SPE 59750 Importance of Completion Design Considerations for Complex, Hostile, and HPHT Wells in Frontier Areas

D.E. Hahn, R.M. Pearson, S.H. Hancock; Adams Pearson Associates Inc.

Copyright 2000, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc. This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2000 SPE/CERI Gas Technology Symposium held in Calgary, Alberta Canada, 35 April 2000. 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.

Traditional uniaxial and biaxial working stress designs are convenient and usually adequate for shallower, lower temperature/pressure wells. However, the severe conditions considered within this paper require state-of-the-art triaxial design software. Examples within the paper will demonstrate how the results of these simulations can be used for hostile environment tubular selection, including discussion of the importance to properly select and test the tubular connections. Many failures have resulted from brittle fracture or fatigue rather than yield, because the tendency for the designer is to choose higher yield strength materials that are inherently less ductile and more prone to hydrogen embrittlement. To avoid this, it is better to push the limits of lower strength, ductile materials, which in turn challenges the typical design safety factors. This challenge has lead some major oil companies to develop and use risk based tubular design processes. Background The completion of HPHT wells have unique design challenges that require rigorous engineering approaches, analyses, and planning. Although the industry has been working with HPHT wells for a number of years, the application of appropriate technology in several areas is still evolving as more operators begin to pursue these horizons. Because of encroachment on some of the generally accepted technology norms and boundaries, some risk will need to be assumed while expanding these boundaries through improved equipment designs, altered or more rigorous engineering based procedures, or development of new technologies. Generally the design philosophy begins with the expansion of available field proven technology, which is preferred over completely new designs that have not been successfully tested in actual field applications. At the outset of an HPHT project, the overall completion design objective should achieve the wells production target with an acceptable level of risk. Generally a completion has three major roles: 1. Provide a flow conduit from the reservoir to surface processing facilities.

Abstract As upstream oil and gas exploration and production companies search for new opportunities, much deeper wells are being drilled and completed. In addition to greater depths, an increasing number of wells are being drilled and completed in much more hostile downhole environments. These very complex wells are frequently drilled in frontier areas around the world, including the Western and Northern Canadian foothills and coastal areas. Where pressures exceed 10,000 psi (69 MPa) and temperatures surpass 300 F (149 C), wells are generally termed High-Pressure/High-Temperature (HPHT) completions. The stresses resulting from the combination of high axial loads and pressure differentials begin encroaching on materials limitations of standard subsurface equipment. This paper provides an overview of an engineering design methodology that can be used during the planning of deep, difficult, or complex wells. The importance of numerous design considerations and realistic, clearly defined load cases will be emphasized. High temperatures cause the well to operate with either significant pipe movement, or high compressional loads at the packer, particularly when these high temperatures are combined with higher operating pressures. The increased well depths, usually with accompanying deviations from vertical, also increase mechanical and fluid friction. These situations require a rigorous engineering analysis with the aid of modern thermal and stress analysis software.

D.E. HAHN, R.M. PEARSON, S.H. HANCOCK

SPE 59750

2.

Provide a means to run, activate, and pull bottom hole assemblies to either establish or isolate communication with the desired production reservoir interval(s). Provide a primary safety barrier in high pressure and/or corrosive wells.

3.

A clear understanding of the conditions that will be placed on the completion components requires accurate predictions. Currently, state-of-the-art simulation software can determine operating temperatures and pressures (transient and stabilized), equipment loads, fluid friction effects, equivalent densities, and corrosion rates. These predictions can then be used to prepare the final completion design and procedures. The completion design for HPHT wells should provide installation and workover flexibility, which implies that simplicity, wherever possible, is of utmost importance. Based on this premise the application of monobore completions has become more prominent for recent HPHT development projects. High Tensile Tubulars When potential well pressures increase, the initial reaction is to increase the API tensile grade of the tubulars. This approach will usually work in sweet well environments; however, since HPHT wells usually are from deep depositions, small amounts of H2 S are always present. High pressures together with low levels of H2 S will render a sour environment because of the resultant H 2 S partial pressures exceed the limits as defined in the NACE Materials Requirement MR01751 . If material tensile levels of the tubulars are increased, generally their resistance to hydrogen embrittlement is decreased or not suitable when exposed to H2 S. Thus it is imperative that the metallurgy of all the components of the completion be appropriate for all the anticipated well conditions. Whenever possible, the preferred option is to use NACE sour service grade materials (T95, L80, J55) where temperatures could fall below 175 F (80 C)2,3 . However, due to inside diameter preferences for drilling assemblies and/or sub-surface safety valve (SSSV) dimensions, HPHT well conditions sometimes dictate consideration of higher grade materials like C110 for the production casing string. Because tubing strings are continuously exposed to well fluids, it is always preferred to use T95 or lower (L80, J55) grade materials for production tubing. The limits of C110 tubulars are determined by the proprietary specification of each steel manufacturer and are not specifically identified within Table 5 of the NACE Materials Requirement MR0175. NACE MR0175 does place the responsibility for the determination of adequacy of the sulfide

