MASTER

Well Drilling

Casing Design

1
 Casing Design

‹ Why Run Casing?

‹ Types of Casing Strings
‹ Classification of Casing
‹ Wellheads
‹ Burst, Collapse and Tension
‹ Example
‹ Effect of Axial Tension on Collapse Strength
‹ Example
2
Read Applied Drilling Engineering, Ch.7

3
 Casing Design

What is casing? Casing

Why run casing? Cement

1. To prevent the hole from caving in

2. Onshore - to prevent contamination of
fresh water sands
3. To prevent water migration to
producing formation
4
 Casing Design - Why run casing, cont’d

4. To confine production to the wellbore

5. To control pressures during drilling
6. To provide an acceptable environment for
subsurface equipment in producing wells
7. To enhance the probability of drilling to total
depth (TD)
e.g., you need 14 ppg to control a lower zone,
but an upper zone will fracture at 12 lb/gal.
What do you do?
5
 Functions of Casing
Individually
‹Drive pipe ‹Conductor pipe
‹Provides a means of ‹Same as Drive pipe
nippling up diverters ‹Supports the weight
‹Provides a mud of subsequent casing
return path strings
‹Prevents erosion of ‹Isolates very weak
ground below rig formations

6
 Functions of Casing
Individually
‹Surface casing ‹Intermediate or
‹Provides a means of protective casing
nippling up BOP ‹Usually set in the
‹Provides a casing first abnormally
seat strong enough pressured zone
to safely close in a ‹Provides isolation of
well after a kick. potentially
‹Provides protection troublesome zones
of fresh water sands ‹Provides integrity to
‹Provides wellbore withstand the high
stabilization mud weights
necessary to reach
TD or next csg seat
7
 Functions of Casing Individually
‹Production casing ‹Liners
‹Provides zonal ‹Drilling liners
isolation (prevents ‹Same as
migration of water to Intermediate or
protective casing
producing zones,
isolates different ‹Production liners
production zones) ‹Same as production
casing
‹Confines production
‹Tieback liners
to wellbore
‹Tie back drilling or
‹Provides the production liner to the
environment to install surface. Converts
subsurface liner to full string of
completion casing
equipment
8
 Types of Strings of Casing

Diameter Example
1. Drive pipe or structural pile 16”-60” 30”
{Gulf Coast and offshore only}
150’-300’ below mudline.

2. Conductor string. 100’ - 1,600’ 16”-48” 20”

(BML)

3. Surface pipe. 2,000’ - 4,000’ 8 5/8”-20” 13 3/8”

(BML)

9
 Types of Strings of Casing

Diameter Example

4. Intermediate String 7 5/8”-13 3/8” 9 5/8”

5. Production String (Csg.) 4 1/2”-9 5/8” 7”

6. Liner(s)

7. Tubing String(s)

10
 Example Hole and String Sizes (in)
Hole Size Pipe Size
36” Structural casing 30”
26” Conductor string 20”

17 1/2 Surface pipe 13 3/8

12 1/4 IntermediateString 9 5/8

8 3/4 Production Liner 7

11
 Example Hole and String Sizes (in)
Hole Size Pipe Size
36” Structural casing 30”
26” Conductor string 20”

17 1/2 Surface pipe 13 3/8

12 1/4 IntermediateString 9 5/8

8 3/4 Production Liner 7

12
Example Hole and String Sizes (in)
Structural casing Mudline
Conductor string
250’

1,000’

4,000’
Surface pipe
IntermediateString
Production Liner

13
 Classification of CSG.

1. Outside diameter of pipe (e.g. 9 5/8”)

2. Wall thickness (e.g. 1/2”)

3. Grade of material (e.g. N-80)

4. Type to threads and couplings (e.g. API LCSG)

5. Length of each joint (RANGE) (e.g. Range 3)

6. Nominal weight (Avg. wt/ft incl. Wt. Coupling)
(e.g. 47 lb/ft)
14
σ
ε 15
 Length of Casing Joints

RANGE 1 16-25 ft

RANGE 2 25-34 ft

RANGE 3 > 34 ft.

