You are on page 1of 7

PETROLEUM SOCIETY

PAPER 2005-179

CANADIAN INSTITUTE OF MINING, METALLURGY & PETROLEUM

Top Drive Casing Running:


Challenges and Solutions
D.M. SHUTE
Volant Products Inc.
This paper is to be presented at the Petroleum Societys 6th Canadian International Petroleum Conference (56th Annual Technical
Meeting), Calgary, Alberta, Canada, June 7 9, 2005. Discussion of this paper is invited and may be presented at the meeting if
filed in writing with the technical program chairman prior to the conclusion of the meeting. This paper and any discussion filed will
be considered for publication in Petroleum Society journals. Publication rights are reserved. This is a pre-print and subject to
correction.

background behind such evaluation and discusses a range of


technologies in the context of that background.

Abstract
Opportunity to improve rig floor safety, reduce technical
casing running risk and reduce cost has motivated operators to
utilise the top drive for casing running operations. Simple and
easy approaches for applying make-up torque and hoisting
loads to the casing string have been used with some success, but
in some applications performing these functions safely,
economically, and without connection damage has not been
trivial.
Operational logistics, management of loads that cause
casing thread damage, and prevention of pipe body damage are
examples of challenges requiring sound technical solutions.
Pipe handling logistics, including engagement of the casing
grip, must be executed efficiently without damaging casing
threads or sealing surfaces. Similarly, bending loads resulting
from rig misalignment or casing curvature can initiate thread
damage if uncertainties remain unmanaged. Finally, local cold
working of pipe body material increases stress cracking
susceptibility, particularly on inner surfaces, and will reduce
casing string reliability.
Successful use of casing running technology depends on
selecting a system that meets the technical requirements of the
application. A sound understanding of casing thread make-up,
drilling rig operations, and the interaction between the two
enables critical evaluation of emerging technology and reduces
the risk of commercial failure. This paper presents the

Introduction
A desire to improve rig floor safety and eliminate
unnecessary expenses has motivated oilfield operators to utilise
the top drive for casing running operations. Applying make up
torque and hoisting the casing string can be accomplished quite
easily, but performing these functions safely, economically, and
without damaging the casing body or connections is a nontrivial task.
Several top drive casing running systems are commercially
available, but consistently successful deployment requires that
users carefully match technology with applications. Technical
challenges are described here and solutions characterized in
application-specific context. Successful exploitation of this
emerging technology will occur more reliably with an
understanding of the relationships between pipe, casing threads,
running equipment, and drilling rig operations.
The simplest way to transfer torsion and axial load from the
top drive quill to the casing is with a crossover, commonly
referred to as a nubbin or make up quill, from the top drive to
the casing thread. This approach is widely used in Western
Canadian shallow hole applications, but fails to capture the full
safety and economic benefit available through top drive casing

running systems that engage the pipe body, rather than the
casing threads.1
Purpose specific top drive casing running tools are used in a
broad range of applications. Success has been reported for
casing runs in:

highly deviated Gulf of Mexico wells2,

river crossings2,

onshore horizontal wells2,

desert wells3, and

the North Sea4.


Compelling business cases for adopting top drive casing
running systems have been published previously1, 2, 3, 4and the
subject will be treated here at a summary level only.
The economic impact of using top drive casing running
systems is positive in three areas. Reduction in manpower
requirements is reflected directly in labor, mobilization/
demobilization, and accommodation costs. Secondly, case
studies have reported shorter rig-in time, faster running time,
and faster rig-out time compared to conventional practices.
Finally, casing can be landed more reliably at the intended
depth with the capability of simultaneously reciprocating,
rotating, and circulating.
Use of top drive casing running systems improves rig safety
by replacing multiple pieces of equipment with a single multifunction component and reducing the number of people
necessary to run casing. Conventional power tong-based casing
running operations typically require casing elevators, power
tongs, a power tong operator, and a derrick man. In some cases
additional equipment and personnel include a fill-up and
circulate tool with operator and a lay down machine with
operator. Depending on rig location and hole depth multiple
crews may be required. In contrast, top drive casing running
systems typically require only one or two additional workers,
better utilize on-site personnel, and combine the function of
elevators, power tongs, and fill-up and circulate tools in a single
tool. Safety is also improved for both land and offshore
operations by reducing the number of man-miles traveled.
Running casing safer and at lower cost is an attractive
prospect. However, thorough examination of the technical
challenges, the associated uncertainties, and the resulting cost of
risk is necessary to match available technology with the right
applications. Failure to assess technical weaknesses in emerging
technology and the potential impact on operations results in the
assumption of unknown risk.
Technical challenges of top drive casing running relate
primarily to:

managing risk of thread damage during casing


connection make up,

acquiring representative make up monitoring data,


and

inducing only acceptable pipe body damage.