stress cracking (SSC) resistance on the user of the material. One such test using full sized prototype samples, as described in References 4 and 5, determined that the normal NACE Test Method TM0177 Method A6 does not necessarily provide the lower bound of the threshold stress. Thus other test procedures also need to be performed to provide adequate assurances of suitability for the specific application. Involvement of an independent, qualified metallurgist is highly recommended for Quality Assurance - Quality Control (QA/QC) of the manufacturing process. The independent metallurgist should also audit or develop rigorous inspection criteria and subsequent qualification testing of any C110 materials, using the NACE Test Method TM0177 Method B or Method D6 . Corrosion Resistant Alloys (CRAs) can be used for corrosive environments, but the exact metal specification needs to address the effects of Chloride Stress Cracking (CSC), high temperature corrosion, combined SSC and CSC, and potential exposure to acid 5, 7, 8. Once a CRA material is considered technically suitable, the predominant challenge is to determine if this is the most cost effective solution for coping with the desired operating parameters. Once again, specific equipment qualification testing may be required dependent on the environments and conditions to which the material will be exposed. Selection of Tubular Connections Connections built according to the American Petroleum Institute (API) specifications cannot ensure leak resistance9 , thus are, generally, not acceptable for HPHT applications; and premium connections are therefore required. The extreme stresses and forces that are imparted on the tubulars in HPHT wells dictate that premium connections be evaluated and selected based on actual qualification test data. Usually, the most severe connection leakage case will be when the tubing is in simultaneous compression and bending together with applied pressure differentials at elevated temperatures. Moreover, the effects of stress cycling should also be considered. Vendors of premium connections state that their generic compression ratings are as high as 70% of the connection tension ratings but in many cases they may prove to be 50% or less. Once an application has been identified, the vendor should be required to provide test data that closely matches the expected operating conditions, otherwise a qualification test needs to be performed to verify that the connection is suitable. This qualification test with a gas (usually nitrogen) should include various temperature cycling and combined loading cases with the predicted extremes of axial loads, pressure differentials, and induced bending effects. The qualification testing of the connections is very important to ensure leak tight integrity is achieved for the life of the tubing string.

SPE 59750

IMPORTANCE OF COMPLETION DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR COMPLEX, HOSTILE, AND HPHT WELLS

Simulation and Prediction Requirements The primary intent of a complete tubing stress analysis is to ensure that the pipe and connections remain within acceptable triaxial, axial, burst, and collapse safety factors. The triaxial determination with a specified safety factor will result in what is commonly termed a Von Mises ellipse (as illustrated by the ellipse that is superimposed on the uniaxial design safety factor limitations in Figure 1, developed by Landmarks WSTUBE program). An acceptable completion engineering design should ensure that all the calculated safety factors remain within the limitations of the specified design safety factor boundaries. It is important to realize that many factors can significantly affect the performance of tubular materials. Some of these factors are listed below: Applied loads (e.g. set down weight, pressure tests) Induced loads (e.g. thermal expansion) Shock loads (e.g. perforating, running pipe) Cyclical loads (e.g. producing and shut in periods) Bending Triaxial effects Corrosion Connection make up Mill defects Damage Estimation Errors

designer should assess the maximum reservoir inflow capacity and whether it is critical to account for a blowout condition as one of the design loads. The production performance of a well is typically modeled with an industry nodal analysis simulator that can accurately predict the bottomhole flowing pressure at various producing rates. These values are required for the subsequent modeling of the tubing/casing conditions under various operating conditions. In addition to these parameters, rate restrictions due to erosion limitations can be determined. The state-of-the-art, sophisticated commercial stress analysis software can provide pressure and temperature simulations throughout the wellbore during all the various loading conditions throughout the life of the well. These simulations will provide predictions for both transient and stabilized periods, which is very important for HPHT wells. Figure 3 provides output from a typical temperature simulation for an HPHT well using the Landmark WT-PROD software. Note the significant heating of the wellbore during production cycles, with the other extreme being the cooling during an acid stimulation. The non-linear trends imply higher tubular temperatures than the average of the flowing tubing head and bottomhole temperatures. Also of interest are the surface temperature differences for transient and stabilized flow of dry gas and gas with free water production. These thermal variations can create significant stress on the downhole tubulars and equipment. The mechanical performance of most wellbore tubulars is reduced at elevated temperatures, thus it is important that the simulation derates the tubing strength according to the temperature that it encounters. The yield strength degradation of steel and several alloys is shown in Figure 45 . After completing the pressure and temperature simulations the various loading conditions during the life of the well need to be defined. These loading conditions can usually be grouped as follows: Reference Condition: The landing conditions of the tubing string and/or packer affect the subsequent stresses and forces that result from the various load conditions. The fluids and landing loads (compression or tension) that are present are important to identify. The time since the last extended period of circulation and circulation just prior to landing may cause the landing temperature to be different from the normal assumption of the pipe being at the geothermal gradient. Frequent Loads : Producing conditions throughout the life of the well need to be identified with the extremes being the most important for the analysis. The characteristics of the produced fluids can significantly affect the resulting temperatures, particularly liquids that will heat up the tubing due to their higher heat capacities. Sensitivities of various annulus operating pressures are also required