16
 Casing Threads and Couplings

API round threads - short { CSG }

API round thread - long { LCSG }
Buttress { BCSG }
Extreme line { XCSG }
Other …

See Halliburton Book...

17
Rounded Threads
* 8 per inch

~ Square Threads
* Longer
* Stronger

Integral Joint
* Smaller ID, OD
* Costs more
* Strong
18
19
23 lb/ft
26 lb/ft

N-80 20
 API Design Factors (typical)

Required Design

10,000 psi Collapse 1.125 11,250 psi

100,000 lbf Tension 1.8 180,000 lbf

10,000 psi Burst 1.1 11,000 psi

21
Abnormal

Normal Pore Pressure Abnormal Pore Pressure

0.433 - 0.465 psi/ft gp > normal
22
Design from bottom
23
Press. Gauge
Wing Valve X-mas Tree
Choke Box

Master
Valves
Wellhead
• Hang Csg. Strings
• Provide Seals
• Control Production
from Well

24
Wellhead

25
Wellhead

26
 Casing Design

Tension Tension
Depth
Burst

Collapse

Collapse
STRESS
Burst:
Burst Assume full reservoir pressure all along the wellbore.
Collapse: Hydrostatic pressure increases with depth
Tension: Tensile stress due to weight of string is highest at top

27
Casing Design - Tension

28
Tensile force balance on pipe body

Ften = σyield * A s
29
 Tensile force balance on pipe body

Example 7.1:
Compute the body-
yield strength for 20-
in., K-55 casing with a
nominal wall thickness
of 0.635 in. and a
nominal weight per
foot of 133 lbf/ft.
Ften = σyield * A s
30
 Tensile force balance on pipe body
K55
Solution:
This pipe has a minimum
yield strength of 55,000 psi
and an ID of:
Ften = σyield * A s

d = 20 .00 − 2 ( 0 .635 ) = 18 .730 in .

31
 Tensile force balance on pipe body

Thus, the cross-sectional area of steel is

π
As = ( 20 2 − 18 . 73 2 ) = 38 . 63 sq .in .
4
and a minimum pipe-body yield
is predicted by Eq. 7.1 at
an axial force of:
Ften = σyield * A s

Ften = 55,000 (38.63) = 2,125,000 lbf

32
 Pipe Body Yield Strength

π 2 2
Py = (D − d )Yp
4
where
Py = pipe body yield strength, lbf
Yp = specified minimum yield strength, psi
D = outside diameter of pipe, in
d = inside diameter of pipe, in
33
 Casing Design - Burst
(from internal pressure)

4 Internal Yield Pressure for pipe

4 Internal Yield Pressure for couplings
4 Internal pressure leak resistance

p Internal p
Pressure

34
Internal Yield Pressure for Pipe (Burst)

FT
⎡ 2 Yp t ⎤
P = 0.875 ⎢ ⎥ FP
⎣ D ⎦

where FP = DLP

P = internal yield pressure, psi FT = 2tLYP

Yp = minimum yield strength, psi DLP = 2tLYP

t = nominal wall thickness, in ⎡ 2Y p t ⎤

P=⎢ ⎥
D = O.D. of pipe, in ⎣ D ⎦
35
 Example

For 7”, 26 #/ft P-110 pipe

⎡ 2 Yp t ⎤
P = 0.875 ⎢ ⎥
⎣ D ⎦
(7 - 6.276)
= 0.875 * 2 * 110,000 *
2*7
= 9,955

P = 9 ,960 psi (to the nearest 10 psi)

…agrees with Halliburton Tables.
36
 Casing Design - Burst

Example

Design a 7” Csg. String to 10,000 ft.

