SPE 153986

HPHT Gas Well Cementing Complications and its Effect on Casing Collapse
Resistance
Zhaoguang Yuan, Texas A&M, Jerome Schubert, Texas A&M, Catalin Teodoriu, TU Clausthal, Paolo Gardoni,
Texas A&M
Copyright 2012, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Oil and Gas India Conference and Exhibition held in Mumbai, India, 2830 March 2012.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers 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 SPE copyright.


Abstract
The failure probability of casing collapse is high in HPHT gas wells because of the cementing complications and the
operational environment. In the life of a well, the cement sheath not only provides zonal isolation but also supports casing
and increases casing collapse resistance. Due to the high temperature high pressure conditions, the cement sheath plays a
more important role in maintaining wellbore integrity. During the production process in HPHT gas wells, the pressure
differential inside the casing and the surrounding formation is larger than the conventional wells, this presents a greater
challenge to the casing integrity.
Casing eccentricity, cement voids and cement channels usually are cementing complications in HPHT gas wells. Pore-
pressure was also considered in this study. In the analysis, the finite element method was used and 2D simulation model was
built to study the effect of cementing complications on casing collapse resistance. In the study, two cement systems, brittle
cement system and elastic cement system, were used to analyze the effect of the cement property on the casing collapse
resistance. In the sensitivity analysis, void location, void size and shape, casing eccentricity, pore pressure, casing internal
pressure, horizontal stress, cement Youngs Modulus, cement Poisson ratio, hole diameter, and formation temperature were
considered to study their effect on casing collapse resistance.
The results showed that an improvement of collapse resistance of 12% is observed in various conditions in elastic cement
system. Casing collapse resistance is very sensitive to void location, cement Poissons Ratio, cement Youngs Modulus, and
pore-pressure. Casing eccentricity and voids shape have minor effect on the casing collapse resistance. Simultaneous cement
channeling and casing eccentricity is the worst case scenario in casing collapse resistance.
This study gives a better understanding of casing collapse failure in HPHT gas wells and helps improve cement and casing
design to maintain wellbore integrity that can be expected to last for the life of the well.
Introduction

