SPE

Society of Petroleum EngineeI's

SPE 21386

Casing Design Considerations for Horizontal Wells

A-A.H. EI-Sayed* and F. Khalaf, * GUPCO/Cairo U., and S.M. Ghzaly, GUPCO
* SPE Members

Copyright 1991, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Middle East Oil Show held in Bahrain, 16-19 November 1991.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of information contained in an abstract sUb~itted by the author(s). Contents of t~e paper,
as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correctio~ by the author(s). The _ma~enal, ~ presen~ed: does not necessanly ref!ect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE '!leetlngs are subjee.t to publication r9View by Edl~onal C0!'1mlttees of the Society
of Petroleum Engineers. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. illustrations may not be COPied. The abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment
of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836 U.S.A., Telex, 730989 SPEDAL.

I-INTRODUCTION
ABSTRACT
Little publications have addressed the
problems of casing design for a horizontal
Horizontal Drilling is now a well well. However. horizontal technology is
established technique with growing now considered a well established
popularity for exploiting a number of technique after developing many equipment
reservoirs which would otherwise be used to drill horizontal wells under
noncommercial. However a horizontal well variety of operational conditions. A
requires a substantial engineering work horizontal well can be classified as a
compared to conventional directional "short", "medium" and "long radius" well
drilling. Significant advances in depending on the build-up rate or the
drilling technology have made it possible radius of curvature it describes (1)*.
to drill horizontally in almost any Wells wi"tll short radius build inclination
situation by using very specialized tools. at 2 to 6°/100 ft (30 m) with a horizontal
But some inherent weaknesses to this displacement sect.ion extending up to 3000
technique still exist. like casing design. ft (914 m). Wells with a medium radius
Most of the reported horizontal wells are drilling technique change from vertical to
con~leted with open hole or slotted liner. horizontal at 8 to 20°/100 ft with a
This type of completion is simple and horizontal length extends 1000 feet or
inexpensive. but may not furnish enough more. We lIs wi th a short radius systems,
support to the walls of the well to allow in comparison, change angle at 1.5 to 3°
for long well life. per foot (0.3 m) to have wellbore geometry
form vertical to horizontal in 20 to 60
This paper discusses casing design ft. Because of difficulties of cementing
eonsideratiol1s for horizontal wells. It horizontal sections and due to the
addresses the type and nature of loads unknowns of casing design for horizontal
applied on casing strings set in wells. most of horizontal wells drilled
horizontal wells; examples of these loads worldwide are completed as open hole.
are torque and drag, formation subsidence,
effect of perforations. and bending loads. Open hole completion has some
A design method for casing string under disadvantages: it restril:ts the production
loads tha"t prevail in horizontal wells is rate due to hole stability problem and the
also included. The proposed design method possibility of borehole failure. Studies
shows that the horizontal section needs made on this problem showed that there is
high collapse resistance pipe or thick-- a certain limit for applying a bottom hole
wall pipe to avoid casing failure due to pressure as we J.l as a pressure draw down
non-conventional loads that prevails in (2). Moreover. open hole completion doea
horizontal wells. not nllow the use Q£ pumping technique for
production from horizontal well. To
Reference and illustrations at paper end* minimize the disadvantages of open hole
cOIopletion. casing and cementing is to be
recommended in horizontal well.
421
2 CASING DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR HORIZONTAL WELLS SPE 21386

