Copyright 2002, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Western Regional/AAPG Pacific Section
Joint Meeting held in Anchorage, Alaska, U.S.A., 2022 May 2002.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the 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 Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the 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 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
Traditionally, completion engineers have faced a dilemma
when deciding whether to run a large bore, hydraulic set,
permanent, or retrievable packer. Thanks to advances in
cutting technology, this decision is no longer an
either/or proposition. The innovative alternative is the
removable packer.
This paper will address the development of a removable
packer that combines the best features of both permanent and
retrievable packers: large bore, high performance, simple
design, and flexible retrieving options. The paper will trace the
development of the technique from stack-up testing to the
maiden run and retrieval of the first removable packer in the
Milne Point field, Alaska. Through analysis of this case
history, the paper will address challenges faced, problems
solved and lessons learned that are now being applied to future
enhancements of the removable packer technique.

Introduction
Historically, the selection of a completions production packer
has been an either or proposition either a permanent or
retrievable packer. In practical applications, there is
considerable overlap in which either option is acceptable, but
determination of the boundaries of that overlap continues to be
debated. There are, however, application considerations
that should provide the engineer with a general guideline
for selection.
The permanent packer has long been thought of as the
most reliable option for extreme conditions. As milling is its
only means of removal, consideration of reservoir life
expectancy versus the costs of removal will usually weigh
heavily in the choice of options. By definition, the permanent
set offers simplicity, requiring few moving parts. The lack of
any retrieval mechanism, or internal pressure equalizing
system, permits a larger internal diameter, while maintaining
high differential pressure ratings. Hostile environments are
typically addressed with permanent packers, both for
management of cost and concerns for the long-term integrity
of the retrieval mechanism.
The retrievable option offers the most flexibility and
potential economy in cases where the removal is anticipated in
the short term, or repeatedly in the life of the well.
Performance characteristics in terms of differential pressure
ratings, as well as the reliability of retrieval, have improved
dramatically in recent years. Some of the current retrievable
designs actually rival permanent packer performance in some
size ranges. Despite performance enhancements, retrievable
packer models still dictate limitations in their internal diameter
specifications, associated with the internal bypass and
retrieval mechanisms.
In recent years, a niche has evolved for a third option,
driven by the use of larger diameter production tubulars. The
required packer bore diameters, relative to the available cross-
section, exceed the possibility of conventional retrievable
technology. At the same time, all of the flexibility of a true
retrievable packer is not required. The combination of
permanent packer performance, with a means to facilitate
removal without a costly milling operation, has led to a new
platform of removable packer design. This option provides
for the removal of the packer through advanced chemical or
mechanical cutting technologies (Figure 1).

Removable Packer

Application
The removable packer was designed for prolific reservoirs
that employ large-diameter tubulars for high-volume
production. Often these developments are high-profile
monobore wells, which are found in remote or offshore
environments, many in deepwater or subsea wells or involving
horizontal or extended reach wells. The packer will function
as either a production packer or an isolation packer, above a
liner top or run in tandem as a straddle (Figure 2).

Benefits
Given the high profile and varied applications for a large-
bore packer, the four main removable packer design

SPE 76711
Resolving the Completion Engineer's Dilemma: Permanent or Retrievable Packer?
M.T. Triolo, BP; L.F. Anderson, SPE, M.V. Smith, SPE, Baker Oil Tools
2 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH SPE 76711
drivers were saving rig time, product reliability, flexibility,
and removability.

Save Rig Time: (Figure 3)
1) One-trip, flanged up, no tubing manipulation, no-
movement required during hydraulic setting.
2) Multiple interventionless setting options to further
reduce installation costs and risk.
3) Removal of packer on the production string in event
of pre-set while running in the well.
4) Optional contingency removal methods using thru-
tubing and workstring methods.

Reliability: (Figure 3)
1) Simple robust design similar to permanent packer
with no integral retrieving mechanism to complicate
the design.
2) Use of proven non-deforming slips and element
system with retrievable extrusion barriers to ensure
removability.
3) Design verification illustrated using permanent
packer performance envelope, according to highest
ISO 14310, Level V0 specifications for production
packer testing.
4) System verification by means of a stack-up test from
a drilling rig.

