Collapse Resistance of Casing

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
COLLAPSE RESISTANCE OF MILLSELECTED HIGH COLLAPSE GRADE 95 CASING
Roy S. Marlow, P.E.
FINAL REPORT SwRI Project 06-8665
Industry Consortium
through the
AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE 211 N. Ervay, Suite 1700 Dallas, TX 75201-3668
August 1987
S O U T H W E S T RESEARCH f N S T I T U T E
S A N ANTONIO
HOUSTON
Copyright American Petroleum Institute Provided by IHS under license with API No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
Not for Resale
_.
S T D - A P I / P E T R O 80-30B-ENGL
1787 W 0732270 0588050 bL2
SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Post Office Drawer 28510, 6220 Culebra Road San Antonio, Texas 78284
COLLAPSE- RESiSTANCE OF MILL SELECTED HIGH COLLAPSE GRADE 95 CASING

bY
Roy S. Marlow,
P.E.
FINAL REPORT SwRI Project 06-8665
Industry Consortium through the
AM ERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE 211 N. h a y , Suite 1700 Dallas, TX 75201-3668

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
August 1987
Reviewed:
Offshore Products Development and Evaluation
w
Approved : Edward M. &i%, Director Department of ructural and Mechanical Systems
Not for Resale
EXECUTIVE S W R Y
This report describes : h e
procedures and results of a project performed
at Southwest Research Inscitute (SwRX) for the purpose of assessing the collapse resistance of- mill selected High Collapse Grade 95 (HC-95) casing.
One-hundred-and-eight
pieces of casing were tested which represent the most Dimensional properties, coupon
popular sizes and weights currently in use.
material properties and residual stresses were measured and correlated with failure values. Empirical formulas for predicting collapse failure are given.
The results show that the industry is capable of producing HC-95 casing with superior collapse performance properties. The minimum collapse pressures For
currently published by the manufacturers are safe for the casing tested.
D/t ratios of lg-l/2 and greater the manufacturers' values closely agree with the minimum values determined by statistical methods. At D/t ratios of 19-1/2
and less, the manufacturers' values are lower than the statistical minimum values.
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
~ ~
~~
S T D - A P I I P E T R O 80-306-ENGL
L987
0732290 0588052 4 9 5
I I p
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TABLE OF CONTEMTS ......................................................ii LIST OF FIGURES
....... I......:...,.....................................iii
I
LIST OF TABtES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
I.
II.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l TECHNICAL APPROACH .................................................2

12
III PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ............................

IV.
CONCLUSIONS AND R r C O ~ N D A T I O N S ...................................35
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 7 APPENDIX A
Specimen Selection Guidelines and Manufacturer
Requested Information
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
S T D .A P I / P E T R O 80-30B-ENGL 1987
0732290 0588053 321
-m
.
.
.
-y c
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2 FIGURE 3 FIGURE 4 FIWRE 5 FIGURE 6 FIGURE 7 FIGURE 8 FIGURE 9 FIGURE 10 FIGURE 11 FIGURE 12 FIGURE 13 FIGURE 14 FIGURE 15 FIGURE 16 FIGURE 17 FIGURE 18 FIGURE 19 FIGURE 20 FIGURE 2 1 FIGURE 22 FIGURE 23
................................. 3 SPECIMEN SIZE DISTRIBUTION (NOMINAL) ...................... 4 SPECIMEN SIZE DISTRIBUTION (ACTUAL) .......................4 RESIDUAL STRIN TEST MEASUREMENT .......................... 6 CORRELATION OF RESIDUAL STRESS MEASUREMENT ................8 COLLAPSE TEST SETUP ...................................... 11 OVALITY DISTRIBUTION ..................................... 13 LOG (OVALITY) DISTRIBUTION ............................... 13 ECCENTRICITY DISTRIBUTION ................................ 14 LOC (ECCENTRICITY) DISTRIBUTION.......................... 14 YIELD STRESS DISTRIBUTION ................................ 15 TENSILE STRESS DISTRfBuN.. ............................15 PROPORTIONAL LIMIT DISTRIBUTION.......................... 16 ELONGATION DISTRIBUTZON .................................. 16 YOUNG'S MODULUS DISTRIBUTION ............................. 17 RESIDUAL STRESS DISTRIBUTION (ERW Casing) ................18 RESIDUAL STRESS DISTRIBUTION (Seamless Casing) ...........18 STRESS-STRAIN CURVES (First 3% Strain)...................19 STRESS-STRAIN CURVES ..................................... 19 IDEALIZED STRESS-STRAIN CURVE ( F i r s t 3%Strain) ..........20 IDEALIZED STRESS-STRAIN CURVE ............................ 20
MANUFACTURER DISTRIBTION COLLAPSE PRESSURE V S . D/t RATIO .......................... (COMPARISON TO CAi'ALG 'I'ALUES) COLLAPSE PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION...........................
22
22
Not for Resale
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
LIST OF FIGURES ( con t h u e d
FIGURE 24 FIGURE 25 FIGURE 26
COLLAPSE PRESSURE VS. D/T RATIO ..........................25 (COMPARISON TO REGRESSION VALUES) RESIDUAL STRESS VALUES ...................................32 (SURI 06-866) RESIDUAL STRESS VALVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 (PRAC 80-30)
-iv--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
- -
STD.API/PETRO BU-3DB-ENGL
1987 B 0 7 3 2 2 7 0 0 5 8 8 0 5 5 I T 4 IBB
LIST OF TABLES
Page
TABLE
i
STATISTICAL COMPARISON OP SELECTED CASING PROPERTIES
................24
TABLE II TABLE III TABLE IV TABLE
COMPARISON OF REGRESSION CONSTANTS AND COLLAPSE ..........27 PRESSURES FOR SELECTED GRADES OF CASING
SIGNIFICANCE OF MULTI-LINEAR REGRESSION VARIABLE S........^^ (SURI 06-8665 DATA)

