Study

of

the

Potential

Off-Bo~~am
Well
John

Dynamic

Having

D.

Gas

for

Gillespie,

an

SPE,

Richard

an

Kill

of

. ~.,

~as

Underground

F.

SPE,

Morgan,

and

.510wout

Thomas

K.

SPE,

Perkins,

3
Summary.

The

paper

This

counterblow

repofi$

of the kll

design

the

Arco

Oil

CO.

well

concepts

fluid
and

or one in

on amanalysis

and

gas

below

techniques

which

the

that
@

presented

string

lii

kill

expected

resewoir

can

a significant

string

should

play

be applicable

is a significant

dktance

off

to any
bottom

literamrelJ

describes

on

imoduction
the flow

bemme

zone

Arco

the

Oil &Gas

weU-kif2
of tie

last

Co.

method

of a gas well

with

To

extend

study

from

to the

the

a gas-recycliig

40%PI

EOR

[5403

retijected
tained

into

to 7205

4,700

stream

tie

however,

at the point

it may
above

the

out.

was

tie

beiig

dyn~c-

washed

out

Wells

in tbk

with

GORS

std m3/m3].

The

reservoir

psi [32 407 kl?a].

reservoir

prcduce

of

is thus

reservoir

blowout,

tie

assumed

at 250

150

psi

[1034

fracture

m]

kFaI,

gradi~t.

bottom

last

workover

the well

witi

lbm/gd
washed
to its

MFP

[7.3-cm]
crater

tubing

the

the last sand hidge

last

sand

X 103

std

9.5-

selected

as the

the area.

cuknhg

be opened
and

an

and

1. The

..bis type

hut at various,a%umed

of

when

depths

above

a3 the

zone.

Assessment

of

namic

kills

perfommnce

circulation

rates

performance
mdadon
betig

gas

B) wJ2

lifted

out

a dynamic

1990

SPE Drilling

Alaska

Society

(Fig.

fluid

and

a stable

of the well.

the

reserw.ir

&ta,

flow

zone.

2) are generated
compared

or falls below

reach

Kill

The

the reservoir
condition,

minimum
curve

performance

!m

with
curve

flow

4.

circulating

perfomw.nce

the weUbore

ki22 has a performance

intersecting)

.iWw at Arm

Dynamic

analyzing

weflbore-hydraulics

rate that intemects

CWytight

curves
Any

for

resemoir

near

of a given

curve.

curve
achieve

with

and a kio sbing

hydrtilcs

for

a method

of a gas well

hydraulic<,

(not

Potential

et al. 1 described

dy-

flow

for different
the resewoir
for a given
perfomkwe.
with

gas had

the fluid

circulation
that

is totally

curve

(Cume

rate

to

above
A).

Petroleum

Enginem+ms,

[1018
brine

was

brine

as a function

which

is typical

depths

(TVDs).

TYD and MJJ

given

for

depths
was

pressure

MD.
were

for different

used

in cd-

circulation

rates

connection

upsets

on the

1 %-in.

equipment,
were

tubing

witi

reducer

as gas-lift
to have.

mandrels

the

same

ID

no leakage.

not associated
the

such

assumed
VW

the gas when

brine

was

well.
was

added

to the

9.5-Ibrm@d

[1138-

brine.
[7.3-cm]
from
sting.

reservoir
besn

tubing
tie

was clear

<perforations

of sand

bridges

to the bottom

and other

of the

1%-in.

k%],

tid

pressure

produced

from

was

4,700

psi

this sanded-up

407

we21 in tie

no

prec.@ng

7. The
in.

maximum

[3. 175-cm]

10,000

psi

8. The
flow

[68

change

3urface-wOrking-pre33ure

workstring
950
from

occurred

md

M%].

pump

with

the

system

1 %was

simgfe-phase
exactfy

limit

snubbing-unit

at the

gas flow
end

to two-phase

of the

1%-in.

gas

and

[3 .175-cM

tubing

EIIdem

September

lbm/gsl
NaCt

years

brine
of

of

and dmshy

to measured

between

curves

valves,

was

kill

6. The

cir-

purposes

ignored.

to kill

restrictions

[3.175-&]

drikd,

at any

at the

was

friction

pressure

design.

F.3-cm]

NaCl

@culated

pressure.