Flexibility: (Figure 4)
1) Modular design based on three components: head,
packer, tail.
2) Head configurable for tubing connection floating
seals, anchored seals, or no seals.
3) Head configurable for removal: thru-tubing or
workstring cut-to-removal options.
4) Tail configurable for setting hydraulic, hydrostatic
or via remote actuated plugging device.

Removability: (Figure 5)
1) On production string
a) Thru-tubing chemical cut
b) Thru-tubing mechanical cut
c) Straight-pull shear release (low service only).
2) On workstring
a) Removing tool
b) Milling tool.

Operations
Running. The removable packer was designed to be run
and set as with traditional hydraulic set packers. Once at
setting depth, land the tubing into the wellhead hanger and
install the plugging device below the packer. Slowly apply
internal pressure to the tubing string to the calculated setting
pressure. Hold the pressure for 15 minutes to ensure all
components of the packer are fully deployed. Bleed off tubing
and test the packer. Remove plugging device from tubing by
appropriate means.
The removable packer was designed to be compatible with
existing alternative setting modules hydrostatic setting
module or various disappearing plug modules. These
alternative setting modules would allow the packer to be set
without wireline intervention (Figure 4).
Removal. Equalize pressure above and below the packer
by opening sliding sleeves or perforating the tubing. To
retrieve the packer and tailpipe, the packer mandrel must be
cut. Two methods of removal are available, depending on
the geometry of the completion: 1) removal on the completion
string using a thru-tubing chemical or mechanical cutter,
and/or 2) removal on the workstring using a removing or
milling tool. In either case, once the mandrel is cut, upward
movement of the tubing will release and stretch out the slips
and element of the packer (Figure 5).

1) Removal on Completion String.

Using Thru-Tubing Chemical Cutter.
In non-restrictive ID completions, chemical cutting is the
primary method of removing the packer. This cutting method
is applicable only when the OD of the pre-determined cutting
assembly can pass through all the restrictions above
the packer.
Care should be given when running the completion
bottomhole assembly to take accurate length, ID and OD
measurements of the packer, pipe and crossover connections.
One should allow enough space below the desired cutting area
for the collar locator or correlation device to pass below the
packer to ensure accurate depth correlation. The use of a
radioactive tag run on the original completion is recommended
as a means of locating the cutting zone of the packer.
A Chemical Cutter should be run on an appropriately
designed wireline tool string consisting of weight bars, collar
locator and/or gamma ray correlation device, firing sub, upper
propellant sub, slip sub, lower propellant sub, chemical
cylinder, cutting head and bull plug. The chemical cutter is
anchored by a button type slip sub, which anchors the tool
during the cutting operation. Once the cutting operation is
completed, the slips retract and the tool is free to be pulled
from the well.
Once activated, the chemical cutter will cut cleanly
through the packer mandrel, allowing the packer and tailpipe
to be retrieved. In stacked packer applications, all the packers
can be retrieved on the production tubing simultaneously,
simply by cutting all the packer mandrels.

Using Thru-Tubing Mechanical Cutter.
In restricted ID type completions, coiled tubing conveyed
mechanical cutting allows retrieval of the removable packer
on the completion string. This cutting method must be pre-
designed into the original completion as it requires the use of a
Thru-Tubing Cutting Extension (TCE). The TCE, placed
above the removable packer, allows the cutting BHA to locate
and position itself across the cutting zone of the packer.
Care should be given when running the completion
bottomhole assembly to take accurate length, ID and OD
SPE 76711 RESOLVING THE COMPLETION ENGINEER'S DILEMMA: PERMANENT OR RETRIEVABLE PACKER? 3
measurements of the packer, pipe and crossover connections.
One should allow enough space above the desired cutting area
for the adjustable no-go locating sub to locate and still provide
sufficient distance for the motor and the underreamer.
An underreaming tool should be run on an appropriately
designed coiled tubing tool string, consisting of a connector,
dual-flapper back pressure valve, hydraulic disconnect, dual-
actuated circulation sub, adjustable no-go locating sub, and
mud motor.
Upon reaching the TCE, the adjustable no-go sub will
position the underreamer across the cutting zone of the packer.
Gradually bring the pump rate up to the flow rate determined
by the service company representative on site. Continue the
cutting process until a positive pressure drop has been
observed. This will indicate that the cut has been made.
Once the cutting operation is completed, the cutting knives
retract into the underreamer and the entire cutting bottomhole
assembly is removed from the well. Upward movement of the
production tubing will release and stretch out the slips and
packing element system. The packer and tailpipe can be
pulled out of the well with upstrain.

