CASING DESIGN

CRITERIA/CALCULATIONS

• Bottom-up design
• Top-down design

Wathik M. Alhashimi, P.Eng

1
• To design a casing string, one must have knowledge of:
o Purpose of the well
o Geological cross section
o Available casing and bit sizes
o Cementing and drilling practices
o Rig performance
o Safety and environmental regulations
• To arrive at the optimal solution, the design engineer must consider casing as a part of a whole
drilling system.

2
 Design objective
• The engineer responsible for developing the well plan and casing design is faced with a number of tasks that can
be briefly characterized.
• Ensure the well’s mechanical integrity by providing a design basis that accounts for all the anticipated loads that
can be encountered during the life of the well.
• Design strings to minimize well costs over the life of the well.
• Provide clear documentation of the design basis to operational personnel at the well site.
• This will help prevent exceeding the design envelope by application of loads not considered in the original
design.
• While the intention is to provide reliable well construction at a minimum cost, at times failures occur.
• Most documented failures occur because the pipe was exposed to loads for which it was not designed. These
failures are called “off-design” failures.
• “On-design” failures are rather rare.
• This implies that casing-design practices are mostly conservative.
• Many failures occur at connections.
• This implies that either field makeup practices are not adequate, or the connection design basis is not
consistent with the pipe-body design basis. 3
 Design method
• The design process can be divided into two distinct phases.
Preliminary design
o Typically the largest opportunities for saving money are present while performing this task.
o This design phase includes:
o Data gathering and interpretation
o Determination of casing shoe depths and number of strings
o Selection of hole and casing sizes
o Mud-weight design
o Directional design
• The quality of the gathered data will have a large impact on the appropriate choice of casing sizes and shoe
depths and whether the casing design objective is successfully met.
Detailed design
• detailed design phase includes selection of pipe weights and grades for each casing string.
• The selection process consists of comparing pipe ratings with design loads and applying minimum acceptable
safety standards (i.e., design factors).
• A cost-effective design meets all the design criteria with the least expensive available pipe. 4
 Required information
• The items listed next are a checklist, which is provided to aid the well planners/casing designers in both
the preliminary and detailed design.
• Formation properties: pore pressure; formation fracture pressure; formation strength (borehole
failure); temperature profile; location of squeezing salt and shale zones; location of permeable zones;
chemical stability/sensitive shales (mud type and exposure time); lost-circulation zones, shallow gas;
location of freshwater sands; and presence of H2S and/or CO2.
• Directional data: surface location; geologic target(s); and well interference data.
• Minimum diameter requirements: minimum hole size required to meet drilling and production
objectives; logging tool outside diameter (OD); tubing size(s); packer and related equipment
requirements; subsurface safety valve OD (offshore well); and completion requirements.
• Production data: packer-fluid density; produced-fluid composition; and worst-case loads that might
occur during completion, production, and workover operations.
• Other: available inventory; regulatory requirements; and rig equipment limitations.

5
 Preliminary design method
o The purpose of preliminary design is to establish:
o Casing and corresponding drill-bit sizes
o Casing setting depths
o The number of casing strings
• Casing program (well plan) is obtained as a result of preliminary design. Casing program design is accomplished
in three major steps:
o Mud program is prepared
o The casing sizes and corresponding drill-bit sizes are determined
o The setting depths of individual casing strings are found

6
 Mud program

• The most important mud program parameter used in casing design is the “mud weight.” The
complete mud program is determined from:
o Pore pressure
o Formation strength (fracture and borehole stability)
o Lithology
o Hole cleaning and cuttings transport capability
o Potential formation damage, stability problems, and drilling rate
o Formation evaluation requirement
o Environmental and regulatory requirements