Pore pressure gradient = 0.5 psi/ft

Design factor, Ni=1.1

Design for burst only.

37
 Burst Example

1. Calculate probable reservoir pressure.

psi
p res = 0 .5 * 10 ,000 ft = 5,000 psi
ft

2. Calculate required pipe internal yield

pressure rating
p i = p res * N i = 5 ,000 * 1 . 1 = 5 ,500 psi

Ni = API Design Factor for BURST = 1.1

38
 Example

3. Select the appropriate csg. grade and wt.

from the Halliburton Cementing tables:

Burst Pressure required = 5,500 psi

7”, J-55, 26 lb/ft has BURST Rating of 4,980 psi
7”, N-80, 23 lb/ft has BURST Rating of 6,340 psi
7”, N-80, 26 lb/ft has BURST Rating of 7,249 psi

Use N-80 Csg., 23 lb/ft

39
40
23 lb/ft
26 lb/ft

N-80
41
Casing Design - Collapse

42
 Collapse Pressure

The following factors are important:

4 The collapse pressure resistance of a pipe

depends on the axial stress

4 There are different types of collapse

failure

43
 Collapse Pressure

‹ There are four different types of collapse

pressure, each with its own equation for
calculating the collapse resistance:

4 Yield strength collapse

4 Plastic collapse
4 Transition collapse
4 Elastic collapse
44
 Casing Design - Collapse

If Axial Tension is Zero:

Yield Strength Plastic Transition Elastic

J-55 14.81 25.01 37.31

N-80 13.38 22.47 31.02
P-110 12.44 20.41 26.22

(D / t) →
45
 Casing Design

Collapse pressure - with axial stress

⎧⎡ 2
⎤
1/ 2
⎫
⎪ ⎛ SA ⎞ ⎛ S A ⎞⎪
1. YPA = YP ⎨⎢1− 0.75 ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎥ − 0.5 ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟⎬
⎪⎩⎢⎣ ⎝ YP ⎠ ⎥⎦ ⎝ YP ⎠⎪
⎭
YPA = yield strength of axial stress
equivalent grade, psi
YP = minimum yield strength of pipe, psi
SA = Axial stress, psi (tension is positive)
46
 Casing Design - Collapse
2. Calculate D/t to determine proper equation
to use for calculating the collapse pressure
⎡ ⎛ D ⎞ ⎤
⎢ ⎜ ⎟ − 1⎥
Yield Strength ⎝ t ⎠
P YP = 2 Yp ⎢ ⎥
Collapse : ⎢ ⎛ D ⎞
2
⎥
⎢ ⎜ ⎟ ⎥
⎣ ⎝ t ⎠ ⎦
⎡ ⎤
⎢ A ⎥
Pp = Yp ⎢ − B⎥ − C
Plastic Collapse: ⎢⎛ D ⎞ ⎥
⎜ ⎟
⎢⎣ ⎝ t ⎠ ⎥⎦
47
Casing Design - Collapse, cont’d

⎡ ⎤
Transition ⎢ F ⎥
Collapse: PT = Y p ⎢ − G⎥
⎢⎛ D ⎞ ⎥
⎢ ⎜⎝ t ⎟⎠ ⎥
⎣ ⎦

6
Elastic 46 . 95 X 10
PE = 2
Collapse: ⎛D ⎞ ⎡⎛ D ⎞ ⎤
⎜ ⎟ ⎢ ⎜ ⎟ − 1⎥
⎝ t ⎠ ⎣⎝ t ⎠ ⎦
48
 Example 2

Determine the collapse strength of 5 1/2”

O.D., 14.00 #/ft J-55 casing under zero
axial load.