STATISTICAL COMPARISON OF PRAC 80-30 AND.. SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE 06-8665 DATA
.............. .30
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
SIGNIFICANCE OF MULTI-LINEAR REGRESSION VARIABLES . . . . . . . . 3 3 (SWRI 06-8665 AND PRAC 80-30 DATA)
-VCopyright American Petroleum Institute Provided by IHS under license with API No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
Not for Resale
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
T h i s report descrites the procedures and results of
a project perforined
ac
Southwest Research Institute (SURI) for the purpose of assessing the collapse resistance of mill selected - High Collapse Grade 95 (HC-g?)
casing.
One-
hundred-and-eight pieces of casing were tested representing the most popular sizes currently in use. Dimensional properties, coupon material properties,
and residual stresses were measured and correlated with collapse values. An earlier project, PRAC 80-30 [ 1 , 2 ] , conducted in 1980-82. was funded by the API and was
In that project, 152 HC-95 casing specimens uere

As a group, the
selected from user field inventories and tested at SwRI.
casing exhibited lower than expected collapse strengths and the industry was generally concerned by the results. It was theorized, at the time, that there
may have been some "aging" process at work that degraded the performance of
the casing after it left the mills. The current project was conducted in an effort to assess the performance of HC-95 casing as it is being produced and shipped from the mills. It was
funded by the following participating manufacturers" and was administered by the API's Dallas office.
Kawasaki Steel Corporation Lone Star Steel Company Nippon Kokan K. K. Nippon Steel Corporation Sumitomo Metals Corporation Tubular Corporation of America United States Steel corporation
The generic term HC-95 is used throughout this report instead of individual manufacturer designations. These are not necessarily the same manufacturers whose products uere tested in PRAC 80-30.
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
JDQ imFR8665
Not for Resale
II. TECHNICAL APPROACH
The project was perforined using the same equipment, the same operators, and the same procedures and quality control measures as f o r PRAC 80-30. Additional descriptions of these items may be found in References I and 2.
All instrumentation used had calibrations traceable to the National Bureau of

. Standards.
A.
Specimen Selection and Manufacturer Reporting Test specimens were selected from mill production or stock inventories by
third-party selectors using guidelines which had been developed and approved by the API's Task Group on Performance Properties (Committee 5).
A copy of
these guidelines and the requested mill production information are given in Appendix A.
E .
Test Specimens
The seven manufacturers supplied 108 casing specimens ranging in diameter
from 4-112 in.
to 9-5/8 in.
All but one manufacturer supplied four pieces in
each of four nominal D/t ranges:
15-16, 17-18, 20-21 and 22-23.
One
manufacturer supplied four specimens in three of these ranges.
Figures 1-3
show the distributions of test specimens by manufacturer, by nominal D/t range and by actual D/t range,
A single g-foot piece of pipe was received for each specimen and was cut
into appropriate test lengths by SwRI.
Collapse test specimens were cut to
eight times the nominal diameter in length (L/D = 81, and residual stress test specimens were cut to 12 inches in length. were -0 in., +1/16 in. Machining tolerances in both cases.
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
MANUFACTU RER DISTRIBUTION

20
-
18 17
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
STD.API/PETRO BO-30B-ENGL
1987 W 11732290 0 5 8 8 0 5 9 8 4 T 1881
SPECIMEN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

m
N W N K 0/8
mm
i
Y
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
PI
24
2a
20 18 to
14
12
10
8
O
t
O
SPECIMEN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

WAENKOCRNlO
22
20
18
14
12
10
O
4
8
O
Not for Resale
C.
Pre-Test Dimensional Checks
Prior to testing
the average dimeter, xall thickness, and diameter
variance of each collapse test specimen were measured according to che procedures given in API 5C3, Paragraph 1.3
[3].
Wall thicknesses wer?
measured at eight equally spaced locations on one end of the specimen using a
thickness micrometer.
Average outside diameters were measured using a "Pi
tape" and diameter variances were measured using a dial gauge test stand. Eccentricity (percent wall thickness variance) and ovality (percent: diameter variance) were calculated for each specimen using the following formulas:
Eccentricity ( % I = tmax Ovality ( I ) = where,
tmin
Dmax
-hin
,oo
Dmax = maximum Dmln = minimum D = Average tmax = maximum tmin = minimum t = average
diameter diameter diameter of eight of eight of eight
in any plane (in.) in any plane (in,) from Pi tape measurement (in.) thickness measurements (in:) thickness measurements (in.) thickness measurements (in.)
D, Residual Stress Tests

A single residual stress test was performed f o r each +foot
length of pipe
using the following procedure (Figure 4) :

(1)
Mark one end of 1 2 inch specimen with punch marks at 11 o'clock and 1
o'clock positions.
(2)
Measure using micrometer calipers: (a) the distance between punch

marks, and (b) the diameter of the pipe.
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
S T D - A P I / P E T R O 8 0 - 3 0 B - E N G L 1 9 8 7 E 0732270
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
FIGURE 4,
RESIDUAL STRAIN
TEST MEASUREMENTS
Not for Resale
. -
STD.API/PETRO
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
80-30B-ENGL
1967
0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0 5 8 8 0 6 2 334 W
-e 4
-7-
(3) Cut the specimen at the 12 o'clock position and parallel to the
longitudinal axis. (4) Fiepeat measurements (a) and (b) from step (2). The punch mark, or "change-in-sector" method was the method used in the
PRAC 80-30 project.
-This method is somewhat unconventional and after the
project was completed, there was some question as to why it was selected and how to convert the data into residual stresses. Because of this, only raw
measurements were reported in the final report and different readers have used different methods in converting them. The "change-in-diameter" method
is more
conventional
and
uses
the
following relationship to convert measurements to stresses'.:

a =
(1
E t x uz>
(D2 D1) (D2 x D1)
where,
a
E
t
u D1
02
= = =
=
Maximum Circumferential Residual Stress (psi) Young's Modulus (assumed = 30,000 ksi) Average Wall thickness (in. ) Poisson's Ratio (assumed = 0 . 3 ) Mid-Wall Diameter Before Cut (in. ) Mid-Wall Diameter After Cut (in.)
There was a very high correlation between measurements for the ehange-insector and change-in-diameter methods. This
is shown
in
Figure
5.
Calculating the change-in-diameter
term from the regression equation and
substituting it into Eq. (3) yields the following empirical formula for calculating residual stresses from change-in-sector measurements.
Using this convention, pipes that open up after cutting are listed as having positive residual stresses. Before cutting, the stresses would Se tensile on the outside diameter and Compressive on the inside diameter.
Not for Resale
STD.API/PETRO
80-30B-ENGL 1787
0 7 3 2 2 7 0 0 5 8 8 0 b 3 2 7 0 H-F
d
CORRELATION O F RESID. STRESS MEAS.
Not for Resale
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
-9-
ur =
E t
1
AD ( D I + ADID,
where,
AD = (0.36068) AS + 0.00209 AS = (M2 Mi), Figure 4
This equation may be used to calculate residual stresses for PRAC 80-30 data.
E.
Material Property Tests

A single curved-plate tensile test was performed for each 9-foot length of
pipe according to API Spec.
5 A , Section 4 [4]. Tensile coupons were cut from
residual stress specimens after these tests were completed.
Coupons 'were
taken 180 degrees from the longitudinal cut and away from the weld seam on ERW casing. The tests were performed by An-Tech Metallurgical Laboratories in Houston as a sub-contractor to SURI. Proportional limit, yield strength, tensile
strength, elongation and Young's Modulus were measured.
F.
Collapse Resistance Tests Collapse tests were performed in SwRI's High Pressure Laboratory according
to the procedures given in API Bulletin 5C3, Para. 1.3.
Specimens were
secured in fixtures that are designed so that there are no restraints at the ends of the casing, and so that no hydrostatic end loads can be transmitted during testing. vessel. Figure 6 shows the placement of the specimen in the pressure
During testing, the interior of each specimen was filled witn water PressUre
and was vented to the atmosphere through the closure of the vessel. was then increased uniformly until failure occurred.
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
Failure was indicated i n four ways
-- by
sound, by a drop in the pressure
gauge, by venting of the test pressure to the atmosphere through the broken
end seal, and finally, by inspection ar'ter removal from t'ne pressure vessel.
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
.-
--
._
STD.API/PETRO 80-30B-ENGL
1787 E 0 7 3 2 2 7 0 0 5 8 8 0 b b T B T g
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
FIGURE 6, COLLAPSE TEST SETUP
Not for Resale
STD.API/PETRO 8 0 - 3 D B - E N G L
1787
= 0732290
0588b7 9 L b E
-Y
-12-
III. PRESENTATION A M I DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
A.
Dimensional and Material Properties Figures 7 through

21
show frequency distributions for
the measured
dimensional and materal property data.
Under SURI'S contract with the
. manufacturers, data for
individual specimens are not included in this
report.
These have been reported to the API along with manufacturer The detailed data are
information on production and finishing procedures.
available from the API, subject to its agreements with the manufacturers. Distributions for all but eccentricity and ovality are f a i r l y normally distributed. Since eccentricity and ovality have lower bounds of zero
(perfectly concentric, perfectly round), they are more accurately represented by log-normal distributions (Figures 8 and 10). With a few minor exceptions,
both sets of values are well within the APT maximum limits. Values for Young's Modulus (Figure 15) are reported but are somewhat in question. The laboratory doing the testing used grips that slipped in the
lower tension ranges and produced an erratic curve until they tightened sufficiently. The measurement of Young's modulus was based only on the upper part of the elastic curve. For this reason, a nominal modulus of 30,000 ksi Reporting of modulus data is not a
was usea in calculating residual stresses.
part of the project requirements and are given only for general reference.
Stress-strain curves for all manufacturers
in Figures 18 and 19.
samples are plotted together
These were idealized as shown in Figures 20 and 21. This is significant since a, shown to benefit collapse
A l l of the curves are relatively sharp-kneed.
sharp-kneed performance.
stress-strain
curve
has
been
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
S T D . A P I / P E T R O B O - 3 0 8 - E N G L 1987 m 0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0 5 8 8 0 b d 8 5 2 R Y -ei9Em!iLz
OVALITY DISTRIBUTION
30
26
26
24
22
20
18 16 14 12
io
8
6
4
2
O
LOG(OVALITY) DISTRIBUTION
1s
18
17
16
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
1s
14 13 12 11
o
8
7
(I
5
4
s
2 1
O
Not for Resale
1787
ECCENTRICITY DISTRIBUTION
--
0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0 5 8 8 0 b 9 797
LOG (ECCENTRICIP() DISTRIBUTION
Not for Resale
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
.-
S T D . A P I / P E T R O AO-30B-ENGL
1987
FIGURE
-'I 0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0 5 8 8 0 7 0 Li00 e-2-
YIELD STRESS DISTRIBUTION
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
TENSILE STRESS DISTRIBUTION
Not for Resale
~~
STD.API/PETRO 80-3UB-ENGL
1787
0732270 0588073
PROPORTIONAL LIMIT DISTRIBUTION

u). _ _
28
26
24
22
20
18
16 14
12
to
b
4
2
O
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
FIGURE
ELONGATION DISTRIBUTION
J2 30
28 26
24
t =
1:
Is
16
14
:o
e
4
-;;--;--;;17-38
- - @ - - -I ,
19-30
21-22
23-24
23-26
27-28
29-30
QR(JoATIo(iI (%)
Not for Resale
S T D . A P I / P E T R O 80-30B-ENGL
2987
0732290 0588072 283 E
__ . - c-17-
FIGURE 15
YOUNG'S MODULUS DISTRIBUTION
Not for Resale
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
LU-
RESIDUAL STRESS DISTRIBUTION
--
DENOTES COMPRESSIVE STRESS
E-uf3Lu
RESIDUAL STRESS DISTRIBUTION

