W200 Casing Design Day 1

CASING DESIGN
W200 – Core & Well

DEM1 CTDM
448 f t TOC
0 ft RKB
448 f t 575 f t Mud Line
Engineering Knowledge
3000 f t 26" x 20" Surf ace Casing
8000 f t
9850 f t TOC
13950 f t TOC
14450 f t 13 5/8" Intermediate Casing
15899 f t TOL
15903 f t 10 3/4" x 9.974" Production Casing
16000 f t 3 1/2" Production Tubing
Establish, Verify, Document

18610 f t 7" Production Liner
Copyright Copyright
of Shell International
E&P E&P RESTRICTED
RESTRICTED June
June
2011
2011 1
About your instructor
Copyright of Shell International E & P W200 – EP Core & Well Engineering Knowledge Casing RESTRICTED June 2011 2
Design
About your instructor
Ruggero Trevisan [Rodger]
Work experience:
• Altus Well Experts – Senior Engineer
• Halliburton/Landmark – Drilling Consultant (Shell – BP)
• Mott Mac Donald – Geotech/Structural Engineer
(foundation/conductor design – soil interaction)
Education:
• MSc Mechanical Engineering (dynamics) Aberdeen University
(UK)
• MEng Geotechnical/Structural Engineering - Padua University
(Italy)
Design
About Altus Well Experts
- Founded December 2001
- Based in Houston – offices in London & Aberdeen
- Dr Malcolm Goodman, President, founded Enertech in 1976

- Enertech developed WellCat, StressCheck & CasingSeat
- Enertech was sold to Halliburton in 1996
- Majority of staff are ex-Enertech (expert WellCat users)

- Licenses for all Landmark tubulars products
- Specialized in: Thermal Analysis/Tubular Analysis HPHT wells –

Critical well designs – QA audits – post-failure analyses – engineering
mentoring – manuals
- Global contracts with major Operators for training

Design
Bet they
didn’t design
for this!!
Design
Tubular Design in the Wells DLP and Round 2
Tubular Design
(Core Knowledge)
Casing Design Tubing Stress Analysis

(Well Engineering Knowledge) (Well Services Knowledge)
Design
Core Knowledge - Tubular Design
Tubular Design Philosophy

Well Loads
Tubular Strength
Standards
Tubular Selection
Design Software
Design
Functions of Casing
Keeping the hole open from sloughing and swelling

shales;
Keeping the hole open from moving salt formations;
Preventing contamination of fresh-water horizons;
Providing a means of controlling fluid influxes;
Providing a container for drilling and completion fluids;
Confining produced fluid to the well bore;
Providing a smooth conduit for drilling, logging and
completion tools;
Providing a smooth conduit for future casing and tubing
strings;
Supporting wellhead equipment and subsequent casing
strings;
Providing a means of anchoring the BOPs and christmas
tree.
Design
Flow Conduit
Close Circulation System:
1. Fluid is pumped down

2. Fluid return to surface and get treated
3. Fluid is re-circulated
W200 – EP Core & Well Engineering Knowledge Casing Design

Copyright of Shell International E & P RESTRICTED June 2011 9
Structural Support
Design
Zonal Isolation
Design
Zonal Isolation
Design
Casing Functions
Terminology varies from

OU to OU
Different terminology for
surface and sub-sea wells
Focus on function rather
than name!!
Consider loads and load
cases
Design
Casing String Nomenclature (i)
Stove Pipe (driven or cemented in pre-drilled hole)