Casing systems should be viewed as long, thin pressure
vessels. The same care and attention devoted to designing
pressure vessels, qualifying manufacturing processes, and
ensuring compliance with the design intent should be mirrored
in well construction. Recognizing that casing running is the
final step of a pressure vessel manufacturing process provides a
context for assessing processes that control quality.
Solutions exist for every technical challenge identified here
and most are commercially available. The right level of quality
can be delivered without compromising safety or efficiency.
Attentive readers will be better equipped to assess risk, ask
relevant questions, and select the best casing running solution
for a given application.

Technical Challenges
Successful top drive casing running equipment needs to
engage rapidly and grip the pipe securely. It is equally
important that the grip preserve the integrity of the casing
connection and the pipe body during make-up and hoisting
operations.

Casing Thread Damage


Casing threads are typically finer and more delicate than tool
joint threads.4 They require more care and attention during
make up to prevent thread and seal damage which compromises
connection sealability, and, in some cases, structural integrity.
Casing threads are cut on relatively thin walled tubulars,
relative to drill pipe, and are required to carry large axial loads.
Connection designers must therefore choose between specifying
an upset pipe end to increase available wall thickness or
selecting a low profile thread with a near-flat load flank contact
angle to maximize available load capacity and minimize radial
load on the thin pipe wall. Upsetting pipe ends increases
connection cost and reduces annular clearance; therefore most
casing connections use a low profile, short pitch thread with a
low angle load flank. As a result, casing threads are generally
finer than drill pipe threads and have a profile that is more
rectangular than v-shaped. These factors make casing threads
more susceptible to damage than drill pipe threads, particularly
during initial engagement. Even if threads are not damaged
during engagement, casing connections are less durable than
drill pipe connections. Most casing connection qualification test
programs rightly require only three make/break cycles to
demonstrate durability adequate for the intended purpose.5
Casing thread damage imposed by top drive make up
generally falls into one of three categories. The most obvious is
wear and damage resulting from engagement with a crossover
sub between the top drive and casing thread. Transferring full
make up torque through the casing thread effectively applies
one make/break cycle to the connection before it reaches the rig
floor. Even if crossover thread interference is reduced to
minimize sliding distance under load, substantial thread contact
loads are required for torque transfer. Crossover thread damage
is transferred to the casing thread, thereby reducing thread
durability and increasing the chance of making a bad
connection.
The second damage mechanism occurs at the point of initial
thread engagement. Casing threads are most vulnerable to
damage at this point because misalignment causes localized
contact between pin and box thread corners (the transition
from crest to flank) to contact as shown in Figure 1. Thread
corner radii are typically small and damaging contact stress can
result from even modest contact load induced by bending or
axial load applied when threads are misaligned. The
consequence can be thread galling and impairment of
connection functionality. Damage is commonly induced either
when rotation is started or when stabbing loads result in contact
stress that exceeds thread corner capacity. Large stabbing loads
most often result from either setting top drive weight on the
casing connection while stabbing the casing running tool, or
from lowering the joint in the derrick too rapidly.

combined with common casing curvature the resulting effect


can be significant compared to allowable thread misalignment.
Casing connections can tolerate some axis misalignment, but
damage susceptibility typically increases with misalignment
beyond the onset of thread corner interference and creates an
untenable condition beyond a connection-specific limit. Thread
axis alignment must therefore be considered in top drive casing
running system selection and implementation.

Make up Monitoring and Control


Casing connections must be made up to an appropriate
degree to ensure structural integrity and sealability consistent
with the design intent. Make up specification varies between
connections. Generally, API 8 round and buttress connection
performance is suitable for non-critical applications over a wide
range of interference and these connections are usually made up
successfully without sophisticated monitoring, recording, or
control equipment. Conversely, premium connections are
typically selected for critical wells where the consequence of
connection leakage is severe enough to justify their additional
expense.
Most premium connections utilize a sealing mechanism that
depends on precise damage-free engagement of the pin and box
for maximum seal reliability. Premium connection make up
must therefore be performed with care and strict adherence to
specified procedures.

