MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4251642022 · doi:10.2523/iptc-11970-ms

Killing of a Gas Well: Successful Implementation of Innovative Approaches in a Middle-Eastern Carbonate Field - A Field Case

2008· article· en· W4251642022 sur OpenAlexaff
Saeed Salehi, G. Hareland, J. J. Azar

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Petroleum Technology Conference · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Calgary
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCasingTectonicsPetroleum engineeringGeologyMining engineeringEngineeringCivil engineeringSeismology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract A casing collapse occurred in a gas producing well with about 2.5 million cubic meters per day gas flow rate at a depth of 216 ft due to tectonic movements. As a result, the well blew out and different serious procedures were put into play to kill the well (Figure 1). This paper aims to review the practical and innovative approach that was used to secure and extinguish the well. Initially attempts to kill the well included pumping water and or cement into the well to kill and secure it but it was not successful. Two directional relief wells, Kanagan-23A and Kanagan-23B were drilled to secure the well, the latter one was successful. The 23B well was drilled down to total depth of 2500m and entered into drainage area of Kangan-23 gas well. Different directional surveys were tried according to geophysical and geological data for entering the target area. The well relief and intersection was done by combining the new wellpath with the old well and injecting different pills and acidizing the new well to generate connectivity between the two wells. This type of innovative techniques has never been used in killing a well successfully before. This paper presents the unique thinking and practical approach used for securing this well including the failures as well as successes. The successful procedure may be used in killing future wells under similar condition. Introduction The case history herein describes a relief well planning and execution for a shallow blow out in a middle-eastern carbonate gas field. The reason for the sheared failure of the casing was detected to be the tectonic movements. One successful deviated well with four legs were used to kill this well. Key achievements included designing a secure program utilizing the injection of pills and acid. This is the first paper describing a killing program for relief operation of this kind in a middle-eastern gas fields. The Kangan anticline is located in coastal Fars, southwest of Nar and west of the western Assaluyeh anticlines and north of Kangan harbor in Busher province. This structure is extended in the northwest-southeast direction and divided into 4 parts of A, B, C and D. The Kangan anticline is nearly asymmetric and the base on a structural map shows a 55Km length and 6Km width. The youngest and the oldest formations on surface are Bakhtiyari (Pliocene) and Sarvak (Cenomanian) respectively. The highest dip angles of 30 and 40 degrees were defined for north and south flanks of Kangan anticline respectively and two reverse faults cut these flanks parallel to structure elongation. The well Kangan-23 is located on the southern flank of the Kangan structure with the distance around 1.1 km from the well Kangan-22 and 1.8 km from the well Kangan-3 with the Lambert coordinate of: Easting: 2, 201, 400 m, Northing: 677, 512 m. Figure 2shows the location of this well. The Kangan-23 well was expected to have collapse problem at shallow depth from the observed seepages around the well. The Kangan-23 was a gas producer well with 1900 psi flowing wellhead pressure and shut in tubing pressure was 2800 psi. The flowing wellhead pressure suddenly dropped from 1900 psi to 880 psi on the 9th of October, 2005, and an immediate decision was made to close the well. After two days the well pressures had dropped even more as reported in Table 1. After investigating the evidence showed there was severe casing damage from 60m-300m. The 7" tubing and the casing in the well was damaged and connected to each other and to the formation behind the casing. This caused the underground blowout and the gas from tubing flowed in the shallow formations. Sketches of the well before and after the collapse are illustrated respectively in Figure 3 and Figure 4.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,832
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,496

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,029
Tête enseignante GPT0,258
Écart entre enseignants0,229 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Petroleum Technology ConferenceMême sujetHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisTravaux en français237 207