Gas Plus Drill Pipe Faliure Report

Technical Report
Metallurgical Analysis of Failed 5 Drill Pipe Section

A Report To: Adrill Service Peeraj Group
P.O.Box 8436,
Dubai
UAE

Document Reference: A 402373
Date: April 14
th
, 2014

Copy: 1

Issue No.: 1

Page 1

Document No.: A 402373 Page No.: 2 of 17
Author: Yuan Pinglin Issue Date: April 14
th
, 2014
Client: Adrill Service - Peeraj Issue No.: 1


Revision History
Issue No : 1 Re - Issue Date : N/A
Revised By: N/A Approved By: N/A
Reason for Revision: First issue

Issue No : Re - Issue Date :
Revised By: Approved By:
Reason for Revision:

Report Signatories and Approval

Prepared by

Yuan Pinglin
Senior Metallurgist
(For and on behalf of Exova (Abu Dhabi) Ltd)
Reviewed and Approved by

Pratap P Adiyodi
Lab Manager
(For and on behalf of Exova (Abu Dhabi) Ltd)

th
, 2014


Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................4
2.0 RESULTS ......................................................................................................................................5
2.1. VISUAL EXAMINATION ....................................................................................................................5
2.2. SEM ANALYSIS.............................................................................................................................5
2.3. CHEMICAL COMPOSITION ANALYSIS ...............................................................................................6
2.4. TENSILE TEST ...............................................................................................................................6
2.5. CHARPY IMPACT TEST ...................................................................................................................6
2.6. HARDNESS SURVEY ......................................................................................................................7
2.7. METALLURGICAL EXAMINATION .....................................................................................................7
3.0 DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................8

Appendices ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 9
Figure 1: General views of the submitted material in as-received condition ..................................................................... 10
Figure 2: Internal view of the sample .................................................................................................................................... 11
Figure 3: Close views of the fracture surface ....................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 4: SEM fractographs @ L1 ........................................................................................................................................ 13
Figure 5: SEM fractographs @ L2 ........................................................................................................................................ 14
Figure 6: Photographs show Tensile and Charpy impact test specimens after testing .................................................. 15
Figure 7: Cross-sectional macrographs ............................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 8: Microstructure of parent material consists of temper martensite; Magnification: As scale ............................. 16
Figure 9: Combined photomicrographs at the fracture location in Met-1 showing the grain flow deformation ............ 17

th
, 2014


1.0 INTRODUCTION
Exova Limited (Abu Dhabi) was requested by Adirll Service - Peeraj to carry out a laboratory-
based metallurgical analysis of a 5 drill pipe section. It was reported by the client that the drill
pipe was washed out during service and hence resulted in fishing. 53 singles were recovered plus
the cut joint, which is submitted to the lab for analysis. The following details were provided by the
client:
Component description: 5 Drill Pipe, G-105 19.5ppf Surface Pulled Not In Hole,
4 IF Pin X 4 IF Box
Material grade: Grads G105
Service life: N/A
Operating environment: drilling down hole
Others: Field name Gas Plus Khalakan; Weld Name: Shewashan-1

The objectives of this analysis are to verify the drill pipe material grade and to determine the
failure mechanism. The following scope of work was conducted on the sample to facilitate the
investigation:

Visual examination and photographic documentation of the sample in as-received condition;
Chemical analysis of the sample to determine the elemental composition;
Fractographic examination using SEM to study the fracture surface morphology;
Mechanical test of the sample including Tensile test, Impact test and Hardness measurements
to determine the mechanical properties of the material;
Metallurgical examination including Macro cross-sectional examination and Microstructure
examination at selected locations;
Evaluation of results, assessment of probable cause(s) of the failure.

th
, 2014


2.0 RESULTS
2.1. VISUAL EXAMINATION
A cut pipe section including the fracture location was provided by the client. Figure 1 shows the
general views of the submitted material in as-received condition. Length of the sample is
measured 28 inch. Fracture occurred at straight pipe portion, approximately 14 inch away from
the reducing section. Evident diameter reduction (necking) and plastic deformation can be seen
at the fracture region, while no significant corrosion such localized pitting or metal loss was
observed on external surface.