Exploring and producing new hydrocarbon reserves may be a more and more challenging task, often requiring petroleum
industry to contend with hostile downhole conditions. Although high-pressure, high-temperature wells are drilled, stimulated,
produced and monitored in a way similar to wells with less-demanding conditions, the HPHT environment limits the range of
available materials and technologies to exploit these reservoirs. The oil and gas industry has been contending with elevated
temperatures and pressures for years.
Wells that present HPHT characteristics have been being drilled since the late 70s in the Gulf of Mexico and in the early
80s in the North Sea. HPHT wells have been split into three categories based on the temperature and pressure envelopes,
namely HPHT, extreme HPHT and ultra-HPHT wells, with temperature higher than 400
0
F and pressure greater than 20,000
psi (R.R. Paula Jr., et al., 2009). According to the Health and Safety Executive, British safety agency, the HPHT well (in the
industry, these wells are known as high pressure and high temperature) is the one where the non-disturbed, bottom
temperature, is superior to 300
0
F and the highest gradient of the pores pressure foreseen for any porous formation exceeds 0.8
psi/ft or the required working pressure for the equipment of well controlling (BOP) is superior to a 10,000 psi.
2 SPE 153986
As the pressure was increased, more gas can be stored per cubic foot in HPHT wells makes them very productive. But they
are much more expensive to complete because of the more advanced technology required. Among the increasingly deep and
unknown places operators are going are high-pressure, high-temperature gas wells, where the definitions of depth, pressure
and temperature are ever expanding. HPHT environments result in higher drilling and completion risk and cost. The
increased temperature drastically affects the stability and longevity of downhole electronics and must be properly considered
to manage overall efficiency and cost. And simultaneously, because of the high pressure operation conditions, the partial
pressures of CO
2
and H
2
S exposed to wellbore tubular was increased significantly, there is the potential for severe corrosion
and cracking. The corrosive rates are higher for HPHT wells and require expensive corrosion-resistant alloys for downhole
tools, wellbore construction and surface pressure-control equipments.
Because of the high cost of HPHT wells, the way to reduce the failure probability of HPHT wells and increase the wellbore
service life are highlighted. In the completion process, the cementing complications may happen though the best efforts are
tried. The study to know the effect of cementing complications and find methods to mitigate or avoid wellbore failure is
important. Cement mechanical properties are the important input data for casing-cement system analytical analysis and finite
element method study. Many experimental studies have been taken out to measure cement mechanical properties under
different conditions. One of the earliest lab tests to simulate the field condition was taken to test cement sheath failure
(Goodwin K.J. et al., 1992). The cement was cured at the temperature of 350
o
F , with the maximum casing inside pressure of
10,000 psi and the annulus pressure of 500 psi. Another model with the cements cured under higher temperature was built for
testing the long term HPHT condition on the properties of cements (D. Stiles et al., 2006). The cement was cured at the
pressure of 2,133 psi with the temperature of 645
0
F. The cement was cured under the condition of 2,610 psi, and 212
0
F
(Catalin Teodoriu, et al., 2012). The experimental results can be used for the casing-cement-formation system analytical
study (C. Atkinson., et al., 1996; Catalin Teodoriu, et al., 2010). However, the analytical analysis can only consider
symmetry condition. The casing eccentricity, cementing voids and channeling is difficult to be studied under this condition.
Casing eccentricity usually depends on wellbore angle, the number of casing centralizers and wellbore dimension. The higher
the wellbore inclination angle usually leads to higher value of casing eccentricity (Ferda Akgun, et al., 2004). The effect of
casing eccentricity on the cementing operation was investigated (M.Courturier et al., 1990; Silva, M.G.P. et al., 1996). When
the casing is off centered, the fluid favors the path of least resistance and flows more rapidly on the wide side than on the
narrow side of the geometry. The consequence is that the velocity distribution is distorted and the displacing fluids may
bypass the slowly moving drilling mud on the narrow side. Then at the end of displacement process, the annulus may be left
with a long strip of inefficient cementing displacement of the drilling mud in a given interval depending on the local
geometry. If casing eccentricity happens, cement channeling tends to build up simultaneously. Cement channeling allows for
cavities to be filled with drilling mud, unset cement, or formation materials. To prevent cement channeling needs to design
mud, spacer and the cement properties properly (Christopher F.Lockyear, et al., 1990). Some techniques can be used to detect
and repair cement channels (P.E. Hart, et at., 1990).
Its also very import to know the effect of casing eccentricity and cement channeling on the wellbore integrity if the
cementing problems exist. Finite element methods are good for studying cementing complications with complicated
conditions. Using finite element methods, the stress distribution in the cement and the casing under perfect condition was
well analyzed (W.J.Rodriguez et al., 2003). There is much difference for the Von Mises stress distribution in the casing
between the high thermal properties cements with the thermal conductivity of 2.4 /Wm
-1
K
-1
and the low thermal properties
cements with the thermal conductivity of 0.66 /Wm
-1
K
-1
(Manoochehr Salehabadi et al., 2010). The maximum Von Mises
stress in casing in wellbores cemented using high thermal properties cements does not increase significantly by increasing the
degree of casing eccentricity. However, the maximum Von Mises stress in casings in wellbores cemented using the low
thermal properties cements increases by increasing the casing eccentricity. In reality, most of the cements fall into the
category of low thermal property cements. The effect of casing eccentricity, voids, cement channels and pore pressure decline
on the collapse resistance of casing was studied (A.Berger et al., 2004). The presence of voids and cement channels can
reduce the casing collapse significantly. The casing eccentricity has minor effect on casing collapse resistance. However, the
voids size, location and sensitivity analysis was not considered. One more study (A.Nabipour et al., 2010) shows the same
results that the casing eccentricity has minor effect on casing collapse resistance.
However, the sensitivities of mechanical properties to stress distribution in casing-cement-formation system are still seldom
studied and they are the important parameters to improve the cement design. In this analysis, the sensitivity of casing and
cement mechanical properties, voids location, voids size and shape are taken into account and tried to figure out which
parameter is the most important and its effect on casing collapse resistance.
Finite Element Methods
Finite element methods are the effective tool for structural analysis and thermal analysis. ANSYS 12.0 was the platform to
develop codes for this study. In the thermal analysis, the element of PLANE77 was used. PLANE77 is a higher order version
of the 2-D, 4-node thermal element. The element has one degree of freedom, temperature, at each node. The 8-node elements
have compatible temperature shapes and are well suited to model curved boundaries. The 8-node thermal element is
SPE 153986 3
applicable to a 2-D, steady-state or transient thermal analysis. After the thermal analysis was done, the results of element
temperature are loaded for structural analysis. The element of PLANE82 was used for structural analysis. PLANE82 is 2-D
8-Node Structural Solid element. It provides more accurate results for mixed (quadrilateral-triangular) automatic meshes and
can tolerate irregular shapes without as much loss of accuracy. The 8-node elements have compatible displacement shapes
and are well suited to model curved boundaries. The 8-node element is defined by eight nodes having two degrees of freedom
at each node: translations in the nodal x and y directions. The element may be used as a plane element or as an axisymmetric
element. The element has plasticity, creep, swelling, stress stiffening, large deflection, and large strain capabilities.
The elements generated are shown in figure 8. In the first step, in the environment of thermal analysis, using the element of
PLANE77, the temperature of each node is calculated and stored in a file. Then, the file was loaded in structural analysis
environment, using the element of PLANE82, the thermal expansion and thermal stress of the casing-cement-formation
system is solved. Together with the displacement boundary and pressure boundary conditions, the stress distribution in the
system was calculated (shown in figure 9 to figure 32).
Model Dimension and Boundary Conditions
The wellbore conditions are from one typical high pressure high temperature gas well in south Texas which produces gas in
sand formation. The well depth is 18,000 ft with the pore-pressure gradient of 0.9 psi/ft. The 23.2 lb/ft, 5 in. OD, Grade P110
Casing was used for well completion with the hole of 6 in. In the simulation, two cement systems are used, elastic cement
and brittle cement system, to study the effect of cement mechanical properties on casing collapse resistance.