7
 Hole and pipe diameters
• Hole and casing diameters are based on the requirements of:
Production
• The production equipment requirements include:
• Tubing
• Subsurface safety valve
• Submersible pump and gas lift mandrel size
• Completion requirements (e.g., gravel packing)
• Weighing the benefits of increased tubing performance of larger tubing against the higher cost of larger casing over the life of the well
Evaluation
• Evaluation requirements include logging interpretation and tool diameters.
Drilling
• Drilling requirements include:
• A minimum bit diameter for adequate directional control and drilling performance
• Available downhole equipment
• Rig specifications
• Available blowout prevention (BOP) equipment
• These requirements normally impact the final hole or casing diameter.
• Because of this, casing sizes should be determined from the inside outward starting from the bottom of the hole. The design sequence is,
usually, as follows:
• Proper tubing size is selected, based upon reservoir inflow and tubing intake performance
• The required production casing size is determined, considering completion requirements
• The diameter of the drill bit is selected for drilling the production section of the hole, considering drilling and cementing stipulations
• The smallest casing through which the drill bit will pass is determined
• The process is repeated
• Large cost savings are possible by becoming more aggressive (using smaller clearances) during this portion of the preliminary design phase.
• This has been one of the principal motivations in the increased popularity of slimhole drilling.
• Typical casing and rock bit sizes are given in Table 1
8
Table 1- Commonly Used Bit Sizes That Will Pass Through API Casing

9
 Casing shoe depths and the number of strings
• Following the selection of drillbit and casing sizes, the setting depth of individual casing strings must be
determined.
• In conventional rotary drilling operations, the setting depths are determined principally by the mud weight and
the fracture gradient, as schematically depicted in Fig. 1, which is sometimes called a well plan.
• Equivalent mud weight (EMW) is pressure divided by true vertical depth and converted to units of lbm/gal. EMW
equals actual mud weight when the fluid column is uniform and static.
• Pore and fracture gradient lines must be drawn on a well-depth vs. EMW chart.
• These are the solid lines in Fig. 1. Safety margins are introduced, and broken lines are drawn, which establish the
design ranges.
• The offset from the predicted pore pressure and fracture gradient nominally accounts for kick tolerance and the
increased equivalent circulating density (ECD) during drilling.
• There are two possible ways to estimate setting depths from this figure.

10
 Mud Operating Window

1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3 Depth (MD) TR (“)

200 30
1.06 – 1.07 g/cc 30”@ 200m
1000 20

1.16 – 1.19 g/cc 2800 13 3/8

20” @ 1000m 4100 11 3/4

5230 9 7/8
RP
Fault 1 5800 7 5/8

1.36 – 1.44 g/cc Fault 2

From To Mud Weight
Fault 3
0 200 1..06 – 1.07

13 3/8”@ 2800m 200 1000 1.16 – 1.19

1000 2800 1.36 1.44

2800 4100 1.67 – 1.76

PLIOM 4100 5230 1.96
1.67 – 1.76 g/cc
5230 5800 1.31-1.34

11 3/4”@ 4100m

PLIOI 1.96 g/cc

Fault 4
Operating window
EI 9 7/8”@ 5230 m
PAL
Pressure 610 a 630 kg/cm2
KS Pore Pressure
1.31a 1.34 g/cc
KM
7 5/8 ”@ 5800m Fracture Pressure
Pore Pressure
Tensile Strenght
Fracture presure Loss
UCS
Min Stress
Friction Angle Breakdown
Breakdown
 Bottom-up design
• This is the standard method for casing seat selection.
• From Point A in Fig. 1 (the highest mud weight required at the total depth), draw a vertical line upward to Point B.
• A protective 7 5/8-in. casing string must be set at 12,000 ft, corresponding to Point B, to enable safe drilling on the
section AB.
• To determine the setting depth of the next casing, draw a horizontal line BC and then a vertical line CD.
• In such a manner, Point D is determined for setting the 9 5/8-in. casing at 9,500 ft.
• The procedure is repeated for other casing strings, usually until a specified surface casing depth is reached.