As shown in Figure 2, the sample was partially bisected (close to the fracture) along the
longitudinal axis to reveal the internal surface condition. Cross-sectional thickness reduction can
be clearly seen. Internal surface of the pipe exhibited beige colour coating; localized corrosion
was observed at the ID changing region/geometrical change area, however showed no concern
with the fracture.

Figure 4 shows the close views of the fracture surface after proper cleaning. It can be seen that
the fracture is at a 45 degree angle to the cross section of the sample, appearing to be due to
ductile overload.

2.2. SEM ANALYSIS
The fracture surface was analysed using the Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) to study the
features of fracture surface (locations indicated in Figure 3, L1 & L2). Low magnification SEM
fractographs showed extensive post fracture rubbing marks. Elongated dimples appearance was
observed when examined at high magnification, which suggest a ductile fracture mode due to
tension overload (Figures 4-5).

th
, 2014


2.3. CHEMICAL COMPOSITION ANALYSIS
Chemical analysis was carried out on the failed sample using Optical Emission Method to
determine the chemical composition of the material. Results are given in Table 1. Chemical
composition of the tested material meets the requirement of API 5D Grade G105.
Table 1 Chemical Analysis Results
Elements Test Results, % Wt
API 5D Grade G105
Requirements
C 0.24 ---
Si 0.26 ---
Mn 1.06 ---
P 0.013 0.030 max
S <0.005 0.030 max
Cr 0.84 ---
Mo 0.17 ---
Ni 0.04 ---
Cu 0.11 ---
V <0.01 ---

2.4. TENSILE TEST
One longitudinal tensile specimen was machined from the sample and tested in accordance with
standard ASTM A370. The fracture surface of the specimens (Figure 6) after testing showed a
typical ductile fracture appearance. The test results are given in Table 2, which are in line with
the tensile requirements of API 5D Grade G105.
Table 2 Tensile Test Results
Longitudinal Direction Yield Strength Tensile Strength Elongation
Reduction
of area
Test results 812 Mpa 891 Mpa 16% 65%
API 5D Grade G 105
Requirements
724 -931 Mpa 793 Mpa min 13% min -

2.5. CHARPY IMPACT TEST
A set of three Charpy impact test specimens were longitudinally extracted from the sample and
tested in accordance with ASTM A370. The fracture surface of the specimens (Figure 6) after
testing showed a typical ductile fracture appearance. Table 3 gives the test results, which meet
the requirement of API 5D Grade G 105.
Table 3 Charpy Impact Test Results
Specimen Dimension : 10 10 55 mm Test Temperature: 23C
Charpy Impact Energy, J 150 142 152 Average: 148
API 5D Grade G105 Requirements
Minimum average 54 J, single specimen 47J @ 21C 2.8C
for specimen size 10 X 10 X55 mm

th
, 2014


2.6. HARDNESS SURVEY
Vickers hardness survey using 10kg load was carried out on the sample. Results are given in
Table 4. Hardness readings of the sample are found generally uniform indicating homogeneity of
the material. Hardness at the fracture locations gave slightly higher readings, which is likely due
to the work hardening effect introduced by the plastic deformation.
Table 4 Vickers Hardness Test Results
Test location Sample 1 Sample 2
Close to fracture 319, 317, 314 314, 316, 312
Away from fracture 294, 302, 301 300, 296, 299

2.7. METALLURGICAL EXAMINATION
Two metallurgical specimens were longitudinally removed from the sample across the fracture
region (locations see Figure 3). The specimens were prepared using standard metallographic
techniques and examined visually. The cross-sectional macrographs, as shown in Figure 7,
revealed evident plastic deformation and thickness reduction adjacent to the fracture location.