8.5

and simplifications

completion

5.. The 21-ii.

we12bore
Wellbore-

No

kg/m3]

and

to calculafe

properly

safety

circulated

For

to true vertical

pmgmm

OD

tubing

3. Od production
being

Lynch

increased

2X-in.

for a given

the

used,

are related

are related

assumptions

subsurface

the ~emo~

gas viscosity

of tie

the relationship

heads

2. AU downbole
and

tb*

[1 138-kg/m3]

dirdionalfy

to a conservative

p. 175-cm]

conceivably

dynmdcaUy

led

prop-

computer

bdttombcde

approximately

we21bore-hydmidics

the

reservoti

show

of welhre

The. viscosity

m the computer
fluid

and a two-

tubing

of ternprature
is

the

[3.175x7.3-cm]

3 and4

drms

heads
well,

following

tubing,

P.%n]

gas composition

Hydraulic-pressure

and

To c+culate.

1 ~d

wellbore,

17.3-

calculated.

was

but fluid

,The

to model

2%-bI.

was u$ed in the 2%-

flOW mte Of g=

wifhin~e

we21 was

For the example

in Table

as a function

kiO fluid.

example

work.

[3. 175-cM]

so a 9.5-lbn@aI

of temperature

was

used

computer

1 A x27ciu

F@.

pressure

equivalent,

included

in a welL

inside

model

of the 2~gin.

zone

into a reservoir-simul~on

as functions

reservoir

kg/m3]

in the 2X-in.

could

well

with

bridge

Therefore,

tie

into

sandout

mg (d]

the hole

unit.

the

dyntic

geometty

1 A-in.
data

the flowing

calculated

The

with

tie

the weU could

to kill

WA washed

wash

magnitude

the snubbing

potential

at

the

tqbing

flow

the ex~.ed

hydraulics

(MDs),

kill the well

through

of this

ex-

to bottom.

flow

in the

p&forations.

3 lists

detetig
l%.

the
used

at the bottom

(BHP).

were

lowered

ana.lyzc

and Perkim2

entered

to determine
deliver

Table

into

weUbore

production

2 were

and
main-

to snub

well

deliverability

constant
up,

was

the

The
in Table

=ervoir

zone.

string,

U08

occur

rates

below

needed

MMscf/D

was

[1198-kg/m3]

flow

operation,

would

Flow

the ground

operation
flow

25

blowout
tubing.

the

Because

the cleining

below

to

tubing

was

to be tided

dynamically

NaC1.

of about

[7.3-cm]

a. 10-lb@gal

above

[3.175-cm]

tubing
model

flow

would

or snubbed

be

to

a single-phase

at the

and gas prop-

pressure

undefconsideration

if necessary,

out during

underground

the

bridge

[1138-kg/m3]

exit

W& assumed

procedure
and

the

is about

weil

sand

in the Z%-in.

that

which

a 1 %-in.

of the tubing,

a hole

and

The

of the

The

that

U6

on Clark

pressure

30,000

gas is separated

pressure

The

weU

of the

pbase

program

an example

to be run

c~ot

used

of
@lL

1 %-in. [3.175-cml

in. [7 .3-cM]

erties

he

dynamics

a dynamic

A resemoir-simulatiomlwellbore-hydratixcs

was based

anmdus.

string

The

during

at any pasitionsbovetbe

kill with

hydraulics,

control

hydradics.

and

1725

behavior

!dl

can

Wing

we12bore

bridges

selected

the

program

sufficient

in the. well.

requires

1 is a schematic

cm] tubing.

wellbore

expected

approach

dynamic

if the sand

we

with

in the

of a blowout

of s!dl

Fig.

at

operation

that
time

same

potential

bloyrmt.

oil

The

kill

erties
are known.
The example
wd2 was completed
with Z%-in.
[7.3-cm]
tubing,:
as 2%
1 shows.
Table
1 lists this wells maximum
flow uotential
@).
To explore
the risks that could resuft &om an und~rgro.nd
isted

welI

to maintain

zone

project,

the reservoir.

at about

sand

tubing,

-gravity

gas

in whether

when

inVolved,

[0.825-g/cm3]

40,0K.wfibbl

Ml

interested

production

tlmv(ng

welf

fn a workover

is washed

underground

principles

dynamic

in the tubing,

bridge

in:tbe

ti

to the

a.dynamic

sand

be us:d,

a hole

of

wall.

a hole

became

could

weU, to prevent

(Od not

with

to peiiorm

where

fluid

in the blowing

gas well

necessary

flow

concept

of a kill

zone

on a sanded-up

the

role

at the

The

Introdtktlon

Industry
or near

performance

~&

1990

215

Fig.

performance

2Example

TABLE

curves

2-ESTIMATED

for

RESERVOIR

dynamic

PROPERTIES

h, ft (net)

110

md

k,

100

,,

$4, %

.32

SW,

Fig.

completion

lwell

,,,ma

,dm

with

WV+.,

Wph

kill string.

