OTC 21066

New 9-7/8-in. HPHT Permanent Packer with New Back-Up System Provides
North Sea Operator with an Effective Solution for Worn Casing
Richard Innes and Michael Eddy, Total E&P UK Ltd; John Ligertwood, NRD, Limited; Thomas Robb and Ernie
Valentine, Halliburton
Copyright 2010, Offshore Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2010 Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston, Texas, USA, 3–6

.

This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Offshore Technology Conference, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Offshore Technology Conference 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 OTC copyright.

Abstract
A major operator in the North Sea had experienced a problem with worn casing at the packer setting depth of an existing
HPHT well, causing a leak into the production annulus. This problem required a workover, and a calliper survey was
conducted after retrieving the tubing. Two large grooves along the longitudinal axis of the casing at 120° to each other were
found.
Since the worn casing was the problem, a new permanent packer was required, and this paper will discuss the process
required to successfully qualify and install an HPHT permanent packer that would satisfactorily address the needs for worn
casing.
Permanent packers are qualified by ISO 14310 V0 in a test fixture to meet the API 5CT internal casing dimensions;
however, they do not account for any wear or damage in the casing. A test program was developed to test the packer for both
HPHT well conditions and worn casing. The test program consisted of the following:
1. Install the packer in 9-7/8-in casing and flow test to 3 bpm at 180°F to verify that the circulation around the packer
would not damage the Aflas® element.
2. Perform an application test using synthetic oil to mimic packer loading until failure, including setting, production,
and hot/cold shut in.; apply 9,000 psi annulus pressure to
support the casing during testing. In this case, the
maximum temperature was 343°F or above for over 200
hours.
3. Perform a modified ISO 14310 V0 test at 450°F with
15,000 psi differential pressure and 400,000 lbf tension
and compression.
The packer passed all tests with no extrusion of the three-piece
multi-durometer Aflas® element, and no leaks were detected at any
of the load points in the application (liquid) test or modified ISO
V0 gas test.
The discussion will include information on the packer design,
HPHT tests in worn casing, and casing acceptance criteria. This
test was the first packer test performed in worn casing that
demonstrated the capability of a compliant back-up system to
support the entire element in worn casing and at the HPHT
conditions.

Introduction
The Elgin Franklin fields were discovered in 1991 and 1986
respectively and are the largest and highest pressured HPHT gas
fields to be developed in the UK. The fields lie approximately 140
miles East of Aberdeen in the Central Graben region of the North
Sea (Fig 1). The primary reservoir is the Fulmar sands, which is
Fig 1: Location
2 R. INNES, M. EDDY, J. LIGERTWOOD, T. ROBB, and E. VALENTINE OTC-21066

located at an approximate depth of 19,000- ft TVD SS. Reservoir fluids within the Fulmar are gas condensate with a
bottomhole pressure of 16,000 psi and a static temperature of 375º F. The Fulmar reservoir is underlain by the Pentland
reservoir with bottomhole conditions of 16,500 psi and 392º F.
Production commenced in 2001 with an infrastructure that was comprised of a fixed wellhead platform for the Elgin and
Franklin reservoirs plus a production, utilities and quarters (PUQ) jack-up platform adjacent to the Elgin wellhead platform.
The PUQ is linked to the Elgin wellhead platform by a 300-ft-long bridge and to the Franklin wellhead platform by a subsea
pipeline bundle. Both Elgin and Franklin wellhead platforms normally are unmanned and are operated remotely from the
PUQ. Drilling and completion of the wells was carried out by two heavy-duty jack-ups in cantilever mode over the wellhead
jackets. Fig 2 shows the Elgin Franklin infrastructure.