2) Removal on Workstring

Using Workstring Conveyed Removing Tool (WCRT).
This method of removal can only be used when the
removable packer is run with an alternative upper sealbore.
To use the WCRT, the anchor type seal assembly must be
removed from the upper sealbore of the packer.
The WCRT is run in on an appropriately designed
workover string consisting of jars, drill collars, or if rotation of
the pipe is not possible, a downhole motor.
Upon reaching the upper sealbore receptacle, the tool
enters the packer bore and is automatically positioned for
mechanical cutting. Applying set-down weight at this point
will ensure that the anchor latch positively engages the left-
hand thread in the sealbore receptacle. Gradually, bring the
pump rate up to the flow rate and RPMs, which was
determined by the service company representative on site.
Continue the cutting process until a positive pressure drop has
been observed. This will indicate that the cut has been made.
Once the packer mandrel is cut, upward movement of the
workstring will release and stretch out the slips and packing
element system. The packer and tailpipe can be pulled out of
the well with upstrain.

Using Milling Tool.
In the event the packer can not be removed using standard
removal procedures, the packer can be milled over
and retrieved.
A milling tool can be used in conjunction with a washover
assembly to burn over and retrieve the removable packer in
one trip. Run in the hole with washover assembly with
appropriately sized milling shoe. Mill down to the slips or
until the packer moves downhole. Pull out of the hole with
washover assembly and recovered packer.
Design Concept
Performance. The removable packer concept utilized
proven retrievable components taken from both mechanical
and hydraulic set packers. A slip-element-slip with positive
debris barrier design was chosen over conventional element-
slip or the unconventional slip-element design for its ability to
emulate the permanent packer in performance and simplicity.
Having a slip on either side of the element reduces tri-axial
stresses, both in the casing and the body of the packer; the
casing, as the load (holding slip) is separated (by the packing
element) from the pressure; the body, as the load path doesnt
extend past the slips on the body, thus permitting use of
standard yield strength materials and reduced cross section to
enable more reliable cutting and removal of the packer.
Removability. The cut-to-remove concept is based on the
premise that the cross-section of the packers cut zone is
similar to that of the production tubing. Thus, as long as the
operator can chemically cut his tubing and no major
restrictions exist above the packer, then the packer body
should be able to be cut. Mechanical cutting would be much
the same, requiring no new tool developments, though the
travel of the knives would need to be controlled so the cut did
not extend past the body. The workstring retrieving tool
would combine a proven retrieving tool with a mechanical
cutter. In summary, no new technology development or
characterization of cutters was planned using this cut-to-
remove design concept.

Design Validation
The design concepts covering the packer performance and
its removability would be validated analytically by component
in the laboratory, systemically on a test rig, and operationally
in the field.

1) Equipment Validation: Lab Tests
Performance. Extensive component testing was
performed on both the slip mechanism and packing element
system to ensure removability.
Packer performance was verified using a ratings
performance envelope (Figure 6). The rating envelope was
originally developed to describe the performance of permanent
packers and their failure modes.
3
The rating envelope has
evolved through the International Standards Organization, ISO
14310, as a standard means to illustrate the combined loading,
i.e., applied pressure and axial load, which a packer sees
during design validation testing. ISO 14310 sets six standard
design validation grades (V6 to V1) and one special grade
(V0). These standardized grades allow the user/purchaser to
match the appropriate level of validation testing to the actual
well application requirements. Design validation grade V6 is
the minimum grade where the validation method has been
defined by the supplier/manufacturer. The complexity and
severity of the validation testing increases as the grade number
decreases.

(Table 1). Full-scale testing of the removable
packer was performed according to the most stringent ISO
14310, level V0 validation testing criteria. V0 validation
testing requires testing in gas, in maximum rated casing ID.
4 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH SPE 76711
This is a test inclusive of all intersection points of the rated
performance envelope, with temperature cycles, and with no
leaks- holding gas pressure bubble tight.
4

Additional testing was performed to verify the no body
movement was required during setting specification so the
packer would qualify for straddle packer and liner top
isolation completions.
Removability. To speed up development, the two aspects
of the cut-to-remove technique were tested separately in the
laboratory: 1) cut and 2) remove.
Cutting ability was tested, both on the mechanical cutter
and chemical cutter. Sample targets, cylinders of same cross-
section and metallurgy of the body of the packer, were
furnished to the cutting service providers. The mechanical
cutter was qualified using a mud motor in a flow loop, while
the chemical cutter was qualified in an environmental test cell
that could simulate temperature and hydrostatic pressure.
Special non-destructive, laboratory-based removal
procedures were developed to test the ability of the packer to
be removed after full ISO 14310 V0 verification testing.

