Chapter Eleven: Casing

Collapse and Shear

Topics
Salt Movement
Casing Collapse and Shear
Multi-Lateral Junction Stability

Chapter Objectives
Be able to describe at least two causes of casing
collapse.
Be able to calculate reservoir pressures that
may cause casing collapse.

2005 GeoMechanics International

Mud Weight in Salt Sections

Objectives
Model salt creep in openhole using finite element technology
hole closure as a function of time
Simulation using openhole geometry and standard flow laws
for salt
Assumptions
Salt solution due to circulation of mud not considered
Cooling of salt due to circulation of mud roughly estimated
Primary creep of salt not included

2005 GeoMechanics International

Mesh Generation Around Borehole

Finer mesh is used

around the
wellbore than in
the far-field in
order to accurately
measure the
deformation of the
wellbore wall

2005 GeoMechanics International

Deformed Mesh
Green is original mesh
Black is deformed
mesh
The deformation of the
material becomes more
severe at the wellbore
wall and decreases to
very small values a
short distance from the
wellbore

2005 GeoMechanics International

Magnitude of Creep Strain

Hot colors indicate larger values of creep strain.

2005 GeoMechanics International

Magnitude of Creep Strain

2005 GeoMechanics International

Magnitude of Creep Strain

2005 GeoMechanics International

Magnitude of Creep Strain

10

2005 GeoMechanics International

Magnitude of Creep Strain

11

2005 GeoMechanics International

Magnitude of Creep Strain

12

2005 GeoMechanics International

Magnitude of Creep Strain

13

2005 GeoMechanics International

Temperature in Germany
Source: Database GGA Hannover,
Schellschmidt 2003
The salt temperature has a
major influence on salt creep
rates
Estimation of equilibrium
temperatures from
temperature maps at different
depth levels

14

2005 GeoMechanics International

Zechstein Evaporites 140 deg Celsius

30
MW = 1.6, Temp = 140
MW = 1.65, Temp = 140
MW = 1.7, Temp = 140
MW = 1.75, Temp = 140
MW = 1.8, Temp = 140
MW = 1.85, Temp = 140
MW = 1.9, Temp = 140

% closure ( r//R 0)

25

20

Depth: 4510 m
Stress: 2.29 sg
Flow law: Carter &
Hansen
Young's Mod.:
30000 MPa
Pois. ratio: 0.25
Hole size: 12.25

15

10

0
0

2% closure is
critical for
this operation

time (days)

Time to reach the critical wellbore hole closure value in the

Zechstein salt for different mud weights
15

2005 GeoMechanics International

Zechstein Evaporites 151 deg Celsius

30

MW =
MW =
MW =
MW =
MW =
MW =
MW =

% closure ( r//R0)

25

20

Depth: 4510 m
Stress: 2.29 sg
Flow law: Carter &
Hansen
Young's Mod.:
30000 MPa
Pois. ratio: 0.25
Hole size: 12.25

1.6, Temp = 151

1.65, Temp = 151
1.7, Temp = 151
1.75, Temp = 151
1.8, Temp = 151
1.85, Temp = 151
1.9, Temp = 151

15

10

0
0

4
time (days)

16

2% closure is
critical for this
operation

2005 GeoMechanics International

Hole Closure after 3 Days

Hole closure after 3 days

Dependence of
hole closure on
mud weight for
different
temperatures

25

4510 m, 140 C
4510 m, 151 C
% closure (r//R0)

20

4670 m, 145 C
4670 m, 156 C

15

10

0
1.55

1.6

1.65

1.7

1.75

1.8

1.85

1.9

1.95

mud weight [sg]

17

2005 GeoMechanics International

Stresses around a Salt Dome (I)

Setup of Finite-Element Model
Light blue salt; continuous salt layer at bottom;
asymmetric salt dome in center
Colors sediment layers with different densities
2-D cross section

18

2005 GeoMechanics International

Stresses around a Salt Dome (II)

The upward movement of the salt causes large stress differences at the top and above
the salt dome
Typically normal faults are seen in this region
Due to the small stress differences in the salt, one of the principal stresses close to the
surface of the salt dome has to be normal to this surface
This causes significant rotations of the stress tensor

19

2005 GeoMechanics International

Stresses around a Salt Dome (III)

The common assumption of the vertical stress being a principal stress is not valid
anymore
The common assumption that the stress field is approximately constant with magnitude
and orientation over a field is not valid anymore
Stress orientation and stress magnitudes are changing rapidly as a function of position
relative to the salt body

20

2005 GeoMechanics International

Problems Related to Salt

Salt creep can cause high loads on casing strings
Creep dependent on
Composition
Temperature
Stress

Casing with internal liner is used for cases with high expected casing
load
For isotropic loading casing can tolerate higher loads than for
anisotropic loading
Anisotropy can be caused by

Oval hole shape

Oval shape of casing
Bad cement
Point loading
Anisotropic stresses
Washouts
21

2005 GeoMechanics International

Casing Shear

Casing Deformation under High

Tectonic Stresses

Wells drilled into faults in

actively deforming tectonic
regions have a high likelihood
of shearing as a result of
reactivating the faults

Highly compressive stress

situations may cause
casing deformation
problems
BP (SPE 74560) reports
such problems for their
fields in Colombia
Problems
Restricted access
Reduced collapse resistance
23

2005 GeoMechanics International

Sheared Casing Middle East

24

2005 GeoMechanics International

Sheared Casing Middle East

25

2005 GeoMechanics International

Casing Deformation under High

Tectonic Stresses
Deformation not related to faults; extends over long hole sections
Early time response with up to 3% deformation within the first 100 days
Casing buckling may be postponed with better casing or a double
casing string, but the most effective way of maintaining casing integrity
is to have a good cement job.