1. Calculate D 5.500
= = 22.54
the D/t ratio: t 1
(5.500 − 5.012)
2
↑
From Halliburton book
49
 Casing Design - Collapse

If Axial Tension is Zero:

Yield Strength Plastic Transition Elastic

J-55 14.81 25.01 37.31

N-80 13.38 22.47 31.02
P-110 12.44 20.41 26.22

(D / t) →
50
 Example 2
D
= 22.54
2. Check the mode of collapse t

Table (above) shows that,

for J-55 pipe,
with 14.81 < D/t < 25.01

the mode of failure is plastic collapse.

51
 Casing Design - Collapse
Calculate D/t to determine proper equation to
use for calculating the collapse pressure

⎡ ⎤
Plastic Collapse: ⎢ A ⎥
Pp = Yp ⎢ − B⎥ − C
⎢⎛ D ⎞ ⎥
⎜ ⎟
⎢⎣ ⎝ t ⎠ ⎥⎦
52
 Example 2

The plastic collapse is calculated from:

⎛ A ⎞
Pp = Yp ⎜ − B⎟ − C
⎝D/t ⎠

⎡ 2.991 ⎤
= 55,000 ⎢ − 0 .0541⎥ − 1,206
⎣ 22.54 ⎦
Halliburton Tables
Pp = 3,117 psi
rounds off to 3,120 psi

53
 Example 3
Determine the collapse strength for a 5 1/2” O.D.,
14.00 #/ft, J-55 casing under axial load of 100,000
lbs
The axial tension will reduce the collapse pressure
as follows:
⎡ 2 ⎤
⎛SA ⎞ ⎛SA ⎞⎥
Y PA = ⎢ 1 − 0 . 75 ⎜ ⎟ − 0 .5 ⎜ ⎟ YP
⎢ ⎜ Y ⎟ ⎜ Y ⎟⎥
⎢⎣ ⎝ p ⎠ ⎝ p ⎠⎥
⎦

FA 100,000
SA = = = 24,820 psi
Area π 5.5 2 − 5.012 2
( )
4
54
 ⎡ ⎛ ⎞
2
⎛ ⎞ ⎤
Example 3 cont’d Y PA = ⎢ 1 − 0 . 75 ⎜ A ⎟ − 0 . 5 ⎜ A ⎟ ⎥ Y P
S S
⎢ ⎜Y ⎟ ⎜ Y ⎟⎥
⎣⎢ ⎝ p ⎠ ⎝ p ⎠ ⎥⎦

The axial tension will reduce the collapse

pressure rating to:
⎡ 2 ⎤
⎢ ⎛ 24,820 ⎞ ⎛ 24,820 ⎞ ⎥
YPA = 1 − 0.75 ⎜ ⎟ − 0 .5 ⎜ ⎟ 55,000
⎢ ⎝ 55,000 ⎠ ⎝ 55,000 ⎠ ⎥
⎣ ⎦

= 38,216 psi

Here the axial load decreased the J-55

rating to an equivalent “J-38.2” rating
55
 Example 3 - cont’d

⎛ A ⎞
∴ Pp = YPA ⎜ − B⎟ − C
⎝D/t ⎠

⎡ 2 .945 −2 ⎤
= 38,216 ⎢ − 4 .557 x10 ⎥ − 700 .43 = 2,551
⎣ 22 .54 ⎦

P p ≈ 2 , 550 psi

…compared to 3,117 psi with no axial stress!

56
 Example 3 - cont’d

The Halliburton Cementing Tables list the

collapse resistance of 5 ½ -in, 14.00 lb/ft J-55
casing at 3,120 psi.

The axial tension in this case would derate the

collapse strength to about 2,550 psi.