These factors need to be accommodated within the following tubular ratings and design assumptions as demonstrated in Figure 2: Nature of the API Tubular Ratings: The typical uniaxial API yield rating for tubulars (burst, tensile) has provided an implicit safety factor within their specifications, whereby the tubular will definitely remain in the elastic region of the stress/strain curve for the particular grade of material. Design Safety Factor: Commonly used safety factors (Table 1) are applied in the design of a tubing string. These safety factors can be altered somewhat (up or down) depending on the certainty of actual service conditions and quality of data available. Assumed Loading Conditions: The completion design engineer will frequently use the most extreme conditions that are anticipated during the life of the well. The issue is to properly assess the probability, consequences, and timing of this condition. Design Basis Most stress analysis simulation programs only consider the flowing performance up the tubing and do not incorporate the reservoir performance aspect of a producing well. The

D.E. HAHN, R.M. PEARSON, S.H. HANCOCK

SPE 59750

because they can also affect the tubular and packer loadings. Other frequent loads that need to be defined are during shut in periods where the tubing is filled with hydrocarbon at the two extreme temperature profiles (HOT highest flowing temperature profile with maximum shut in wellhead pressure and COLD normal geothermal temperature profile with corresponding shut in wellhead pressure). Infrequent Loads : Pressure tests of the tubing and annulus are usually only conducted during the completion phase; however, any subsequent pressure tests need to be reviewed to ensure the loading is within the design of the downhole equipment. Killing the well during subsequent interventions should examine the conditions at the beginning of the operation (ie. hydrocarbon filled tubing with maximum wellhead pressure) and the end of pumping (ie. tubing filled with cooler kill fluid). One issue that should be addressed is whether the well will be allowed to cool before pump -in operations commence. Stimulation loads need to be examined to determine the pumping limitations or the operational adjustments that must be made (like heating the fluid). Potential problem situations, like a proppant screen out causing high instantaneous loads, need to be considered. A partially evacuated tubing string load case should be considered for wells where SSSVs are used and require periodic function testing (this is usually more important for deep-set SSSVs in subsea wells). In order to ensure integrity is maintained throughout the completion string and packer in the unlikely event of a surface tubing leak (i.e. maximum wellhead shut in pressure on annulus fluid column under HOT conditions), a worst case load under these conditions also needs to be analyzed. Workover Conditions: When a well requires the removal of the tubing string it will either need to be unlatched/removed from a packer, or the packer will need to be released. This will require axial forces exceeding the normal string weight and drag forces. The axial limitation of the tubing string at surface will also affect the selection and design of any downhole shearing assemblies. For deviated and horizontal wells, the additional drag forces while running and pulling a tubing string need to be determined, usually with some form of wellbore drag simulation. The identification of potential areas of trapped fluids is important because the thermal expansion of these fluids can

significantly increase pressure and cause equipment failure. An example of a trapped fluid situation is when a packer tailpipe is sealed within a liner top polished bore receptacle (PBR). During a heating cycle, the annular fluid between the packer seal and the PBR seal cannot escape, thus pressure build up due to thermal expansion can often exceed tubular and equipment ratings. The casing design should also be reviewed to ensure that potential trapped fluid thermal expansion scenarios in the casing annular space have also been evaluated and quantified. These situations should be identified and quantified with the state-of-the-art temperature and stress analysis simulators. Production casing/liner conditions also need to be examined for the various load cases. Hostile environment wells frequently have multiple, fully cemented casing strings which can improve the predicted safety factors for the production casing10 . This is predicated on the assumption that a very effective cement column exists between the two casing strings and that fluids cannot be trapped within uncemented gaps. Several companies have developed proprietary well stress design procedures that consider and quantify uncertainties, risks and economics within a well design. These procedures provide additional engineering support for situations where the predicted safety factors are encroaching on the accepted design safety factors. One such proprietary reliability based design format, Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD), was developed by Mobil and is detailed in Reference 11. The LRFD procedure allows the design to suit the application and provides the engineer the opportunity to treat each well individually. Packer Selection Considerations Packers are usually used to isolate reservoir fluids and conditions from the final casing string that is in place. All packers will have an acceptable operating envelope of forces and pressure differentials, which should always be obtained from the vendor. The predicted tubing-to-packer loads (force and pressure differential) from the tubing stress simulations can be superimposed on this packer operating envelope to confirm its applicability. It is very important that the operating envelope be derated and/or qualified (tested) for the anticipated temperatures. If the predicted operating conditions do not remain within the packer operating envelope, either a different packer design or a downhole tubing hanger needs to be considered to assume some of the induced loads. The packer-to-casing forces are generally only an issue in extreme loading conditions, but should always be reviewed. Significant elastomer research and development has been undertaken by several vendors and continues to evolve. The major factors in elastomer selection include the operating temperatures, pressure differentials, and type of fluid exposure. For example, a nitrile element is the preferred elastomer in a high density oil based mud system, but is not

