First Dual-Plug Cementing in a 4.5in Liner in Sub-Saharan Africa

Roberto Elizalde, Pierre-Marie Drevillon
{"title":"First Dual-Plug Cementing in a 4.5in Liner in Sub-Saharan Africa","authors":"Roberto Elizalde, Pierre-Marie Drevillon","doi":"10.2118/197914-ms","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Cementing of a casing string or liner is always considered a crucial phase of the well construction process. The difference with the other phases, is that once cement has been mixed and pumped in the well, there is a limited amount of time for operators to take decisions for troubleshooting or surpassing any obstacles encountered, before cement is no longer pumpable, as at such point, decisions become exponentially costlier, and can even result in the loss of the well, or sidetrack.\n Steps to mitigate these risks involve extensive pre-planning to identify all possible risk scenarios, and prepare mitigation, elimination and correction methods. Another step is to count with appropriate equipment, backup equipment, and contingency procedures ready to be implemented if required. Decisions such as how much more volume should be pumped if plug bump is not seen, or if volume count should be reset when dart latch is seen, should be reviewed in advance, as a decision-making process cannot take place when the event is seen, as the timeframe to take these decisions are too narrow.\n Cementing a liner in a deepwater scenario increases the risks during the operation. Inaccuracies for volume counting during displacement are increased, and in situations when there is a small liner, and the displacement volume is greatly larger than the slurry volume, increases inaccuracies even further. Free-fall of cement is also increased, as a heavier slurry is being displaced throughout a longer interval, until it U-turns at the shoe and is finally placed on the annular space. This also increases the risk of not seeing the dart latch with the plug, not being able to reset the volume count to a more precise volume.\n The cementing phase of the 4.5\" liner for the Deepwater Total Moho-Nord Albian Project, presented these risks due to the short 4.5\" liner interval. The liner interval can be as short as 450 mts of liner length, equivalent to 10 m3 of cement slurry) in comparison with the TOL depth (average 4,100 m MD, equivalent to over 50 m3 of displacement). The risks were increased as the project relies on plug bump to set a series of annular inflatable packers to help seal the formation from water influxes. This meant that if the theoretical volume was pumped and the plug did not bump at the time, displacement had to stop, and the packers could not be inflated. Rotation, which often helps cement placement, was also not an option in this project, as T&D analysis proved that there was a high risk to exceed the torque limit of the liner connections.\n All these risks combined, made the cementing operation of the 4.5\" liner of the Albian project, one of the most complex and crucial parts of the well operation.","PeriodicalId":11328,"journal":{"name":"Day 4 Thu, November 14, 2019","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Day 4 Thu, November 14, 2019","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/197914-ms","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Cementing of a casing string or liner is always considered a crucial phase of the well construction process. The difference with the other phases, is that once cement has been mixed and pumped in the well, there is a limited amount of time for operators to take decisions for troubleshooting or surpassing any obstacles encountered, before cement is no longer pumpable, as at such point, decisions become exponentially costlier, and can even result in the loss of the well, or sidetrack. Steps to mitigate these risks involve extensive pre-planning to identify all possible risk scenarios, and prepare mitigation, elimination and correction methods. Another step is to count with appropriate equipment, backup equipment, and contingency procedures ready to be implemented if required. Decisions such as how much more volume should be pumped if plug bump is not seen, or if volume count should be reset when dart latch is seen, should be reviewed in advance, as a decision-making process cannot take place when the event is seen, as the timeframe to take these decisions are too narrow. Cementing a liner in a deepwater scenario increases the risks during the operation. Inaccuracies for volume counting during displacement are increased, and in situations when there is a small liner, and the displacement volume is greatly larger than the slurry volume, increases inaccuracies even further. Free-fall of cement is also increased, as a heavier slurry is being displaced throughout a longer interval, until it U-turns at the shoe and is finally placed on the annular space. This also increases the risk of not seeing the dart latch with the plug, not being able to reset the volume count to a more precise volume. The cementing phase of the 4.5" liner for the Deepwater Total Moho-Nord Albian Project, presented these risks due to the short 4.5" liner interval. The liner interval can be as short as 450 mts of liner length, equivalent to 10 m3 of cement slurry) in comparison with the TOL depth (average 4,100 m MD, equivalent to over 50 m3 of displacement). The risks were increased as the project relies on plug bump to set a series of annular inflatable packers to help seal the formation from water influxes. This meant that if the theoretical volume was pumped and the plug did not bump at the time, displacement had to stop, and the packers could not be inflated. Rotation, which often helps cement placement, was also not an option in this project, as T&D analysis proved that there was a high risk to exceed the torque limit of the liner connections. All these risks combined, made the cementing operation of the 4.5" liner of the Albian project, one of the most complex and crucial parts of the well operation.
在撒哈拉以南非洲地区,首次在4.5in尾管中进行双桥塞固井
套管或尾管的固井一直被认为是井施工过程中的关键阶段。与其他阶段的不同之处在于,一旦水泥混合并泵入井中,在水泥无法泵入之前,作业者就会在有限的时间内做出排除故障或克服遇到的任何障碍的决定,因为在这个时候,决策成本会成倍增加,甚至可能导致井的损失或侧钻。减轻这些风险的步骤涉及广泛的预先规划,以确定所有可能的风险情景,并准备减轻、消除和纠正方法。另一个步骤是清点适当的设备、备用设备和应急程序,以便在需要时实施。如果没有看到桥塞凸起,应该增加多少排量,或者当看到堵头闩锁时是否应该重新设置排量,这些决定都应该提前进行审查,因为当看到事件时,无法进行决策过程,因为做出这些决定的时间范围太窄。在深水作业中,尾管固井会增加作业过程中的风险。在驱替过程中,体积计数的不准确性会增加,而在衬管较小且驱替体积远大于泥浆体积的情况下,不准确性会进一步增加。水泥的自由落体也增加了,因为较重的泥浆在更长的间隔内被置换,直到它在鞋处u型转弯,最终被放置在环空空间上。这也增加了看不到堵头的风险,无法将体积计数重置为更精确的体积。在深水Total Moho-Nord Albian项目的4.5”尾管固井阶段,由于4.5”尾管间隔较短,存在这些风险。与TOL深度(平均4100 m MD,相当于超过50 m3的排量)相比,尾管间距可短至450 mts,相当于10 m3的水泥浆。由于该项目依赖于桥塞凸起来设置一系列环空膨胀封隔器,以帮助密封地层免受水流入的影响,因此风险增加了。这意味着,如果泵入了理论体积,并且桥塞没有发生碰撞,则必须停止驱油,并且封隔器无法膨胀。旋转通常有助于固井,但在该项目中也不是一个选择,因为T&D分析证明,超过尾管连接扭矩限制的风险很高。所有这些风险加在一起,使得Albian项目的4.5”尾管固井作业成为井作业中最复杂、最关键的部分之一。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信