Onshore drilling, Circulation system
Marine Conductor (Driven, drilled & driven or Cmt’d.)
Offshore drilling where BOP stack is above water.
Structural strength, Circulation system, Guide
Foundation Pile (Jetted or cemented in pre-drilled hole)
Offshore drilling where BOP stack is on sea bed
Circulation system, Guide
Design
Casing String Nomenclature (ii)
Conductor String (1st string with BOPs installed)
Installed to cover shallow unconsolidated formations
To seal off shallow water sands
To provide protection against shallow gas
Surface String (Cemented to surface or inside conductor)
Installed to provide BOP protection
To seal off water sands and/or to prevent loss of circulation
Intermediate String
To isolate weak formations
To case of loss zones, sloughing, caving & reservoir formations
Also set in transition zones to abnormal formation pressures
To provide BOP protection by upgrading the strength of the well
Design
Casing String Nomenclature (iii)
Production String
Installed to separate productive zones (Hydrocarbons barrier)
Design for damage/wear when drilling through
Liner (other than slotted liners)
A string of casing which does not extend all the way to surface
Installed to permit deeper drilling
To separate productive zones
Cemented to the top to avoid TAP effect
Design
Well Engineering Knowledge – Casing Design
Preliminary Casing Design – A recommended best practice

Casing seat selection
Casing / Liner scheme selection
Detailed Casing Design – A mandatory Shell standard
Casing strength requirements
Pipe selection
Thread selection
Design
Casing Design Process
Will the bungee be strong

enough?
Will the bungee stretch
enough to stop my body
being pulled to pieces
when it stops?
Will the bungee not stretch
so far that I hit the ground?
Do these guys know what
they are doing?
Design
Loads need to be determined
understanding of the dynamics of the system
[well is a dynamic entity]
Developing of a mathematical model of the
system [formulas and equations]
skill to be able to use the model to calculate
the actual loads [is the mathematical model
realistic?]
How system will behave under a number of
different loads needs to be modelled and
understood [Drilling – Cementing – Production
– hot/cold shut-in – injection – abandonment]
Mechanical properties of the equipment used
must be understood – including how it
deforms under load and also what is its
ultimate strength [Min Yield Strength of
material of tubulars]
Design
Critical that operational limits of system are

determined and communicated to all relevant
parties [Interaction of tubulars with surface and
completion equipment]
Critical that condition of equipment is monitored
an understanding of how changes in
condition can effect ability to withstand loads
that might be applied.[Yield Strength deration
with temperature]
The impact of getting the calculations wrong or
going outside the operating envelope can be
catastrophic.[Risk management – Design
Factors].
Design
A comparison of resistance (i.e., strength or capacity) of the pipe vs the load
(from force or pressure) which acts on the pipe during different operations of
the well.
Necessary to differentiate three elements of tubulars design:
capacity (resistance) of the pipe
loads caused by weight, fluid pressures, and temperatures and, sometimes,
additional loads caused by reservoir compaction or salt movement.
operations of the well which cause certain combinations of loads to occur
The loads that are applied to tubulars in a well generate a number of different
stresses
Fundamental concept for casing design: Equivalent stress - must remain a
prescribed amount (or more) below the stress that will cause yield in the pipe
(the yield stress)
Design
σYield
σLoad × DF < σYield or σLoad <
DF
where :
σLoad = stress due to applied loads
σYield = stress that will cause yield in the pipe
DF = design factor
Design
Loads on Tubulars
Design
Loads on Tubulars
Burst Loads
Collapse Loads
Tensile Loads
Service Loads
Design
Load Cases
Critical aspect of design is identification, documentation and

modelling of all operations that are likely to take place on a well
through to its eventual abandonment
Normal production /injection
Pressure testing
Stimulation
Workover and sidetrack

Gas lifting
Conversion from production to injection or vice versa
Design
Load Cases
Pipe must tolerate predictable events such as:

Changes in operating temperature
Changes in reservoir pressure
Well intervention operations such as stimulation, workover etc
Tubing Leaks
Annulus blowdown during gas lifting
Corrosion of tubulars
Well kill operations
Design
Design – Challenge and Opportunity
Design
The New CTDM – WS.39.01.20.12
CTDM is a Manual in place of the previous Guide

Split into three volumes
normative requirements (mandatory, “shall” and “SHALL [PS]”)
informative best practices (recommended, “should”)
background information
Casing and Tubing Design Manual