1 PRODUCTION

HISTORY

ANO

708

42

for

Table

see

std msld].

X 103

two

Figs.

of the

3 and

assumed

4 show
depths

the

results

of the

pf the @cu-

kilf

string.

Analysis

CALCULATED

Neglected

Ffid

calculating

the

smrface
Fi8s.

Counterblow
BHP,

tijection

pressure

the

pressure

of the kill

Kflf

String.

program

wa3 limited

the conditions

The

psi

lead

to

calculated
surface

to 10,000

that woufd

addition

fn

also

of the kiU string.

string

3 and 4 show

Below

computer

the

working

[68 950

to thk

kPa];

maximum

pressure.
Caki!at8d

3850

MFP

2S

MMscf/D

and

D6W?;W,

WI

BOPD

Ihro.gh

27-1.;

tubing

Fig.

wtih

3, for a kill-string

if no brine
len@

9. Added

backpressure

the tion

of brine

effects

flow

that

i+ow

could

the. 1 Win.

result

from

[3. 175<m]

reversing
tubing

10.. The
250

were

reservoir
varied

tl [76

~mperature

finearly

m]

was

to tbe.etit

172F

u8eC],

temperature

and

the tem-

of 72F

[22C!l

at

11. AU piping

wellbore

factors

were

of

the pressure
rates

assumed

to be for commercial

matical

press~

snubbing

string

6,048,8,050,
and

gas

drop,
brine
at five

and
ffow

were

rates

10,053
from

different
R [617,
0.001

at

rate.

and

assumed
1233,

the

way,
1%-in.

depths

WMxjut

std

[1O.6X1O3
jection

4,045,

rates

rate

culations

m])
to

injected
only

gas

to ensure
ah

described

[10.6

based

up tie

below

the

be continuously
For

injection

however;

exceed

be kiUed.

shows

somewhat
resistance

103

as high

std

weUbore

SPE Dritting

m31dJ.

as 4 bblhnin

limit.

the

10,COO-

However,

in-.

to 11.9 x 10-3
the reservoir

pressure
.by the gas
of the

kill

Engineetig,

m!/s]

pressure.

fiits.

on the assumption

bottom

rates

the BHP

absolute.open-flow

[351X

x 10-3

4,6W

4 Mfvf?..f/D

and not exceed

the maximum

are

was about

about

tie

rates

kpa].

for example,.

the hydraulic

limit

working-pressure

here

is cmried

is flowing

would

that BHPs

950

m3/sl,

ft [617 m],

be achieved

exceed

for the 1 Yi-

[68

and the weU would

MMscfiD

Of 4 to 4.5 bblhdn

would
brine

might

psi

more,

or

injection

maximum

not be

would

is injected,

12.4

reducer,

rn3/s]

are calculated
This

about

as 2.5

codd

the weU.

of 2,024

kill shing

as high

was

brine

pressure
depth

inside
to about

rates

the BHP

rate

fiat

reducer

103

where

m3/s]

If no brine

Oldy

psi [68 95&kPa]

cabm-

m3/d

behavior.,

[1.3x
flow

striog

pressure

10,@M

killing

103

the reservok

a friction

fnjection
a friction

inject+

without

[2.6x

by the shorter
to

gas

The

4, for a kiff-string

P.3tential

and 3064
[28

exceed

below

[3.175-cm]

(2,024,

1843,2454,
MMscf/D

were

std m31d].

1 bblkin

mathe-

at

the

shows

by the long

[3. 175-cM]

an injegtion

condldon

and

m],

caused

the weU productivity

exceeded

of 0.5 bb!.hnin

of about

offered

BHP%

require

that

to the surface

different

or single-

acceleration.

rate
!@a]

1 %-in.
limit

std m3/d].

it wmdd
tubing

ft [3064

resistam%

ms /s] witlout

a stwdy-sti

717

[113 X 103

at 250

in a stepwise

two-

in this

.rat.ss with

to 25

pressure

vs. depth

of geometry,

head,

constant

would

103

103

gas lifted

Fig.

to calculate

the weUbore.into

pressure

reach

of 1.0,053

of the

tubing

because

PI

would

used

pressure

the weUbore

determined

injection

kpa]

flow

for various

the fracturing

effects
fluid

was

welfbore

by dividing

the

which

several

tie

Because

and determining

[1034

of weU

clearance

f3. 175-cM]

could

curves

program

to be constant,

including

perforations,
for

within

becafadated

wfdfe

phase-flow

computer

assumed

increments

manner

150 ~si

iridependent

Wellbore-Hydr&lIes

distribution

deptimdd

prissure,of
to.be

of gas and brine.

ft V6 m] was

lat@

&stied

wellbrm+hydraulics

flow

tie

(fracturing)

was

Calculation

that

achieved
in.

deptb

the hydmtilc

[209X

[6.6x

,% injection

friction

ft [76 m]

small
v.3-cm]

MMscf/D

psi

12. The

TM

7.4

MD.