SPE 59750

IMPORTANCE OF COMPLETION DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR COMPLEX, HOSTILE, AND HPHT WELLS

compatible with a high density zinc bromide (ZnBr2 ) brine, where an AFLAS element is preferred. Moreover, the sequence of the planned completion procedures may influence the selection of the most appropriate elastomer for the packer. Once again an appropriate suite of certification tests are recommended to ensure the elastomers perform adequately at high temperatures and differential pressures. Since an HPHT packer is usually a permanent installation, it is important that the material selection of all the components that will be exposed to the produced fluids be a corrosion resistant material. Most wells produce at least some formation water (sometimes later in life of well) and CO2 within the gas stream can create corrosive environments. Thus, it can normally be assumed that, at some point in the life of the well, corrosion fluids will be an issue. In HPHT wells, the completion fluid environment can also affect the setting of the packer, because of the high densities required to maintain a kill fluid overbalance. High density oil based mud will be heavily ladened with barite and has been known to cause setting and sealing problems. This can result from plugging of communication ports or from residual mud adherence to the walls of the casing at the high bottomhole temperatures 5 . The preferred setting environment of the final packer is a clear brine after the casing wall has been effectively cleaned. A common practice is to circulate to a lower density filtered brine, which will be used as the annulus packer fluid, if the casing/liner is well cemented and properly pressure tested3,5,12. HPHT packers are either set hydraulically on pipe or electrically on wireline. The selection of an appropriate setting tool is of utmost importance, particularly the potential temperature limitations of the electric wireline setting tools. It is also important to specify the appropriate burn rate of the power charge used in the setting tool, such that the packer setting mechanism is properly activated. Packer seal assemblies can be designed to move within a sealbore; however, it is generally felt that moving seals have a much larger chance of eventually leaking and failing. The recommended design should ensure that there is no seal movement after the first production (heating) period. Downward movement of the tubing string is usually accommodated by the elastic deformation (buckling) of the tubing string when the movement of the top of the seal assembly is stopped at the packer. In order to keep the seals from moving upwards during periods of tubing contraction (shut in, pumping cooler fluids down tubing, etc), the string needs sufficient setdown weight or needs to be anchored near bottom (packer or downhole anchor). Once again the design and limitations of the latching assembly, including the release mechanism and shearing contingencies, need to be incorporated into the tubing stress analysis and simulation results. Operational contingencies (such as applied annulus

pressure) are sometimes required if equipment limits are approached. Good completions engineering design will always attempt to maximize the packer bore size and thus provide the most operational flexibility. This can be a limiting factor in traditional packer style completions thus several operators have adopted monobore style completions where the tubing has virtually the same inside diameter as the production liner5 . The annulus between the tubing and production casing is isolated by a tubing seal assembly that is landed or latched into an integral PBR on the liner top packer. This monobore completion provides fullbore intervention, within the tubing string and liner, to the reservoir zone(s) for perforating, isolation, wireline, coil tubing, and snubbing. The major disadvantage of the monobore completion can be during exploration well testing, where the reservoir deliverabilities and conditions are unknown and the large wellbore diameter can cause production stability problems at low flow rates. Other Downhole Equipment The selection of downhole high pressure flow control profiles is limited at the present time. When installing plug mandrels into these profiles, the majority have a lower pressure differential rating from above than from below. When placing profiles as part of a packer tailpipe, the use of appropriate CRA material is recommended. When evaluating the application of a monobore completion, a primary consideration is to have a nippleless heavy wall liner possibly with polish bores. An alternative is to place nipple profiles at strategic depths along the cemented liner, which requires working closely with the drilling operation of the well. All offshore and some onshore HPHT wells require SSSVs to adequately mitigate risks during production operations. The SSSVs should be qualified to operate in the predicted hostile environment and conditions. The introduction of this equipment adds to increased complexity of the completion, which, in turn, provides more opportunities for failures and malfunctions. In situations where it is optional to install a SSSV, it is recommended to perform a risk assessment evaluation to ascertain whether it is prudent to assume the additional operational risks associated with its installation. Completion Fluids A clear brine is always the preferred fluid to complete any potential producing well. Most HPHT wells are drilled with solids laden oil based mud that will have a tendency to begin to bake or cake to the walls of the casing, together with the potential for downward migration of the barite as the muds suspension properties degrade.
3 A major issue with brine weights over 11.5 ppg (1351 kg/m ), particularly bromides that contain zinc weighting materials, is maintaining effective short term corrosion inhibition and the safe handling of the fluids. Over the past several years, more