26

2005 GeoMechanics International

Example of Casing Shear in Tectonic Area

Problem:
Production from
100+ wells is lost
instantaneously due
to casing shear.
Recovered pipes
show significant
bend.

27

2005 GeoMechanics International

Pore Pressure and Stress vs Depth

Pressure, sg
0

100
200

Overburden EG353

300
400
Depth, meters

Slip event
could have
been
reverse
faulting in
the
shallow
subsurface

Least prinicipal
stress

South

Pore pressure
500

North
Hydrostatic pressure

600

Overburden EG484

700
800

North

Overburden EG161

900

Overburden EG14

The stress in the

area was
constrained to
determine
whether the
stresses were
sufficient to
explain the fault
slip event

1000
1100

North

1200

The least principal stress value obtained from the step rate test in the southern part
of the field is extremely close or equal to the vertical stress magnitude.
In the northern part of the field least principal stress magnitude is significantly
smaller than the vertical stress.
28

2005 GeoMechanics International

Summary of SHmax Analysis (South)

Pp
Sv
Shmin
SHmax

Stresses in the
south where the slip
event was observed
displayed Shmin
very close to Sv,
indicating this part of
the field may have
been in a reversefaulting stress
regime.

29

2005 GeoMechanics International

Summary of SHmax Analysis (North)

Pp
Sv
Shmin
SHmax

Stresses in the
north of the field
were not as highly
compressional,
and wells in this
part of the field
have not
experienced
sheared casing.

30

2005 GeoMechanics International

Modeling Fault-Induced Stress at

the Wellbore Wall

Slip on faults perturbs the stress field and will cause rotations of the stress
31

2005 GeoMechanics International

Large Scale Breakout Rotation in Well A

(Larger fault)
100

Observed
NO DATA

150

The fault size above the well

intersection is 200 meters and the
fault intersects well at a depth of 440
meters

The following can be concluded:

Modeled

200

250

1.

Well A is intersected by an
active reverse fault with a dip of
~70 degrees.

2.

The stress state needed to

model the rotation is consistent
with the stress derived to the
south of the field.

3.

The fault must have a spatial

extent of at least 1km.

4.

The fault is ~10x larger below

than above the well intersection

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

This is most likely the fault that caused

the casing shear problems

NO DATA
650
0

90

180
270
Azimuth (deg)

360

32

2005 GeoMechanics International

Large Scale Breakout Rotation in Well B

Observed

850

Modeled

NO DATA
900

950

A reverse fault intersecting

Well B at a depth of ~1,050
meters that is roughly striking
NNW-SSE can explain the
observed breakout rotation.

1000

1050

1100

This is again consistent with

the previously determined
stress field.

1150

This fault has comparable

dimensions to the fault
intersecting Well A.

1200

1250

1300

1350
0

90

180
270
Azimuth (deg)

360

33

2005 GeoMechanics International

Large Scale Breakout Rotation in Well C

Observed

Modeled

140

150

160

170

The observed breakout

rotation in Well C can be
explained by a relatively small
fault (10-100 meters) with a
steep dip, again striking
roughly north-south.

180

190

As on previous slides, the

calculations are consistent
with the determined stress
state (magnitudes and
orientation).

200

210
0

90

180
270
Azimuth (deg)

360

34

2005 GeoMechanics International

Breakout Rotation Near Fractures in Well D

Small rotations in breakouts also are observed on a very small scale around small
fractures. This implies that even fractures with sizes of ~1 meter are currently active.

35

2005 GeoMechanics International

Multi-Lateral Junction Stability

Stability of Multi Lateral

Junctions

Max stress

The interference of stresses

between the main bore and a
multilateral can be modeled with
finite element analysis.
Poro elasto-plastic materials
Critical plastic strain as failure
criterion
Arbitrary orientation and
geometry
37

2005 GeoMechanics International

Level 2 Multilateral
Pore Pressure
Distribution
around
multilateral is
affected by
production

Vertical scale is
reduces by a
factor of 5
(original kick-off
angle is 3).

38

2005 GeoMechanics International

Optimum Toolface

The optimum
direction to kick off
the multilateral can
be modeled based
on the stress field
and the stress
perturbation
induced by the
main bore.
39

2005 GeoMechanics International

Maximum Drawdown

maximum drawdown
can also be modeled
based on the stress
perturbations
associated with the
pressure depletion
and the perturbations
around the main bore
and the multilateral.

40

2005 GeoMechanics International

Cross Sections
Stress concentrations between the two wellbores when they
are close enough to interfere with each other.

41

2005 GeoMechanics International

Further Reading
Barton, C. A. and M. D. Zoback, 1994. Stress
Perturbations Associated with Active Faults Penetrated by
Boreholes: Evidence for Near Complete Stress Drop and
a New Technique for Stress Magnitude Measurement, J.
Geophys. Res. 99(5), 9,3739,390.
Last, N., Mujica, S., Pattillo, P, Kelso, G., 2002. Casing
Deformation in a Tectonic Setting: Evaluation, Impact and
Management. IADC/SPE Drilling Conference in Dallas,
Texas, 26-28 February 2002, SPE 74560.
Segall, P., J.R. Grasso, A. Mossop, 1994. Poroelastic
Stressing and Induced Seismicity near the Lacq Gas
Field, Southwestern France, 99 Jour. Geophys. Res.
15,423.
Willson, S.M., Fossum, A.F., Fredrich, J.T., 2003.
Assessment of salt loading on well casings. SPE 81820.
42

2005 GeoMechanics International