Supercement for Annular Seal Supercement for Annular Seal and Long-term Integrity in and Long-term Integrity in Deep, Hot Wells Deep, Hot Wells

DE-FC26-02NT41836

Problem:Long Term Zone Problem:Long Term Zone Isolation in HTHP WellsIsolation in HTHP Wells

High Temperature and Pressure

Deviation angles - Placement is difficult

High Density systems – 17 to 20 ppg well fluids

High Pressure Gas – Gas migration

Narrow Annuli – High Friction

Liners versus longstrings

Tie Backs and Expandable Liners

CO2 and H2S common

Problem: Well Intervention is Problem: Well Intervention is Big CostBig Cost Survey – 15% of all primary jobs require remedial

cementing Estimate of 35% of HTHP primary jobs require remedial

cementing Cost estimate:

– On shore - $100k per squeeze (average 2 per)– Off shore - $500k per squeeze (average 2 per)

Bigger cost for Operators – Long Term loss of production– Interzonal flow– Water influx

Project ObjectivesProject Objectives Develop database of jobs for evaluation Determine the cement system properties that affects

the ability of cementing materials to provide long term zone isolation under deep hot conditions

Use recently developed laboratory methods to determine key properties

Evaluate various materials to generate the key properties

Develop Supercement systems!!!! Application for all wells including “deep hot”

Project Work Team Project Work Team CSI Technologies LLC

Material Manufacturers

Steering Committee

Operators

HTHP Well DatabaseHTHP Well Database Develop database for HTHP Cementing

– Determine critical well info and parameters– Successful cementing/completion– Unsuccessful cementing/completion– Confidentially is important (all contributing

members have access)– Track industry practices and results– Status – rollout week of 10-31-05

Update with outside data if possible

Deep Trek Technical Interest Deep Trek Technical Interest Web-SiteWeb-Site

CSI/DOE develop web-site – Clearing house for discussion, questions,

concerning Deep Trek wells– Focus mainly US but can include others– Look for trends, new information, repeating

issues, new technologies used etc.

Mechanical Integrity IssuesMechanical Integrity Issues Flow of Fluids

– Around the Cement Bonding, Microannulus, Deformation

– Through the matrix of the Cement Cracking, Permeability changes

– Stress Pressure, Temperature Stress Cycling Conditions Mechanical shock

Mechanical Integrity Issues - Mechanical Integrity Issues - SolutionsSolutions Improve material properties relative to Portland

Cements:– Higher Tensile Strength– Higher Ductility*– Lower Anelastic Strain– Higher Young’s Modulus

Correlate material properties with performance

Anelastic StrainAnelastic StrainDefinition: Permanent Deformation resulting from

Low-Intensity Stress Cycling

– Measured at 25% and 50% ultimate strength– Tensile and Compressive may be very different– All Portland cements exhibit behavior – Measured by comparing “ideal” (completely elastic)

behavior with actual– Low-level stress can modify ultimate strength

Potential HTHP SolutionsPotential HTHP Solutions

Multi-material solutions– Optimized sealing– Optimized strength

Placement methods Enhanced Portland performance Non-Portland materials Hybrid Portland materials

Phase I TasksPhase I Tasks

Literature Search on Portland and Non-Portland Binders

Evaluate materials at low temperatures Evaluate materials at high temperatures Evaluate materials with non-traditional

testing

Literature Search StrategyLiterature Search Strategy

Emphasis on non-Portland binder research Emphasis on ceramic acid-base reactions Effects of unconventional additives on

Portland cement properties Refractory cements Emphasis on non-oilfield binder

applications

Literature Search ResultsLiterature Search Results Chemically-reactive fibers

– Ceramic– Kevlar

Inorganic expansive additives– Molybdenum– High concentrations of MgO

Ceramicrete (ANL) Calcium Aluminum Silicate High-temperature resins

Material Evaluation StrategyMaterial Evaluation Strategy Conduct screening laboratory tests to determine

material properties

Advanced material property and performance testing on best materials from screening tests

