic deformation; original tail cement at 16,500 ft. Risk of damage over load phases; depth along
well=16,500 ft; cement material=16.4-lb/gal conventional cement.
IADC/SPE 98869
Fig. 16Remaining capacities of new lead cement design for 9 5/8-in. casing at 16,500 ft. Risk of damage over
load phases; depth along well=10,550 ft; cement material=13.2-lb/gal Class H cement and pozzolan blend.
19
20
IADC/SPE 98869
Fig. 17 Remaining capacities of tail cement for 9 5/8-in. casing at 16,500 ft. Risk of damage over load phases;
depth along well=16,500 ft; cement material=16.4-lb/gal Class H nonshrinking cement.
IADC/SPE 98869
21
Displacement
Spacer
Lead
Slurry
Tail
Slurry
22
IADC/SPE 98869
Fig. 21CBL of elastomeric tail slurry after 15,000-psi casing pressure test.
IADC/SPE 98869
23
Fig. 22CBL of non-elastomeric lead slurry after 15,000-psi casing pressure test.