St@.

250

and

bblhuin

perature

is rejected,

the 27&n.

i@Ored.

216

4.700

m3

lations

TABLE

.172

p,, psi
oil, API

,.

,0,ss

40

0/0

Tj

kill.

The
that

and

cal-

all the

thus,

that

sting.
geptember

1990

,Oo.om
~o,ow
-

Raw.

d EqmEd

Sour6wilow

BelGw

KU

3WW

.,
o
Io,cca

..

~.&
. .....

..

. .

. .

. l,OBPM

>..//-+-

...

ml 341tiacE

W&9Jm.unm

Weu lull h

,.----~----

--

. . . ..-----

..

. . ...

~m

. ..
.[

. . .
05

,.

~,.

~;;

,.
Bdre

Vxa

(@Js-dbn

RaM

f
-

Fwl

Pdmlw-

7,4

10.0
I

..

3Performance
brine

curves

as

injection

%Q

l-i

GAS

/gal

.01

MMscFm

with

1 Vi-in.

WOW

tubing

RATE

(MMSCFD)

inside

2%in.

tubing

at

10,053

ft with

9.5-

fluid.

100,000

Rarw

01 Elr8usd

Wemliv

COuMefl&IEebWK10

tom

SUiW

,0$

,001

79.

4PetiOrman@

Irine

3?iuid

Counterblow

injection

rate

might

be

small,
with

lifted

however,

brine
brine

shing

Breakup

and

mining

leading

factors:

kill

and

rate

flow

inside

2%-in.

tubing

at 2,024

ff,with

9.5.lbM/gal

rate

TABLE

3RESERVOIR

Amount

the gas

1%-in.

is acomplexprccess

c,..

Ml

contdkd

can

diameter

be obtained

ofdroplet

value

esdmate
by deter-

1.92

C8

1.71

iC.

0.2s

nCq

0.43

nC3

0.07

nC ~

0.06

toefist

C02

0.15

coefficient

fJ2

likely

for the drag

%)

C2

[3. 175-

.4 conservative

(mol

Component

of gas. In this counthe

COMPOSITION

GAS

<1

weU.

effects.

a conservative

brine

is sufllcienfly

to fall through

below

the

to a well

tbelargest

a gas

velocily

accumulate

atan

for example,

flow

be able

the upwad

will

tubing

too

0.0

droplet,

l%ree

methods

With

odymmili
fackd

will

1 %-in.

4impliesthat

with
If the gas

into droplets

conditions

in the Em stream

size.

Fig.
m3/s],

and hydrodynamic

hvo

of tbe

String.
x 10-3

eventually

oftbeliquid

by aerdpamic
of those

Kill
[10.6

droplets

with

fluid.

outcontinuously

that eiceeds

situation,

Ml

curves

injection

&x?.3 x 103 std m3/d].

a vekwity

terblow
cm]

BeItiw

of 4bbl/min

gas

MMscf/D

as

:1

swfam

Umil

PqJm

tie
force

tension

were

first

tending

(IFT)

used

mehd,
force

NwefC,=P&rm/a.

to estimate
a critical

todeforrna
tending

the maximum
Weber

droplet
to

maintain

liiely

droplet

number-ratio
relative
tie

droplet-is

of aerto the

inter-

Mined.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(1)

Harper

et al

On the basis
number.

Tbe

d ~u=20ulpcv~.

reviewed

of these

the work

studies,

maximum

likely

of llbwe~,s

10 was

chosen

droplet

@f

Hanson

for tbecriticd

diameter

is then

et al. 6
Weber
given

by

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(2)
,.

SPE

Drilling

E@neering,

September

1990

217

TABLE

4ESTIMATE

OF

CRITICAL

BRINE

Gas
Depth
Kill

Flow

Using

of

Eq.

(R)

FLOW

RATE

OF

Rate

dmm.

String

GAS

DROPLETS

From

Gas

Flow

Using

d~~

SWEEP

Gas

Flow

Using

From
3

From

Eq.