22
2 0
78
smMLE3j CIUINC (E-3o.OOo
ICs)
1 6
1 4
1 2
IO
U
6
4
2
O
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
STD.API/PETRO
80-30B-ENGL
I987
0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0 5 8 8 0 7 4 0 5 b 8a
FIGURE 18
150
,140
130
STRESS-STRAIN CURVES 'LLL u= (nmr 3% ZCIRCJN)
120
110
100
Y)
Y
90
60
u)
70 60
50
40
30
20
10 O
I I
0.4
0.8
1-2
m
1. I
24
28
N (x)
STRESS-STRAI N CU RVES
130,
um
B
Y
B
I
12
-N
16
20
24
Za
. .
(rn
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
STD.API/PETRO
80-30B-ENGL
1987
0732270 0588075 T72
FIGURE 30
I DEALIZED STRESS-STRAI N CU RVE

( n m SJI SreUiN)
PL
o
Y
a Y
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
24
2 . 8
IDEALIZED STR ESS-STRAI N CURVE

140
T S -1% 120 110
100
40
30
20
10
I
I
O
12
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
18 m 4 l (r)
20
24
28
Not for Resale
...
-21-
B. Collapse Performance
Ideasured coilpse resi:ta?ces.
as
function of measured D/t ratios, are
showr. in Figure 22 along wLLh minimum valae curves for several grades of
casing.
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Minimum value curves for N-80, C-95 and P-1 1 0 casiq are taken from
Two
API Bul. 5 C l .
minimum value lines are shown for HC-95.
The first is
plotted from the manufacturers' minimum published values and the second i s calculated from a regression analysis of the data using the API method (51. The manufacturers' minimum values agree closely with the minimum values from the regression at D/t ratios of 19-112 and greater. Below this value the manufacturers' numbers are conservative. Figure 23 shows the distribution of collapse pressures normalized to a standard D/t of 19". Collapse values are normally distributed with a mean or"
9,838 p s i g and a standard deviation of 533 psig.
Values were normalized by mathematically moving them parallel to a linear regression line to the D/t=19 location on the X-axis.
Not for Resale
FIGURF 22
COLLAPSE PRESSURE VS. D/t

la
If
COMPARISON TO C A t A L O VALUES
RATIO
I
B
z
-
18 15 14
13
12 11 10
a a
7 6
8 4 -3 21-
REORESS.
EuBL23 COLLAPS E PRESSURE DISTR IBUTI0N

50
45
$0
(NORMAUZfD To
o/t =
19)
35
50
2s
20
19
10
3
O
8 ; a . s
as-a
9-9.3
9.3-io
O
10-10.3 10.5-1 i i1 4 1 . 3 ii+iz
NOCIMAUZLD C
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
M PRRSiJR): (KS)
Not for Resale
_ ~
~-
-~
1 9 8 7 E 0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0 5 8 8 0 7 8 7TL I I
-F d
=z-
T r e a t i n g t h e casing tested as a t o t a l population and assuming t h a t i t followed norinal o r log-nornal d i s t r i b u t i o n s as d i s c u s s e d above, a s t a t i s t i c a l conpa7ison was made betkeon the v a r i o u s manufacturers for s e v e r a l factors
[61.
S i g n i f i c a n t s t a t i s t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s were seen between manufacturers for i n most

the
dimensional and material prgperties b u t , correlate

with
cases,
these d i d
no;
collapse performance,
and
analysis
yielded
little
information.
Table I compaFes t h e h i g h e s t and t h e lowest performing manufacturers.
The
h i g h e s t performer is s u p e r i o r t o t h e lowest performer i n most areas, a l t h o u g h
since all o f t h e c a s i n g was of good q u a l i t y , these d i f f e r e n c e s are small.
The
most s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s f o r t h e better performing c a s i n g are its lower o v a l i t y , lower r e s i d u a l stress, higher p r o p o r t i o n a l l i m i t and h i g h e r r a t i o s o f p r o p o r t i o n a l l i m i t t o y i e l d and t e n s i l e stress.
The better c a s i n g also shows
better o v e r a l l conformity (lower s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s ) . The confidence levels a t t h e bottom o f t h e table refer t o t h e c o n f i d e n c e

t h a t t h e two groups o f c a s i n g are d i f f e r e n t for t h a t c a t e g o r y and n o t t o t h e
s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e v a r i a b l e itself on c o l l a p s e p r e s s u r e .
C.
mirical Prediction of Collapse Pressure