Figure 1 Thread corner contact


The third common source of casing thread damage occurs
when threads are engaged and rotated while misaligned.
Although contact stress is reduced when thread flanks are
engaged, the combination of stress and sliding distance is often
sufficient to induce thread damage as shown in Figure 2. Rapid
rotation is known to exacerbate this problem and has resulted in
many premium connection manufacturers limiting maximum
make up speed.6
Axis misalignment is identified as a significant factor
contributing to thread damage and is always present to some
degree. The top drive and casing axes rarely line up, and when

Monitoring
Premium connection make up is typically monitored and
recorded to detect damage and create a record documenting
final assembly of each connection6. This documentation serves
two primary purposes: verification of connection make up and
demonstration of compliance with recommended practices. Data
recorded during the make up process must accurately represent
the parameters chosen to indicate connection damage and
confirm final assembly consistent with the design intent.
Measurement of applied torque, connection rotation, or turns,
and time are the most common recorded parameters.
Control
The physical process of connection make up must be
controlled within acceptable limits to minimize the chance of
inducing damage. Galling of mating surfaces is the primary
source of connection damage and is affected by several factors
controllable at the field level. Some are well known, but others
are taken for granted in conventional casing running operations
and have been ignored in early commercial deployment of top
drive casing running systems.
Well known parameters that must be controlled during
connection make up are:

connection cleaning and lubrication,

rotation speed, and

applied torque.
The first two parameters are easily satisfied during top drive
casing running operations, but control of applied torque is a
more complex challenge. Cleaning and lubrication ensure that
mating surfaces are free of foreign material and protected from
high friction contact that increases the chance of galling.
Throttling rotational speed to ensure compliance with
manufacturer recommended limits is also necessary to minimize
connection damage.
Control of make up torque is necessary to comply with
minimum and maximum torque specified by connection
running procedures. Particularly for premium connections,
maximum and minimum make up torque has been chosen with

Figure 2 - Premium connection thread and seal


damage

variations that affect mechanical efficiency and influence output


torque accuracy. Pressure transducers positioned to measure
flow losses in hydraulic lines in addition to pressure drop across
the motor are subject to error resulting from variations in flow
rates and hydraulic fluid viscosity. Some systems measure only
the upstream pressure and assume that back pressure is either
zero or constant. Both assumptions increase output torque
uncertainty.
Both hydraulic and electric top drives have greater rotational
inertia than power tongs. Torque required to decelerate rotating
components should be considered when quantifying
measurement uncertainty. This effect increases with the square
of rotational speed and therefore becomes more significant
during faster connection make up.
Uncertainty in torque that will be applied to a connection
depends on both measurement accuracy and the ability of the
control system to stop at a preset torque value. If torque
measurement is uncertain, even the best controller can not arrest
make up at a value that is more certain than the input. As shown
in Figure 4, controllers introduce incremental uncertainty that
must be considered together with measurement uncertainty in
the application context.

care to ensure adequate interference for sealability and to avoid


damaging overload conditions. Most top drive control systems
measure and control torque, but the accuracy of these systems
has typically been designed for drill pipe, not for casing.
Consequently, not all top drive systems provide instrumentation
suitable for making up all casing connections.
Selecting measurement technology, transducer location,
recording equipment, and control strategy to deliver accuracy
appropriate for the application ensures optimum technical and
economic performance. Some connections allow for a large
difference between minimum and maximum torque while others
specify a relatively narrow window.
Measurement and control system accuracy requirements
therefore depend on the application. A system delivering
accuracy suitable for all applications can be expected to cost
significantly more than other alternatives that may only satisfy
some applications. Understanding the limitations of
measurement and control systems enables good, cost effective
deployment decisions.
Uncertainty in torque applied to casing connections depends
on several parameters that interact to define system capabilities.
Measurement uncertainty, shown in Figure 3, is typically the
most significant challenge. Electric and hydraulic top drives
present different challenges that must be managed to ensure
accuracy suitable for the intended application.

