Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 11

OTC 14313

Expandable Liner Hangers: Case Histories


Melvin J. Moore, BP America Inc.; Donald B. Campo, Shell International Exploration & Production; Joel Hockaday,
Enventure Global Technology; Lev Ring, Enventure Global Technology
Copyright 2002, Offshore Technology Conference
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2002 Offshore Technology Conference held in
Houston, Texas U.S.A., 69 May 2002.
This paper was selected for presentation by the OTC 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 Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Offshore Technology Conference or its officers. Electronic reproduction,
distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written
consent of the Offshore Technology Conference 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.

Abstract
Initial liner top integrity is a primary concern for most
operators. If the liner top fails routine or regulatory integrity
tests, expensive and time-consuming remedial operations
increase direct costs for equipment and services. This
remediation delays well completion, which ultimately delays
revenue generation. These expenses often exceed the initial
cost of the liner equipment. Liner top failure continues to
challenge the industry despite improvements in integrally run
liner top packers, special cements, and cementing pratices.
Even newer generation liner top packers, run either integrally
with the liner hanger or as a second trip packer, have multiple
sealing surfaces that must function under rigorous conditions
to achieve liner top isolation.
The expandable liner hanger has been developed and
successfully field-tested as an alternative to conventional
cone and slip liner hangers and liner top isolation packer
systems. The expandable liner hanger combines the functions
of the liner hanger and the isolation packer into a single
component. The expandable liner hanger uses elastomeric
bands to provide the axial load capacity of a conventional
liner hanger and the annular sealing capability of the liner top
isolation packer. The expandable liner hanger is expanded
hydraulically with the liner running/setting tool assembly.
During expansion, the elastomeric bands are compressed into
contact with the ID of the supporting/intermediate casing,
virtually eliminating the annular space between the liner
hanger and the casing.
This paper discusses expandable liner hanger design
criteria and testing undertaken to qualify the expandable liner
hanger as a reliable liner top isolation system. Initial field
installations and the lessons learned are also discussed.

Introduction
The importance of the liner-casing overlap is illustrated by the
efforts and expense taken by operators to ensure hydraulic
integrity of the overlap. Typical methods of achieving pressure
integrity include the following:
Cement squeezes, including a liner top packer as a
component of the initial liner hanger setting
One or more second-trip liner top isolation packers
installed to control gas migration at the liner top
The typical liner top is complex in its design (Fig. 1) and can
develop leaks due to a myriad of causes1.
A recent informal survey of several GOM operators
revealed that 30 to 50% of pressure seals in overlaps fail. One
operator made a concerted effort to improve liner running and
cementing procedures. Data gathered over an 18-month period
was used to shed light on possible causes of overlap failure by
gathering information on liner/casing sizes, types of
equipment, overlap length, mud data, annular cross section,
equipment, and service suppliers. The study concluded the
chances of having a liner overlap seal failure did not depend
on any single factor and the chances for an incident were
nearly the same regardless of the factors associated with any
given well2.
The development and successful deployment of solid
expandable tubulars improved the probability of eliminating
liner top leaks and reducing the associated remediation costs.
The expandable liner hanger is a byproduct of developing
expandable openhole and expandable cased-hole liners3. The
design features of the anchor joint elastomeric seals used to
seal and anchor the expanded liner to the casing ID were
adapted to run and hang conventional, non-expanded liners
(Fig. 2).
Expandable Liner Hanger Design
Initial design criteria for the expandable liner hanger include
the following:
Incorporate solid expandable tubular features into
expandable anchor joints to provide maximum axial load
capacity and pressure integrity at the liner/casing annulus

