Casing Centralization—Planned Compared to Actual: A Kuwait Case Study

M. A. Fituri, Y. Ali, A. Al-Naqi, J. Saikia, K. Abdulrahim
{"title":"Casing Centralization—Planned Compared to Actual: A Kuwait Case Study","authors":"M. A. Fituri, Y. Ali, A. Al-Naqi, J. Saikia, K. Abdulrahim","doi":"10.2523/iptc-23514-ms","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Several reasons can contribute to poor cementation; however, proper casing centralization can lead to uniform mud displacement with cement and can mitigate some of the cementation problems. Cementing companies design their casing centralizations based on simulators, but they have never been able to validate quantitatively how their planned centralization compares to the actual, the only comparison made in the past was based on the overall cement quality measured by the cement evaluation tools. This can be reflective of the centralization program in some instances; however, in others, attributing quality to centralization can be misjudged or centralization may be mixed with other factors.\n Not being able to directly quantify and evaluate each element in the casing and cementation program makes it challenging to improve or acknowledge each design. Relating the achieved cement quality to casing centralization gives inconsistent results. In many instances poor cement behind casing is because of other factors such as spacer design, fluid rheology, formation fluids, borehole geometry, etc., and is not only due to poor casing centralization.\n Casing eccentricity or casing touching outer casing/formation is always observed on cement evaluation imaging logs, as they typically appear in a form of galaxy pattern. However, these galaxy patterns can only be considered as a qualitative indication of the casing being close to a casing or to a formation, as it will be shown later in the paper that galaxy pattern start to show on cement evaluation images when casing centralization is below 60%.\n The new generation of ultrasonic flexural measurement tools can evaluate cement and at the same time provide third interface echo (TIE) measurement over 360°. The TIE measurement can evaluate casing centralization by evaluating the time between the first casing reflection (mud-casing interface) and the third interface reflection (cement formation interface) (Δt). When all the Δt values across all azimuths are equal, it is an indication of casing being 100% centered, and when Δt is 0 or small (casing touching formation) from any direction then casing is 0% centered. This Δt can also be converted to pseudo annulus thickness by assuming a velocity for the material behind the casing.\n For an operator to improve their field casing cementation, a campaign was performed for evaluating casing centralization in multiple casing sizes for different well trajectories to set benchmark for future centralization improvements. Each casing had different centralizer size and different patterns.","PeriodicalId":518539,"journal":{"name":"Day 3 Wed, February 14, 2024","volume":"29 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Day 3 Wed, February 14, 2024","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2523/iptc-23514-ms","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Several reasons can contribute to poor cementation; however, proper casing centralization can lead to uniform mud displacement with cement and can mitigate some of the cementation problems. Cementing companies design their casing centralizations based on simulators, but they have never been able to validate quantitatively how their planned centralization compares to the actual, the only comparison made in the past was based on the overall cement quality measured by the cement evaluation tools. This can be reflective of the centralization program in some instances; however, in others, attributing quality to centralization can be misjudged or centralization may be mixed with other factors. Not being able to directly quantify and evaluate each element in the casing and cementation program makes it challenging to improve or acknowledge each design. Relating the achieved cement quality to casing centralization gives inconsistent results. In many instances poor cement behind casing is because of other factors such as spacer design, fluid rheology, formation fluids, borehole geometry, etc., and is not only due to poor casing centralization. Casing eccentricity or casing touching outer casing/formation is always observed on cement evaluation imaging logs, as they typically appear in a form of galaxy pattern. However, these galaxy patterns can only be considered as a qualitative indication of the casing being close to a casing or to a formation, as it will be shown later in the paper that galaxy pattern start to show on cement evaluation images when casing centralization is below 60%. The new generation of ultrasonic flexural measurement tools can evaluate cement and at the same time provide third interface echo (TIE) measurement over 360°. The TIE measurement can evaluate casing centralization by evaluating the time between the first casing reflection (mud-casing interface) and the third interface reflection (cement formation interface) (Δt). When all the Δt values across all azimuths are equal, it is an indication of casing being 100% centered, and when Δt is 0 or small (casing touching formation) from any direction then casing is 0% centered. This Δt can also be converted to pseudo annulus thickness by assuming a velocity for the material behind the casing. For an operator to improve their field casing cementation, a campaign was performed for evaluating casing centralization in multiple casing sizes for different well trajectories to set benchmark for future centralization improvements. Each casing had different centralizer size and different patterns.
套管集中--计划与实际对比:科威特案例研究
造成固井效果不佳的原因有多种,但适当的套管集中可以使泥浆与水泥的位移均匀一致,从而减轻一些固井问题。固井公司根据模拟器设计套管集中,但他们从未对计划的集中与实际的集中进行过定量验证,过去唯一的比较是基于水泥评估工具测量的整体水泥质量。在某些情况下,这可以反映集中化计划;但在其他情况下,将质量归因于集中化可能会造成误判,或者集中化可能与其他因素混杂在一起。由于无法直接量化和评估套管和固井计划中的每个要素,因此改进或确认每个设计都具有挑战性。将所达到的水泥质量与套管集中度联系起来会产生不一致的结果。在许多情况下,套管后的固井效果不佳是由其他因素造成的,如间隔器设计、流体流变学、地层流体、井眼几何形状等,而不仅仅是由于套管集中度不佳造成的。套管偏心或套管与外套管/地层相碰,在水泥评价成像测井仪上总是可以观察到,因为它们通常以星系的形式出现。然而,这些星系图案只能作为套管靠近套管或地层的定性指标,因为本文后面将说明,当套管集中度低于 60% 时,水泥评价成像上开始出现星系图案。新一代超声波挠曲测量工具可以在对水泥进行评估的同时,提供 360° 的第三界面回波(TIE)测量。TIE 测量可通过评估第一个套管反射(泥浆-套管界面)和第三个界面反射(水泥层界面)之间的时间(Δt)来评估套管集中度。当所有方位角的 Δt 值相等时,表明套管 100%居中,而当任何方向的 Δt 值为 0 或很小(套管接触地层)时,则表明套管 0%居中。通过假设套管后材料的速度,Δt 也可以转换为假环空厚度。为了改善油田套管固井效果,作业者对不同井轨迹的多种套管尺寸进行了套管集中度评估,为今后改进集中度设定基准。每种套管都有不同的集中器尺寸和不同的模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信