10000

10000

9000

9000

8000

8000

5% measurement
uncertainty

7000

5% measurement
uncertainty

7000

6000
True
5000
Torque
4000

6000
True
5000
Torque
4000

3000

3000

2000

2000

1000

1000

5% control
uncertainty
Target
torque

0
0

2000

4000 6000 8000


Measured Torque

10000

2000

4000 6000 8000


Measured Torque

10000

Figure 4 - Combined effects of measurement and control


uncertainty on applied torque

Figure 3 - Effect of measurement uncertainty on applied


torque
Electric top drives typically use a variable frequency drive
(VFD) with a built-in motor model that calculates output torque
as a function of voltage, frequency, current, and many other
parameters. The accuracy of most motor models decreases with
rotational speed. Because premium casing connection make up
is typically performed at relatively slow speeds, accuracy of the
VFD motor model, over the range of interest, is likely to be less
certain than published values based on higher speeds more
common in drilling operations. VFD output torque accuracy
must be assessed over the range of application speeds to verify
suitability.
Hydraulic top drives most often indicate torque based on
pressure measurement. Output torque of a hydraulic motor
depends primarily on pressure drop across the motor, but is
influenced by friction which can vary with operating conditions
and motor condition. Care must be taken to understand friction

Pipe Body Damage


Casing material is selected for strength and corrosion
resistance to fit the application. Casing system performance
requirements include:

containing internal pressure,

resisting external pressure,

carrying axial loads, and

remaining circular enough to facilitate access to


the well bore.
Just as pressure vessel material is treated carefully to
preserve the design intent, so must casing material. Care must
be taken to complete final assembly (make up) and installation
(lowering into the hole) of the casing system in a manner that
enables the material to perform as intended.

uses time unnecessarily detracts from potential value.


Positioning tasks that require careful human control with low
error tolerance present a common challenge. Because errors
have high consequences operators must take the time necessary
to perform sensitive tasks without damaging equipment or
casing threads.
Top drive casing running procedures should not combine
multiple operations that increase risk of damaging casing
threads and reduce running efficiency. One example is engaging
the pipe grip when the casing thread is stabbed, but the threads
are not engaged. Casing threads are most vulnerable to damage
during initial thread engagement because applied loads are
distributed over a smaller area than that available after threads
are fully engaged. Efficiency is reduced in this situation because
the driller must take care not to set excessive weight on the
casing thread during pipe grip engagement.
Although casing for most vertical wells is hoisted and
lowered into the hole, slant wells typically require the casing to
be pushed into the hole. Slant wells are commonly used in
shallow Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) applications
to limit curvature required to reach the horizontal section. Rigs
are constructed with pull-down capabilities and compressive
load must be transferred to the top of the casing string during
installation. Pipe grip design must prevent damage to the casing
thread and remain securely engaged with the casing string.

Gripping the pipe directly avoids thread damage, but diebased casing grips typically penetrate the casing surface and
may globally deform the pipe body. Localised cold work
induced by dies increases material hardness and sulphide stress
cracking susceptibility. Rigid die-based grips cannot distribute
radial load uniformly, even at modest hoisting loads, so flexural
yielding occurs at the edge of die contact as shown in Figure 5.

Pipe

Die

Pipe

Safety
Running casing with the top drive provides an opportunity to
reduce the risk of personal injury, but presents safety challenges
that must be managed to fully realize the available benefits. The
first relates to unintentional release of pressurized fluid.
Because top drive casing running tools typically provide a fill
up and circulate function, the pipe grip is required to react loads
developed by internal casing pressure over the active area.
Although running procedures logically require that pumps are
stopped and casing pressure is bled to an acceptable level before
disengaging the pipe grip, the consequence of error in this
context can be severe.
A second safety challenge is to ensure that the pipe grip and
the slips or spider can not be released at the same time.
Although slip and pipe grips are usually designed to selfenergise with load and prevent inappropriate release, powered
actuators, particularly for high capacity systems, are capable of
releasing under modest string weight. Interlock systems to
prevent this error are available for conventional casing running
operations and should be considered in top drive casing running
operations to improve system fault tolerance.

Die

Flexurally
yielded
zone

Figure 5 Exaggerated illustration of pipe and die


contact
Consideration must be given to the effect of the resulting
non-circular cross section on the reliability of downhole tools
designed to run and set in circular pipe and on collapse
resistance of the casing system.

Pipe Handling Logistics

Solutions

Conventional pipe handling operations have evolved to


improve safety and efficiency of power tong-based casing
running. Top drive casing running presents unique pipe
handling requirements that must be managed to avoid
introducing new rig floor hazards.
Top drive casing running operations require:

pipe to be positioned in the derrick,

pipe grip engagement,

casing thread engagement,

casing connection make up, and

casing string installation in the well bore.