Vol. 2 (end of
Vol. 1 (2011) Vol. 3 (2013)
2012)
Requirements Background
Best Practices
Vol. 1 - Mandatory Requirements
rule book what to comply with
not a cook book not how to do it
Design
Process Safety
The standards contain a number of mandatory requirements relating
to prevention of, or managing risk associated with a Process Safety
related incident with RAM (Risk Assessment Matrix) red or yellow 4/5
rating.
Design
CTDM aligns with the HSSE & SP Control Framework
The HSSE & SP Control Framework Process Safety defines

DEM2 – Process Safety Basic Requirements (PSBR)
DEM1 – Application of Technical Standards
PSBR #11 is about Deep Water well design
Derogation by CEO
CTDM contains ten DEM1 requirements, denoted by “SHALL [PS]”
Derogation by TA1, endorsed by PTE, registered by Standards Group
Other requirements, denoted by “shall”
Derogation by TA1, supported by PTE
PTE Principal Technical Expert

TEH Technical Expertise Holder
Design
The 10 SHALL [PS] Statements
There SHALL [PS] be two barriers after surface casing is run
Barriers are being defined in the Well Control Manual
Materials SHALL [PS] be selected for lifetime fluids environment
Tubular material SHALL [PS] comply with specified QA and inspection
requirements
Only Shell approved connections SHALL [PS] be used for barriers
Well Designer SHALL [PS] ensure that:
All applicable design check equations are fulfilled, or
An appropriate risk-based design is performed to manage the risk to
ALARP
Well Designer SHALL [PS] specify cementing requirements
Pressure testing of the barriers SHALL [PS] be performed
Well accessories SHALL [PS] meet tubular design standards
Hangers SHALL [PS] be locked down prior to next operation
Hangers & seals SHALL [PS] be designed to meet well loads
Derogations
Derogation - Exception to a design requirement
Deviation during design stage

Non-Conformance after design and construction
Procedure
DTA QTP Standards Group
Link
Approval* Endorsement Registration
shall Chief Well
CEO yes HSSE & SP CF
(PSBR) Engineer
SHALL [PS]
TA1 PTE yes DEM1 Derogation
(DEM1)
Wells Technical
shall TA1 PTE no Assurance
* Based on documented risk assessment (Risk ALARP)
DTA Delegated Technical Authority

QTP Qualified Technical Professional
PSBR Process Safety Basic Requirement
PTE Principal Technical Expert
Copyright of Shell International E & P W350 - Casing & Tubing Design Manual - Key RESTRICTED June 2011 32
Global & Regional Standards
Regions shall comply with the Global Casing & Tubing Design Manual
(CTDM)
Notion of Level I, II and III abandoned
Past successful, documented Regional practice may be
‘Grandfathered’ by derogation to form a Regional Design Manual
Regional Design Manual may also cover:
Well types (currently) excluded from CTDM (e.g. Steam wells)
Step-changes based on Risk-Based Well Design process
Detailed Design Process
Ch 3
Materials Selection
Ch 4 Ch 5
Pipe Body Strength Connection Strength
Preliminary Design Supplementary

Design Process
Size, Shoe Depth Requirements
Ch 9
Design Load Cases Design Factors

Ch 6 Ch 8
Design Check Equations
Ch 7
Ch 2: General Req
Material, Size, Weight, Grade, Connection
Ch 10: Specific Req
Key Differences from CTDG EP2000-9073
Materials Selection and Design
Standard Environments or Advice from Materials Qualified Tech
Professional (QTP)
Rules how to design with Carbon, Sour Carbon, 13Cr or CRA
Strength of tubular connections
ISO 13679 testing
Grandfathering legacy connections
Connection Strength Envelope (CSE) tool
Explicit Design Check Equations
Deterministic formulas that need to be complied with in design
Checks for (1) running loads, (2) collapse loads, (3) tri-axial burst loads
No uniaxial design checks
StressCheck or WellCat facilitate performing these checks