M. MOORE, D. CAMPO, J. HOCKADAY, AND L. RING

Minimize expandable liner hanger OD for maximum


running clearance while maintaining axial load and
pressure performance
Provide rotational and reciprocation capability in the liner
running/setting tool assembly
Maximize running/setting tool reliability as well as total
system reliability
Simplify
the
running/setting
tool
cementing
pack-off system
Incorporate conventional cementing wiper plug systems
and standard float equipment into the expandable liner
hanger system
System Specifications
Initial expandable liner hanger specifications included
the following:
Capable of setting in 9-5/8 in., 47 to 53.5 lb/ft casing and
suspending 7-5/8 in. or smaller liners.
Capable of suspending a minimum of 250,000 lb of liner
weight at 250F with standard oilfield nitrile elastomer
compounds (other compounds are available to increase the
temperature range to 400F).
Provide a working pressure of 8,000 psi in burst and 4,000
psi in collapse.
Qualify system to ISO/DIS 14310 guidelines for
packer systems.
System Qualification
Initial qualification tests included the following:
Testing potential expandable liner hanger body materials to
determine expansion parameters and suitability. This
evaluation also included FEA analysis techniques (Fig. 3).
Establishing potential elastomer characteristics when
exposed to temperature and common oilfield fluids.
Testing the bond quality of various elastomers when
applied to the liner hanger body.
Determining the expansion characteristics of the liner
hanger body with elastomeric bands in place.
Qualifying lab-expanded expandable liner hanger sections
in fluid and gas environments.
Qualifying mechanical load capacity and pressure integrity
when expanded into supporting casing.
Function testing of the liner running/setting tool assembly.
Full-scale testing of the expandable liner hanger system in
a deep well simulator.
Field testing the expandable liner hanger system.
The qualification test for the expanded liner hanger system
entailed expanding a 1-foot section of the expandable liner
hanger/liner hanger packer. The 7-5/8 in. base section was
expanded into a section of 9-5/8 in. casing that was cemented
into a section of 13-3/8 in. casing to simulate actual equipment
usage (Fig. 4). This test established an axial load capacity of
over 580,000 lb for the single element section and pressure
integrity of 11,400 psi was achieved (Fig. 5).

OTC 14313

Deep well simulator testing was conducted on a full-scale


system. The 7-5/8 x 9-5/8 in. expandable liner hanger/liner
hanger packer, using five elastomeric bands, was set using the
running/setting tool assembly. The 9-5/8 in., 53.5 lb/ft casing
was set in the simulator and the expandable liner hanger
assembly was placed in position (Fig. 6a). The casing and the
expandable liner hanger assembly were heated to 300F. After
temperature stabilized, the expandable liner hanger was set
(Fig. 6b) and the running/setting tool assembly was retrieved.
Testing confirmed the expandable liner hanger assembly met
or exceeded the initial design parameters. Subsequent testing
established a total hanging capacity in excess of 750,000 lb
at temperature. After further testing, the expandable liner
hanger body was sectioned for evaluation (Fig. 7 and Fig. 8).
Case Histories
Field Testing Criteria. Following the successful deep well
simulator test, the first field test was conducted on a nonproducing well in South Texas destined for plugging and
abandonment that belonged to Shell Exploration and
Production Company (SEPCO). The second field test, also in
South Texas, was for a drilling liner for a commercial
application on a BP well. The field test sequence was selected
for proof of concept:
Run and set the liner under actual conditions
Prove the systems ability to provide pressure integrity at
the liner/casing overlap
The operational issues involved were discussed at length
and detailed procedures were developed to ensure safety while
achieving the goals of successful equipment deployment.
Detailed planning consisted of the following:
Outline of the operational overview of running the
expandable liner hanger system
Planned sequences
Checkpoints
Contingencies
Results of running the expandable liner hanger system
First Field Test. The first field test was conducted at Shells
Hinojosa No. 8 well, in Fandango Field in Jim Hogg County,
Texas. Since there was no risk of lost production and to
maximize the value of the test, SEPCO opted to test both the
expandable liner hanger system and the expandable sand
screen system. As a result of the sand screen testing, liner
cementing operations were eliminated. The Hinojosa well was
cased with 9-5/8 in., 53.5 lb/ft casing to plug back depth. The
bottomhole temperature was approximately 140F.
To ensure appropriate evaluation of the system functions
and procedures, a casing inspection log and a casing scraper
run were made before running the expandable liner hanger and
expandable sand screen assembly. The casing was filled with
9.5 lb/gal water based mud and tested to 4,000 psi to ensure
casing integrity.