(MMscf/D)
3.3

2,024

1.4

0.8

4,045

1.4

0.8

3.3

6,048

$.4

0.8

3.3

8,050

1.4

0.9

3.4

1.4

0.9

3.5

10,053
Value

of

F=

Lsed

(n

Q,

ford]

Rate

d-

(MMscf/D)

(MMscf/D)

OUT

dmm

Rate

Eq.

CANNOT

THAT

OIAMETER

mlc!etian$.

ABLE

5-SUMMARY

9.5-ibm/gal

QF

ERINE

OYNAMIC

WITH

NO

KILL

DRAG

POTENTIAL

WHEN

REOUCTION

IS

work

shows,

count

USEO

for

Table
Maximum
Minimum
MO

Rate

of

Stinger

Cbculatlon

to

Kill

at

Well

(ft)

MFP

psi

Surfaoe

(bbllmin)

250

Rate

10,000

Limit

2.5

to

4,046

1.5

to 2.5

3.5

4.0
3.0

6,043

1.0

to

1.5

2,6

8,050

1.0

1.5

2.0

to

10,053

0.5

to

1.0

Oepth

will

This

range

cm]

to

4.6

12.4

to

3.5

10,0

to

3.o

8.9

2.5

8.5

=2.0

of the

With

no

brine

, %,lud,$

drctatim

150+,1

curve.

Table

that
kill

gas flow rate

5 summarhs

the

brine

depths

4, show

that
[7.3-

the maximum

flow

For

aoy

the

depth

MFF

potential

without

of the

of

is deter-

where
the 0. O-bb3hnin
the reservoir-deliverab@

dynamic-kill

the

the 27@.

string,

is iujected

various

inside

limits

which

4.

3 aod

std m3/d].

[3.175-cm]

[1138-kg/m3]
MFP,for

tubing

103

to ac-

the lQll string.

3 and

as Figs.

effect

below

below

in I%gs.

such

[680x

1 %-in.

by noting
the
injection-rate

the wells

WI!

a choking

mined
m3/s]

lbm/gal

shown

be needed

rates

of brine

E. 175-cm]

24 MMsct7D

may
levels.

of gas flow

figures,

of the 1 M-in.
creates

insefion

7.4

is also

of design

than

of F=4

intensity

by counterblow

of values

tubing

to less

a value

estimates

be killed

the presence

.23..

that

gas-turbulence

4 summarizes

well

Inspection

(MMscflD)

2,024

Tubing

at

(bbllmin)

W)th

1 I&in.

however,

some

[0.0;

when

9.5-

drag. reduction,

1%-in.

[3.175-cm]

and
tubing

pressure.

Sli-ing.
Rarabekis7

gives

maximum

Ea.

droplet

3. the second

method

used

to estimate

the

dmeten

&MCh3Si01IS

1. Dynamic-well-kill

<w=d95=~t;(dipcF2/0)

0.6.

the intersection

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(3)...

hydmdics
A third

method,

developed

by Sleicher,8

leads

to Eq.

performance

2. ffthe

injection

dnuously

It is now

desirable

of sweeping
settling

to find

out the maximum

veloci~

Gas

sweep

dl &oplets

droplet

relative

velocities

4gdmJod

J
&ag

The

based

gas

the

eqoal

this

to the

critical

The settling

the relative
averzge

wdue

velocity

would

of a spherical.

by

pressures

point,

the

. . . . . . .

(5)

slip

Kd,

velocity

is a

function

(veIocity

of the Reynol&

of the

droplet

number

relative

to the

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ...(6)
coeftkient

values

likely

to

would
!d

the

of the dragcoefficient
drop

in value
Reynolds

of drag

would
lead

well.

be the largest

to larger

settling

7 gk

Eq.

value

velocities

a conservative

io quiescent
coefficient

likely

fluid

that

associated

and
(large)

neglects
with

5. If the

the

the

likely

For

quiescent

Gauvin,
the

eff~

Reductions
interest
218

fluid,

9 Claim

and

of gas
in

because

1
.

AQ468

a value
Gauvin,

dynamics

drag

coefficient

a conservative

wellbore-

gas well

can

cOn-

curve

fies ,above

be killed

as injection

curve

@s

at every

proceeds.

can signitkantly

IepeI

flow,

thus

limiting

small,

kill

string

ccmntertlow

and

thus

the maximum

and

of @e injected

bad

reservoir

estimated

gas flow

liquid

can occur

the well.

stable

esdmate

droplet

size

can be ob@ned
and

the

maximum

coeffkient.
droplet
Weber

8. A conservative
times

(and

that

with

reaching

neglects

fluid

the

the

coefficient

sudden

drop

is needed

reverses

is one

quiesceht

coefficient

that

fluids

asmiiated

number).

to determine
and

direc+on

fluids
for

in drag

correlations

intensity.

for moving
coeffkient

Reynolds

to counterblow

from

or turbulence

of the drag

critical

work

leading

size can be esdmated

drag

the wdue

Additional
as the

curve

and if the resulting

counterblow-potentizl

on titiml

ditions

performance

intersect

more,awmately

the

below

backpressure
the

kill

@e concontribution

string.