Fig 2: Elgin Franklin Infrastructure

Background of the F7z Well

The F7z well was completed in 2003 with the standard Elgin Franklin HPHT completion string that employs a permanent
packer as shown in the configuration in Fig 3. Due to problems experienced with the initial completion, and subsequently,
with a failed casing hanger on the well, the well was suspended in August 2003. The well was re-completed with a
replacement tubing string in mid-2004 and shut-in awaiting availability of ullage in the production system. Hydrocarbons
were in the tubing and inhibited fresh water was in the production annulus.
While shut in, the annulus was monitored. Pressures were normal until March of 2005, when
the production annulus pressure increased to 9,130 psi. The well was killed, and during this
operation, an investigation using PLT data and pressure tests concluded that the production
packer had failed. The tubing was perforated, and both the tubing and annulus were displaced to
2.17 SG caesium formate brine.
Due to the history of the well, more calipers were run than would have been the case in other
scenarios. Five multi-finger calipers were run over the various operational phases of the well.
Although this was an unusually large number, it was done because of the the history of the well;
however, it did allow for a chronological picture of the wear to be tracked. The detectable
features in the casing at the packer setting depth were two minor longitudinal “grooves”; i.e.,
one 1 mm (0.040 in.) x 70 mm (2.7 in.) and the other 0.7 mm (0.028 in.) x 120 mm (4.7 in.)
spaced 120° apart.
The larger groove was a result of drilling the 8-½-in. hole section and was reliably tracked
through the log sequence. The smaller groove was more difficult to track, and the origin was
inconclusive. This groove may have been present when the casing was run. Although milling
operations had taken place earlier during the workover, they had not been the cause of the wear
in the casing. A review of the permanent packers on the market was required to determine
suitability for worn casing and to ensure that there were qualified packers available for future
Fig. 3 − Well Schematic HPHT completions.
OTC-21066 NEW 9-7/8-IN. HPHT PERMANENT PACKER WITH NEW BACK-UP SYSTEM PROVIDES NORTH SEA 3
OPERATORS WITH AN EFFECTIVE SOLUTION FOR WORN CASING

HPHT Permanent Packer Design

A 9-7/8-in. hydraulic-set HPHT permanent packer recently had been developed for the Gulf of
Mexico (Fig. 4). The packer had been qualified for standard API 5CT casing dimensions of 9-7/8
in., 62.8–68 lb/ft and 9-5/8 in, 47–53.5 lb/ft. However, it had never been tested or run in worn or
irregular ID casing.
This packer uses a one-piece mandrel, barrel slips, and HPHT element package and is set with
tubing pressure. The connections were 5-in., 23.2-lb/ft Vam Top HC Box x 5-½-in., 26-lb/ft Vam
Top Box connections. The piston was configured with double O-rings, using Chemraz® o-rings
with Peek® back-up rings. Location of the piston was below the element to ensure that there were
no elastomeric seals above the element. The lower slip arrangement was configured to minimize
mandrel movement. The packer was manufactured from Nickel Alloy 718.
The slips and wedges were designed with a dual-ramp, case-carburized barrel slip that
improved the packer’s load-bearing capability by increasing the packer slip contact to the casing
area, which resulted in a significantly improved packer performance envelope. This is illustrated
in Fig. 5. The HPHT permanent packer successfully passed the ISO 14310 V0 test with Aflas®
elements to 15,000 psi at 450°F and 600,000 lbf axial load during its development phase.

Fig. 5—Packer
Envelope.

Fig. 4—Permanent Packer.

4 R. INNES, M. EDDY, J. LIGERTWOOD, T. ROBB, and E. VALENTINE OTC-21066

History of the Element Package

The standard element package for permanent packers from 1960 to 1980 consisted of a 3-piece element − Nitrile
(hard/soft/hard), with a single brass back-up shoe. This configuration worked well and was typically rated to 325°F and
10,000 psi. The first failure of the standard element package occurred in the 1970’s at the Piney Wood field in Mississippi,
where it was subjected to a bottomhole pressure (BHP) of 15,000 psi and a bottomhole temperature (BHT) of 400°F. A more
elaborate back-up system was developed, which incorporated a Teflon™ back-up ring to support the 3-piece Nitrile element.
Brass and steel metal back-up shoes were also added.
When Aflas® was developed in the 1980’s for temperatures of 450°F, the back-up system was further enhanced with the
addition of the wiremesh anti-extrusion ring to support the Teflon™. The Teflon™ and wiremesh back-up rings provided a
positive 360° anti-extrusion system that would maintain integrity at extremely high pressures (15,000 psi) and temperatures
(450°F).
The HPHT packers were initially designed for 4-½-in. or 5-in.casing. However, over the years, this HPHT element
package and back-up system had been used in larger-size packers of up to 7 inches.

Element Package for 9 7/8-in. Packer

The multi-durometer element package consisted of an Aflas® center and end elements. The elements are free to move
independently, and their geometric design forces the element to compress between the packer and the casing to provide a
positive seal. For higher temperatures, the HPHT back-up system was used to fully support the Aflas® element and to provide
a positive antiextrusion around the entire circumference. The HPHT back-up system consisted of a wiremesh, anti-extrusion
ring, and a Teflon™ anti-extrusion ring, which in turn, is supported by a metal-to-metal back-up system, consisting of brass
and low-alloy steel back-up shoes. Fig. 6 shows the HPHT element package.
The fully complient back-up system provides a full 360° support for the Aflas® element, which enables higher pressure
differential and temperature cycles to be achieved at the elevated temperatures.