D.E. HAHN, R.M. PEARSON, S.H. HANCOCK

SPE 59750

effective inhibitors have been identified and significant improvements in the safe handling procedures of these brines have been enacted. These brines still cannot be used as long term packer fluids (annular fluid above the packer), thus common practice has been to use an inhibited slightly saline water, like potassium chloride or seawater3,5,12 . In addition to the corrosion concerns, the packer operating envelopes can frequently be exceeded in a tubing leak load case with heavy weight packer fluid. The more recent development of formate brines has introduced a non-toxic, safe heavy weight brine, but widespread use has not occurred because they are still 8-10 times the cost of most zinc bromide brines. Safe handling of brines is a matter of proper training for personnel involved, using adequate personal protection (clothing and goggles), and having contingency plans in place should an unexpected release occur. Most vendors and operating companies have been diligent in developing these guidelines, which are being used on a regular basis. During mud displacement procedures and cleaning of the wellbore, effective casing wall scraping is required, particularly in the packer setting areas and/or any sealing surfaces. Because of the high per unit costs of the bromide brines, their recovery and reuse needs to maximized. Recent casing scraper and brush designs and effective washing/circulating procedures appear to have enhanced the casing wall cleaning procedures. Designing an effective mud displacement program with various multi-function pills does assist in proper hole cleaning and achieving clean brine returns as rapidly as possible. Most HPHT horizons are at significant well depths thus the equivalent densities at the bottom of the hole (ie. which equates to actual hydrostatic head or pressure) will be less than the surface pumped density mainly due to temperature effects. For example a bottomhole density of 17.3 ppg (2033 kg/m3 ) at 17000 ft (5182 m) and 375 F (191 C) will require a 3 surface density of 17.8 ppg (2092 kg/m ) at 70 F (21 C). Good tubing stress simulators or the brine vendor can determine the equivalent density versus depth. Perforating Methodology Tubing conveyed perforating systems have become relatively common within the industry; however, when being considered for HPHT wells, the downhole temperature exposure time needs to be closely examined. Many of the published vendor system temperature ratings are for times less than those required for deep HPHT well tubing conveyed operations, particularly with guns suspended below a packer tailpipe. It is important that the completions design engineer identifies the existing limitations and, if necessary, works closely with the vendor to qualify the system to the expected conditions and exposure times. Expert third party involvement in the design and witness of the qualification testing is desirable.

As a minimum, the qualification process of perforating systems should include the explosive charges, detonators, boosters, primacord, firing heads, and gun bodies. High temperature performance testing of the manufactured charge lots to be used is one of the requirements. It is also recommended to Xray the primacord lots, which are intended for high temperature operations, for imperfections or defects. Specific function testing of the firing heads and gun bodies at expected temperatures, pressures, and times, to certify the effectiveness of the elastomer seals is also highly recommended. Electric wireline operations at pressures exceeding 6000 psi (41.4 MPa) are usually avoided because of the additional pressure control risks. The main pressure control issue is maintaining an adequate/continuous pressure seal around a braided wireline in the flow tube seals at the top of the lubricator. Operations should always prepare for the maximum possible wellhead pressure; however, measures to reduce the wellhead pressures, like filling the wellbore with liquids, should be undertaken until improvements are made to the currently available technologies. It is for these reasons that many operators try to avoid traditional electric wireline perforating in HPHT wells. Slickline deployed perforating guns systems have been effectively stacked, hydraulically activated, and subsequently retrieved in monobore completions13 . It is much easier to obtain an effective liquid/elastomer seal around the solid slickline wire; and, thus, it is inherently much safer to use at higher pressures. The major consideration for pressure control is to ensure that a fully redundant pump system is used. It is also preferred that one of these units to be able to pump at very consistent low volumes. Contingency Planning HPHT completion planning requires a clear appreciation and understanding of the risks involved for all the procedures and equipment that will be used. Some of these procedures may be quite complex; and may depend on the outcome of earlier well activity. Since this is uncertain, contingency plans and alternatives need to be formulated and sometimes detailed, particularly where lead times for alternate equipment or services are required. Situations where contingencies are required can include operations like well unloading, stimulation options (poor well performance), wellbore cleanouts, perforating gun failure, electric or slickline wireline problems, and packer leaks. The key factors that need to be identified include identification of specific alternate equipment and the vendors availability, expertise, and experience. High pressure coil tubing operations have become much more common over the past several years and typical HPHT operations may include hole displacements, wellbore cleanouts, wireline plug cleaning and/or retrieval, and well