We shall be using API Tables to correct for the

effect of axial tension on collapse strength of
casing.
57
Combined Loading

58
59
60
61
 Linear Interpolation

y = mx + c
P = mS + C (i)
P1 = mS 1 + C (ii)
P 2 = mS 2 + C (iii)
62
 Linear Interpolation

P2 − P1
(iii) − (ii) P2 − P1 = m(S2 − S1 ) ⇒ m=
S2 − S1

⎛ P2 − P1 ⎞
(i) − (ii) P − P1 = m(S − S1 ) = ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟(S − S1 )
⎝ S2 − S1 ⎠

63
 Linear Interpolation

⎛ S − S1 ⎞
∴ P = P1 + ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟(P2 − P1 )
⎝ S 2 − S1 ⎠

With design factor:

1 ⎡ ⎛ S − S1 ⎞ ⎤
Pcc = ⎢P1 − ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟(P1 − P2 )⎥
D.F. ⎣ ⎝ S2 − S1 ⎠ ⎦
64
α = dogleg severity, deg/100 ft
= angle build rate, deg/100 ft

18,000
Build Radius =
πα

65
Length of arc, L = R∆θR L

∆L = (R + r)∆θ - R∆θ ∆θ
R R+r
dn
∆L = r ∆θ = ∆θ
2
∆L dn ∆θ dn α π
∆ε = = =
L 2 L 2(12 ) 100 180
30 * 10 6
π
∆ σ = E ∆ε = αdn = 218αdn
2,400 180
∆σ = 218 α dn F = 218 α dn A s (7.14a)
66
Figure 7.14 - Incremental stress caused by
bending of casing in a directional well

The area of steel, As, can be expressed

conveniently as the weight per foot of
pipe divided by the density of steel.
For common field units, Eq. 7.14a
becomes
Fab = 64 α d n w.............................(7.14b)

where Fab , α , d n , and w have units of

lbf, degrees/100 ft, in., and lbf/ft, respectively.
67
 Example

α = 5 deg/100 ft
d n , = 7 in
w = 35 lbf / ft

Fab = 64 α d n w.............................(7.14b)

Fab = 64 * 5 * 7 * 35 = 74,400 lbf

Fab = 74,400 lbf

68
 Casing Design Example

‹ Example Problem
‹ API Design Factors
‹ “Worst Possible Conditions”
‹ Effect of Axial Tension on Collapse Strength
‹ Iteration and Interpolation
‹ Design for Burst, Collapse and Tension

69
 Casing Design Example

Design a 9 5/8-in., 8,000-ft combination

casing string for a well where the mud wt.
will be 12.5 ppg and the formation pore
pressure is expected to be 6,000 psi.

Only the grades and weights shown are

available (N-80, all weights). Use API
design factors.

Design for “worst possible conditions.”

70
 Casing Design - Solution

Before solving this problem is it necessary to

understand what we mean by “Design Factors”
and “worst possible conditions”.

API Design Factors

Design factors are essentially “safety factors”
that allow us to design safe, reliable casing
strings. Each operator may have his own set
of design factors, based on his experience,
and the condition of the pipe.
71
 Casing Design

In PETE 661, we’ll use the design factors

recommended by the API unless otherwise
specified.

These are the API design Factors:

Tension and Joint Strength: NT = 1.8

Collapse (from external pressure): Nc= 1.125
Burst (from internal pressure): Ni = 1.1
72
 Casing Design

What this means is that, for example, if we

need to design a string where the maximum
tensile force is expected to be 100,000 lbf,
we select pipe that can handle 100,000 * 1.8
= 180,000 lbf in tension.

Note that the Halliburton Cementing Tables

list actual pipe strengths, without safety
factors built in.

73
 Casing Design

Unless otherwise specified in a particular

problem, we shall also assume the following:

Worst Possible Conditions

1. For Collapse design, assume that the
casing is empty on the inside (p = 0 psig)

2. For Burst design, assume no “backup”

fluid on the outside of the casing (p = 0 psig)

74
 Casing Design

Worst Possible Conditions, cont’d

3. For Tension design,
assume no buoyancy effect
4. For Collapse design,
assume no buoyancy effect
The casing string must be designed to stand up to the
expected conditions in burst, collapse and tension.
Above conditions are quite conservative. They are also
simplified for easier understanding of the basic concepts.
75
 Casing Design - Solution

Burst Requirements (based on the expected pore

pressure)
PB = pore pressure * Design Factor

Depth
= 6,000 psi *1.1
PB = 6,600 psi
Pressure
The whole casing string must be capable of
withstanding this internal pressure without failing in
burst.
76
 Casing Design - Solution

Collapse Requirements
For collapse design, we start at the bottom of
the string and work our way up.