Key Differences from CTDG EP2000-9073
Granularity of Design Factors

Triaxial burst design factors range from 1.1 to 1.25
Design factors depend on severity of fluid environment, material quality and
loading uncertainty
Factors for Legacy connections are 0.2 higher than for Tested connections
Categories of Quality Assurance and Inspection
Material quality impacts the required minimum Design Factor
Live document
Upcoming Chapter 10.8 for Deep Water well design (worst case discharge
load)
Other sections in Chapter 10 are being developed
Yearly updates planned for fixes and improvements
PRELIMINARY DESIGN
Casing Scheme Selection

DEM1 CTDM
448 f t TOC
0 ft RKB
448 f t 575 f t Mud Line
3000 f t 26" x 20" Surf ace Casing
8000 f t
9850 f t TOC
13950 f t TOC
14450 f t 13 5/8" Intermediate Casing
15899 f t TOL
15903 f t 10 3/4" x 9.974" Production Casing
16000 f t 3 1/2" Production Tubing
Establish, Verify, Document

18610 f t 7" Production Liner
Copyright Copyright
E&P E&P RESTRICTED
RESTRICTED June
June
2011
2011 37
Preliminary Casing Design Flowchart
Design
Preliminary Casing Design
Minimum Casing Setting Depth
Drivers
Prevent Formation Breakdown during well control
Prevent Formation Breakdown during drilling Operations
Isolate:
Unstable Formations/Shallow HCs/Lost Circ.
Zones/Freshwater Sands
Design Criteria
FBP should not be exceeded during normal operating conditions,
including well control
Drilling fluid pressures (ECD) should never exceed the FCP
Design
Conductor Setting Depth – Jack Up
Pressure
ρSW
ρmud
ρFS
Minimum conductor setting depth

TVD
Design
Casing Seat Selection
Recommended best practice to be defined in CTDM Volume 2

Conservative approach
Kick Margin Method, top down
Unlimited Kick Method
More aggressive approach
Kick Margin Method, bottom up
Modelled (‘Limited’) Kick
Design
Typical formation breakdown test result
Stable Keep Pumping… Stop Pumping …
Fracture Unstable Fracture Fracture Closure Phase
PropagationPropagation
FBP
PRESSURE
LOP
FPP
ISIP
LP
FCP /
MHS
Leak-Off Test (LOT)

TIME
Formation Integrity or Limit Test
VOLUME
LP = Limit Pressure ISIP = Instantaneous Shut-In Pressure
LOP = Leak-Off Pressure FCP = Fracture Closure Pressure
FBP = Formation Breakdown Pressure MHS = Minimum Horizontal Stress
FPP = Fracture Propagation Pressure
Design
Measuring Formation Strength
Limit Test and Leak-Off Test

Formation Breakdown Test
Measurement on Core Material
Wireline Testing
Analysis of Loss Events
Analytical methods
Design
Eaton’s Method
Where:
Pf = Formation Fracture Pressure Gradient
Pp = Formation Pore Pressure Gradient
v = Poisson’s Ratio
OBG = Overburden Gradient
Design
Eaton’s Method Calculation
Design
Theoretical Eaton Pressure Window
Design
Formation Strength Estimate - Example
CASING POINT SELECTION

OFFSET WELL DATA
0
1000
FIT
2000 Frac Gradient
3000
4000
5000
Mud Weight
6000
Depth (Feet)
7000
FIT
8000
9000 Sloughing Shale
10000
11000
12000 Losses LOT

13000
DST
14000
15000
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Gradient (ppg)
Design
Pressure Loads
Drilling
Mud Circulation
Tripping
Well Control
Design
Pore Pressures
Pressure at point X
EFGX =
True Vertical Depth of point X
Design
Methods of casing setting depth selection
Kick margin method