Table 1 Model Dimension and Boundary Conditions
Casing ID. (in.) 4.044
Casing OD. (in.) 5
Hole Diameter (in.) 6
Formation Radius (in.) 20
Maximum Horizontal Stress (psi) 11,950
Minimum Horizontal Stress (psi) 11,820
Pore Pressure (psi) 11,000
Bottomhole Pressure (psi) 10,000
Reservoir Temperature (
0
F) 300
Bottomhole Temperature (
0
F) 260



Table 2 Material Mechanical Properties
Casing Elastic Cement Brittle Cement Formation
Youngs Modulus (psi) 3e7 2e6 4e6 3e6
Poissons Ratio 0.3 0.35 0.2 0.3
Specific Heat (Btu/lb.
0
F) 0.11943 0.5231 0.5008 0.2385
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion (/
0
F) 1.3e-5 9e-6 1e-5 1e-5
Thermal Conductivity (Btu/hr ft
0
F) 8.668 0.5425 0.6149 0.5726







4 SPE 153986
Sensitivity Analysis
Probabilistic sensitivities are important in allowing you to improve the design toward a more reliable and better quality
product, or to save money while maintaining the reliability or quality of the product. A sensitivity plot for any random output
parameter in the model can be made to show the sensitivities of the random input variables on the random output random
variables.
Usually, the researchers use lognormal distribution to describe material mechanical properties because for lognormal
distribution, the values of material mechanical properties are positive. This is true. However, according to the characteristics
of lognormal distribution, there is a small probability that the values for lognormal distribution reach positive infinity and
nearly zero. In reality, the values of material mechanical properties cannot reach positive infinity or nearly zero. A Beta
distribution can better describe the material property with the lower boundary and upper boundary. A Beta distribution of a
random variable X has four distribution parameters, namely the shape parameters r and t, the lower limit a and the upper
limit b. The probability density function of a Beta distribution is:
( ) ( )
( )( )
1 1
1
( , , , )
,
q r
q r
x a b x
Bet a b q r
B q r b a

+ +

=

,
With parameters range , , , a b < 0 q < 0 r < a x b
In which Beta Function
( )
( ) ( )
( )
,
q r
B q r
q r