Our design criteria will be based on

hydrostatic pressure resulting from the 12.5
ppg mud that will be in the hole when the
casing string is run, prior to cementing.

77
 Depth
Casing Design

Collapse Requirements, cont’d Pressure

Pc = 0.052 * mud weight * depth * design factor

= 0.052 * 12.5 * 8,000 * 1.125
Pc = 5,850 psi ← req' d at the bottom.

Further up the hole the collapse requirements

are less severe
78
 Casing Design
Req’d: Burst: 6,600 psi Collapse: 5,850 psi

79
 Casing Design

Note that two of the weights of N-80 casing

meet the burst requirements, but only the
53.5 #/ft pipe can handle the collapse
requirement at the bottom of the hole (5,850
psi).

The 53.5 #/ft pipe could probably run all the

way to the surface (would still have to check
tension), but there may be a lower cost
alternative.
80
 Casing Design

Depth
To what depth might we
be able to run N-80, 47
#/ft? The maximum Pressure
annular pressure that this
pipe may be exposed to,
is:
Collapse pressure of pipe 4,760
Pc = = = 4,231 psi
design factor 1.125

81
 Casing Design

First Iteration
At what depth do we see this pressure (4,231
psig) in a column of 12.5 #/gal mud?

Pc = 0 . 052 * 12 . 5 * h 1

Pc 4 , 231
∴ h1 = = = 6 ,509 ft
0 . 052 * 12 . 5 0 . 052 * 12 .5

82
 Casing Design
This is the depth to which the pipe
could be run if there were 6,509’
no axial stress in the pipe… 8,000’

But at 6,509’ we have (8,000 - 6,509) =

1,491’ of 53.5 #/ft pipe below us.

The weight of this pipe will reduce the

collapse resistance of the 47.0 #/ft pipe!
83
 Casing Design

Weight, W1 = 53.5 #/ft * 1,491 ft

= 79,769 lbf
This weight results in an axial
stress in the 47 #/ft pipe

weight 79 ,769 lbf

of S1 = = 2
= 5,877 psi
end area 13.572 in

84
 Casing Design

The API tables show that the above

stress will reduce the collapse resistance
from 4,760 to somewhere between

4,680 psi (with 5,000 psi stress)

and 4,600 psi (with 10,000 psi stress)

85
 Casing Design
Interpolation between these values shows
that the collapse resistance at 5,877 psi
axial stress is:
⎛ S − S1 ⎞
Pc1 = P1 − ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ (P1 − P2 )
⎝ S 2 − S1 ⎠

(5,877 − 5,000)
Pc1 = 4,680 − * ( 4,680 − 4,600 ) = 4,666 psi
(10,000 − 5,000)

4,666
With the design factor, Pcc1 = = 4,148 psi
1.125
86
 Casing Design

This (4,148 psig) is the pressure at a

depth
4,148
h2 = = 6,382 ft
0.052 * 12 .5

Which differs considerably from the

initial depth of 6,509 ft, so a second
iteration is required.
87
88
89
 Casing Design

Second Iteration
Now consider running the 47 #/ft
pipe to the new depth of 6,382 ft.