2) Operations Validation: Stack-up Tests
There were two main objectives in the stack-up system
tests performed from a drilling rig based in Bossier City,
Louisiana. The first objective was to determine the ability of
the packers to perform in a drilling environment and in a
stacked packer application. The tools were set and then
pressure tested to ascertain the seal integrity. The second
objective was to remove the packers using four different
removal methods: thru-tubing chemical cut, workstring
conveyed retrieving tool, milling, and thru-tubing mechanical
cut with mud motor.
Performance. Two removable packers were run in
stacked, about 90 ft (27 m) apart. The tools were set at the
same time. After they were set, pressure was applied between
them, below the bottom packer, and then above the top packer.
Removability. Once the pressure test was completed, the
bottom packer was chemically cut on wireline. Then the top
packer was cut on workstring using the retrieving tool. Both
packers were retrieved together (Photos 1 & 2).
A third packer was run in and set by itself. After a push-
pull test, the tool was milled over and retrieved using standard
procedures. The packer and sealbore head were milled over in
3 hours, which is similar to the time required to mill over a
permanent packer (Photo 3).
A fourth packer was set and tested in the same manner as
the third. It was cut through tubing on small OD pipe
(simulating coiled tubing) using a mechanical cutter powered
by a mud motor (Photo 4).
All well tests validated our original design concepts. The
testing also led to design enhancements to the mechanical
cutter and workstring retrieving tools that led to more
efficient operations.

3) Application Validation: Case Histories
The first two installations with removable packers were in
the remote areas of northern Alaska (Figure 7). These two
installations put the removable packers design concepts to the
test immediately: 1) removability: ability to remove the
packer by multiple methods, and 2) performance: operate in
a drilling/workover environment and in a stacked
packer application.

Case History #1 (Figure 8)

Design concept tested & proven: Multiple removable
methods
Application: Single packer, frac,
produce & remove
Well Reference: BP MPF-86
Date of Packer Setting: August 8, 2001
Casing Size: 7 in. 26 ppf
Tubing Size: 4 in. 12.6 ppf
Number of Packers: 1
Packer Setting Depth (MD): 10,806 ft (3294 m)
Max. Deviation: 64
Well Type: Oil Producer

The Milne Point F-86 well was drilled and completed
initially with a removable packer, sliding sleeve and jet pump
installation to allow formation fracturing of Kuparuk A2
sands. The jet pump was placed after the frac treatment was
completed and the well was preproduced and tested. At a later
date, the frac tubing and packer installation were removed and
the A1 and A3 sands perforated. An electrical submersible
pump was installed after the A2/A3 sands were perforated.
The well was then brought on production.
Performance. Removable packer was set by dropping a
ball onto the seat in a plug below the packer. Packer set with
applied pressure and the tubing was tested. Bled pressure on
tubing, and applied pressure to annulus for backside test of the
packer. The well was fraced using 205,200 lb (76,588 kg) of
carbolite treatment over a 3 hour time period. Maximum
surface treating pressure was 5260 psi (387 bar) with an
average flow rate of 25 barrels per minute during the job.
Calculated combined loads at the packer were 6789 psi (468
bar) and 64,000 lb tension (29,205 kg).
Removability. After well testing using a jet pump, rigged
up the chemical cutter with collar locator and attempted to cut
and remove the packer on the production tubing. Pulled up
40,000 lb (18,144 kg) over string weight to free the packer.,
but the packer was still set and would not release. Released
anchor type seal assembly from the packer and came out of
well with the production tubing. Went back in with
workstring conveyed removing tool (WCRT) and tagged
packer at 10,794 ft. (3290 m). Cut the packer mandrel in five
minutes and pulled 25,000 lb. (11,340 kg) over string weight
and the packer came free. Pulled two stands and saw only
minimal drag at the first two casing collars. Continued out of
the well bore with no signs of drag or sticking for the
remainder of the trip.
Subsequent examination of the packer revealed that the
chemical cut was 2.5 in. too low and was placed across the
bottom guide. The workstring removal tool cut the mandrel in
SPE 76711 RESOLVING THE COMPLETION ENGINEER'S DILEMMA: PERMANENT OR RETRIEVABLE PACKER? 5
the exact location as planned (Photo 5). This case history
validated the benefit of having multiple methods of removing
the packer.