Fig. 6—HPHT Element Package.

Design Review
Prior to any testing, a detailed design review on the 9-7/8-in. HPHT permanent packer was completed. This review included
the packer design, drawings, metallic materials, elastomers, element material, quality plans, and ISO 14310 test. The brief
technical specifications for the packer are detailed below:
• Casing: 9-7/8-in., 62.8–68 lb/ft and 9-5/8-in., 47–53.5 lb/ft
• Maximum OD: 8.31 in.
• Minimum ID: 3.961 in.
• Differential Pressure rating: 15,000 psi
• Temperature rating: 212–450°F
• Connections: 5-in., 23.2-lb/ft Vam Top HC x 5-½-in., 26-lb/ft Vam Top

Qualification Testing
The packer was already qualified for 9-7/8-in., 62.8–68-lb/ft and 9-5/8-in., 47–53.5-lb/ft casing and previously had been
tested to ISO 14310 V0 in a 9-5/8-in., 47-lb maximum-ID casing fixture of 8.821 inches. The packer was qualified, therefore,
from a minimum ID of 8.390-in. to a maximum ID of 8.821-in.
The purpose of the new test was to qualify the packer for the customer-supplied worn casing (9-7/8 in., 66.9 lb Q125) and
to the HPHT well conditions. The test was performed in three parts:
• A flow test with water at 3 bbl/min and 180°F.
• An application test with synthetic oil at the maximum temperature of 423°F and the minimum temperature of 343°F.
• A modified V0 test with nitrogen at the maximum temperature of 450°F and the minimum temperature of 212°F.
OTC-21066 NEW 9-7/8-IN. HPHT PERMANENT PACKER WITH NEW BACK-UP SYSTEM PROVIDES NORTH SEA 5
OPERATORS WITH AN EFFECTIVE SOLUTION FOR WORN CASING

The testing was conducted at the High Temperature Test Facility (HTTF) in Dallas, Texas. The customer-supplied 9-7/8-
in. casing was shipped to Dallas, and the grooves were machined into the ID to mimic the casing-wear grooves that had been
experienced in the actual well.

Test Casing
The well was completed with 9 7/8-in. 66.9-lb Q125 casing. The longitudinal casing grooves measured in the well at the
packer setting depth included the following dimensions: one was 1 mm (0.040 in.) x 70 mm (2.7-in.) and the other 0.7 mm
(0.028-in.) x 120 mm (4.7-in.). The grooves were spaced 120° apart.
For the test casing, the grooves were machined, and the wall thickness was measured (ultrasonically), as shown in Fig 7.

Groove Dimension Report (performed by ultrasonic before testing)

SIZE 2.70-in groove depth

Note:
The yellow line represents the minimum depth of the groove required by the customer.
The magenta curve represents the actual 2.70 width groove inside the casing.

Fig. 7 − 2.7-in. Test Casing Grooves Machined into the Test Casing.

The 2.7-in. wide groove depth was measured at 0.070–0.085-in. at the element area. Although this depth is slightly deeper
than the requirements of 0.040-in. for the 2.7-in. groove, it was within the maximum ID of the standard ISO test previously
qualified, and subsequently, provided a worst-case scenario. The 4.7-in. groove was measured at 0.025–0.045-in. at the
element area.
The casing was inspected dimensionally, both before and after the test. The OD and wall thickness were recorded. All
tests (flow, application, and modified ISO) were conducted in the actual casing.
To support the casing during the application and modified ISO tests, an external pressure of 9,000 psi was maintained
throughout the tests to support the casing and represent the reservoir pore pressure without cement.

Flow Test
The purpose of this test was to install the packer inside the 9-7/8-in., 66.9-lb (Q125) casing and to verify that circulation
around the packer would not damage or pack off the Aflas® element. This test would replicate running the packer and
circulating prior to setting the packer. Flow was in the direction from the bottom of the packer up around the annulus area
between the packer and the casing and out through a perforated pup joint. The flow rate was increased in 0.5-bpm increments
up to a maximum of 3 bpm and held for 7 hours. The fluid used during the flow test was water heated to 180°F.
This test arrangement is shown in Fig. 8. After the flow test, the packer was removed from the casing and was fully
inspected. No damage was noted, and the element, back-up shoes, and slips were found to be in good condition.