12
Fig. 1—Casing setting depths—bottom-up design.

13
 Top-down design
• From the setting depth of the 16-in. surface casing (here assumed to be at 2,000 ft), draw a vertical line from
the fracture gradient dotted line, Point A, to the pore pressure dashed line, Point B.
• This establishes the setting point of the 11¾-in. casing at about 9,800 ft.
• Draw a horizontal line from Point B to the intersection with the dotted frac gradient line at Point C; then, draw a
vertical line to Point D at the pore pressure curve intersection.
• This establishes the 9 5/8-in. casing setting depth.
• This process is repeated until bottom hole is reached.
• There are several things to observe about these two methods.
• First, they do not necessarily give the same setting depths. Second, they do not necessarily give the same
number of strings.
• In the top-down design, the bottomhole pressure is missed by a slight amount that requires a short 7-in. liner
section.
• This slight error can be fixed by resetting the surface casing depth.
• The top-down method is more like actually drilling a well, in which the casing is set when necessary to protect
the previous casing shoe.
• This analysis can help anticipate the need for additional strings, given that the pore pressure and fracture
gradient curves have some uncertainty associated with them.
• In practice, a number of regulatory requirements can affect shoe depth design.
• These factors are discussed next.
14
 Hole stability

• This can be a function of mud weight, deviation and stress at the wellbore wall, or can be chemical in nature.
Often, hole stability problems exhibit time-dependent behavior (making shoe selection a function of penetration
rate).
• The plastic flowing behavior of salt zones must also be considered.

15
 Differential sticking

• The probability of becoming differentially stuck increases along with:

o An increase in differential pressure between the wellbore and formation
o An increase in permeability of the formation
o An Increase in fluid loss of the drilling fluid (i.e., thicker mudcake)
Zonal Isolation.
• Shallow freshwater sands must be isolated to prevent contamination.
• Lost-circulation zones must be isolated before a higher-pressure formation is penetrated.

16
 Directional drilling concerns

• A casing string is often run after an angle building section has been drilled.
• This avoids keyseating problems in the curved portion of the wellbore because of the increased normal force
between the wall and the drillpipe.

17
 Uncertainty in predicted formation properties

• Exploration wells often require additional strings to compensate for the uncertainty in the pore pressure and
fracture gradient predictions.
• Another approach that could be used for determining casing setting depths relies on plotting formation and
fracturing pressures vs. hole depth, rather than gradients, as shown in Fig. 2 and Fig. 1.
• This procedure, however, typically yields many strings, and is considered to be very conservative.

18
Fig. 2—Casing setting depths—top-down design.

19
• The problem of choosing the casing setting depths is more complicated in exploratory wells because of
shortage of information on geology, pore pressures, and fracture pressures.
• In such a situation, a number of assumptions must be made. Commonly, the formation pressure gradient is
taken as 0.54 psi/ft for hole depths less then 8,000 ft and taken as 0.65 psi/ft for depths greater than 8,000 ft.
• Overburden gradients are generally taken as 0.8 psi/ft at shallow depth and as 1.0 psi/ft for greater depths.

20
 TOC depths
• Top-of-cement (TOC) depths for each casing string should be selected in the preliminary design phase,
because this selection will influence axial load distributions and external pressure profiles used during the
detailed design phase.
o TOC depths are typically based on:
o Zonal isolation
o Regulatory requirements
o Prior shoe depths
o Formation strength
o Buckling
o Annular pressure buildup(in subsea wells)
• Buckling calculations are not performed until the detailed design phase. Hence, the TOC depth may be
adjusted, as a result of the buckling analysis, to help reduce buckling in some cases.

21
 Directional plan
• For casing design purposes, establishing a directional plan consists of determining the wellpath from the
surface to the geological targets. The directional plan influences all aspects of casing design including:
o Mud weight and mud chemistry selection for hole stability
o Shoe seat selection
o Casing axial load profiles
o Casing wear
o Bending stresses
o Buckling
• It is based on factors that include:
o Geological targets
o Surface location
o Interference from other wellbores
o Torque and drag considerations
o Casing wear considerations
o Bottomhole assembly [(BHA) an assembly of drill collars, stabilizers, and bits]
o Drill-bit performance in the local geological setting
• To account for the variance from the planned build, drop, and turn rates, which occur because of the BHAs
used and operational practices employed, higher doglegs are often superimposed over the wellbore.
• This increases the calculated bending stress in the detailed design phase. 22
 Detailed design method
• Load cases
• In order to select appropriate weights, grades, and connections during the detailed design phase using sound
engineering judgment, design criteria must be established.
• These criteria normally consist of load cases and their corresponding design factors that are compared to
pipe ratings.
• Load cases are typically placed into categories that include:
o Burst loads
o Drilling loads
o Production loads
o Collapse loads
o Axial loads
o Running and cementing loads
o Service loads

23
 Design factors (DF)

where
DF = design factor (the minimum acceptable safety
factor), and
SF = safety factor.
It follows that

• Hence, by multiplying the load by the DF, a direct comparison can be made with the pipe rating.
• As long as the rating is greater than or equal to the modified load (which we will call the design load), the
design criteria have been satisfied.