Case History #2 (Figure 9)

Design concept tested & proven: drilling/workover
environment & stacked
packer application
Application: Triple-straddle isolation
completion
Well Reference: BP Prudhoe Bay, S-107
Date of Packer Setting: August 8, 2001
Casing Size: 7 in. 26 ppf
Tubing Size: 4 in. 12.6 ppf
Number of Packers: 3
Top Packer, MD: 11,718 ft (3572 m)
Measured Depth (MD),
6635 ft +(2022 m)- True
Vertical Depth (TVD)
Middle Packer, MD: 11,823 ft (3604 m) MD,
6680 ft +(2036 m)- TVD
Bottom Packer, MD: 12,223 ft (3726 m) MD,
6850 ft + (2088 m)- TVD
Max. Deviation: 97.6
Well Type: Horizontal H
2
O Injection

The dual purpose of this triple-packer completion was to
selectively capture two seawater injection targets in the
Kuparuk C-sands ~3700 ft. (1128 m) apart and isolate an old
set of perforations above the injection target zones. The old
perforations were isolated between the top packer at 11,720 ft
(3572 m) MD and the middle packer at 11,825 ft (3604 m)
MD. Current desirable injection zones were perforated for
placement between the middle packer and the bottom packer
at 12,226 ft (3226 m) MD. A sliding sleeve was installed
between the middle packer and bottom packer at 11,967 ft
(3648 m) MD to provide injection selectivity between
subzones of the Kuparuk C sands. The main area of
injectivity below the lower packer was cased behind solid pipe
from a liner top packer at 12,259 feet to an external casing
packer at 15,127 ft (4611 m) MD with slotted uncemented
liner from the external casing packer to 15,938 ft MD (4858
m) plug back total depth of the well.
Performance. Three removable packers were run
immediately following clean-out trip where a cast iron bridge
plug was drilled up. During the run-in with the packers, the
string stopped multiple times as the packers encountered cast
iron plug debris. At one point, circulation was stopped due to
the debris in the wellbore. At setting depth, all three packers
were hydraulically set using standard procedures. The tubing
and backside were pressure tested successfully to 3,500 psi
(241.3 bar). This case history validated the removable
packers application in drilling/workover environments and in
stacked packer applications.


Additional Case Histories
The field experience validated our original design
concepts. The removable packer has proven to save rig time
by being stackable, reliable in drilling/workover
environments, flexible and removable. Additional runs have
been recorded in Alaska, the Middle East and Caspian
Sea areas.

Benefits/Limitations/Enhancement Opportunities

Benefits. The current removable packer and cutting
technology provides the following significant benefits for
high-profile monobore wells, which are found in remote or
offshore environments, many in deepwater or subsea wells or
involving horizontal or extended reach wells:
1) Saves rig time - using one-trip, flanged-up hydraulic,
with no-mandrel movement during setting procedures, greatly
simplifying space-out procedures.
2) Reliability - simple robust design similar to the
permanent packers slip-element-slip configuration.
3) Flexibility - modular design using head, packer, and
tail adds flexibility to cover a wide range of applications,
allowing multiple removal and setting methods.
4) Removability - non-deforming slips and attached
extrusion barrier proven to be retrievable.

Limitations. Current removable packer and cutting
technology limitations are as follows:
1) Metallurgy - limited experience in cutting high-nickel
alloy CRA tubulars.
2) Restricted ID completions - limited to workstring
retrieving tool and thru-tubing mechanical cutting
removal options.
3) Thru-tubing cutters - only as good as the means to
locate the cutting zone of the packer mandrel. Use of
no-go or selective locating profiles above the packer
are recommended, and where applicable, a
radioactive tag for locating the chemical cutter.