SPE 59750

IMPORTANCE OF COMPLETION DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR COMPLEX, HOSTILE, AND HPHT WELLS

unloading operations 14,15. A critical component of high pressure coil tubing operations is the low rate, high pressure fluid pumping units which are required to accommodate the high internal friction pressures. Most normal service company pumping units cannot consistently pump at the low rates required by these long coil tubing strings. As with any coil tubing operation, it is very crucial that pipe fatigue monitoring be rigorously performed as a pipe failure on HPHT wells can have serious safety and cost implications. Complex Completion Planning and Preparation The planning of a complex completion begins with the drilling and casing design phases of the wellbore. An engineering design methodology for the planning of complex (HPHT) well completions, as discussed throughout this paper, is presented in Figure 5 and briefly reiterated below. It is important that the overall completion philosophy be developed at these early stages because of the significant impact on subsequent equipment selection and availability. The first decision is to determine the applicability of a monobore style completion versus a restrictive bore packer completion. A monobore completion may be difficult to plan in an exploration well; whereas, for development or delineation wells, it may have significant advantages. When considering monobore completions, the isolation between the formation and the tubing annulus can be with a PBR (packerless) or a large bore packer. In a liner completion, the designer must also consider steps required to isolate the liner lap in the event of an inadequate cement job. A preliminary tubing design with a state-of-the-art stress analysis simulation program is integral for determining the required tubing weight, grade, and connection specifications. The tubing and/or premium connection vendor(s) will need to provide evidence that a particular connection has been qualified for the conditions that are predicted by the simulation, particularly the case of maximum compressive load with induced bending and pressure differentials. If this evidence (i.e. actual tests) is not available then a qualification test will be required before specifying the final pipe connection. When determining the perforating strategy, it is important to consider the effectiveness of their penetration into the formation. Perforation length, cleanliness and sometimes hole size are very important factors in ensuring the reservoir connectivity. It is therefore important to examine theoretical simulations of in-situ (at reservoir conditions) perforation performance as they will be significantly different (poorer) than the vendor supplied API test information. In offshore, environmentally sensitive areas, and where wellhead integrity may be an issue, SSSVs will always be an integral part of the completion but their selection requires a rigorous review to ensure that they meet the expected

conditions. Complexity and higher risks of workovers are an inherent part of SSSVs, thus in other geographic areas it may be prudent to perform a risk assessment on whether they actually are required for the completion. As discussed earlier a clear brine is usually a very important criteria because solids ladened mud can cause significant problems with solids settling at the high temperatures, interference with mechanical movement during equipment operations, plugging of pressure/flow ports, and ineffective sealing of elastomers on pipe walls. The parameters for selecting a particular brine should include well control capability, safety, environmental, subsequent disposal and overall cost. The equipment vendor selection requires a rigorous review of the equipment qualifications to ensure that they meet the predicted conditions. If qualified operating boundaries are being exceeded then additional qualification and sometimes slight redesign needs to be pursued with the vendor. Previous personal experience and possibly relationships with particular vendors will sometimes become a deciding factor in the selection process because of the increased confidence level of knowing that issues will be properly addressed when required. Finally, without timely planning, long lead times in the equipment deliveries may delay initiation of field operations. For complex completions, detailed field operations programs are very important to ensure the rationale for various procedures are adequately explained because the design engineer is not always at the wellsite (although this is highly desirable) or readily available. Breakdowns in communication usually result in errors, improper procedures, misunderstood assumptions, equipment misapplication, equipment/service delivery delays, and worst of all mistrust between parties. Continuous communication between vendors, technical specialists, completion engineers, field operations, and management is of utmost importance. Conclusions 1. 2. The completion engineering and well test design must begin during the initial planning phases of an HPHT well. State-of-the-art temperature and stress analysis simulators are a crucial requirement for all complex (HPHT) completion designs. This stress analysis needs to examine the calculated triaxial, axial, burst, and collapse safety factors together with the packer loadings. High tensile materials should be avoided or used with extreme caution in the cooler regions of the wellbore. Proprietary sour service material selection requires rigorous Quality Assurance and Quality Control in the manufacture and testing of the product. As part of the qualification of these high tensile materials, NACE Test Method TM0177 (Method B or Method D6 ) is highly recommended.