Nomenclature

numbex

+0.5

a producing

reservoir-delivembility

wellbore-hydraulics,

drag

based

+
AIh

with

fhid.
perfonnti=

the

sking

rate is sufficiency

pipe

dizmeter

d95

droplet

dt

wdl

by determining

come

reaching

244
Kd=F

well

performance.curve

is four

drag

is too low,

injected

tba.p)

injection

by estimating

. . . . . . . . . .

designed

be

MFP.

below

stream):

smaller

critical

wheo

rate

wellbore-hydraulics

higher

4. The

can

curves.

the

7. TM maximum

thus be more
sudden

is just
than

is given

A conservative

estimate

droplet

(i.e.,

incapable

Pc)

%e=dmmpcvslpc.

because

size

is just

lift

6. A conservative

cceflkient,

gas

that

3&Kd

on the

Moving

veloci~

greater

out of the wefl.

(4)

droplet

of the largest

gas velocity).

~,&

the gas

gas

3. Iftbe

~=y+l+(:)~

operations

of the reservoirdeliverabiiity

IO and

is appropriate.
L@

value

a.$sociated
value

ft [m]
of maximum:sized,
diameter

particles

of F=
cm the

(7)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,.,.

ID,

and
of the
with

is desired.

Tombin

Duklerll
drag.

ccefkient.

gas flow
Lopes

and

discuss

factor

accele~tion

g.

= critical

are not of

and Dukleis

rI06
h

r~ervoir

stable

corresponding

smaller

to account

than
for

d95,

effect

droplet,

ft [m]

to 95 % volume
ft

of

[m]

of turbulence

Of mvity,
3?,2 WSEZ2
acceleration
of gravity,
32.2

on Kd

[9.8 ~$zl
lbm-ft/lbf.sec2

pa.m2~
tbickn&,

ft
SPE

[m]

DdUing

Engineering,

geptemtm

1990

k
Kd

Fermeabilify,

drag

Nw

rnd

coefficient

= Reynolds

Nwe

spheres

for

number

= Weber

number

P,

=
=

r~emoir
pressure,
psi
radius
of maximum-sized,

S.

water

temperature,

slip

ftkec

rT

VI =

saturation,
ekldy,

v = average

lkpa]
stable

droplet,

ft [m]

%
~C]

velociiy

[dq

of continuous

gas

phase,

frkc

[m{s]
k

cOn~uous-phse

yiscosity,

Ad =

dispmed-pbse

o,

condmous-pba.se

P.I
o

dispersdphsse

fFT,

lbm/(ft-see)

viscosity,
density,

lbm/ft3

densi~,

Ibflft

pa.s]

lbm/(ft-see)

GIllesPie

ra.s]
John

lbmlft3

D.

Qll18sPle

Engineer

for

Oil

Co.S

&Gas

00.

R.D.

2.

(holy

Clark,
of

a al.:

1985)

A.R.

auf

E.Y.,

T.K.:
WeU,

Grubs,
Liquid

.$ WdJbme

>, JPT

G.W.,

(NO,

and

Drops,>,

J.

C02

and

Near-Surface

1981)

2181-88.

Cbang,
Fluid

Rime,

J. O.:

Sciemijic

Critical

5.

6.

7.

1.-D.,

rhe Breakup

(1972)

SUM

of Liquid

52,

Part

Nijhoff,

Olobules;V

Tbe

Hague

Hanson.

A. R..
dthe

6,

8,

No.

E. G.. and Adams.

Omnich.
Brea3mp

Of D&i

by.%

a drilling

H. S.:

Bl&j;;

Shock

a SS

holds

tinguished

Droplet

Size

of Di3ute Liquid/Liquid

Spectra

physic.$

Generased

Dispersions,,

3nves-

of F&j&

(1%3)

gineering
chemidsl

AZhE

9. Torobin,
Spheres

C.A.
J.

Jr.:

(1962)
L.B.

and

Moving

Fluid,,<

AIChE

Clamen,

A.

Cwfticients

Maximum

8, No.

J.
of

Sready
(1961)

7,

Oawim
Spheres

35, No, 2, 184-89.

Liquid

Armdar

Flow,>,

The

and

Accelerated

No.