24
 Other considerations
• After performing a design based on burst, collapse and axial considerations, an initial design is achieved.
• Before a final design is reached, design issues (connection selection, wear, and corrosion) must be addressed.
• In addition, other considerations can also be included in the design.
• These considerations are triaxial stresses because of combined loading (e.g., ballooning and thermal effects)—
this is often called “service life analysis”; other temperature effects; and buckling.

25
 Loads on casing and tubing strings
• In order to evaluate a given casing design, a set of loads is necessary. Casing loads result from:
o Running the casing
o Cementing the casing
o Subsequent drilling operations
o Production and well workover operations
• Casing loads are principally pressure loads, mechanical loads, and thermal loads.
• Pressure loads are produced by fluids within the casing, cement and fluids outside the casing, pressures imposed at
the surface by drilling and workover operations, and pressures imposed by the formation during drilling and
production.
• Mechanical loads are associated with:
o Casing hanging weight
o Shock loads during running
o Packer loads during production and workovers
o Hanger loads
• Temperature changes and resulting thermal expansion loads are induced in casing by drilling, production, and
workovers, and these loads might cause buckling (bending stress) loads in uncemented intervals.
• The casing loads that are typically used in preliminary casing design are:
o External Pressure Loads
o Internal Pressure Loads
o Mechanical Loads
o Thermal Loads and Temperature Effects
• However, each operating company usually has its own special set of design loads for casing, based on their
experience. If you are designing a casing string for a particular company, this load information must be obtained from
them.
• Because there are so many possible loads that must be evaluated, most casing design today is done with computer
programs that generate the appropriate load sets (often custom tailored for a particular operator), evaluate the
26
results, and can sometimes determine a minimum-cost design automatically.
 Casing Performance Properties
• Casing must have certain properties in order to achieve its functions in a well.
• The most important performance properties of casing include its rated values for axial tension, burst pressure,
and collapse pressure.
Axial tension loading
• Which results from the weight of the casing string suspended below the joint of interest.
Body yield strength
• Which is the tensional force required to cause the pipe body to exceed its elastic limit.
Joint strength
• Which is the minimal tensional force required to cause joint failure.
Burst pressure rating
• Which is the calculated minimum internal pressure that will cause the casing to rupture in the absence of
external pressure and axial loading.
Collapse pressure rating
• Which is the minimum external pressure that will cause the casing walls to collapse in the absence of internal
pressure and axial loading.
Biaxial Design
• Which is The combination of stresses due to the weight of the casing and external pressures.
Safety Factors
• Exact values of loading are difficult to predict through out the life of the well. 27
 Casing Design Calculations
Casing Performance Properties
• Casing must have certain properties in order to achieve its functions in a well. The most important performance
properties of casing include its rated values for axial tension, burst pressure, and collapse pressure.
• Casing Design Calculations For Burst Pressure
• The burst loads on the casing must be evaluated to ensure the internal yield resistance of the pipe is not
exceeded.
• In Casing Burst Calculation, you will understand how the casing burst pressure rating is calculated.
Casing Design Calculations For Collapse Pressure
• The primary collapse loads are supplied by the column of fluid on the outside of the casing which act to collapse
the pipe. These fluids are usually the mud and possibly the cement slurry in which the casing was set.
• Casing Collapse Pressure Calculations will make you understand how to calculate collapse pressure rating for the
casing.
Casing Design Calculations For Tensile Strength
• The tensile load of the pipe is the weight of the casing which acts to pull the pipe apart.
• The tension is always the greatest at the surface and decreases with depth due to the casing weight below the
point of interest.
• In Casing Tensile Strength Calculations, you will understand how to calculate the yield strength and casing joint
strength
Casing Bi-axial Effects
• The combination of stresses due to the weight of the casing and external pressures is referred to as ‘biaxial
stresses’.
• In Casing Bi-axial Effects , you will learn to calculate minimum collapse pressure under axial tension stress.