Application Liquid Test

After the flow test, the packer was installed into the 9-7/8-in., 66.9-lb/ft casing test fixture, as shown in Fig. 9 and installed in
the vertical test cell in the HTTF facility. The application test was performed to replicate the offshore operation prior to the
packer failure in the well.
6 R. INNES, M. EDDY, J. LIGERTWOOD, T. ROBB, and E. VALENTINE OTC-21066

Fig. 8—Flow Test

Schematic.

Compression Piston Tension Piston

102.854 Sq. In. 102.854 Sq. In.

Above Packer Outside 9-7/8” Below Packer

Inside Tubing

5-23.2# - VAMTOP 9-7/8” - 66.9# - Q125 212TNT9513-EASK 5-1/2 - 26# VAMTOP

Test Plug

Fig. 9 – Casing Test Fixture.

The packer was set hydraulically with the minimum setting pressure of 6,800 psi. To help support the casing, an external
pressure of 9,000 psi was maintained throughout the test. The test medium for the application test was oil, and the test
temperature was between 343°F and 423°F. A hydraulic jack was connected directly to the top of the packer and provided the
compressive and tensile loads.
The application test was conducted using test pressures and applied axial loads based on the customer program, as shown
in Table 1. This test was used to mimic the critical well conditions experienced in the well and covered setting the packer,
tubing tests, annulus tests, hot shut-in, and cold shut-in. The duration of the tests varied from 2 hours to a maximum of 72
hours for the cold shut-in. No leaks were detected at any of the load points during the application load test.
The test casing assembly was removed from the test fixture and was examined for any signs of damage. The casing OD
dimensions were verified. The packer was inspected, and no signs of Aflas® extrusion were found in the test fluid.

Modified ISO 14310 (V0) Test with Nitrogen

The casing test fixture was re-installed into the test cell. The modified ISO 14310 V0 test was performed to revalidate the
packer envelope at 450°F and to capture the predicted worst-case load conditions. The test was conducted with a maximum
differential pressure of 15,000 psi and with maximum tensile and compressive loads of 400,000 lbf, as shown in Fig. 10.
OTC-21066 NEW 9-7/8-IN. HPHT PERMANENT PACKER WITH NEW BACK-UP SYSTEM PROVIDES NORTH SEA 7
OPERATORS WITH AN EFFECTIVE SOLUTION FOR WORN CASING

Table 1: Application

Inside Above Below Outside Axial Force

Time Temp
Step Tubing Packer Packer 9-7/8 Above
(hr) (°F)
(psi) (psi) (psi) (psi) Packer (lbf)

Initial Conditions 2 6,800 6,800 6,800 9,000 343 0

Set Packer 6,800 psi 0.25 13,300 6,800 6,800 9,000 343 0
Set Packer 6,500 psi 2 13,300 6,800 6,800 9,000 343 7,300
Annulus Test 5,000 psi 2 6,800 11,800 6,800 9,000 343 -55,000
Tubing Test 9,400 psi
16,200 7,200 16,200 9,000 343 70,000
Annulus Test 500 psi 2
Tubing Test 10,900 psi,
17,700 20,100 17,700 9,000 343 -70,000
Annulus Test 13,300 psi 2
Tubing Test
16,200 6,800 16,200 9,000 343 80,000
9,400 psi 2
Flowing
(Annulus Pressure 1,600 5,500 8,400 5,500 9,000 423 -165,000
psi) 48
Hot Shut-in
(Annulus Pressure 1,600 16,000 8,400 16,000 9,000 423 -80,000
psi) 24
Flowing
(Annulus Pressure 1,600 5,500 8,400 5,500 9,000 423 -165,000
psi) 48
Cold Shut-in
16,000 7,700 16,000 9,000 343 85,000
(Annulus Pressure 500 psi) 72

Fig. 10—Modified ISO V0 Test.

These loads were not the maximum tensile/compressive loads for the packer; however, they were the required maximum
to capture all load points for the well conditions. The ISO 14310 V0 test was conducted to ensure no Aflas® extrusion would
occur at the maximum predicted loads for the packer envelope. Table 2 shows the load points around the envelope and the
temperature cycle from 450°F down to 212°F. No leaks were detected during the test at any of the envelope load points.
The test casing assembly was removed from the test fixture. The casing was milled longtitudinally, and the packer was
removed and found to be in excellent condition, with no signs of Aflas® extrusion. All of the packer’s critical components
were dimensionally verified.
8 R. INNES, M. EDDY, J. LIGERTWOOD, T. ROBB, and E. VALENTINE OTC-21066

Fig 11: Element Package After Test

As shown in Fig. 11, the element package showed no signs of extrusion. The element and back-up shoes were in excellent
condition. A groove track was visable where the element package had set into the machined grooves in the casing. The
grooves in the casing were also inspected and verified.