F i g u r e 24 shows
the
c o l l a p s e data f i t t e d t o
the
following
linear
r e g r e s s i o n equation:
(D/t) Coeff. of Det. =
Pcr =
- 10,156
r2
= 0.968
The c o e f f i c i e n t of d e t e r m i n a t i o n i n d i c a t e s t h a t 96.8% of t h e v a r i a b i l i t y
ir! c o l l a p s e p r e s s u r e is due t o t h e v a r i a b i l i t y
i n D / t r a t i o and o n l y 3.2% t o
other variables.
This v a l u e is very high when compared w i t h some o t h e r g r a d e s

c o n s i s t e n c y of the c a s i n g tested.
of c a s i n g and is probably due t o t h e
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
LL
T p;i
I N
I
a ,
+ o,
6
Q,
-4
a)
N '
03. N
a)
r;
cv
t
i + O O
+ ?
cn cn
lCopyright American Petroleum Institute Provided by IHS under license with API No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
S T D - A P I I P E T R O 80-30B-ENGL
1987
0 7 3 2 2 7 0 0588083 27b W
7
. , @
c
-25-
FIGURE 2% COLLAPSE PRESSURE VS. D/t

COMPARISON TO REGRESSION VALUES
c5
Y
RATIO
YI
18 17 16 18 14 13 a 12 11 10
--
ea6-
t84-
321-
o !
13
18
17
la
21
2s
Not for Resale
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
~-
~~
STD.API/PETRO 80-3OB-ENGL
1987 M 0 7 3 2 2 0 5 8 8 0 8 2 1 2 2
- * -e 4
-26.
Expressed in the API format, the equation for the minimum value line can bo
writte? as:
'._
where,
Yp = Minimum specified yield stress (psi)
Table II compares regression constants for several grades of API and nonAPI casing [ 7 ] .
Also
shown are mean and minimum values calculated at a mid-
range Dt of 19. Both the mean and minimum values for HC-95 are higher than for the other standard API grades.
120,000
The mean value i s equivalent to that for
psi yield strength casing. The minimum collapse pressure, however, is
significaiikiy nigher than any of the other grades shown. This is due to the
low variability in the data which is reflected in a very low value for the
constant "C"
.
a
In an effort t o account for the effects of variables other than Dt,

non-linear regression analysis was performed. This equation is:
Pcr = 376,842 (t/D)
+ 18.560 (YS) - 194.554 (OV) + 7.656 (EC) -7.719 (RS) 6,267.8 (YS/TS) + 1,804.8 (PL/YS) -7,906.332
(7)
Coeff. of Det. = where? t/D YS TS PL OV EC
r2
= 0.969
= Average thickness/diameter ratio f o r specimen = Yield stress ( k s i ) = Tensile stress ( k s i ) = Proportional limit (ksi) = Ovality ( % ) = Eccentricity ( 5 )
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
1787
0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0588083 Ob7 9
.P
/
27
TABLE II. ,COMPARISON OF REGRESSION

CONSTANTS AND COLLAPSE PRESSURES FOR SELECTED GRADES OF CASING
MEAN COLLAPSE PRESSURE = Yp
MINIMUM COLLAPSE PRESSURE = Yp
(Olt)
--B
-C
MINIMUM
GRADE
D A = 19
STRESS Y'ELD
I
I
MEAN COLLAPSE
N-80
80,000 95,000 95,000 110,000
3.071 3,124 3.999
0.067
1,955 2,404 1,6il 2,852 3,301 3,451
PRESSURE (PSI)
MINIMUM COLLAPSE PRESSURE
(PSI) 5,640
7,595
8,562 9,840 9,407 9,891 10,332
c-95 HC-95(*) P-110 120(*) 1304

NON-API
0.074 0.107
3.181 3.219 3.258
0.082
0.087
120,000
130,000
1
I
I
1 1 I
6,158
~
8,229
6,555
6,590
6,881
1
I
0.092
GRADES
Not for Resale
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Inclusion o f the addi.tiona1 terms improves the correlation of the equation

by only a very small amount.
0.1;
Together, they account for only an additloral
of t h s variability in callapse Fressures.
Table III shows the significance levels for the variables. OV and EC were found to have low significance. marginal significance.
YS and the YS/TS ratio were found to have
This is expected since the casing had a relatively The PL/YS ratio had a higher significance
small range of YS and TS values.
which is indicative of the importance of a sharp-kneed stress-strain curve*.
RS was also found to have a high significance.

After renoving the lower significance variables, Eq.
( 7 ) reduces to:
Per = 381,013.2 (t/D)

+
+ 12.137
1,860.721 (PL/YS)
- 7.440 -(YS) 13,241
(RS)
Coeff. of Det. = r2 = 0.969 D. Comparison with PRAC 80-30 Data Table IV shows a statistical comparison of average dimensional and material properties for PRAC 80-30 and the current project.
It can be seen
that the casing for the current project i s generally superior to the PRAC casing in both its dimensional and material properties and in its consistency (standard deviations).
The reasons for this are unexplained at present.
Possible reasons that
have been suggested are (i) the lack of traceability for the PRAC specimens and the possibility that users supplied "odds and ends" for testing, ( 2 ) mishandling or improper testing after the specimens left the mills (e.g., field straightening or over-pressurizing during field hydrostatic tests), ( 3 ) , improvements in heat treating and manufacturing/quality control techniqkis over the last few years which has resulted in better casing, and (4) use of improved steels (e.g., caster vs. ingot steels).
~~
Moore (81 has suggested that due to problems with grip slippage, using a small offset on the stress-strain curve may be a more valid representation.. of the elastic properties of a material than the proportional limit.
Not for Resale
S T D * A P I / P E T R O 80-3OB-ENGL
1987
0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0 5 8 8 0 8 5 731
-e r
. 29
Table III SIGNIFICANCE OF MULTI-LINEAR REGRESSION VARIABLES (SwRI 06-8665 Data Only)
VARIABLE
t-VALUE
51.619 1.689 -0.701 0.361 -2.075 -1.590 1.835 -2.340
SIGNIFICANCE
99.9+
,
(XI
t/D YS
ov
EC RS YS/TS PL/YS CONSTANT
90.6+
51.5 28.1 95.9 88.5 93.1 97.9
Not for Resale
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
. t
S T D - A P I I P E T R O 80-3UB-ENGL
1987
0732290 058808b 878
.e 30
4
TABLE IV.
STATISTICAL COMPARISON O F PRAC 80-30 AND SOUTHLVEST RESEARCH INSITUTE 06-8665 DATA
. -
Prc 80-30 Std. Dev.
Mean
SWRI 06-8665 Stat istical Mean Std. Dev. Significance
Pcr (psig)
8,332
1020.0
9,838
533.0
99.9+
(D/t=19)
Pcr/Ys
(D/t=19)
(ksi)
Tensile Stress (ksi)
*I
1
I
I
.O75
111.1
1
l o
0.010
1 0 . 7
1
I
0.081 119.8
I 1
l
1
0.010
5.5
1
I
99.9+99.9+
125.7
9.3
129.7
5.6
99.9+ 99.9+
YWTS
PUYS Elongation
'
0.882
0.032
0.924
0.924 24.3
0.015 0.015 2.3
(a
Eccentricity
(XI
25.2
5.649 0.467
Ovality
(XI
2 . 1
1.862
99.9
1.690
5.692
0.359
2.875
0.199
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
55.6
7 8 . 2
Young's Modulus
(XI
31,782.4
2,815.3
Resi dual Stress (ksi) Seamless
ERW A II
9.1 1.3 5.6
9.1 6.2 8.6