28
Casing Design Calculations Safety Factors
• Exact values of loading are difficult to predict throughout the life of the well.
• For example, if mud of 75 pcf is on the outside of the casing during the running of the casing, this value cannot be
expected to remain constant for the entire life of the well.
• The mud will become deteriorated with time and will reduce this value to perhaps a saltwater value of 64 PCF. Due to
these changes, we have to consider the safety factors.
Casing String Types Used In Drilling Wells
• In Casing Types, you will find the several types of casing strings and related topics such as ( Casing Running and
Cementing Preparation, Casing running – installation patterns, Casing Running Procedures)
Casing Setting depths Design and Calculations
• The selection of the number of casing strings and their respective setting depths generally is based on a consideration
of the pore pressure and fracture pressure gradients of the formations to be penetrated.
• In casing setting depths, you will learn how to design the casing setting depths, factors to be considered and an
example for such calculations.
Casing Design Calculations For Sizes Selection To Match Drilling And Completion Goal
• The design of the casing sizes used in drilling onshore and offshore wells is performed from the bottom to the top,
starting with the production tubing. In casing sizes selection, you will understand
Casing Weights, Grades And Couplings Selection
• To evaluate a given casing design, a set of loads is necessary.
• Casing loads result from running the casing, cementing the casing, subsequent drilling operations, production and well
workover operations.
• Mechanical loads are associated with casing hanging weight, shock loads during running, packer loads during
production and workovers, and hanger loads. 29
 API Casing Design Safety Factors

• In General, The API Casing design safety factors are ranging from 1.1 to 1.6.
• Collapse, tension, Burst, triaxial, and compression.
• Exact values of loading are difficult to predict throughout the life of the well.
• For example, if mud of 75 PCF is on the outside of the casing during the running of the casing, this value
cannot be expected to remain constant for the entire life of the well.
• The mud will become deteriorated with time and will reduce this value to perhaps a saltwater value of 64 PCF.
• Therefore, calculations of burst values assuming a column of mud at 75 pcf are not realistic throughout the
life of the well.
• If the initial casing design is marginal, then over a period of time in the event of a gas leak the casing may
burst.

30
 Why we need a safety factor?

• Casing Design is not an exact technique because of the uncertainties in determining the actual loadings ( which
is related to Casing Design Loads Cases) as well as the deterioration of the casing itself due to corrosion and
wear.
• Use API Casing Design Safety factors to allow for such uncertainties and to ensure that the rated performance
of the casing is always greater than any expected loading.
• In other words, the casing strength is always downrated by a chosen safety factor value.

31
 API Casing Design Safety Factors

• The safety factor is determined by the ratio of the body resistance to the magnitude of the applied pressure.
• Below, find the API SF for collapse, tension, burst, Triaxial, Compression calculations.
• API SF for Casing Collapse Pressure design: 1.125
• API Safety factor for Casing Tension Strength design: 1.6
• API SF for Casing Burst: 1.1
• API Safety factor for Casing Triaxial Design: 1.25
• API SF for Casing Compression Design: 1.2

32
 Casing Load Conditions: Basic Design Scenarios

• The casing design is based on assessing the different loads such as burst, collapse and tension.
• The most realistic scenarios should be applied to get the more accurate design.
• These scenarios can be faced during operations like drilling, cementing and production.