Table 2: Modified ISO

Axial
Inside Above Below Outside Force
Time Temp
Step Tubing Packer Packer 9-7/8 Above
(hr) (°F)
(psi) (psi) (psi) (psi) Packer
(lbf)
1 2 15,000 0 15,000 9,000 450 200,000
2 2 15,000 0 15,000 9,000 450 -364,000
3 2 6,350 0 6,350 9,000 450 -400,000
4 2 0 10,630 0 9,000 450 -400,000
5 2 0 15,000 0 9,000 450 -250,000
6 2 0 15,000 0 9,000 450 250,000
7 2 0 12,500 0 9,000 450 400,000
8 2 10,000 0 10,000 9,000 450 400,000
9 2 15,000 0 15,000 9,000 450 200,000
10 2 15,000 0 15,000 9,000 212 200,000

Qualification
The results of the casing-wear tests demonstrated that the new compliant back-up system prevented extrusion of the Aflas®
element at HPHT conditions. Wear grooves are acceptable as long as the circle formed from the casing centerline to the
maximum groove depth does not exceed a diameter of 8.821-in. This diameter was the maximum ID to which the packer was
qualified in the original casing test fixture (i.e., 9-5/8-in., 47-lb/ft casing).
The two machined grooves in the test casing were within this maximum ID. The actual casing ID was 8.64-in., and the
2.7-in. wide groove was 0.085-in. deep. Conservatively, the operator limited the maximum ID to 8.7-in., including the
deepest groove.
OTC-21066 NEW 9-7/8-IN. HPHT PERMANENT PACKER WITH NEW BACK-UP SYSTEM PROVIDES NORTH SEA 9
OPERATORS WITH AN EFFECTIVE SOLUTION FOR WORN CASING

Conclusion
From the successful test program, the following can be concluded:
1. The packer successfully passed the test program, which consisted of the flow test, application test (liquid), and the
modified ISO 14310 V0 (gas) test. All pressure holds were normal with no returns.
2. At the conclusion of the test, the packer was removed from the test fixture. There were no measurable dimensional
changes for the critical components of the packer.
3. The packer’s fully-compliant back-up system prevented any external or internal extrusion with the worn casing and
fully supported the element at the HPHT conditions.
4. The packer was qualified for a specific level of casing wear and the HPHT conditions of 15000 psi and 450° F.
The packer has been successfully installed in a North Sea HPHT well.

Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Total E & P UK Limited and Halliburton for their encouragement and permission to publish this
paper.

References
Hillis, D; Eddy, M; Cassagne T; Ligertwood, J: “Investigation of Production Tubing Coupling Failures from a Suspended HPHT Well,”
Paper 123892, Offshore Europe, Aberdeen, Sept 2009.
Humphreys, A.: “Completion of Large-Bore High Pressure/High Temperature Wells: Design and Experience,” Paper 12120, Offshore
Technology Conference, Houston, May 2000.
Ray, T: “High Pressure/High Temperature (HP/HT) Seals for Oil and Gas Production,” Paper 39573 presented at Oil and Gas Conference
and Exhibition, New Delhi, February 1998.
Robb, T. and Valentine, E.: “New 9-7/8-in. HPHT Permanent Packer with New Back-Up System Provides North Sea Operator with
Effective Solution for Damaged or Worn Casing,” Paper SPE 132176 presented at the SPE Deep Gas Conference and Exhibition held
in Manama, Bahrain, 24-26 January 2010.

SI Metric Conversion Factors

lbf x 4.448 222 E+00= N
ft x 3.048* E-01= m
in.x 2.54* E+00= cm
psi x 6.894 757 E+00= kPa
bbl x 1.589 873 E–01= m3
gal x 3.785 412 E-03= m3


 







*Conversion factor is exact

Teflon™ is a trademark of the Dupont Company

Aflas® is a registered trademark of the Asahi Glass Co., Ltd.
Chemraz® is a registered trademark of Greene Tweed and Company
Peek® is a registered trademark of Solvay Advanced Polymers, L.L.C.