Although these requirements are not unique, failure to
address each in the appropriate context, at best, compromises
available benefits, and, at worst, wrongly discredits new
technology. Because improved efficiency is a significant benefit
available through top drive casing running, any operation that

Casing Thread Damage


Casing thread damage is best managed by minimizing
externally applied loads. Stabbing loads, side loads, and
bending, particularly during initial thread engagement are the
most common causes of thread damage. These loads can be
effectively managed with equipment that provides freedom of
movement where necessary and isolates casing threads from
stabbing loads.
Casing thread loads can be relieved by providing freedom for
the top of the pipe to move off the top drive axis. This allows
pin and box thread axis to self align as controlled stabbing loads
are applied. Bending loads resulting from rig misalignment and
out-of-straight pipe are effectively managed in this manner.
Side loads resulting from off-axis torque transfer are near-zero
5

Pipe Body Damage

when casing threads are initially engaged, and become large


only when threads are fully engaged and able to react side loads
without incurring damage.
Stabbing loads are best controlled with well-planned running
procedure and with purpose specific equipment. Recommended
procedures should only allow pipe grip engagement when
casing threads are prevented from contacting box threads, which
are potentially damaging, or other destructive surfaces. Suitable
equipment isolates top drive weight from the casing threads and
may compensate the casing joint weight to better control
stabbing loads. When adequate float, or axial free play, is
available the driller can stab the casing threads safely and
efficiently with a broader acceptable draw works position
window, and smaller consequence of error.

Tolerance to pipe body damage is driven mainly by


operational considerations. The consequence of creating die
marks on the inside of the casing is very low on non-critical
wells with low grade casing, but can be severe for critical sour
service wells utilizing corrosion resistant alloy casing.
Similarly, global casing body deformation can be tolerated in
wells that will never require downhole tools to mate with a
circular cross section. However, if local zones of casing body
deformation can cause, for example, packer failure during
operation of the well, tolerance for this kind of damage is much
lower.
Pipe body damage can be managed effectively by selecting a
pipe grip that distributes load evenly over a large area. Uniform
load distribution ensures that the pipe body remains round even
at hoisting loads approaching casing tensile capacity. When
uniform contact pressure is applied over a sufficiently large
contact area, radial load magnitude is large enough to transfer
torsion and hoisting loads even with relatively low friction
coefficients. Modest friction coefficient requirements eliminate
the need to indent the pipe surface and so reduce the risk of
creating stress cracking initiation sites.

Make up Monitoring and Control


The best casing connection monitoring and control solution
depends on the intended application. Connections with a wide
range of acceptable make up interference that are used in noncritical applications can usually be made up without special
monitoring, recording, or control equipment. However, make up
practices must still protect threads from damage that could
compromise sealing performance and structural integrity.
Premium connections with a large range of allowable make
up torque relative to top drive torque uncertainty can be made
up successfully using available top drive controls. If connection
sealability can be compromised by damage during make up,
monitoring and recording torque, turns, and time data should be
considered to provide a record demonstrating compliance with
applicable recommended practices.
Many rigs are equipped with electronic drilling recorders
that monitor and record many parameters including torque and
quill rotational speed. These signals are often filtered heavily to
improve readability during drilling operations where average
values are more meaningful than instantaneous readings.
Electronic drilling recorders typically record data at a frequency
inadequate to characterize premium connection make up.
Detecting connection damage and accurately identifying key
events, such as shoulder engagement of premium connection,
during make up are typically impossible using equipment
intended for recording drilling activity. Signal response time
and recording frequency must be considered when evaluating
instrumentation suitability for casing connection make up
monitoring.
Purpose-specific equipment that directly measures and
controls torque is required for connections with lower tolerance
for final torque uncertainty than is available using rig
instrumentation and controls. Measurements must be made at
locations that accurately represent the quantity of interest and
must not introduce load train dynamics that impair the make up
process.
Even when built-in instrumentation is adequate for the
application, suitability must be determined for each rig and may
change if transducers are damaged or top drive control
parameters are modified. Fundamentally, top drive
instrumentation and controls are designed for drilling and tool
joint make up which have requirements different from casing
connection make up. Rig instrumentation and controls may
perform well for drilling and even some casing connections, but
typically fail to deliver the accuracy and precision necessary to
run all casing successfully.
Fully understanding connection monitoring and control
requirements is the key to matching equipment to applications.
Failure to manage this aspect of top drive casing running can
create downhole liabilities (i.e., poorly made connections), that
reduce the value of the well.