33
 Burst design Criteria
• The burst can be defined as the tensile failure which can result in the rupture created along the axis of the pipe
body.
• The pipe body tends to burst when differential pressure between the internal and external pressure exceeds the
pipe mechanical strength.
• There are many situations where the pressure conditions can lead to bust failure:
o The hydrostatic mud pressure inside the casing exceeds the pressure outside the casing.
o During the well shut-in, the formation fluids can be allowed to enter to the wellbore.
o Gas bubble can be allowed to migrate inside the casing
o During the testing of the well or production, leaks can occur.
• Design Scenario examples
• Casing filled with gas: in this criterion, the casing is considered filled entirely with gas or formation fluids.
• The pressure bellow the wellhead inside the casing can be the formation pressure minus the hydrostatic
pressure of the gas column, and the pressure outside the casing is the hydrostatic pressure of fluids.
• This scenario is a conservative design criterion and should be applied for the production casings.
• The sketch at Fig-1 shows the differential pressure and its trends along the casing. It is clear that the weaker zone
for the burst is that part of casing below the wellhead. 34
Fig 1- Casing Filled with gas scenario for burst design

35
• Tubing leak criterion: in this scenario, during well testing or production, leaks can occur at the top of the tubing
and leads to pressure increase in the space between the production tubing and casing.
• The bottom of the tubing is usually fitted with a packer.
• When the tubing leaks, the pressure inside it will superimposed the pressure in casing/tubing annulus, and
packer will be exerted to a high hydrostatic pressure.

36
Fig 2- Tubing leak scenario for burst design

37
 Collapse Design Criteria
• The casing tends to collapse when the external pressure acting outside the casing body will be greater than the
pressure inside it.
• This outside pressure can be caused by pore pressure or drilling fluids pressure.
• The collapse is considered as a geometric failure.
• When the casing collapses, it changes the circular shape to non-circular form.
• The collapse resistance is largely related to the diameter-wall thickness ratio, so if the casings wears, the collapse
resistance can be affected.
• The collapse failure can be categorized in four categories: yield strength collapse, plastic collapse, transition collapse
and elastic collapse.
• There are many situations which can lead to collapse failure:
o The mud level inside the casing can drop due to loss of circulation event
o High pressure outside the casing can be faced during cement squeeze jobs
o Collapse can occur also when cementing, high cement slurry density outside the casing can contribute in
decreasing the collapse resistance.
o High load can be exerted on casing by the plastic salt layers which can lead casing to collapse.
o When the casing is not filled properly while running in the hole
Design Scenario examples
• Mud losses scenario: while drilling through thief zones, mud losses can be faced leading to mud level to drop and
with the constant pressure outside the casing, the collapse resistance can be affected leading the casing body to fail.
• Collapse during cementing: at the end of the cement job, the column of the cement slurry outside the casing can
exert high hydrostatic pressure on the lowest part of the casing string which is filled with the displacing fluids
developing high collapse force.
38
Fig 3- Mud losses scenario for Collapse design

39
 Tension Design Criteria

• The casing can show three types of deformation under axial tension: elastic, elasto-plastic and plastic.
• If the deformation is in the elastic domain, the damage is not permanent and disappears when removing the
applied force.
• When the deformation is beyond the elastic domain, the pipe body will suffer from permanent damage and
loose its mechanical properties.
• It has to be mentioned that in order to keep the casing in safe range, the load should not exceed the yield
strength of the material during operations

40
Fig 4 - Pipe Body Behavior under Tension

41
• When designing for the tension many issues can be taken in consideration
Buoyant weight: the buoyancy force affects the weight of the casing, when the casing is in vertical position, the
force is exerted on the lowest part of the casing. In horizontal sections, this force is distributed on the length of
the pipe body.
Bending force: when running casing in deviated wells, the pipe body can be under tension and compression
simultaneously.
Shock load: this load can be faced when setting casing on slips and it is a local applied force and for short period
of time that means it is not like the suspended weight or bending force which can be exerted on the entire length
of pipe body.
• The combination on the suspension, bending and shock loads can lead to pipe parting.
Drag force: the casing can be reciprocated during operations which can result in additional axial load due to the
friction between the pipe and the wellbore.
• It is difficult to estimate the drag force due many reasons: hole geometry, filter cake, bore hole irregularities.