4,

Size

A. E.:
.41C3tE

DmpIet
J.

Drag

(1978)

24,

in Tmbuknt

Ccc

No.

S1

Metric

in

(1987)

Flow

Regime,-

@ramics
33,

No.

193

& Gas
in

Austin,

Piano
Co.

Resince
engi-

in chemical
where

[n 1955-56

the

is a Dis-

chemical

degree

and

he
an

enwas

assistant

Faators

141.5/(131.5+

bbl

fi

X
X

API)
~_o~

~m3

3.048*

E01

2.831685

EW

= m3
=.
c

1.589873

gd

3.785

E03

m3

in.

2.54*

E+OO

cm

lbm

4.535924

E01

kg

md

9.869233

E:04

pmz

psi

6.894757

E+OO

kPa

the

Drag

AJCAE

J.

Gas-

1013-24.

Cflgln@J

%prember

Co.s

Oil

office

fmm

on

Wy7,

Engineering,

and

operations.

ft3

at

Drilling

reIrr 1975.

Perk3ns

degrees
at

His

field

GSS

Arco

a PhD

Texss

Conversion

of Single

in Verdcal
6,

MS

K.

Oil&

for

and

1956-57.

F
of rurbulenca

at Arco

Fluids
Center.

Co.

a Turbulent

xavmlw

SPE

in

of

of

engineering

U. and

U.

& Gas

in chemical
Thomas

011

Texas

well-mntrol

a variety

Instructor

API

Flow,,

fficiems

Motion

the

Drilling

drilling

and

ss

fmm

international

worked

A&fd

engineering

615-19.

%ffens

in a Suprcritiml

(1969)

DukJer,

W.H.:

W.33.:

~PS,

Drop

fmm

4, 471-77.

Gauvin,
in

and

Stable

holds
Texas

Oil

coast

Getty

Pipe

in Turbulent

AKhSJ.

hss

and

Research

Arco

worked

degree

of

included

joined

Adviser

He

from

a director

he

Co.

gulf

engineering

Piano

in Arco

in U.S.

&Gas

is Dlredfor

and

Research

Perkins

neering

170-60.

8. Sleicber,

Drilling

worked

and

Oil

Co.s

Louisiana.

Center.

1957.

of

3,289-95.

TUb

engineer,
US.

previously

Arco

Gss

Morgan

Southwestern

He

in petroleum

as

Morg8n

professor

A.J.:

Regional

Center

Morgan

assignment
activities.

of

for

011&

in

A-1,

Mechanism
1, No.

F.

assignments

1070-80,

JCaabelas,

Richard

As

U.

Inc.

Research

degree

at Arco

saarch

of tie Jiydmdymmic
: FIuIdametds
in 13@mim
hxesses,,,
AIChSJ.
(1955)

tigadon

a S8

of

,4ppfierf

(1949)

Alaska,

Piano

3,

273-88.

J.O.

Flow

11.

and

Mmirms

Hear,

U.

previous

Hydrmdi&

Arco

holds

search

Mecfwnics

Splildng

3Jii,

2.

10.

SP%&

Resecmh,

Mechanics,

He

A&M

W.U,

565-91.
4.

Prudhoe/Llsburne

assignments

@meriting

P@ins,
OiJ

Acce[aadng

3G31 of an Unconuolle4

1267-75.

a Blown-Out

3. Haqer,

,DYnamic

is the

p@m3]

N/m]

operations

JPT

Eg/n33]

References
I. Lynch,

Perkins

Morgan

the

factor

SPE

mans.xbl

1390.

Revised

i 9S3

MDCiSPE

(F32)/1

.S
412

SPEDE

is wad

w.W
manu%lp
DfllUg

fCf

mViW

recaiwd
CmW3CS

fib,
Ml

%,

1933.

10,1930.
held

In

PWS,
?WW

Dallas,

accwlnd
[SPE

Feb.

17254)

%-March

b,

PbfitiiO

pmw~

2.

219

TA3k132
Sstbtad

TASLR 3

tirvoir

Rqmrties

E8x0rvoir

~sitim

t401e Percent

Component

h-

110 ft.

(1-let)

k=

100 lad

cl

95,37

Q-

22%

C2

1.92

s=
v

40%

C3

1.71

T=

172-F
4700

psi

oil

42 API

g.ls

see

Table

i-c4

0.29

n-C4

0.43

n-c5

0.07

n-C6

0.06

C02

0.15

N2

0.0

TA3US4

Em-to of critical G- FIW Rata*

of

Depth

Kill

String
(ft. )

Gas F1OW Rate

Gas Plow Rate

Gas Flow Rate

7&lMDj4)

2024

1.4

0.8

3.3

4045

1.4

0.s

3.3

6048

1.4

0.8

3.3

8050

1,4

0.9

3,4

10053

1.4

0.9

3.5

* Value of f = 4 used

in Equation

(7)

all

for

calculations.