Enhancements. Enhancements of removable packer and
cutting technology under development, or that are being
sought, include:
1) Cutting technology for high-grade corrosion resistant
alloys - development of industry accepted and
everyday usage of cutters for high- nickel
alloy tubulars.
2) Through tubing release methods - development of
industry accepted and everyday usage of lower cost
thru-tubing releasing methods.
3) Commercialization/standardization - opportunity to
develop universal and standard thru-tubing locating
methods for use in restricted and non-restricted
completions. Efficient solutions exist, though they
tend to be operator and well specific.

6 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH SPE 76711
Conclusion
1) Removable packers resolve the completion
engineers dilemma when deciding between
retrievable and permanent large-bore packers.
2) Removable packers offer value in high-profile
monobore wells, which are found in remote or
offshore environments, deepwater or subsea wells, or
involve horizontal or extended reach completions.
3) The removable packer design concept was validated
by performance testing in the laboratory, system
testing at a rig, and application testing in the field.
4) Enhancements in cutting technologies will continue
to offer additional value in using removable packers.
5) Wider usage and experience with removable packers
will lead to improved and standardized thru-tubing
locating and cutting techniques.

Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank the management of BP and Baker
Oil Tools for the permission to publish this paper, and thank
the various other operators for their investment in removable
packer technology. This development would not have been
successful without the many synergistic efforts of Baker Oil
Tools Packer group and Fishing Group with their
Metal Muncher

technology, and Baker Atlas chemical
cutting technology.

References
1. Bradley, W.B. (ed): Petroleum Engineering Handbook, Third
Printing, Richardson, TX (1992), Chapter 4, pgs. 1-11.
2. Economides, M. J., Watters, L.T., Dunn, S. (ed): Petroleum
Well Construction, John Wiley & Sons, West Sussex, England,
1998, pg. 381-387.
3. Hopmann, M., and Walker, T.: Predict Permanent Packer
Performance, Petroleum Engineering International (1995)
35-39.
4. ISO/DIS 14310, Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries -
Downhole Equipment - Packers and Bridge Plugs, 18
January 2001.
5. Jones, R. D.: SPE 68349, Developing Coiled-Tubing
Techniques on the Karachaganak Field, Kazakhstan, presented
at SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Roundtable, Houston, TX, 7-8
March 2001.















































SPE 76711 RESOLVING THE COMPLETION ENGINEER'S DILEMMA: PERMANENT OR RETRIEVABLE PACKER? 7






Figure 1. Packer Options


R
e
t
r
i
e
v
a
b
l
e P
e
r
m
a
n
e
n
t
R
e
mova
b
l
e
Thru-tubing and workstring removal options
Can be redressed when practical
Drillable
Can not be redressed
Non-destructive removal
Can be redressed easily
Integral retrieving mechanism
Integral equalizing mechanism
Generally not mill friendly
Moderate performance with
large IDs
Non-drillable
Uses proven
retrievable components
No milling required for
removal
Actuate
Set
Grip & Seal
Simple slip-element-
slip design
Destructive removal
Non-integral equalizing
or retrieving mechanism
Can be milled over &
recovered
High performance
w/large IDs
Grip & Seal






8 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH SPE 76711






Figure 2. Removable Packer Applications


Extended reach deepwater
Liner Top Isolation
Big bore
monobore






SPE 76711 RESOLVING THE COMPLETION ENGINEER'S DILEMMA: PERMANENT OR RETRIEVABLE PACKER? 9


Figure 3. Removable Packer Features


Configurable for floating seals,
anchored seals, or no seals
Configurable for thru-
tubing and/or workstring
cut-to-removal
Positive, element-type
debris barrier
Slip-element-
slip: gripping
slips isolated
from high
pressure
Field proven,
non-deforming
retrievable slip
system
Retrievable
sealing system
No mandrel
movement during
setting
Configurable for
traditional or
interventionless setting


10 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH SPE 76711
Figure 4. Removable Packer Components

HEAD
PACKER
TAIL
Seals
Anchored
Seals
Floating
No Seals
Premium
Disconnect
Premium
Thru-Tubing
Cut Extension
Removable
Packer
Intervention-to-Set Interventionless
Tubing Tester/
Packer Setting
Module
Interventionless
Hydrostatic Setting Moddule
Interventionless
Disappearing Plug Module