42
Casing Tensile Strength

43
• The tensile load of the pipe is the weight of the casing which acts to pull the pipe apart.
• The tension is always the greatest at the surface and decreases with depth due to the casing weight below
the point of interest.
• In designing a casing string the upper most joint of the string is considered to have the maximum load on it
since it has to carry the total weight of the casing string.
• Tensile loads are used to select pipe couplings.
• Tension loads are computed using the buoyant forces acting on the pipe and the pipe weight.
• The buoyancy force acts on the bottom joint of the casing and results in a reduction in the hanging weight
of the casing.
• The buoyant forces are defined as the forces acting on submerged equipment due to hydrostatic pressure.
The weight of the casing in fluid is given by:
• where,
• Wf = weight in fluid
MW = mud weight in pcf
Wa = weight in air

44
 The pipe body yield strength is calculated by:

• Ften(lb) = 0.7854 x Ym (De²- Di²)

• where:
• Di is the ID of the casing.

• Calculate the body yield strength of 7 in, 26-lb/ft J-55 casing with long threads & couplings (LT&C).
• Solution:
• The body yield strength is:
• Ften (lb) = 0.7854 x 55,000 [(7)²- (6.276)²] = 415,200 lb.

45
 Casing Joint Strength Calculations
• To calculate the joint strength of a given thread depends on grade, size and weight of the casing and on the
effective size of the threads.
• Below there are two formulas:
1- The first one is for minimum strength of a joint failing for fracture
2- The Second one is for minimum strength for a joint failing for thread pullout.
• The lesser of the two values govern
• Where:
• Pj = minimum joint strength, lb.
• Ajp = cross sectional area of pipe under the last perfect thread at pin, sq. in. = 0.7854 [(D-0.1425)²- d²] for
eight round threads
• D = nominal outside diameter of pipe, in.
• d = nominal inside diameter of pipe, in.
• L = engaged thread length, in.
• Yp = minimum yield strength of pipe, psi.
• Up = minimum ultimate strength of pipe, psi.

46
• The tensile load of the pipe is the weight of the casing which acts to pull the pipe apart.
• The tension is always the greatest at the surface and decreases with depth due to the casing weight
below the point of interest.
• In designing a casing string the upper most joint of the string is considered to have the maximum load
on it since it has to carry the total weight of the casing string.
• Tensile loads are used to select pipe couplings.
• Tension loads are computed using the buoyant forces acting on the pipe and the pipe weight.
• The buoyancy force acts on the bottom joint of the casing and results in a reduction in the hanging
weight of the casing.
• The buoyant forces are defined as the forces acting on submerged equipment due to hydrostatic
pressure. The weight of the casing in fluid is given by:

where,
Wf = weight in fluid
MW = mud weight in pcf
Wa = weight in air

47
 Casing Collapse Rating Pressure Calculations & Design
• The primary collapse loads are supplied by the column of fluid on the outside of the casing which acts to collapse
the pipe and may cause collapsed casing sticking problem.
• These fluids are usually the mud and possibly the cement slurry in which the casing was set.
• Since the column of mud increases with depth, collapse pressure is the highest at the bottom of the hole section
and is zero at the surface.
• The formula to calculate the hydrostatic pressure acting at a particular depth is:

• Where:ρm : is the density of the fluid in pcf.

• h : is depth in feet.

48
 Casing Collapse Pressure Calculations Design

• The worst-case of casing design conditions are when the casing is void of fluid and the external force (collapse
load) is the maximum mud weight when the Csg was run.
• In designing for collapse, the casing is assumed empty for the surface casing (one of the Types Of Casing),
production casing, and partially empty for the intermediate casing.
• Once the casing is cemented and the cement is set the cement acts to help increase the collapse resistance.

49
 4 Formulas To Calculate Collapse Rating
• There are four formulas to calculate the collapse rating (Pc) depending on the ratio of the pipe outer
diameter to wall thickness.