Casing design for horizontal well as well Using the basics given in References 3 and
as for conventional wells depends on the 4, and illustrations shown in Fig. (2),
loads applied on casing string. Casing the magnitude of the normal force that
loads in a horizontal wells are not apply on a pipe can be expressed as
different than those developed in follows:
conventional wells. However, there is a
distinct difference in the magnitude of Fn ={(Ftoasine-)2+ (Ftoe+Wsine-)2}~ .. (1)
those loads. The most critical loads
applied on casing in a horizontal wells and the increment in tension at any
are bending load, torque and drag, and element is
point and line loads resulting form
formation subsidence. Moreover, the. oFt = W cos e ± ~ Fn (2)
perforation intensity may reduce the
crushing resistance of the casing pipe. and the torsion increment is
These factors may overshadow more
traditional parameters of internal yield, oM =II It'n r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ( 3 )
collapse, and tension of conventional The plus or minus sign reflects the
design procedures. direction of pipe motion either up or
down; the plus sign is for upward motion
where friction adds to the axial loads and
According to the well trajectory, Fig. the minus sign is for downward motion. The
(1), the well path can be divided into value of the coefficient of friction
three intervals: horizontal section, build varies between 0.2 and 0.4 depending on
up section, and vertical section. Each the type of mud in hole and the formation
section has its own load conditions and type. Using a computer program, the drag
sometimes differs from the others. This forces are determined along the horizontal
paper discusses the loads that apply on section for both closed ends and open ends
casing strings in horizontal wells through casing strings of different sizes landed
the three specified intervals of the well at different true vertical depths.
path, clarifies the effect of these loads
on the resistance of the pipe, and shows The calculations are carried out for three
how to select casing strings for casing sizes (5", 18#; 7", 26#; and 9-
horizontal wells. 5/8", 47#) set in a horizontal well with
different horizontal sections ranging from
zero to 3000-. The true vertical depth of
11- HORIZONTAL SECTION the horizontal well is assumed to be 6000
feet. The pipe is considered as open
ended pipe and the coefficient of friction
Depending on the inclination angle, the is taken as 0.4. The results are plotted
well path in this section is horizontal or in Figure (3). This figure shows the load
nearly horizontal. The inclination angle applied at point (C) of Figure (1)
of a horizontal well lies between 80 and required to push the casing through the
90° depending on the dipping angle of the horizontal section. This load increases
reservoir formation. Besides the by increasing lateral section, casing size
traditional loads of the conventional and true vertical depth.
procedures, this section is subjected to
torque and drag forces, effect of
perforation on collapse resistance, and The calculations are devoted to 5 inch
formation subsidence. casing pipe having a nominal weight of 18
lb/ft. The results are plotted in Figures
Torque and drag can be caused entirely by (4 and 5) which give the load applied at
sliding friction forces that result from point (C) required to push the casing
the contact of the pipe to the bore hole. through the horizontal section for both
Two factors affect sliding wellbore open and closed ended casing. This load
friction-the normal contact force and the increases by increasing the horizontal
coefficient of friction between casing and displacement as well as the true vertical
formation. The product of the two factors depth and equals the sum of the buoyancy
represents the magnitude of the sliding and the drag forces. The drag force is
friction forces (2). The normal contact the same for both closed and open ended
force between the casing string and the casing while the buoyancy force for closed
wall of the hole mainly depends on the ended casing is about four times that for
effect of gravity pipe and the effect of open ended casing. For example, the drag
tension and compression applied on the in a 3000 ft horizontal displacement at
casing. The value of sliding friction 6000 ft true vertical depth is about 21600
coefficient depends on the specified pound. Taking into consideration the
contacting materials and the degree of effect of buoyancy, the running load will
lubrication at various places in the well be 9800 pound at point (C), for closed
bore, mainly affected by mud type. ended pipe, and 36400 pound for open ended
pipe. This load can actually cause casing
damage while running-in and it is

422
 SPE 21386 A.A. H. EL-SAYED, F. KHALAF & S.M. GHZALY 3

recommended to be considered in casing running-in the casing string, this load is