=
+

And Gamma Function
( ) ( )
1
0
exp
k
k u u

du
Inherently, Monte Carlo simulations always vary all random input variables at the same time, thus if interactions exist then
they will always be correctly reflected in the probabilistic sensitivities. Monte Carlo simulations method is used for the
sensitivity analysis with 1,000 repetitions which means every random input variable has 1,000 sample points as shown in
wellbore diameter distribution in figure 3. For probability analysis, the Monte Carlo simulation takes 5 hours to generate
1,000 samples for each random input variable and to finish the solution.
Table 3 Random Input Variables and Distribution
Distribution Type
a
( Minimum value)
B
(Maximum value)
q
(Shape Factor)
r
(Shape Factor)
Casing Inside
Pressure (psi)
Beta Distribution 2000 14000 2 3
Wellbore
Diameter (in.)
Beta Distribution 5.8 7.5 2 5
Casing Youngs
Modulus (psi)
Beta Distribution 2.5e7 3.5e7 2 2
Casing Poissons
Ratio
Beta Distribution 0.25 0.35 2 2
Cement Youngs
Modulus (psi)
Beta Distribution 1e6 5e6 2 3
Cement Poissons
Ratio
Beta Distribution 0.15 0.4 2 3
Formation
Youngs Modulus
(psi)
Beta Distribution 1e6 3e6 2 2
Formation
Poissons Ratio
Beta Distribution 0.15 0.35 2 2



SPE 153986 5
Usually, the cement sheath fails before the casing fails because the cement sheath cannot provide enough support for the
casing. Thus, in the sensitivity analysis, the cement stress distribution is more important than the casing stress distribution. In
the analysis, the cement maximum Von Mises stress and maximum shear stress are used as random output variables
The evaluation of the probabilistic sensitivities is based on the correlation coefficients between all random input variables
and a particular random output parameter. To plot the sensitivities of a certain random output parameter, the random input
variables are separated into two groups: those that are significant (important) and those that are insignificant (not important)
for the random output parameter. The sensitivity plots will only include the significant random input variables. The
probabilistic design system will plot only the sensitivities of the random input variables that are found to be significant.
However, insignificant sensitivities are printed in the output window. In the plot, a positive sensitivity indicates that
increasing the value of the random input variable increases the value of the random output parameter for which the
sensitivities are plotted. Likewise, a negative sensitivity indicates that increasing the random input variable value reduces the
random output parameter value.
Figure 1 and figure 2 show that the cement maximum Von Mises stress and the cement maximum shear stress are sensitive to
cement Youngs modulus and formation Youngs modulus. The casing inside pressure, wellbore diameter, casing youngs
Modulus, casing Poissons ratio, cement Poissons ratio and formation Poissons ratio are insignificant parameters in the
sensitivity analysis. In reality, formation Youngs modulus is uncontrollable parameter, only cement Youngs modulus can be
designed and controlled. Reducing the value of cement Youngs modulus can reduce the cement maximum Von Mises stress
and provide a better cement sheath support for the casing. On the other hand, reducing the value of cement Youngs modulus
will increase the cement maximum shear stress which may lead to bad cement sheath support. The balance has to be weighed
between the advantage and disadvantage of reducing the cement Youngs Modulus. Within the limit of cement shear failure,
the value of cement Youngs modulus can be designed to minimum if economically available.