~~
15.0
9.3
1 0 . 3
11.3
2.6
12.5
99.9i 99.9+ 99.9+
Confidence t h a t t h e two groups of casing ore different.
Not for Resale
Improper field testing or straightening could alter the stresses in the casing t s well as the shape of t h e stress-strain curve.
A s statsd in the
original F3AC report, however, it is unlikely that improger testing occurred

on so rriany of the specimens, so the reasons for differences between the two
groups remain unclear.
Figures 25 and 26 compare residual. szresses for seamless and ERN casing in both projects.
For the current project, ERW casing had compressive residual
stresses and the seamless casing typically had tensile residual stresses. For the PRAC project, the residual stresses were mixed suggesting some difference in the casing histories for the two projects. Finally, a multiple linear regression analysis was performed with data
from the two projects combined.
The PL/YS term was not included since
proportional limits were not measured in PRAC 80-30. The equation is:
Coeff. of Det. = r2 = 0.878
Significance levels for the variables are shown in Table V. again show low significance levels.
YS
OV and EC
and YS/TS show very high significance
levels which is indicative of the importance of both the yield stress value and the shape of the stress-strain curve.
The significance levels f o r these
variables are much higher than in Eq. ( 7 ) since there is a much larger range,
of values represented in the data base.
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
S T D - A P I I P E T R O 80-30B-ENGL
1987
RESIDUAL STRESS VALUES

siircIIO(I-86a
-1 o.oO0
-20.000
RESIDUAL STRESS VALUES
Not for Resale
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
SEAMLESS
Table V SIGNIFICANCE OF MULTI-LINEAR REGRESSION VARIABLES (SwRI 06-8665 & PRAC 80-30 Data)
VARIABLE
t-VALUE
41.523 4.078 -0.951 -0.223 0.651 2.675 -10,265
SIGNIFICANCE
99.9+ 99*9+ 65.7 17.6 48.4 99.2 99.9+
(XI
t/D
YS
ov
EC
RS YS/TS CONSTANT
Not for Resale
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
STD.API/PETRO B O - 3 0 B - E N G L
L987 M 0 7 3 2 2 7 0 0 5 8 8 0 9 0 2 T 9
3;:
RS values in Table I I I show a

Table VI.
t o be
h i g h level of significance but a low one in
Analyses by other researchers havs generally shown residual stress
of low or marginal importance and t h e rEsults of t h e two tables taken
together seem to support this.

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Of greater importance might be the rounding
effect a high residual stress can have on the specimen's stress-strain curve.
After dropping the low-significance variables, Eq. ( 9 ) can be written as:
i
I
..
Not for Resale
S T D - A P I I P E T R O 80-3B-ENLL
1987
0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0588091 1 3 5
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A.
Conclusions
The results P f
the- study show that the industry is capable of casing having superior collapse resistance
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
producing
HC-93
characteristics. High collapse performance can be achieved by close control of casing dimensional characteristics, material practices. properties, and finishing For a
These are within the current state-of-the-art.
given D/t value, a high yield strength and sharp-kneed stress-strain curve seem to be of greatest importance in achieving a high collapse strength. Dimensional control is of lower importance as long as it Residual stress, in
is held within normal API tolerance limits.
itself, appears to be of low importance except for the influence it
can have on the stress-strain curve.

There are many statistical differences between casing from differenc manufacturers. Most of these differences, however, cannot be When comparing the high
directly related to observed performance.
and low performing casing in this study, the more "ideal" casing performed better, and in some cases performed better than casing with higher yield strengths. Empirical equations have been presented which reasonably predict the collapse pressure of the casing tested. These equations have n o t ,
been validated outside of the D/t range tested. The single variable,
API form of the regression equation is the easiest to apply and is
reasonably accurate. more accurate.
The multiple variable form is only slightly
However, it is useful in determining the effects of
differences in casing properties on collapse pressure.