Applies where moveable hydrocarbons NOT expected
Uses equivalent gradient plot
Applies gradient margin (‘trip’ or overbalance margin on pore
pressure gradient, ‘kick’ margin on fracture gradient)
Unlimited kick method
Applies where moveable hydrocarbons ARE expected
Uses pressure plot
Applies pressure margin on pore pressure and fracture pressure
Both methods can be applied ‘Top Down’ or ‘Bottom Up’
Design
Methods of casing setting depth selection
At any point in the well there are two limits for the density of the
drilling fluid:
Drilling fluid hydrostatic pressure must be greater than the pore
pressure … to prevent an influx occurring
Drilling fluid hydrostatic pressure must be less than the formation
strength … to prevent losses or formation fracture.
Normal to establish a margin on the limiting values
200 psi/0.5 ppg above the pore pressure
200 psi/0.5ppg below the formation strength pressure
Drilling fluid hydrostatic pressure should then lie between these two
limits
Design
Kick Margin Method
Suitable when hydrocarbons not expected

Basis is that previous shoe strength can tolerate the drilling fluid
density required to balance pore pressure at section TD
Margins may be applied to both expected pore pressure and
formation strength gradients
Simple graphical solution using EFG vs depth
Kick tolerance limited to margins applied to pore and fracture
pressures
Design
Kick Margin Method
Equivalent Fluid
Equivalent Fluid Gradient
Gradient (PPG)
(PPG)
88 10
10 12
12 14
14 16
16 18
18
00
2000
2000
4000
4000
6000
6000
8000
8000
(ft)
TVD(ft)
10000
10000
TVD
12000
12000
14000
14000
16000
16000
18000
18000
20000
20000
Pore Pressure Formation Strength Min gradient Max Gradient

Pore Pressure Formation Strength
Design
Suitable in formations where moveable hydrocarbons anticipated

Based on total evacuation of open hole annulus to gas with zero
gradient
Margins can be applied to pore and fracture pressures
Extremely conservative kick tolerance
Can result in excessive number of casing strings
Design
Unlimited Kick Design
Pressure
PFS
Dshoe
ρgas
PO
TVD
Design
Pressure
Pressure(psi)
(psi)
00 2000 40005000
6000 8000 10000
10000 12000 14000 16000
15000 18000 20000
20000
00
2000
2000
4000
4000
6000
6000
8000
(ft)
(ft) 8000
10000
TVD
10000
TVD
12000
12000
14000
14000
16000
16000
18000
18000
20000
20000
Pore Pressure Formation Strength Min pressure Max Pressure
Pore Pressure Formation Strength
Design
Lithological
Considerations
Lithology may well fine

tune the minimum setting
depths
May require additional
casing strings
Often the predominant
factor
May be driven by
legislation
Design
Minimum Casing Diameter
Exploration and Appraisal

Wells
Well Testing
Coring
Electric Wireline Logging

Development Wells
Inflow System
Outflow System
Completion Design
Design
Casing Scheme Selection
Inputs:
Last hole / casing size
Number of casing strings
Availability /applicability of special clearance couplings
and special drift / light wall casing
Select compatible casing / hole sizes

Often driven by availability / delivery time
Don’t forget rig capabilities / equipment
availability
Design
Solid Expandable Tubulars (SET) – preserving hole size
Design
SET – the Monodiameter objective
Design
Wellhead Considerations
Wellhead and casing design are

interlinked
Needs to be suitable number of hang-
off points
Space below rig and in platform
wellhead area can be critical
Spool type wellheads are space
intensive
Compact wellheads can save
space…but fixed number of strings
Design
Wellhead Considerations
Design
Limited Kick Design
Less conservative approach
Typically based on kick tolerance criteria
Minimum casing setting depth from which design kick from section TD
can be circulated out without breaking down previous casing shoe
Well designed to tolerate one of the two principal forms of kick:
Drilling Kick: when well penetrates permeable formation with pore
pressure gradient greater than drilling fluid gradient
Swab Kick: when BHP falls below pore pressure while POOH and
water / hydrocarbons flows into well from permeable formation
Design
Limited Kick Design
Minimum casing setting depth

selected by balancing pressure
load at any depth in the well
with the formation strength or
formation breakdown gradient
in the well
Typically formation strength will
increase with depth.
The pressure at the top of a gas
influx will change as the influx is
circulated out of the well.
Design
Graphical Shoe Depth Selection
Calculate and Plot the Formation Breakdown Pressure in the well