Figure 1 Cement Maximum Von Mises Stress Sensitivity Analysis








6 SPE 153986

Figure 2 Cement Maximum Shear Stress Sensitivity Analysis





Figure 3 Wellbore Diameter Distribution



SPE 153986 7
Cementing Complications Analysis
In the simulation, seven different cases were studied (figure 9 to figure 29). Casing Centered in the hole without any
cementing complications is the perfect case. In the cementing complication analysis, casing eccentricity, void, and cement
channel were considered. In the cementing void analysis, the effect of the void location on the wellbore integrity was studied.
Finally, casing eccentricity and cement channel were studied together in the last case.
In the analysis, the 0.3 in. eccentricity stands for the center of the casing moves 0.3 in. toward the wellbore. From table 4,
figure 4, the casing eccentricity alone doesnt have much effect on the casing and cement. The maximum Von Mises stress
difference is only 0.27% for the 0.3 in. eccentricity and the casing centered in the hole. The void location is the most
important factor on casing stress. If the voids locate near the casing, the maximum von Mises stress in the casing increase
significantly comparing to other cases. The Von Mises stress in the contact area between the casing and the voids is beyond
the casing yielding strength a lot. Water or drilling mud is trapped in the voids. Water and drilling mud has very lower
compressibility and they behave like incompressible material comparing to casing and cement. This may cause the very high
stress in the contact area between the voids and the casing.
Casing eccentricity and cement channel usually happen simultaneously. This is the second highest failure probability
scenario. If casing is not centered, the cross section area fluid flow velocity is different during the cementing process. This
may contribute to the cement channel problem in the lower clearance area. Cement channel leads to the third highest von
Mises stress in the casing. The stress in this scenario is 60% higher than the stress in the perfect condition. Casing
eccentricity, voids in the center of cement and voids near formation doesnt have much effect on the casing von Mises stress
comparing to the perfect condition.
There is a little bit lower Von Mises stress developed in the casing under the condition of the elastic cement. However, using
the elastic cement doesnt improve the stress distribution in the casing significantly. The stress in the casing under the
condition of elastic cement is 12% lower than stress in the casing under the condition of brittle cement.
For the stress developed in the cement, from figure 5, voids in the center of the cement, voids near casing and 0.3 in.
eccentricity & cement channel are the three worst cases. For brittle cement, voids near formation and cement channel also
develop very high stresses in the cement. Cement channel and cement voids near formation increase the Von Mises stress in
the cement significantly comparing to the perfect cement condition. It is obviously that the elastic cement has much better
behavior than brittle cement. The stresses in the three worst cases are almost reduced 33% to 43%. This trend is also seen in
the scenario of voids near formation and cement channel.


Table 4 Casing and Cement Maximum Von Mises Stress Distribution

Brittle Cement Elastic Cement
Casing Von
Mises Stress
(psi)
Cement Von
Mises Stress
(psi)
Casing Von
Mises Stress
(psi)
Cement Von Mises
Stress (psi)
Casing Centered in the Hole 49,598 15,418 46,246 14,658
0.3 in. Eccentricity 49,730 15,949 46, 697 14,832
Voids Near Casing 189,570 49,010 178,266 27,912
Voids in the Center of Cement 53,010 47,234 46,770 28,878
Voids near Formation 54,016 26,719 51,767 15,477
Cement Channel 79,043 30,134 62,276 17,792
0.3 in. Eccentricity & Cement Channel 103,254 45,975 91,864 30,625








8 SPE 153986

Fig.4 Maximum Von Mises Stress in Casing







Fig.5 Maximum Von Mises Stress in Cement



Voids Shape and Size Effect

In the two dimension simulation, rectangle and circle void shape are used in the analysis. For the circle voids, the radius was
increased from 0.1 in. to 0.2 in. As shown in table 5 and figure 6, the voids shape and size doesnt have much effect on the
maximum Von Mises stress developed in the casing.
However, from figure 7, the maximum Von Mises stress developed in the cement with 0.2 in. radius circle void is 27%
higher than that in cement with 0.1 in. radius circle void. For brittle cement, the cement with the rectangle void and the 0.2 in.
radius circle void has the highest Von Mises stress. The brittle cement is more sensitive to the void shape. For elastic
cement, the void shape has minor effect on the cement stress distribution. As the void size increases, the maximum stresses
developed in the cement also increase. No matter from the voids location, voids size and voids shape, the elastic cement
shows much better behavior than the brittle cement.