design. This drag acts as a compression mostly compressive and increases linearly
load in case of casing running-in and as a by increasing the horizontal sections.
tension load while pulling-up the string. Figure (7) shows this load as a function
of the bUild-up rate. It shows that the
The second major factor in the load load increases in nonlinear manner till a
considerations is the formation subsidence rate ot' about 25 ~ /100 ft. E'or rates from
which results in a nonuniform load on the 20° and 45°/100 ft, the load stays
casing string equivalent to the overburden constant and then above 40°/100 ft it
load (5), specially in case of poor cement starts to decrease again. ~his phenomenon
job. A previous work, Reference (5), is mainly due to the decrease of the
proved that the collapse resistance of measured depth through the build-up
casing pipe under that type of load will section by increasing the build-up rate
be reduced to about 20% of its original and is due to the decrease of the
collapse resistance. According to those component of load that affected the drag
results, the casing string may suffer force.
major collapse problem after running-in if
this load is discarded from the design In case of pulling~up the string, the drag
procedures. To avoid such failure a force will result in a tension load at
proposed collapse safety factor, named point (B). For the same previous example,
formation subsidence safety factor with a the load at point (B) during running the 5
value of 2.0 is used with the overburden inch casing, 18 lb/ft, in a horizontal
pressure to select the specified casing. section of 3000 ft and at a rate of 20°/
100 ft is 12400 pounds, compression load,
The third factor is the effect of while the pulling-up load at the same
perforations on the casing resistance point is 31800 pounds, tension load, Fig.
which depends on the intensity of the (8). This means that during reciprocation
perforations per longitudinal foot. the point (B) will be subjected to a load
Experiments made by King Ref. (6) showed changed between -12400 pound and +31800
that a perforation intensity higher than 4 pound.
perforations per foot reduces the crushing
resistance of the pipe by 10 to 60 percent The second major load in the build-up
of its original resistance. The crushing section is the bending load. This load
resistance has normally a direct can be calculated by the following
relationship to the collapse resistance equation:
and its reduction may cause collapse
failure of pipe. Depending on the Fb = 63 e WD (4)
intensity of perforations, a perforation
factor is assumed to correct the collapse This load increases linearly with the
resistance of the pipe. This factor can be build-up rate - see Fig. (9) - and results
calculated as the reciprocal of the in a compression load on the convex side
reduction of the crushing resistance of of the pipe and in tension load on the
the pipe and has to be multiplied by the concave one. For the previous example,
corrected collapse value of the formation this load is ± 113400 pound. By adding
subsidence pressure to get the overall this value to the running or pulling load
design safety factor (we recommend 1.25 at point B, the casing string will be
which represents a reduction of 20 percent subjected to a compression load of 125800
due to perforations). pound and a tension load of 145200 pound
which may cause joint failure in casing
string.
111- BUILD-UP SECTION
IV- VERTICAL SECTION
This section has usually changes in both
azimuth and inclination angles which
induces drag and bending loads on casing In the vertical section of the well, the
string. Contrary to the horizontal load is maximum at point (A), see Fig (1).
section, the drag force in this section this load is the sum of the weight of
have a nonlinear relationship to the casing string from surface to the kick-
measured depth. Taking into off-point and the load at point B. For the
considerations that the change in the previous example, the kick-off-point lies
azimuth is minor and can be neglected, a at 5715 true vertical depth. This section
stepwise calculations are made for this results in a load of 102870 pound and the
section to determine the load resulted at tension load at point B is 31800 pound.
kick-off-paint. paint (B) Fig. (1). The This means that at point (A) the casing
calculations are made for different build- will be subjected to 134670 pound during
up rates ranging from 5· to 50°/100 foot. pulling-up compared to 145200 pounds for
Figure (6) gives this load as a function point B. It is clear therefore that the
of the horizontal displacement at maximum compound load in the string lies
different build-up rates. In case of at the point B due to both drag and

423
4 CASING DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR HORIZONTAL WELLS SPE 21386

bending during pulling-up the string. joints, and the biaxial compression
Meanwhile, the horizontal section will be effect. These factors will be discussed in
subjected to nonuniform load that reduces later publications.
the collapse strength to about 25% of its
original resistance. The following
procedure shows how to select a casing VI - CONCLUSIONS
string for such a horizontal well based on
the previous analYsis.
From the previous analysis and
discussions, the following conclusions can
V- DESIGN PROCEDURES be recommended:

1. The drag force. formation subsidence,

The proposed design method is based on effect of perforations, and bending
biaxial collapse resistance of casing loads as well as the conventional loads
pipe, Fig. (10), which incorporate the are the major loads applied on casing
conventional loads, and the loads due to strings set in a horizontal wells.
horizontal configuration, discussed These loads can cause major casing
previously. The design begins from the failure if they are not considered in
total depth of the well from point (D) to the design. The drag force depends on
the surface point (A), Assuming a 5 inch the type of mud and the drilled
casing to be set in a 6000 feet true formation. This load is compressive in
vertical depth well with 3000 feet case of running in the string and
horizontal displacement and build-up angle tensile in case of pulling up.
of 20°/100 ft, this method is illustrated
through the following example. 2. Formation subsidence produces
nonuniform overburden load acting as a
1. Calculate the overburden pressure at point line load on the pipe and reduces
the bottom of the well, point (D). the collapse resistance drastically ..
Using overburden pressure gradient of This reduction can reach to about 25
1.0 psi/ft, this value will be 6000 percent of its original resistance.
psi.
2. Correct this value to meet the 3. Perforation technique results in a
nonuniform load and the effect of reduction of 10 to 60 percent of the
perforation by multiplying this value crushing resistance as well as the
by nonuniform and perforation collapse resistance of the pipe
correction factor. The corrected value depending on the intensity of the
is 15151 psi, using correction factors perforations.
2 and 1.25, respectively for nonuniform
load and perforations. 4. The proposed design method calculates
3. Plot the corrected value on the biaxial the loads applied on the horizontal
relationship curve Fig.(10), point (1). sting, proposed two new factors to
4. Calculate the normal collapse pressure correct the loads for horizontal
at point (c) using the normal collapse loading conditions, namely formation
pressure formula. This value will be subsidence factor of 2.0 and
3180 psi. perforation effect factor of 1.11, and
5. Calculate the pulling-up load at point allows the selection of the proper
(C) and plot it on the same figure specified pipe to be run in a
using the corrected value of overburden horizontal well.
pressure and the normal collapse
pressure, points (2) and (3).
6. Calculate the load and the normal REFERENCES
pressure and the pulling-up load at
point (B) and determine the position of
point (4). 1. H. Karlsson. R. Cobbley, and G.E.
7. Calculate the bending load through the Jaques: "New Developments in Short-,
build-up section and add its value to Medium-, and Long-RadiUS Lateral
the line from 3 to 4 to become 5 to 6. Drilling," SPE/IADC 18706, presented at
8. Calculate the load at point (A) and 1989 SPE/IADC drilling Conference held
plot point ('7). in New Orleans. Louisiana. February ~8
9. Follow the line 1-2-3-5-6-4-'7 and - March 3. 1989.
choose the grade that posses a 2. A.H. El-Sayed: "Maximum Allowable
resistance curve covering each section. Production Rates From Open Hole
Horizontal Wells." SPE 21383, SPE
In this example, the grade V-100 is Middle East Oil Conference to be held
recommended for the horizontal section and in Manama. Bahrain Nov. 16-19, 1991.
N-80 for both build-up and vertical
sections. This method neglects the torque 3. C.A. Johancsik. D.B. Friesen, and
applied on casing during rotation of Rapier Dawson: "Torque and Drag in
string, the compression design of the tool Directional Wells Prediction and

424
SPE 21386 A.A. H. EL-SAYED, F. KHALAF & S.M. GHZALY 5

Measurement," Jl'l', June 1964, pp 987 - NOMENCLATURl!:S

993.
4. Rapier Dawson: "Drill Pipe Buckling in
Inclined Holes," SP:!!: paper No. 11167,
= element,
net normal
lb.
force acting on
presented at the 57th Annual Fall = axial tension force at lower end
Technical Conference nd Exhibition held of element, lb.
in New Orleans, La, Sept. 26-29, 1982. = increase in tension over length of
element, lb.
5. A.H. EI-Sayed and F. Khalaf: k.o.p = kick-off-point
"Resistance of Cemented Concentric
Casing Strings Under Nonuniform Loads,"
M = torsion at lower end of element,
ft. lb.
SPE paper No 17927 Presented at SP:!!: oM = increase in torsion over length of
Middle East Oil Conference held in element, ft. lb.
Manama, Bahrain, March 9-11, 1989. T.V.D.= true vertical depth, ft.
T.S.F' = tension safety factor.
6. G.E. King: "Casing Crush Resistance r = actual radius of pipe element, ft.
Loss Due to High-Density Perforating: W = buoyed weight of pipe element, lb.
Casing Tests," SPE 20634, presented at a = azimuth angle, degree or radians.
the 65th Annual Technical Conference oa = increase in azimuth angle over
and exhibition of the Society of length of element, degree or
Petroleum Engineers held in New radians.
Orleans, LA, Sept. 23026, 1990. e = inclination angle, degree or
radians.
7. M.D. Mueller, J.M. Quintana, and M.J. oe = increase in inclination angle over
Bunyak: "Extended-Reach Drilling From length of element, degree or
Platform Irene," SPE Drilling radians.
Engineering, June 1991, pp. 138-144. = azimuth angle, degree or radians.
= sliding friction coefficient
8. R.M. Hackney:" A New Approach to Casing between casing and well bore.
Design for Salt Formation," SPE/IADC
13431, Presented at 1985 Drilling
Conference held in New Orleans, March
6-8, 1985

Vertical Section
A - B

Kick-Oft-Point B

Build-Up Section B-C

c
---------------o
Horizontal Section C-D

Fig. 1-Wellbore sketch: important design po~nts.

425
 80· I

coefficient of friction· 0.4

D
r 60 ~"--'''''''''''''--'''''''''''''''''-''''''''-''''''''''''-'''-''''''''''-'-'''' - - -.-..- - - -.------ -;rC- ---- ",,,,,-,--,,,-,-1
a
g
F
Fn o
r 40 ~ ..----..-..- -..---.. ---..- -.- --.-.- - -- :.:~.-_ -..-..- - --.--.. _-- -.-- - ~
c
e

M
20 ~ - ---..--- -..---_.~.- ..- --- ---- ~ ---·-.. ·-····~·-····_· ..·· -..-_··..-..·..·-··- ·I
I
b

w \ w
O~
000 1000
I

2000
I

3000
I

4000
I

Horizontal Dlatance, ft.