OTC 14313

EXPANDABLE LINER HANGERS: CASE HISTORIES

After initial preparations, the 285-foot expandable sand


screen assembly was picked up and run into the hole. The
expandable liner hanger assembly, including the liner
running/setting tool, was picked up and made up to the spacer
joint at the top of the expandable sand screen assembly. The
running/setting tool assembly was made up to 4-1/2 in. tubing
and run to the setting depth, with the top of the liner at
approximately 3,200 ft (Fig. 9).
A choke manifold system was incorporated into the
pumping system to permit the controlled flow rate
(approximately 5 to 8 gal/min) at anticipated expansion
pressures of 4,000 psi. Pressure and flow rates were captured
during the expansion process. Prior to hanger expansion,
appropriate lines were tested to 7,000 psi and an automatic
kick-out on the pump truck was set at 6,500 psi
and function-tested.
After all systems were checked and the appropriate safety
meetings were held, the system was slowly brought up to
pressure and the expandable liner hanger system was
successfully expanded. Expansion pressures were in line with
normal parameters. The running/setting tool bypass ports,
indicating completion of the expansion process, functioned
properly. The running/setting tool was released by slacking off
weight to release the collet locking system, and the running
tool was released and pulled out of the hole.
The expandable sand screen system was expanded using a
separate expansion assembly. Following the sand screen
expansion, a caliper log was run on a wireline to ascertain the
ID of the expanded liner hanger. The expanded ID was
approximately 7.58 in., as expected. A test packer was run and
set above the liner top to verify pressure integrity. Test
pressure at 3,800 psi held for approximately 45 minutes.
When all testing was complete, the well was prepared for
abandonment per Texas Railroad Commission requirements.
Second Field Test. The second field test was actually the first
application of the expandable liner hanger technology in a
commercial well. This test was conducted on BPs McLean
Heirs No. 7 well in the Northeast Thompsonville Field of Jim
Hogg County, Texas. Since this application was a drilling
liner, the liner was to be cemented to provide a full-scale
operational test of the expandable liner hanger system.
The McLean Heirs well was cased with 9-5/8 in., 43.5 lb/ft
casing, except the bottom five joints, which were 9-5/8 in.,
53.5 lb/ft casing. This configuration permitted using the
original size expandable liner hanger equipment without
having to run qualification tests for a different weight range
system. The 7-5/8 in., 29.7 lb/ft L-80 STL liner was run to a
depth of 11,797 ft. The top of the liner was 8,211 ft., for a total
of 3,586 ft and a buoyed weight of approximately 80,000 lb
(Fig. 10). The bottomhole static temperature (BHST) was
250F
and
the
oil-base
mud
weight
was
approximately 16 lb/gal.

In this case, the expandable liner hanger was run with


auto-fill float equipment and a J-type circulating sub above the
liner running/setting tool assembly. The liner was run on 5 in.
19.5 lb/ft drill pipe to the setting depth. A choke manifold, as
previously run, was planned and used to ensure controlled
flow and pressure rates for expanding the liner hanger.
The 7-5/8 in., 29.7 lb/ft liner was run according to plan and
the expandable liner hanger assembly, including the
running/setting tool assembly, was made up to the top joint of
casing. The running tool was made up to the first joint of drill
pipe, the circulating sub was installed, and the liner was run
into the hole following normal liner running procedures.
When setting depth was reached, a pump-in sub was made
up to the work string, the circulating sub was closed, and the
liner was cemented conventionally. After cementing was
complete and the liner wiper plug bumped, the circulating sub
was opened and the hole was reverse-circulated above the
liner top to remove any excess cement. The expansion setting
ball was dropped and pumped to the setting tool. Highpressure lines were rigged up to the choke manifold. Data
acquisition equipment was rigged up to record expansion
pressures and flow rates and lines were tested.
After the setting ball reached the ball seat in the setting
tool, the system was pressurized to 4,000 psi to initiate
expandable liner hanger expansion. Expansion was achieved
at the planned pressures and rates. When expansion was
complete, the bypass ports in the running/setting tool assembly
functioned as designed and the pressure dropped, indicating
completion. Weight was slacked off on the setting tool,
allowing approximately six inches of travel to release the
collet lock system.
The running/setting tool was picked up above the liner top,
the rams were closed, and the liner top tested to 2,000 psi with
16 lb/gal fluid in the hole. After liner top testing was
complete, the running tool assembly was retrieved. Drilling
operations resumed. The well was drilled to total depth (TD)
and completed.
The first application of the expandable liner hanger in a
commercial well environment was successful and established
that cementing operations could be conducted normally with
this new technology (Fig. 11).
Lesson learned:
Extra choke manifold and flowmeters are not necessary for
successfully operating the expandable liner hanger system.
Suitable flow rates and control can be provided by pumping
systems normally used when cementing liners.
The expandable liner hanger running/setting tool assembly
did not have a drill pipe pup joint made up onto the top of the
tool when picked up. This omission caused some delay, but