SPE 76711 RESOLVING THE COMPLETION ENGINEER'S DILEMMA: PERMANENT OR RETRIEVABLE PACKER? 11

Figure 5. Removable Packer Removal Techniques


ON WORKSTRING ON PRODUCTION TUBING
Thru-tubing
Chemical Cut
Thru-tubing
Mechanical Cut
Removing Tool Milling Tool

12 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH SPE 76711
Figure 6. Performance Envelope

Above Below 0
A
p
p
l
i
e
d

A
x
i
a
l

L
o
a
d
S
e
t
-
D
o
w
n
T
e
n
s
i
o
n
0
Differential Pressure



Figure 7. Geographic Location of Milne Point and Prudhoe Bay, Alaska

KOBUK
NORTH SLOPE
YUKON-KOYUKUK
Umiat
Kaktovik
Barrow
Be a u f o r t Se a
Ar ct i c Oc ean
Prudhoe Bay-Field
S
a
ga
v
a
n
i
r
k
o
k
R
i
v
e
r
Teshekpuk
Lake
Colville River
Harrison Bay
Camden Bay
Milne Point Field
ALASKA
CANADA

SPE 76711 RESOLVING THE COMPLETION ENGINEER'S DILEMMA: PERMANENT OR RETRIEVABLE PACKER? 13






Figure 8. Milne Point F-86 Well with Frac, Test and Remove Completion

4-1/2 Tbg.12.6#,
L-80, ID=3.958
4-1/2 Gas Lift Mandrel 10578
4-1/2 Sliding Sleeve 10772
7x4-1/2 Removable Packer
w/alternative upper seal bore
10786
4-1/2 Nipple 10816
10827 WLEG
MPF-86
7 Csg. 26#,
L-80, ID = 6.276
11206
9-5/8 Csg. 40# -
L-80, ID=8.835
7x4-1/2 Anchor Type Seal
Assembly
10784
5517

14 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH SPE 76711

Figure 9. Prudhoe Bay S-107 Well with Triple-Packer Completion


S-107
4-1/2 SSSVN, ID = 3.813
4-1/2 Nipple, ID = 3.813
4-1/2 Sliding Sleeve, ID = 3.812
7x 4-1/2 Removable Pkr, ID= 3.875
4-1/2 Nipple, ID =3.813
7x 4-1/2 Removable Pkr, ID = 3.875
4-1/2 Nipple, ID =3.725
7x 5 Liner Pkr, ID = 5.250
4-1/2 WLEG, ID =3.958
4-1/2 Ext. Csg. Pkr, ID = 3.937
7x 4-1/2 Removable Pkr, ID= 3.875
7x 5 Liner Hanger, ID = 4.430
7 Csg, 26#,
L-80, ID = 6.276
4-1/2 Tbg, 12.6#,
L-80, ID = 3.958
RA Tags in Joint # 10
4265 10-3/4 Csg, 45.5#,
L-80, ID = 9.980
4-1/2 Slotted Liner 12.6#, L-80, ID = 3.958
Top of 4-1/2 Slotted Liner
2277
11654
11967
11718
11823
12202
12223
12250
12259
12263
12274
15019
15274
PBTD 15938
4-1/2 Liner, 12.6#, L-80, ID = 3.958
12274
12421
12262
11665
15980

SPE 76711 RESOLVING THE COMPLETION ENGINEER'S DILEMMA: PERMANENT OR RETRIEVABLE PACKER? 15




Photo 1. Disassembled recovered packer Photo 2. Disassembled recovered packer showing
showing mandrel severed by chemical cutter mandrel severed by workstring-conveyed removing tool









Photo 3. Recovered packer using milling tool Photo 4. Disassembled recovered packer showing mandrel
severed by mechanical cutter and mud motor


16 M. T. TRIOLO, L. F. ANDERSON, M. V. SMITH SPE 76711






Photo 5. Disassembled recovered packer showing both
workstring-conveyed retrieving tool cut on mandrel and
chemical cut in bottom guide











Table 1. ISO 14310 Production Packer Design Validation Grades

Grade V6 Supplier/manufacturer defined test
Grade V5 Liquid pressure test
Grade V4 Liquid performance envelope
Grade V3 Liquid performance envelope with temperature cycling
Grade V2 Gas performance envelope
Grade V1 Gas performance envelope with temperature cycling
Grade V0 Gas performance envelope plus temperature cycling with zero bubble leakage