TASLS 5

S-ry
of MC
Kill PotentialUlwl
IMng 9.5 pps BrineWith k DraB bductim
Max Rate
Measured
Oepth of
St ingar
(feet)

25o

**

Hinimtm
Rate to K li
well
(Bf?l)

(n. a.)

2024

2,5

- 3.5

4045

1.5

6048

1.0

8050
10053

naxiulum Flow

Circulation
at 10,000 psi

Potential*
with
1-1/4 inch Tubing

Surface
Limit
(BF?l)

at Depth
(lMXF/D)

(n. a.)

23**

4.0

- 4.5

12.4

- 2.5

3,0

- 3.5

10.0

1.5

2.5

3.0

8.9

1.0

- 1.5

2.0

- 2.5

8.5

0.5

2.0

7.4

1.0

Uith no circulation
of brine
Includes
150 psi exit
pres5ure

WE 17254

10,000IMiwrlace

Wofidng
preswfaUrnn

v=dragbn
103/4-@I

3102fl

End of 1-1/4 tubing

.x .-::.
................ ....... ,,,....,>,:,

. .*.**....

*4.

T @ 11,209

ft, P9D @ 10,936

FIGURE 1: Sketch Of Well Completion With Kill String

Wdlbom HydreuBos
PerformanceCuwes

4.

~..--

__---,--------

- - -____

Parfonnanlm
cum,

CurveA illustrateswel,bombehaviorlor a @JidInpcilon

LOOAR17HM
OF(3X3FLOWRATE(MMBCFIQ)

FIGURE 2: Example Performance Curves For Oynemlc Kill

lW,WO
10,OW Iml.%llia*
Pfr6am LhM

Rawsf Exlwtdw64xuLy
C+ur4mlkwSoOWK4w

./

Io,cw

l.sm

MuWun

Fh# [email protected] MMSCFM

!m

.001

,01

,i

10

GAS FLl)W RATE (MMSCFD)

FIGURE 3: Performance Curves With 1-1/4 in, Tubing Inside

%
~
to,ooo
~

........

-.o

..-.-

BA

k?
i!
&

,,~o

:
MUhwm

100
.Ooi

.01

.1

Fkw $Wtihl.

12.4 MM?CFM

T---&-1

10

OASFLOWRATE (WASCFD)

FIGURE 4: Perfownence CUIV8S With 1-1/4 In, Tubing

.-,

*
..

.J

lADC.6pE
Study of the Potential for an Off-Bottom Dynamic Kill of a Gas
Well Hav!ng r.n Underground Blowout
by J,D. Gillespie, @.F.Morgan, and T.K, Perkins, ARCO Oil & Gas Co.
WE Motnbors
.

coPYfw~$ws. IAocmPEOriuingCenlererwo
Thle POP@ WM PWOrOd tor IxeeenteIbn

at the 198S WC/WE

Drilllrw ConterenCO held In DOIIOO,TOXU, FetwuerY 2S-Mmoh 2, 19S6.

This peper wee eelected tw preeentetiorr by n lADC/SPE Program Committee followhtg rcvimv of information contelned in en ebetraot aubmined by
the the+(o). Cc+wenteof the peper, m preeonled, hew not been reviewed by the %ciity of Petroleum En@eere or lmernetiorml Assdc!hn o! Dri!~
ing *f80tOt0
end W OUbjOOl IO CWNOMII by lhe 9uIhor@). The mworiel, u WOSeMOd,d4e8 not Mcwemily Mocl Wry poeilion Ot the IADc or
S% ite ~,
or memberm Papers cweented at IAD(YSPE meeting8 we subjeo! 10 publkatiorr rwiew by Edimriel Committees of the IADC and
WE. Permmwon to MWYi8 reetricled 10an ebetrecl of not mom Ihen 200 words. Illustrations may rwt M copied. The abstrect ehould conlain conepiow
t of where and by whom ttre @per i8 preeented. Write PublicWvna Manager, SPE, P.O. Sox 8326S6, Rkhardgon, 1% ?50S2-2820.
~tiyk_-Da

ERRATA
EQUATION 5, ON PAGE 3, SHOULD READ:

4gdmax

( + d -

~.

Cd

PC

4g dmax

fd-)@C

v.
d

fc

cd

? C)