M. MOORE, D. CAMPO, J. HOCKADAY, AND L. RING

has been corrected by making up the proper pup joint prior to


shipping the equipment to location.
The spacer tube to connect the liner wiper plug assembly
to the expandable liner hanger running/setting tool was too
short and required additional time and effort to connect the
plug assembly on location. This situation has been rectified.
Time spent in planning a liner installation identifies the
risks, defines the contingencies, and permits proper
operational actions when the equipment is actually run. All
parties are aware of potential problems and the actions
required for successfully installing the equipment safely
and efficiently.
Conclusions
The expandable liner hanger system provides a viable,
technologically advanced method of running and cementing
liners. Operational efforts are only moderately different from
those used for conventional liner systems. Expansion of the
expandable liner hanger/liner hanger packer after cement
placement adds minimal risk with proper tools, techniques,
and planning prior to running the liner. The expandable liner
hanger system improves liner top integrity, significantly
reduces the annular area between the liner hanger packer after
expansion, and virtually eliminates any gas migration paths.
References
1.
2.

3.

J. Agnew and R. Kline, The Leaking Liner Top, SPE paper


12614, 1984 SPE Deep Drilling and Production Symposium,
Amarillo, Texas, April 1-3, 1984.
C. Lee Lohoefer and Ben Mathis, Unocal; David Brisco,
Halliburton Energy Services; Kevin Waddell, Lev Ring, and
Patrick York, Enventure Global Technology; Expandable
Liner Hanger Provides Cost-Effective Alternative Solution,
IADC/SPE paper 59151, 2000 IADC Drilling Conference, New
Orleans, Louisiana, February 2000.
Filippov, A., et al.: Expandable Tubular Solutions, SPE paper
56500 presented at the 1999 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, October 3-6, 1999.

OTC 14313

OTC 14313

EXPANDABLE LINER HANGERS: CASE HISTORIES

Fig. 1 Conventional Liner-Top Packers

Potential Leak Paths

Fig. 2 Expandable Liner Hanger/Liner Hanger Packer As Set

M. MOORE, D. CAMPO, J. HOCKADAY, AND L. RING

Fig. 3 Finite-element analysis used to study stresses during the design of the expandable liner hanger system.

Fig. 4 Test Fixture to Determine Hanging Weight and Seal Effectiveness

OTC 14313

OTC 14313

EXPANDABLE LINER HANGERS: CASE HISTORIES

Fig. 5 Liner Hanger Tests

Fig. 6 Expandable Liner Hanger Before and After Expansion

Figure 6a - Before Expansion

Figure 6b - After Expansion

M. MOORE, D. CAMPO, J. HOCKADAY, AND L. RING

Fig. 7 Expandable Liner Hanger Body Sectioned for Evaluation.

Fig. 8 Expandable Liner Hanger Body Sectioned for Evaluation.

OTC 14313

OTC 14313

EXPANDABLE LINER HANGERS: CASE HISTORIES

Fig. 9 First Installation of an Expandable Liner Hanger System

10

M. MOORE, D. CAMPO, J. HOCKADAY, AND L. RING

Fig. 10 First Application of Expandable Liner Hanger Technology in a Commercial Well

McLean Heirs Jim Hogg #7 Well

17-1/2 in. hole

13-3/8 in. at 2,011 ft

12-1/4 in. hole

Top of liner
at 8,211 ft
9-5/8 in. at 8,737 ft

8-1/2 in. hole

7-5/8 in., 29.7 lb/ft, P-110, STL Liner


for 8,211 - 11,797 ft

6-3/4 in. hole


5th Hinnant Perfs

3-1/2 in. at 13,800 ft


13,800 ft TD

OTC 14313

OTC 14313

EXPANDABLE LINER HANGERS: CASE HISTORIES

Fig. 11 Expandable Liner Hanger Running Sequence

11

Вам также может понравиться