SPE 153986 9
Table 5 Casing and Cement Maximum Von Mises Stress Distribution for Different Voids

Brittle Cement Elastic Cement
Casing Von
Mises Stress
(psi)
Cement Von
Mises Stress
(psi)
Casing Von
Mises Stress
(psi)
Cement Von Mises
Stress (psi)
Casing Centered in the Hole 49,598 15,418 46,246 14,658
Rectangle Void in the Center of
Cement
53,010 47,234 46,770 28,878
Circle Void in the Center of Cement
(0.1 in. radius)
50,559 39,592 49,314 34,542
Circle Void in the Center of Cement
(0.15 in radius)
53,035 44,455 51,685 39,899
Circle Void in the Center of Cement
(0.2 in. radius)
56,925 48,378 55,414 43,872


Figure 6 Maximum Von Mises Stress in Casing


Figure 7 Maximum Von Mises Stress in Cement
10 SPE 153986
Conclusions

1. The cement maximum Von Mises stress and the cement maximum shear stress are sensitive to cement Youngs
modulus and formation Youngs modulus. Reducing the value of cement Youngs modulus can reduce the cement
maximum Von Mises stress and increase the cement maximum shear stress. Within the limit of cement shear failure,
the value of cement Youngs modulus can be designed to minimum if economically available.

2. The casing eccentricity alone doesnt have much effect on the casing and cement. The maximum Von Mises stress
difference is only 0.27% for the 0.3 in. eccentricity and the casing centered in the hole.

3. For the stresses developed in the cement, voids in the center of the cement, voids near casing and 0.3 in. eccentricity &
cement channel are the three worst cases. For the stresses developed in the casing, voids near casing, and Casing
eccentricity & cement channel are the worst two cases.

4. The elastic cement has much better behavior than brittle cement. The stress in the casing under the condition of elastic
cement is 12% lower than stress in the casing under the condition of brittle cement. The stresses developed in the
cement in the three worst cases (voids in the center of the cement, voids near casing and 0.3 in. eccentricity & cement
channel) are almost reduced 33% to 43%.

5. The voids shape and size doesnt have much effect on the maximum Von Mises stress developed in the casing. The
brittle cement is more sensitive to the void shape than the elastic cement for the stress developed in the cement.




Acknowledgments

This study was supported by Research Chevron Center for Well Construction and Production of Crisman Institute for
Petroleum Engineering in Texas A&M Petroleum Engineering Department. We gratefully acknowledge these supports.
References
A. Gerger, W. W. Flecknestein, and A. W. Eustes:Effect of Eccentricity, Voids, Cement Channels, and Pore Pressure
Decline on Collapse Resistance of Casing, SPE 90045, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 26-29 September
2004, Houston, Texas.
A.Nabipour and B.Joodi:Finite Element Simulation of Downhole Stresses in Deep gas Wells Cements, SPE 132156, SPE
Deep Gas Conference and Exhibition, 24-26 January 2010, Manama, Bahrain.
C. Atkinson., and D. A. Eftaxiopoulos:A Plane Model for The Stress Field around an Inclined, Cased and Cemented
Wellbore, International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 1996, Vol. 20, 549-569.
Catalin Teodoriu, Ignatius Ugwu and Jerome Schubert:Estimation of Casing-Cement-Formation Interaction Using a new
Analytical Model, SPE 131335, SPE EUROPEC/EAGE Annual Conference and Exhibition, 14-17, June 2010, Barcelona,
Spain.
Catalin Teodoriu, Zhaoguang Yuan, Jerome Schubert and Mahmood Amani:Experimental Measurements of Mechanical
Parameters of Class G Cement, SPE 153007, SPE/EAGE European Unconventional Resources Conferences and Exhibition,
20-22 March 2012, Vienna, Austria.
Couturler, M., Guillot, D., Hendriks, H. and Callet F.:Design Rules and Associated Spacer Properties for Optimal Mud
Removal in Eccentric Annuli, SPE 21594, CIM/SPE International Technical Meeting, 10-13 June 1990, Calgary, Alberta,
Canada.
D. Stiles:Effects of Long-Term Exposure to Ultrahigh Temperature on the Mechanical Parameters of Cement, IADC/SPE
98896, 21-23 February, 2006 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Miami, Florida
Ferda Akgun, Shedid A. Shedid and Hamed H. Al-Ghadban:Simulation Investigation of Casing Eccentricity Estimation for
Different Inclination Angles and Tensile Forces Using Finite Element Method, SPE 91811, SPE International Petroleum
Conference in Mexico, 7-9 November 2004, Puebla Pue., Mexico.