Calculate and Plot the Wellbore Pressure Profile whilst circulating out
a kick using the Drillers Method.
Determine the point at which the wellbore pressure would exceed the
Formation Breakdown Pressure.
Design
Circulating out the Kick
Design
Wellbore Pressure Profile when Circulating out a Kick
Graphical Method - Procedure
Start at the bottom of the well (TD) then plot at the top of the DC’s and
at 1000ft -2000 ft intervals above TD by calculating, in sequence:
Depth of bottom of Bubble
Pressure at bottom of Bubble
Bubble Volume
Bubble Length
Depth of top of Bubble
Pressure at top of Bubble
Design
Graphical Method - PV constant
P1V1=P2V2
On bottom:
Height of kick on bottom (Hkick) = Vkick / Ann Cap BHA
Pressure at top of kick = Po – (ρkick x Hkick)
With bottom of kick at a distance “D” off bottom
Pressure at bottom of influx (PD)= Po – (D x ρmud)
Volume of kick at D (Vkick*)= Vkick x (Po / PD)
Height of kick at D (Hkick*) = Vkick / Ann Cap D
Pressure at top of kick at D = PD – (ρkick x Hkick*)
Design
Kick around the BHA
Design
Graphical Method
Pressure
PFS
TVD
Copyright of Shell International E & P W200 – EP Core & Well Engineering Knowledge Casing RESTRICTED Pmud
June 2011 71
Design
Pore Pressure Considerations
Pore Pressure Gradient (PO)

Probability of drilling into higher than
expected pore pressures
Kick while Drilling Swab Kick
Minimal
Development Drilling in hydrostatic or
PO≤ ρdrilling
mild overpressured formations (< PO=ρdrilling fluid
0.6psi/ft) fluid
Low / Medium PO=10 to 20% greater than

•Exploration Wells ρdrilling fluid
•Appraisal sections Depending on the pore PO≤ ρdrilling
•Drilling in mild to highly pressured pressure transition zone profile fluid
formations (> 0.6psi/ft) and the highest anticipated
pore pressure
Design
Determining Kick Type in Wellplan (Well Control)
Three types of kicks:

• Kick While Drilling
• Kick After Pump Shut Down
• Swab Kick
Design
Limited Kick Design
Exploration, appraisal and early development wells tend to be

designed to accommodate a drilling kick due to uncertainty of:
Formation depths
Pore pressures
Formation strengths
Formation fluids
Late development wells tend to be designed for swab kicks
relatively rare to experience a drilling kick in mature fields
Operational errors can still lead to swab kicks
Design
Effect of Kick Volume
Design
Factors affecting influx volume
Pressure Regime
Reservoir pressure
True mud hydrostatic pressure [ρ=f(P, T)]
Reservoir characteristics
Permeability
Porosity
Thickness and length penetrated

Crew Reaction Times
Detection method
Equipment configuration
Operation in progress
Design
Kick Size Predictor
Design
Kick Size Predictor
Design
Kick Size Predictor
Design
Reservoir Parameters
Design
Kick Size Predictor – Reaction Times
Design
Kick Size Predictor
Design
Base line Kick Volumes
Baseline values intended for guidance only

Used where local experience / practice not developed
Best suited for exploration / appraisal wells
Hole Size Design Kick Volume
12-1/4” 100 bbl 16 m3
8-1/2” 40 bbl 6 m3
6” 20 bbl 3 m3
Design
Bubble formula or PV constant?
Design
Bubble Equation Method
Calculate and Plot the Formation Breakdown Pressure in the well