50
• Example:
• A string of 9-5/8” 53.5# L-80 casing is to be set in 75 pcf mud at a depth of 6000 ft.
• Calculate the collapse rating for this casing, assume that the casing is empty.
• Then determine if the Csg can safely be set to this depth in order to satisfy a safety factor for
collapse of 1.125. Ym = 80,000 psi, ID = 8.535 in.
• Solution:
• Phyd = (75/144) x 6000 ft = 3,125 psi;
• Since: De/t = 9.625 / 0.545 = 17.6605
• We use Pc = Ym[A’/(D/t)-B’]-C
• For N-80/L-80, A’ = 3.07; B’ = 0.0667; C = 1955
• Pc = 80,000 [(3.07/17.6605) – 0.0667] – 1955 = 6616 psi SF = 6616 / 3125 = 2.12
Allowable Collapse Pressure = 6616 psi / 1.125 = 5880 psi.
• Therefore, from the previous casing collapse pressure calculations, the collapse load at 6000’
(3125 psi) is less than the allowable collapse (5880 psi), then it is safe to run.

51
 Casing Burst Pressure Calculation

• The resulting effective burst pressure is the internal

pipe pressure minus the external pressure.
• Burst conditions are established and the least
expensive pipe that will satisfy the burst pressure is
tentatively selected.

52
• casing design calculations.
• Casing Burst Pressure Calculation is a major aspect in casing design calculations as the burst loads
on the casing must be evaluated to ensure the internal yield resistance of the pipe is not exceeded.
• The burst load is the force applied by the fluid inside the casing which acts to rupture the pipe in
the absence of external pressure.

53
 The API Casing burst pressure Calculation
Casing Burst pressure calculation is given by simple equation:

Where:
Ym: is the minimum yield strength of the pipe
t : is the wall thickness in inches.
De: is the outer diameter in inches.

• Example:
• Calculate the burst rating for 7” 23# J-55 casing.
• Solution:
• From Table 2, Ym for J-55 casing is 55,000 psi. The ID of 7” 23# casing in 6.377”, therefore,

54
 Biaxial Loading
• It's a condition where the load is acting in two directions (axes) at the same time. It happens when there is an
eccentricity in loading.
• In field operations, there is not one form of loading on casing body, a combination of different loading can be
exerted on the pipe body.
• The collapse strength delivered by the manufacturer is for zero axial load, it can be faced in the field that the
pipe body is under combination of external pressure, internal pressure and axial loads and this combination can
lead to reduce the mechanical strength of the casing.

55
 Biaxial Casing Design Definition & Calculation
• Biaxial Casing : the combination of stresses due to the weight of the casing and external pressures which is
also referred to as ‘biaxial stresses’.
• Biaxial stresses can reduce collapse resistance of the casing and must be accounted for in designing deep
wells.
• The collapse resistance, Pcc under tensile loading is given by the following formula:

• Where
• Pcc= Minimum collapse pressure under axial tension stress (psi)
• Pc = collapse resistance with no tensile load (psi)
• W = weight supported by the casing (lb)
• Ym = average yield stress of steel (psi) with zero load
• A = cross sectional area.

56
• Biaxial loading generates forces within the
surfaces of the casing which reduce the
casing collapse but increase its burst
resistance.
• This equation can be represented in
tabular form, showing the percentage
reduction in collapse resistance for a given
unit weight carried by the casing, see
below.
• To use above Table, determine the ratio
between the weight to be carried by the
top joint of the weakest casing and
the yield strength of the casing.
• Then from the table determine the
corresponding reduction in collapse
strength.

57
 Example: casing biaxial design
• A 13-3/8” 68# K-55 casing string with an average yield strength 1,069,000 lb, weighs 250,000 lb in air and is to
be run in a well that contains 75 pcf mud. The ID of the casing is 12.415 in.
• What is the corrected weight of the casing and what is the collapse rating reduced due to biaxial loading /
biaxial stresses?
• Solution:
• Corrected weight (W) is: 250,000 lb [1 – (75/490)] = 211,735 lb
• The biaxial effect on the collapse rating of the pipe is: 211,735/1,069,000 = 0.198 and looking at Table 8 on page
41 for this ratio we can see that the collapse resistance needs to be multiplied by a 0.885 correction factor.
• So instead of a collapse rating of 1950 psi for this casing, it is actually 1726 psi once the biaxial effect is
included.
• Solve this by using the above equation.
• W = 211,735 lb
• Pc = 1950 psi
• Ym = 55,000 psi
• A = πt(OD-t) = 19.435 in .
58
THANK YOU

59