Ft
Ft
(8) (A) ~ CaBlng 6·, 18 # -+- CaBlng 7·, 28# """*- CaBlng 9 6/8·, 47#

.
N
Gl
Fig. 2-Pipe element (A) and load analysis (B). Fig. 3-Drag force on casing due to horizontal sections.

70 18
Mud weight· 9 ppg I friction coefficient· 0.4
Mud weight =9 ppg & friction coefficient = 0.4 16
60
L L 14
0 60 0
a a 12
d d
a 40 a 10
• ,
30 8
M M
6
I 20 I
b b 4
(/l
10 -0
2
rn
0' , , I ,
0
000 1000 2000 3000 4000 000 1000 2000 3000 4000 I':)
Horizontal Dlatance, ft Horizontal Dlatance, ft ..-
VI
0)
~ T.Y.D. 4000 It -t- T.Y.D. 8000 It """*- T.Y.D. 12000 ft ~ T.Y.D. 4000 ft -t- T.Y.D. 8000 ft """*- T.Y.D. 12000 ft
~
Fig. 4-Runnlng loads applied on open·and horizontal casing strings (5-ln., 18 Ib, Point C). Fig. 5-Runnlng loade applied on closed-end horizontal casing strings (5-ln. casing, 18 Ib, Point C).
 6 <: 6
....0
.,"'<:
L Eo<
0
L
0 0
a a
d d
8 -6
8
,
-10 M 8 -1 0 }~._._--_ - ~- -.-- -.._._ _..- -- ·······.._···..· · . ·..·..· ·····1
M ....
I :g
I
b -16 '" -16 1-
b So - ..-.- - - =0::-....... B fl ¢r
. §
u

-20 -20' I , , I ,

000 1000 2000 3000 4000 6 ro ~ ~ ~ ~

Horizontal Dlatance, ft Build-Up rate, deg.1100 ft

Build-up 5/100 -+- BUild-up 10/100 It Hor. Dlat. 0000 It -+- Hor. Dlat. 1000 It
-lif- Build-up 201100 It ~ BUild-up 30/100 It -lif- Hor. Dlat. 2000 It ~ Hor. Dlat. 3000 It

Fig. 6-Runnlng loads at K.O.P. function of horizontal dlstancas (open-end s·ln. csslng, 16 Ib, Point BI. Fig. 7-Runnlng loads at K.O.P. function of buildUp rates (open-end S·ln., casing 18 Ib, Point BI.

3000
....
N
..... 60 B
a 2600
n
... d
L <: I
o .~ n 2000
g
a "'
d~ L
, 0 1600
a
M d
0 a
, 1000
I <:
b 0 M
.~ -20
.,"'r.. I 600
b
Ii
S -40 0
6 10 20 30 40 60 0 10 20 30 40 60 60 70 60 90
Bulld-up rate, deg.l100 ft Build-up rata, deg.l100 It

-+- C..lng --*- Casing

~
Hor. Dlat. 0000 -+- Hor. Dlat. 1000 - Casing 5" 18# 7" 26# 95/8" 47#
-lif- Hor. Dlat. 2000 ~ Hor. Dlat. 3000 ft'\

Fig. 8-Pulllng-up loads applied on open·end casing at K.O.P. (S·ln., 18 Ib, Point BI· Fig. 9-Bending loads through buildup Intervsl due to rates of buildup. ~
~

\J4
aJ
g,
 300 I I I

-1'-J-80

- P-l'IO
250 ..... ···············~···· .
- V-150
.
:e 200 ... Jomt .Strength. J. T.5.
0
0
0
~

-0150 .........
0
0
.e-
..J :6 h 4 :
N
CllI
C
o 7.:
.. .
. ..... , .
·iii 100 ~ .
c
Q)
t-

50 .. : ,'.

3:
O~
o I
v . ,i
. i. ;
1 .i 1<
1- i: \;.
, 1 :I \ :I I
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
(f)
Collapse Pressure. 1000 psi. ."
rn

Fig. 10-Graphical design method of 5-ln., 18-lb casing for a horizontal well of 6,ooo-ft true vertical depth and 3,ooo-ft
'"
.-
'VI
horizontal distance. 0:>
0-