3.

D.E. HAHN, R.M. PEARSON, S.H. HANCOCK

SPE 59750

4.

Corrosion resistant alloy (CRA) material selection needs to assess the window of application with respect to complex corrosion, sulfide stress cracking (SSC), and chloride stress cracking (CSC) mechanisms. Properly qualified premium connections are required for all tubing, liner, and casing strings that could potentially be exposed to the produced fluids. This is particularly true for the predicted compressive loadings in a tubing string. The metal failure limits require deration at elevated temperatures. Elastomer movement after the initial landing should be avoided in HPHT completions. Elastomer selection requires consideration of all potential fluid exposure and elevated temperatures over 300 C (149 C) including qualification testing. Always attempt to use clear brines as the primary completion fluid. High density bromide brines will require additional handling and disposal procedures. The uses of the more desirable non-toxic brines, like the formates, require further development and/or significant cost reduction to achieve widespread application. Perforating systems require detailed review of their qualification, particularly for TCP guns, which will be at bottomhole pressures, and temperatures for adequate periods of time.

5.

6. 7.

8.

9.

10. Contingency planning is a crucial part of the completion design because HPHT equipment and/or services are not always readily available. 11. In geographic areas where SSSVs are not obligatory, it is prudent to perform a risk assessment of their necessity. 12. Continuous effective communication between engineering, operations, regulatory entities, and vendors is imperative. References
1. NACE International, Standard Material Requirements Sulfide Stress Cracking Resistant Metallic Materials for Oilfield Equipment, NACE Standard MR0175-99, 1999 Edition 2. Bacarreza, L.J.; van Melsen, R.J.; Jantschy, G.: Conceptual Design for HP/HT Surface Development Wells, paper SPE 28893 presented at the 1994 SPE European Petroleum Conference, London, U.K., 25-27 October 3. Kraus, H.; Prieur, J.: High-Pressure Well Design, SPE 20900, SPE Drilling Engineer (December 1991), pp 240-244 4. Greer, J.B.; Elliott, G.; Shivers, R.M.: Prototype Sulfide Stress Cracking Testing of High Strength Oil Country Tubular Goods, paper NACE 96-69 presented at the 1996 NACE International Annual Conference and Exposition 5. Elliott, G.S.; Brockman, R.A.; Shivers, R.M.: HPHT Drilling and Completion Design for the Erskine Field, paper SPE 30364 presented at the 1995 SPE Offshore Europe Conference, Aberdeen, U.K., 5-8 September

6. NACE International, Standard Test Method Laboratory Testing of Metals for Resistance to Sulfide Stess Cracking in H2S Environments, NACE Standard TM0177-90, 1990 Edition 7. Huntoon, G.G.: Completion Practices in Deep Sour Tuscaloosa Wells, paper SPE 11190 presented at the 1982 SPE Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, 26-29 September 8. Snyder, R.E.; Suman, G.O.: High Pressure Well Completions Part 3, World Oil (October 1978) pp 123 9. Schwind, B.E., Curington, D.W., Miller, R.A.; LRFD Derived Performance of a Qualified API Connection Population, paper OTC 7940 presented at the 1995 Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, 1-4 May 10. Lewis, D.B.; Brand, P.R.; Whitney, W.S.; Hood, M.G.; Maes, M.A.: Load and Resistance Factor Design for Oil Country Tubular Goods, paper OTC 7936 presented at the 1995 Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, 1-4 May 11. Goodman, M.A.; Halal, A.S.: Case Study: HPHT Casing Design Achieved With Multistring Analysis, paper SPE 26322 presented at the 1993 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, 3-6 October 12. Snyder, R.E.; Suman, G.O.: High Pressure Well Completions Part 4, World Oil (November 1978) pp 77 13. Allen, R.F.; Walters, M.: Erskine Field: Early Operating Experience, paper SPE 56899 presented at the 1999 SPE Offshore Europe Conference, Aberdeen, 7-9 September 14. Larsen, H.A.; Kenrick, A.; Bell, R.: Utilizing Coiled Tubing in Mobile Bays 22,000 TVD Gas Wells Yields Economical and Technical Advancements, paper SPE 38423 presented at the 1997 SPE/ICOTA North American Coiled Tubing Roundtable 15. Morrison, D.; Reid, K.; Kenney, T.: High Pressure Coiled Tubing Job Prepares Gulf Coast Well, paper SPE 38419 presented at the 1997 SPE/ICOTA North American Coiled Tubing Roundtable 16. Landmark Enertech, WT-PROD and WS-TUBE Software, Version 1998.5