Copyright American Petroleum Institute Provided by IHS under license with API No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Not for Resale
( 5 ) The manufacturers' published minimum c o l l a p s e v a l u e s a g r e e c l o s e l y

with minimum v a l u e s determined by r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s f o r D / t r a t i o s
g r e a t e r than 19-1/2. conservative.
Below t h i s v a l u e , t h e manufacturers' v a l u e s are
(6) The c a s i n g tested - was of better q u a l i t y and was more c o n s i s t e n t than

t h a t tested i n t h e PRAC 80-30 p r o j e c t .
The reasons f o r t h i s are as
y e t unresolved. B. Recornendations
(1)
S e v e r a l manufacturers have conducted companion s t u d i e s t o SwRI's, u s i n g c a s i n g specimens c u t from t h e same o r i g i n a l j o i n t s .

These data
should be combined and a n a l y s e s should be made of t h e e n l a r g e d data
base.
This w i l l allow performances t o be determined u s i n g d i f f e r e n t I t may also r e s u l t i n more
test machines and t e s t i n g procedures.
accurate predictions enlarged data base.

(2)
A
f o r minimum c o l l a p s e p r e s s u r e s due t o t h e
Work
Group
should
be
formed
to
consider
development of
S p e c i f i c a t i o n for High C o l l a p s e Grade 95 Casing.
Not for Resale
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
-37-
REFERENCES
Marlow, R.S. ; "Collapse Performance OS HC-95 Casing"; Report on FRAC Project 80-30; i982 American Petroleum Institute Annual Meeting ar.d Conference Harlow, R.S.; "Collapse Performance of HC-95 Casing"; PETROLEUM ENGINEEfl INTERNATIONAL; May S82; pp. 744-144
API BUL 5C3, "Formulas and Calculations for Casing, Tubing, Drill Pipe, and Line Pipe Properties"; Fourth Edition; February 1985; pp. 16-78
A P I Spec 5A, "Specification f o r Casing, Tubing, and Drill Pipe"; ThirtyThird Edition; March 1976; p . 9
API BUL SC3, "Formulas and Calculations for Casing, Tubing, Drill Pipe, and Line Pipe Properties"; Fourth Edition; February 1985; pp. 9-10
Lipson, C. and Sheth, N.J.; Statistical Design and Analvsis Engineering Experiments, McCraw-Hill; pp. 101-103
of
API BUL 5C3, "Formulas and Calculations f o r Casing, Tubing, Drill Pipe, and Line Pipe Properties"; Fourth Edition; February 1985; p. 5 .
Moore, P .W. ; "Manufacturing Techniques in Producing Consistent High Collapse Properties"; American Petrnlou Institute 1986 Annual Standardization Conference; Proceedings, Pipe Symposium
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
.-
. I
S T D . A P I / P E T R O BO-30B-ENGL
1 9 8 7 M 0 7 3 2 2 9 0 0.558094 9 4 4 lg$
APPENDIX
Specimen Selection Guidelines and Hanufacturer Requested Information
Not for Resale
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
TENTATIVE
GUIDELINES FOR SELECTING HIGH COLLAPSE CASING SAMPLES

March 1, i985
User Subcommittee on OCTG accepts r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for selecting samples of high collapse casing. Selection w i l l be made by a member Of the Subcamittee i n the United States. An appropriate outside agency may be employed f n foreign countries.
Selection uf *les
Samples w i l l be selected on a-randan basis, fran m i l l production or m i l l stock. Samples taken from m i l l r o d u c t i o n w i l l be a f t e r hyrostatic t e s t i n g to HC-95 t e s t pressure. When possible, samples w i l l be selected to minimize cost of project. Speci f i c gui del ines are :
1. J o i n t s selected should be completely processed, insofar as manufacturing operations which might a i t e r collapse, i . e * , pipe should have been hydrostatic tested. To minimize cost, ( a l the f i n a l coating operation i s not essential, and (b) j o i n t s with thread defects only are acceptable, as these two items do not alter collapse. 2.
Four j o i n t s should be selected randomly f r o m the m i l l run, but w i t h r o m the early, middle and l a t e parts o f the run. roughly equal choices f The f i n a l inspection area i s a convenient place f o r selection a t the mlll. Manufacturers markings should be clear, for l a t e r p o s i t i v e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n .
3.
Shipping Instructions
Samples shall be marked i n more than one place w i t h a code number and shipped to:
Roy Marlou Southwest Research I n s t i t u t e 6220 Culebra Road San Antonio, TX 78284
N b c t of
-les
Four samples, each selected from te f o l l o w i n g D / t r a t i o s 15-16, 17-18, 20-21, and 22-23 *
Size and Wight
o/ t
Size and Weight
17-18 20-21
22-23
7 518" 29.71, 9 5/8" 47%. 11 3/4" 71#

/
7" 23#, 9 518" 43.5#,

/
11 314" 6%
'
Not for Resale
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
i i . 6 # , 7" a # , 7 5/aii 33.7#, 4 1121~
5/8ii 44th 9 5/a" 53.51
T h i s i s a t o t a l of 16 samples.
Marlow's report.
This i s the same / t r a t i o s mat: are i n ROY Each sample w i l l be 9 feet i n length.
-4-
c
t
Infomation f+a uwfacturer
--. -_
Manufacturer w i l l supply information on process of manufacture, type of heat treatment , straf ghteni ng method and t a p e r a t u r e , cold s i t i ng (how) , mil 1 t e s t report, physical properties s? sample, minimum and maximum y i e l d strength and m i nfmum tensi 1e strength.
Sple Infoiration
.
Mail copy o f fonn to: Techno1ogy
/ V 7 l e - J i / Z L31;
P.\J?sq
Sample information i s recorded on the attached form.