Pipe Handling Logistics


Running procedures and equipment must address the unique
challenges presented by top drive casing running. Top drives
are heavy compared to joints of casing and casing threads are
delicate compared to drill pipe threads. Isolating the top drive
weight from the casing ensures that thread stabbing, bending,
and side loads are managed effectively. Deploying equipment
that protects casing threads from damage during sensitive
operations when the threads are most vulnerable improves
connection make up quality.

Safety
Top drive casing running offers substantial improvements to
rig floor safety, but presents new challenges as well. Safety
benefits can be maximized by anticipating hazards and
designing systems that increase error tolerance and reduce
consequences.
Unintentional release of pressurized fluid within the casing is
usually a result of operator error, but, given that errors
sometimes occur, can be avoided in two ways. First, an
interlock preventing pipe grip release under pressure greater
than a prescribed threshold reduces the chance of uncontrolled
fluid release. A second strategy that mitigates damage resulting
from pipe grip release under pressure is to disable the fluid seal
prior to fully releasing the pipe grip. In this case, pressurized
fluid leaks in a controlled manner rather than releasing during a
catastrophic event.
The consequence of releasing both the pipe grip and the slips
or spider is relatively severe. While this scenario may be
impossible with adequate string weight and self-energizing
tools, powered equipment actuation can result in a situation
where light string weight is inadequate to prevent inappropriate
equipment release. An interlock to prevent this event will
improve top drive casing running reliability and safety.

Conclusion
Top drive casing running offers compelling improvements
in rig floor safety, efficiency, and risk reduction, but presents
technical challenges that require well-designed solutions to fully
realize the available benefits. A single tool can replace casing
6

REFERENCES

elevators, power tongs, and fill-up and circulate tools, and uses
the rig crew to run casing, instead of requiring a additional
personnel. The reduction in people and equipment on the rig
floor is expected to improve safety records for one of the most
hazardous operations in well construction. As the top drive
revolutionized the drilling process, top drive casing running is
positioned to change the way casing is installed in the well bore.
The ability to circulate, reciprocate, and circulate at any time
reduces the risk of failing to land casing at the design depth.
Technical challenges that currently limit the value delivered
by top drive casing running are related primarily to casing
thread damage, pipe body damage, and quality assurance
processes. Technology development is progressing rapidly in
this area and solutions to these challenges are becoming
commercially available.
Casing thread damage can be minimized by limiting thread
loads, particularly during initial engagement, with a
combination of carefully designed running procedures and
suitable equipment.
Pipe body damage resulting from die penetration and global
pipe body yielding into a non-circular cross section can be
avoided by selecting pipe grip technology suitable for the
application. Die-based systems can be effectively utilized in
applications that require only modest torsion and hoisting load
transfer or where die indentations or pipe body cross section
deformations are tolerable. Critical applications that benefit
from non-marking and non damaging load transfer are better
executed with a gentler pipe grip mechanism. Non-damaging
pipe grips can be achieved by distributing load uniformly over a
large area so friction coefficient requirements are small enough
to avoid indentations that can become stress cracking initiation
sites.
Requirements for make up quality verification and
documentation depend on both connection and application
requirements. Many applications can be satisfied using rig
instrumentation and controls, but some critical applications
should only be undertaken with purpose-specific equipment
suited to casing connection make up requirements. Torque and
rotation measurement accuracy, signal response times, and
recording frequency should be considered when evaluating
suitability of any monitoring and control system.
Successful exploitation of top drive casing running
technology depends on fully understanding casing connection
make up requirements and matching applications with suitable
equipment. Improved safety, reduced casing running risk, and
technical excellence can be delivered using top drive casing
running technology if the challenges presented here are met
with sound technical solutions.

1.
2.
3.

4.
5.
6.

Galloway, G., Rotary Drilling with Casing a field


proven method of reducing wellbore construction cost;
World Oil Technical Conference, March 2003
Warren, T., Johns, R., Zipse, D., Improved Casing
Running Process, SPE/IADC Drilling Conference,
February 2005
Moussa, N.H., Warren, J., and Roling, R., Running
Casing Faster and Safer with Less Cost, Using Existing
Rig Crew: A Case Study, SPE/IADC Drilling
Conference, February 2005
Casing running tool trial a success, The Shell EPE
Technology Learning Publication, Issue 13, November
2004.
Hydril Company; Tech Note, Make and Break
Qualification Tests, June 2001
Raney, J.B., Lamb, J.F., Running and Handling of a
Premium Connection on a Rig; SPE/IADC Conference,
March 1989

You might also like