Conversions ft x3.048 F ( F-32)/1.8 lbf x4.448 222 ppg x1.1751 Nomenclature API CO2 CRA CSC H2 S HPHT LRFD PBR ppg QA/QC SSC SSSV TCP ZnBr2 American Petroleum Institute Carbon Dioxide Corrosion Resistant Alloy Chloride Stress Cracking Hydrogen Sulfide High Pressure High Temperature Load and Resistance Factor Design Polished Bore Receptacle Pounds per gallon Quality Assurance Quality Control Sulfide Stress Corrosion Cracking Surface Controlled SubSurface Safety Valve Tubing Conveyed Perforating Zinc Bromide E-01 = m =C E+00 = N E+02 = kg/m3

SPE 59750

IMPORTANCE OF COMPLETION DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR COMPLEX, HOSTILE, AND HPHT WELLS

TABLE 1 Tubing Design Safety Factors Body or Upset Condition Connection Burst Collapse Tension Connection Leakage* Total Triaxial Stress 1.125 1.125 1.2 1.3 1.2 2.0 1.25 1.67** Connection 1.125 1.125 1.3 1.5 1.3 2.0 1.25 1.67** Non-Upset

* Vendor supplied and/or qualification test results ** Frequent loads in Critical Sour Wells

Figure 1 Typical Design Limits Plot

90000

73636

57273 Burst 1.125 40909 Effective Internal Pressure (kPag)

Tri-axial 1.250 Tension 1.300

24545

8182

-8182 Initial Conditions -24545 Pressure Test Tubing Prod 800 e3m3/d (10 days) Prod 600 e3m3/d & Water (10 days) Collapse 1.125 Prod 800 e3m3/d Steady State Start Kill Hot -57273 End Kill Cold Tubing Leak Hot Evacuated Tubing -73636 Note: Limits are approximate -1000.000 -750.000 -500.000 -250.000 0.000 250.000 Effective Tension (kN) 500.000 750.000 1000.000 1250.000 1500.000 Acidize 120 m3 @ 4 m3/min Overpull 55000 daN -90000

-40909

-1250.000

10

D.E. HAHN, R.M. PEARSON, S.H. HANCOCK

SPE 59750

Figure 2 Balance Between Factors Affecting Tubulars and Tubular Ratings/Design Assumptions

Applied Loads Induced Loads Shock Loads Cyclical Loads Bending Triaxial Effects Corrosion Connection Make-Up Mill Defects Damage Estimation Errors

Nature of the API Tubular Ratings Design Safety Factor Assumed Loading Conditions

Figure 3 Typical Temperature Simulation

0.0

400.0

800.0

1200.0

1600.0

MD (m)

2000.0

2400.0

2800.0

3200.0 Prod 800 e3m3/d (10 days) Undisturbed Prod 600 e3m3/d & Water (10 days) Prod 800 e3m3/d Steady State End Kill Cold (WS-Tube) Acidize 120 m3 @ 4 m3/min (WS-Tube)

3600.0

4000.0

4400.0 0.00

15.00

30.00

45.00

60.00

75.00 90.00 Temperature (deg C)

105.00

120.00

135.00

150.00

165.00

SPE 59750

IMPORTANCE OF COMPLETION DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR COMPLEX, HOSTILE, AND HPHT WELLS

11

Figure 4 Yield Strength Degradation Factors with Temperature

(from Elliott et al Reference 5)

YS Degradation Factor

Figure 5 Complex Completion Engineering Design Methodology

DETERMINE DETERMINE COMPLETION COMPLETION PHILOSOPHY PHILOSOPHY Packer vs Packerless Monobore vs Restrictive Bore Performance Strategy Prepare Preliminary Tubing Design Downhole Equipment Functional Specs SSSV Issues (Risk Assessment) Completion Fluid Selection Perforation Strategy

Qualified Connection Available?

Yes

Order Pipe

TUBING
No Select Alternate Vendors or Qualify Connection Fails Qualify Alternate Vendor or Connection Passes Passes

SELECT SELECT VENDORS VENDORS Qualified Equipment Understand What Equipment Still Needs to be Qualified Costs and Timing of Qualification QA/QC Procedures/Costs Overall Price Previous Experience/Relationship

COMPLETION EQUIPMENT
Temperature (F)
PREPARE PREPARE DETAILED DETAILED OPERATIONS OPERATIONS PROCEDURES PROCEDURES Review with Vendors Plan for Contingencies (Proper Equipment, Availability) Does All Equipment Qualify for Well Conditions? Yes Finalize Tubing Stress Analysis Ensure Equipment Still Suitable

No Passes Run Qualification Tests Fails Select Alternate Product or Vendor