Evaluate materials at low and high temps

Correlate material properties and performance

Material Evaluation StrategyMaterial Evaluation Strategy Conventional testing

– Compressive Strength– Tensile Strength

Kinetics and Placement– Thickening time– Consistency

Material Evaluation StrategyMaterial Evaluation Strategy Non-traditional testing

– Young’s Modulus– Anelastic Strain / Fatigue– Annular Seal performance under cyclic loading– Expansion– Shearbond

Material Evaluation ResultsMaterial Evaluation Results Candidate Phase II Materials

– 9 formulations in 3 product categories: Non-Portland

– High-temperature resin– Calcium Aluminum Silicate

Portland with Unconventional Additives– MgO– Molybdenum

Reactive Fibers– Modifier for other slurry systems

Material Evaluation ResultsMaterial Evaluation Results “Best” properties do not always mean best performance

No single property is a reliable predictor of performance

Performance based on Annular Seal model

Preliminary numerical model relates energy application and resistance prior to loss of seal to cement properties

When available, evaluate Single-Wall Carbon Nanotubes as performance-enhancing additive

Material Evaluation ResultsMaterial Evaluation ResultsSystemSystem FormForm

ulaulaRecipeRecipe WatWat

ererDensDensityity

BaselinBaselinee

9999 H + 35% Silica FlourH + 35% Silica Flour 5.165.16 16.616.6

Mod Mod BaselineBaseline

7777 H+25% SBMC+15% MFA+2% H+25% SBMC+15% MFA+2% Daxad 9Daxad 9

2.502.50 19.719.7

MgOMgO 128128 Baseline 77 + 20% MgO HBaseline 77 + 20% MgO H 3.603.60 19.019.0MolyMoly 132132 Baseline 99 + 0.5% MolyBaseline 99 + 0.5% Moly 5.195.19 16.616.6MolyMoly 133133 Baseline 77 + 0.5% MolyBaseline 77 + 0.5% Moly 2.502.50 19.719.7ResinResin 188188 Resin + Hardener + Reactive Resin + Hardener + Reactive

DiluentDiluentN/AN/A 9.09.0

SilicateSilicate 180180 NaSiONaSiO33 + CaOH + AlOOH + CaOH + AlOOH 24%24%

FiberFiber 130130 Baseline 99 + 1.0% Ceramic Baseline 99 + 1.0% Ceramic FibersFibers

5.215.21 16.616.6

FiberFiber 131131 Baseline 99 + 1.4% Ceramic Baseline 99 + 1.4% Ceramic FibersFibers

5.245.24 16.616.6

FiberFiber 136136 Baseline 77 + 0.5% Ceramic Baseline 77 + 0.5% Ceramic FibersFibers

2.502.50 19.619.6

Material Evaluation ResultsMaterial Evaluation ResultsSystemSystem FormForm

ulaulaComCom

ppTensilTensil

eeAS * AS * 1010-6-6

SBSB Ann Ann SealSeal

BaselineBaseline 9999 4,7904,790 705705 5.875.87 260260 44,850

Mod Mod BaselineBaseline

7777 5,6505,650 725725 3.493.49 470470 29.900

MgO MgO 128128 3,193,1900

281*281* * 1851850+0+

Pend HT

MolyMoly 132132 4,2804,280 1,0831,083 1.551.55 308308 1,325,360MolyMoly 133133 6,686,68

001,3661,366 0.850.85 570570 349,900

ResinResin 188188 5,555,5500

3,6903,690 18.23*18.23* 1851850+0+

In Proc

Silicate Silicate 180180 1,2401,240 970970 6.416.41 In Proc

FiberFiber 130130 3,7103,710 1,0161,016 4.044.04 300300 0FiberFiber 131131 3,023,02