W 2 = ( 8,000 − 6,382 ) * 53 . 5 = 86 ,563 lbf

86 ,563 lbf
S2 = 2
= 6,378 psi
13 . 572 in
90
 Casing Design
Interpolating again,
1 ⎡ ⎛ S − S1 ⎞ ⎤
Pc1 = ⎢ P1 − ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ (P1 − P2 )⎥
D.F. ⎢ ⎝ S 2 − S1 ⎠ ⎥⎦
⎣

1 ⎧ ⎡ 6,378 − 5000 ⎤⎫
pcc2 = ⎨4,680 − ⎢ * (4,680 − 4,600)⎥ ⎬ = 4,140 psi
1.125 ⎩ ⎣ 5000 ⎦⎭

This is the pressure at a depth of

4,140
h3 = = 6,369 ft
0 .052 * 12 .5
91
 Casing Design
This is within 13 ft of the assumed value. If
more accuracy is desired (generally not
needed), proceed with the:
Third Iteration
h 3 = 6,369 '
W 3 = ( 8,000 − 6,369 ) * 53 . 5 = 87 ,259 lbf
87 ,259
S3 = = 6,429 psi
13 . 572
Pcc3 = ?
92
 Casing Design

Third Iteration, cont’d

1 ⎧ 6,429 − 5,000 ⎫
thus Pcc3 = ⎨4,680 − * (4,680 − 4,600)⎬
1.125 ⎩ 5,000 ⎭

= 4,140 psi = Pcc 2

93
 Casing Design

Third Iteration, cont’d

This is the answer we are looking for, i.e.,
we can run 47 #/ft N-80 pipe to a depth of
6,369 ft, and 53.5 #/ft pipe between 6,369
and 8,000 ft.
Perhaps this string will run all the way to the
surface (check tension), or perhaps an even
more economical string would include some
43.5 #/ft pipe?
94
 Casing Design

At some depth the 43.5 #/ft pipe would be

able to handle the collapse requirements,
but we have already determined that it will
not meet burst requirements.

∴ NO!
95
 N-80
43.5 #/ft?
Depth = 5,057?
5,066?
5,210?
N-80
47.0 #/ft

Depth = 6,369
6,369
N-80 6,382
53.5 #/ft 6,509

8,000
96
 Tension Check

The weight on the top joint of casing

would be
(6,369 ft * 47.0# / ft ) + (1,631 ft * 53.5# / ft )

= 386,602 lbs actual weight

With a design factor of 1.8 for tension, a
pipe strength of
1.8 * 386,602 = 695,080 lbf is required
97
 Tension Check

The Halliburton cementing tables give a

yield strength of 1,086,000 lbf for the pipe
body and a joint strength of 905,000 lbf for
LT & C.

∴ 47.0 # / ft is OK to surface

98
 Casing Design Review

We have 4 different weights of casing

available to us in this case:
1. Two of the four weights are unacceptable
to us everywhere in the string because
they do not satisfy the burst
requirements.

2. Only the N-80, 53.5 #/ft pipe is capable of

withstanding the collapse requirements
at the bottom of the string
99
 Casing Design Review

3. Since the 53.5 #/ft pipe is the most

expensive, we want to use as little of it
as possible, so we want to use as
much 47.0 #/ft pipe as possible.

4. Don’t forget to check to make sure the

tension requirements are met; both for
pipe body, and for threads and
couplings (T&C).

100
 Casing Design Review

The collapse resistance of N-80, 47 #/ft will

determine to what depth it can be run. Two
factors will reduce this depth:
‹ Design Factor
‹ Axial Stress (tension)

“Halliburton” collapse resistance: 4,760 psi

‹ Apply design factor:4,760 = 4,231 psi
1.125
101
 Casing Design Review

To determine the effect of axial stress

requires an iterative process:

1. Determine the depth capability without

axial stress
4,231
depth = = 6,509 ft
0.052 * 12.5
2. Determine axial stress at this point

102
 Casing Design Review
3. Determine corresponding collapse resistance
4. Determine depth where this pressure exists
5. Compare with previous depth estimate
6. Repeat steps 2-6 using the new depth
estimate

7. When depths agree, accept answer

(typically 2-4 iterations) (agreement to
within 30 ft will be satisfactory)
103