Calculate and Plot the Wellbore Pressure Profile whilst circulating out
a kick using the Drillers Method.
Determine the point at which the wellbore pressure would exceed the
Formation Breakdown Pressure.
Design
Bubble Formula
Design
Kick Tolerance in Wellplan
- Kick Tolerance is the ability of

a well to handle a kick
- Tracked through the drilling of
a hole section it changes as the
mud weight changes
- Type of influx (lower density
of influx>lower volume of
influx)
Design
Kick Tolerance in Wellplan
Design
Kick Tolerance in Wellplan (Allowable Kick Vol Plot)
Design
Kick Simulation in Wellplan
Design
Kick Simulation in Wellplan
Design
And the numbers
Design
LET’S HAVE A LOOK AT THE CASING AND TUBING
DESIGN MANUAL.
Design
NWH-2 Preliminary Design Exercise
Group Exercise
Complete/correct your PPFG profiles
Develop casing scheme (shoe depths & nominal sizes) for your
NWH-2 well
Either:
Use the Kick Margin and Unlimited Kick methods described, or
Use a Limited Kick basis, but be able to justify your decision for
management approval
Completion: assumed a 5” production tubing
For presentation tomorrow morning
Design

W200 Casing Design Day 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

W200 Casing Design Day 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CASING DESIGN

W200 – Core & Well

Establish, Verify, Document

- Based in Houston – offices in London & Aberdeen

- Dr Malcolm Goodman, President, founded Enertech in 1976

- Majority of staff are ex-Enertech (expert WellCat users)

- Specialized in: Thermal Analysis/Tubular Analysis HPHT wells –

- Global contracts with major Operators for training

Casing Design Tubing Stress Analysis

Tubular Design Philosophy

Keeping the hole open from sloughing and swelling

Close Circulation System:

1. Fluid is pumped down

W200 – EP Core & Well Engineering Knowledge Casing Design

Terminology varies from

Stove Pipe (driven or cemented in pre-drilled hole)

Preliminary Casing Design – A recommended best practice

Will the bungee be strong

Critical that operational limits of system are

Critical aspect of design is identification, documentation and

Workover and sidetrack

Pipe must tolerate predictable events such as:

CTDM is a Manual in place of the previous Guide

Casing and Tubing Design Manual

The HSSE & SP Control Framework Process Safety defines

PTE Principal Technical Expert

Deviation during design stage

* Based on documented risk assessment (Risk ALARP)

DTA Delegated Technical Authority

Preliminary Design Supplementary

Design Load Cases Design Factors

No uniaxial design checks

StressCheck or WellCat facilitate performing these checks

Granularity of Design Factors

Casing Scheme Selection

3000 f t 26" x 20" Surf ace Casing

Establish, Verify, Document

Minimum conductor setting depth

Recommended best practice to be defined in CTDM Volume 2

Leak-Off Test (LOT)

Limit Test and Leak-Off Test

CASING POINT SELECTION

9000 Sloughing Shale

12000 Losses LOT

Kick margin method

Suitable when hydrocarbons not expected

Pore Pressure Formation Strength Min gradient Max Gradient

Suitable in formations where moveable hydrocarbons anticipated

Lithology may well fine

Exploration and Appraisal

Electric Wireline Logging

Select compatible casing / hole sizes

Wellhead and casing design are

Minimum casing setting depth

Calculate and Plot the Formation Breakdown Pressure in the well

Pore Pressure Gradient (PO)

Low / Medium PO=10 to 20% greater than

Three types of kicks:

Exploration, appraisal and early development wells tend to be

Thickness and length penetrated

Baseline values intended for guidance only

Hole Size Design Kick Volume

12-1/4” 100 bbl 16 m3

Calculate and Plot the Formation Breakdown Pressure in the well