001,1491,149 3.103.10 190190 8,250

Fiber Fiber 136136 4,5104,510 1,3121,312 1.591.59 1,0201,020 1,749,500

High-Temperature Epoxy ResinHigh-Temperature Epoxy Resin Solves problems with Furan Resins

– Shrinkage– Water intolerance– Weighting / Lightening destroys properties– Difficult to control kinetics

High-Temperature Epoxy Resins– Discovered as part of a different project– Traditional usage – HT winding insulation for electric motors– Evaluation revealed controllable kinetics at high temps– Material subjected to DeepTrek testing

High-Temperature Epoxy ResinHigh-Temperature Epoxy Resin Properties

– Very high tensile and compressive strength– High shearbond– Rubber-like

Absorbs large amount of energy without failure Difficult to test using conventional cement test protocols High anelastic strain over short time / Low anelastic strain

over long time (deforms, then rebounds)

High-Temperature Epoxy ResinHigh-Temperature Epoxy Resin Issues

– Liquid / liquid system– Health issues with handling– Highly exothermic – must cure under pressure– Can use conventional batch mixers– Dedicated automatic-controlled continuous mixer

feasible– Requires different test protocols and equipment to

adequately quantify properties and performance

Modifications to ResinModifications to Resin

Combine with Cement– Solids help with fluid loss – Penetration of big voids with cement– Filtrate of the fluid sets and consolidates

formations– Sealing and zone isloation not only in wellbore

but in the formation itself

Phase II TasksPhase II Tasks

Manufacture Supercement to specification Batch testing to confirm performance on

large scale Large-scale mixing, shearing, and drillout,

testing Field test, research test well

Phase II Result to DatePhase II Result to Date Phase II Tasks nearly complete for Epoxy Resin

– Field-scale mixing, shear, and drillout testing– Large-scale manufacturing– Field tests in low temperature (200 deg F) well

Phase II Remaining Work– Deep, Hot test well application– Test well applications of other candidate systems

Phase II Results to DatePhase II Results to Date Continuing materials property and performance

testing to refine formulations– Epoxy Resin– Calcium Aluminum Silicate– MgO and Moly (performance)– Hybrid Epoxy Resin / Portland Cement

Interesting properties Fills matrix voids with strength and ductility-contributing

material

Testing IssuesTesting Issues Cannot measure tensile strength via Splitting

Method for highly expansive cements

Cannot measure tensile Young’s Modulus with indirect Splitting method

“Ultimate” Annular Seal test must be conducted at elevated temperatures

Expansion of highly-expansive cements cannot be measured with current tests

Testing Issues - SolutionTesting Issues - Solution Design new test equipment, develop testing

protocols, and perform validation tests– “Direct” tensile strength test– Expansion under elevated temperature and

pressure conditions– High temperature Annular Seal

Phase II Extension Proposal to Develop apparatus, protocols, and validation

Direct Tensile Strength MethodDirect Tensile Strength Method No industry-

authorized method

Different methods give different results

Proposed method yields tensile YM

High Temperature ExpansionHigh Temperature Expansion Utilize split

sleeve Expansion

imposes forces on transducers

Continuous measurement of expansive forces

High Temperature Annular SealHigh Temperature Annular Seal Test resistance for

gas flow continuously at temperature and pressure

Different methods give different results

Proposed method yields tensile YM

Phase III – 2007-2008Phase III – 2007-2008

Evaluate Supercement in Field Applications Cost / benefit analysis Commericalization / Technology Transfer

Deep Star ProjectDeep Star Project Determine current technology and gaps in

cementing and zone isolation at HTHP wells primarily in deep water

Considering leveraging Deep Trek for addressing key gap in cementing

CO2 and H2S resistance at elevated T and P Estimated funding at $1million (non DOE

funds)

SummarySummary Successful Phase I – multiple candidate

systems of interest Successful Phase II to date with Epoxy

Resin Additional test apparatus and protocols

required to evaluate candidate systems under HTHP conditions