SPE 153986 11
Goodwin K.J., and Crook R.J.:Cement Sheath Stress Failure, SPE Drilling Engineering, December 1992,
Volume 7, Number 4, Pages 291-296.
Hart P.E. and Wilson L.C.:Improved Channel Repairs with Small-Phased Circumferential Perforating Guns, SPE 20424,
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 23-26 September 1990, New Orleans, Louisiana.
Lockyear, Christopher F., Ryan, Daniel F., Gunningham and Marcus M.:Cement Channeling: How To Predict and Prevent,
SPE Drilling Engineering, September 1990, Volume 5, Number 3 Pages 201-208.
Manoochehr Salehabadi, Min Jin, Jinhai Yang, Rehan Ahmed and Bahman Tohidi:Effect of Casing Eccentricity on Casing
Stability Analysis in Wellbores Drilled in Gas Hydrate Bearing Sediments, SPE 131236, SPE EUROPEC/EAGE Annual
Conference and Exhibition, 14-17 June 2010, Barcelona, Spain.
R.R. Paula Jr., P.R. Ribeiro and O.L.A. Santos:HPHT DrillingNew Frontiers for Well Safety, SPE 119909, SPE/IADC
Drilling Conference and Exhibition, 17-19 March 2009, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Silva, M.G.P., Martins, A.L., Barbosa, B.C. and Garcia Jr. H.:Designing Fluid Velocity Profiles for Optimal Primary
Cementing, SPE 36136, SPE Latin America/Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference, 23-26 April 1996, Port-of-
Spain, Trinidad.
W.J.Rodriguez, W.W.Fleckenstein, and A.W.Eustes:Simulation of Collapse loads on Cemented Casing Using Finite
Element Analysis, SPE Paper 84566, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 5-8 October 2003, Denver,
Colorado.



































12 SPE 153986

Figure 8 Casing, Cement and Formation Elements
(Casing Centered in the Hole)






Figure 9 Casing, Cement and Formation Von Mises Stresses Distribution
(Casing Centered in the Hole)










SPE 153986 13

Figure 10 Casing Von Mises Stress
(Casing Centered in the Hole)






Figure 11 Cement Von Mises Stress
(Casing Centered in the Hole)












14 SPE 153986

Figure 12 Casing, Cement and Formation Von Mises Stress
(Voids near Casing)


Figure 13 Casing Von Mises Stress
(Voids near Casing)

Figure 14 Cement Von Mises Stress
(Voids near Casing)
SPE 153986 15

Figure 15 Casing, Cement and Formation Von Mises Stress
(Voids in the Center of Cement)


Figure 16 Casing Von Mises Stress
(Voids in the Center of Cement)


Figure 17 Cement Von Mises Stress
(Voids in the Center of Cement)
16 SPE 153986

Figure 18 Casing, Cement and Formation Von Mises Stress
(Voids near Formation)

Figure 19 Casing Von Mises Stress
(Voids near Formation)

Figure 20 Cement Von Mises Stress
(Voids near Formation)
SPE 153986 17

Figure 21 Casing, Cement and Formation Von Mises Stress
(Cement Channel)

Figure 22 Casing Von Mises Stress
(Cement Channel)

Figure 23 Cement Von Mises Stress
(Cement Channel)
18 SPE 153986

Figure 24 Casing, Cement and Formation Von Mises Stress
(0.3 in. Eccentricity)

Figure 25 Casing Von Mises Stress
(0.3 in. Eccentricity)

Figure 26 Cement Von Mises Stress
(0.3 in. Eccentricity)
SPE 153986 19

Figure 27 Casing, Cement and Formation Von Mises Stress
(0.3 in. Eccentricity & Channel)

Figure 28 Casing Von Mises Stress
(0.3 in. Eccentricity & Channel)

Figure 29 Cement Von Mises Stress
(0.3 in. Eccentricity & Channel)
20 SPE 153986

Figure 30 , Cement and Formation Von Mises Stress
(Circle Void in the Center of the Cement, 0.2 in. radius)

Figure 31 Casing Von Mises Stress
(Circle Void in the Center of the Cement, 0.2 in. radius)

Figure 32 Cement Von Mises Stress
(Circle Void in the Center of the Cement, 0.2 in. radius)