The macro specimens were further prepared for micro examination under optical microscope
with different magnifications. General microstructure of the pipe material consists of homogenous
tempered martensite with no inherent metallurgical anomalies such as microfissuring (see Figure
8). Figure 9 shows the microstructure at the fracture location, evident grain flow deformation was
observed adjacent to the fracture location, which is indicative of the plastic deformation due to
tension load. No inherent metallurgical anomalies with regards to the fracture were found.

th
, 2014


3.0 DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS
The chemical composition of the drill pipe material was in accordance with the requirements of
API 5D Grade G105.
The tensile test and charpy impact test results both meet the requirements of API 5D Grade
G105.
Hardness survey gave generally uniform readings indicating homogeneity of the material.
Hardness at the fracture locations gave slightly higher readings, which is likely due to the work
hardening effect introduced by the plastic deformation during fracture.
Metallurgical examination of the material revealed no inherent metallurgical abnormalities
such as micro fissures which could have contributed to the failure. General microstructure of
the material consists of homogenous tempered martensite, which indicates a quenched and
tempered condition of the material.
Visual examination of the sample showed no significant corrosion attack on the outside
surface of the sample. Internal surface of the pipe showed localized corrosion at the ID
changing region/geometrical change area, however no due concern with the failure of the
sample. The fracture occurred at the straight pipe portion, with evident diameter reduction
(necking) and plastic deformation at the fracture region. The fracture is at a 45 degree angle
to the cross section of the sample, and appeared due to ductile overload.
Fractography examination of the fracture surface exhibited extensive and rubbing marks and
elongated dimples, which are typical characteristic in ductile fracture.
Macro cross-sectional examination showed evident plastic deformation and thickness
reduction adjacent to the fracture location. Microstructure at the fracture showed evident grain
flow deformation was observed adjacent to the fracture location, which is indicative of the
plastic deformation due to tension load.

Based on the laboratory results conducted, our investigation revealed no inherent abnormalities
or deficiencies of the drill pipe material which could have caused the failure of the sample; the
overall characteristics of the analyzed sample indicate a ductile overload fracture mechanism. It
was reported by the client that the drill pipe was washed out in downhole, which resulted in
fishing. The original washed out / failed pipe portion was not able to be found out, therefore, the
original failure mechanism of the drill pipe cannot be found out based on the submitted sample.
Failure of the submitted pipe portion is likely a subsequent overload fracture (after the original
wash out failure of the sample) during the fishing.

The results contained within this report have been reported in an abbreviated format. The test data and result sheets containing more detailed
information in accordance with the technical works procedures or standards used are held at Exova as part of the accredited quality assurance
system. Opinions and interpretations expressed herein are outside the scope of the UKAS accreditation of this laboratory.
END OF TEXT

th
, 2014


Appendices

th
, 2014


Figure 1: General views of the submitted material in as-received condition

14 inch
28 inch

th
, 2014


Figure 2: Internal view of the sample showed localized corrosion but no concern with the fracture; cross-sectional
thickness reduction can be clearly seen

th
, 2014


Figure 3: Close views of the fracture surface
L2
L1
Met 1
Met 2

th
, 2014


Figure 4: SEM fractographs @ L1

th
, 2014


Figure 5: SEM fractographs @ L2

th
, 2014


Figure 6: Photographs show Tensile and Charpy impact test specimens after testing

Figure 7: Cross-sectional macrographs showed evident plastic deformation and thickness reduction adjacent
to the fracture location

OD
ID
Fracture
surface
ID
OD
Fracture
surface
Met 1
Met 2

th
, 2014


Figure 8: Microstructure of parent material consists of temper martensite; Magnification: As scale

th
, 2014


Figure 9: Combined photomicrographs at the fracture location in Met-1 showing the grain flow deformation

OD
ID
Fracture
surface

Gas Plus Drill Pipe Faliure Report

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Gas Plus Drill Pipe Faliure Report

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Technical Report

Metallurgical Analysis of Failed 5 Drill Pipe Section

Вам также может понравиться