Roy Marlow AND Southwest Research Ins ti t u t e P. O. Drawer 28510 San Antonio, TX 78284
Detail s are as f o l lows:
i
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Sple N r
Amco B r i t i s h Steel B r i t i s h Steel Wet ded Er1 anger Kauasaki LTV Lone Star A016 BO36 CO56 0076 E096 FU6 Gl21 t o 6136 H141 t o H156 5161 t o 5176 K18 t o U196 i201 t o L216 M221 t o a 3 6
A001 to BO21 t o CO41 to DO61 t o E081 t o Fi01 t o
=-e,
r3
z*r w F 7
I*
/&u5?dd
773-
NKK
Nippon Steel Sumi tomo TCA US Steel
Ifother manufacturers j o i n :
A l goma C F d I Oalmi ne Mannesmann Val 1ourcc
N t
N241 to N256 0261 t o 0276 P281 t o P296 9301 t o 0316 R321 t o R336
of Pieces:
P
Show nuniber o f pieces i n l o t from which selection i s nude.
Date:
Sanipl i ng date ay/iaonth/year.
sliple Source:
Location:
- from production, S - from stock.

Name o f manufacturer representative.
Place of sampling.
14rnufactunr Rep:
User Rep:
Name o f user representative.
Not for Resale
S T D - A P I / P E T R O 80-30B-ENGL
1 9 8 7 nIs 0 7 3 2 2 7 0 0 5 8 8 0 7 7 b 5 3
Di**:
Yt/ft:
Nominal. Nominal. Noini na1
Ya1 1 Thf Ckmss: Grade:
Proprietary & s i gnatf on.
Heat W-er:
From paint s t e n c i l .
From manufacturer records.
Date of Iihnufacture: -
Process of Manufacture:
Type of tieat Treatment: .
- ERN, S - Seamless.
None Rotary
NR i zed N f Normalized Normal d Tempered QT Quench & Tempered __

AR
Type
of Straightening and N-cr
of Rolls:
H Hot Rotary P Press None N
Taperatute A f t e r Straightening:
Fahrenhei t
Y
Stress Relieve After Straightening:

M i l l Test Report At-ched: Y
- yes, N - no.
Y
- yes, N - no.
Stress S t r a i n Curve Athched:

Y i e l d Strength: Tensile Strength: Elongation:
'XI
- yes, N - no
psi.
psi.
Collapse Pressure: Residual Stress: Harthass:
psi Absolute value k s i , compression a t inside diameter i s negative.
Rockwell C Scale.
Y
Cold Sizing:
- yes, N - no.
Describe.
Haw is i t Dorn:
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Not for Resale
Sample # Rumbet 07 Pieces gate Samp?e Saurce Locatf on
--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
I
~
Mfr rep
i
-
U ser rep
Diameter
Wft
Wal 1 Thickness Grade Heat Number uate or Manufacture Process o f Manufacture 'Type ot !k;t Treatment Type of b t r a l g h t ening 8 # r o l l s Temperature a f t e r S t r a i ghteni ng 5 tress Re1ieve After S t r a i ghteng R i l l Te s t Re o r t Attached
1
&nm
Curve Attached
Yield Strength
Tensile Strength
E l ongation
t
Col 1apse Pressure
Resi dual Stress

Hardness
1
I
Cold S i z i n g
f
I
1
How i s i t Done?
Remarks:
Not for Resale

Collapse Resistance of Casing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Collapse Resistance of Casing

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

Collapse Resistance of Casing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

--``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

COLLAPSE RESISTANCE OF MILLSELECTED HIGH COLLAPSE GRADE 95 CASING

Roy S. Marlow, P.E.

FINAL REPORT SwRI Project 06-8665

AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE 211 N. Ervay, Suite 1700 Dallas, TX 75201-3668

Not for Resale

1787 W 0732270 0588050 bL2

SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE

COLLAPSE- RESiSTANCE OF MILL SELECTED HIGH COLLAPSE GRADE 95 CASING

FINAL REPORT SwRI Project 06-8665

Industry Consortium through the

AM ERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE 211 N. h a y , Suite 1700 Dallas, TX 75201-3668

Offshore Products Development and Evaluation

This report describes : h e

procedures and results of a project performed

popular sizes and weights currently in use.

Not for Resale

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l TECHNICAL APPROACH .................................................2

III PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ............................

CONCLUSIONS AND R r C O ~ N D A T I O N S ...................................35

Specimen Selection Guidelines and Manufacturer

Not for Resale

0732290 0588053 321

Not for Resale

LIST OF FIGURES ( con t h u e d

FIGURE 24 FIGURE 25 FIGURE 26

Not for Resale

STATISTICAL COMPARISON OP SELECTED CASING PROPERTIES

TABLE II TABLE III TABLE IV TABLE

SIGNIFICANCE OF MULTI-LINEAR REGRESSION VARIABLE S........^^ (SURI 06-8665 DATA)

Not for Resale

I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

T h i s report descrites the procedures and results of

In that project, 152 HC-95 casing specimens uere

selected from user field inventories and tested at SwRI.

II. TECHNICAL APPROACH

All instrumentation used had calibrations traceable to the National Bureau of

from 4-112 in.

All but one manufacturer supplied four pieces in

each of four nominal D/t ranges:

15-16, 17-18, 20-21 and 22-23.

manufacturer supplied four specimens in three of these ranges.

into appropriate test lengths by SwRI.

Collapse test specimens were cut to

Not for Resale

MANUFACTU RER DISTRIBUTION

Not for Resale

1987 W 11732290 0 5 8 8 0 5 9 8 4 T 1881

SPECIMEN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

SPECIMEN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

Not for Resale

Pre-Test Dimensional Checks

the average dimeter, xall thickness, and diameter

Wall thicknesses wer?

Average outside diameters were measured using a "Pi

Eccentricity ( % I = tmax Ovality ( I ) = where,

diameter diameter diameter of eight of eight of eight

D, Residual Stress Tests