skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Tests find hammering, fluid cutting, erosion cause float shoe failures

Abstract

The results of a systematic test program to evaluate float equipment performance are presented. The testing has destroyed, over an eightmonth period, 160 float valves, float shoes and float collars. A new float valve design with greater resistance to failure has been developed as a result of the testing. New float collars and float shoes are expected to provide the operator with a failure rate of less than 1 1/2% when used within design limits and under normal cementing conditions. Further testing objectives include: extension of operating temperature limits to include deep well and geothermal conditions, and evaluation of the effects of more abrasive mud and cement systems.

Authors:
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Weatherford Int., Houston, TX
OSTI Identifier:
6504436
Alternate Identifier(s):
OSTI ID: 6504436
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Oil Gas J.; (United States); Journal Volume: 83:3
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
02 PETROLEUM; 03 NATURAL GAS; FIELD PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT; WEAR; ADDITIVES; CEMENTS; DRILLING FLUIDS; EROSION; EXPERIMENT PLANNING; FAILURE MODE ANALYSIS; FLOTATION; FLOW REGULATORS; HIGH TEMPERATURE; PERFORMANCE TESTING; BUILDING MATERIALS; CONTROL EQUIPMENT; EQUIPMENT; FLUIDS; MATERIALS; PLANNING; SEPARATION PROCESSES; SYSTEM FAILURE ANALYSIS; SYSTEMS ANALYSIS; TESTING 020300* -- Petroleum-- Drilling & Production; 030300 -- Natural Gas-- Drilling, Production, & Processing

Citation Formats

Stringfellow, B. Tests find hammering, fluid cutting, erosion cause float shoe failures. United States: N. p., 1985. Web.
Stringfellow, B. Tests find hammering, fluid cutting, erosion cause float shoe failures. United States.
Stringfellow, B. Mon . "Tests find hammering, fluid cutting, erosion cause float shoe failures". United States. doi:.
@article{osti_6504436,
title = {Tests find hammering, fluid cutting, erosion cause float shoe failures},
author = {Stringfellow, B.},
abstractNote = {The results of a systematic test program to evaluate float equipment performance are presented. The testing has destroyed, over an eightmonth period, 160 float valves, float shoes and float collars. A new float valve design with greater resistance to failure has been developed as a result of the testing. New float collars and float shoes are expected to provide the operator with a failure rate of less than 1 1/2% when used within design limits and under normal cementing conditions. Further testing objectives include: extension of operating temperature limits to include deep well and geothermal conditions, and evaluation of the effects of more abrasive mud and cement systems.},
doi = {},
journal = {Oil Gas J.; (United States)},
number = ,
volume = 83:3,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Jan 21 00:00:00 EST 1985},
month = {Mon Jan 21 00:00:00 EST 1985}
}
  • A cement float valve has been recovered after it was circulated through and cemented downhole. It was retrieved by coring as part of an investigation into a cementing failure. The float equipment was then analyzed for downhole performance. This is believed to be the first instance of intact recovery of full-scale cementing hardware after it has been cemented in place. In this instance, the valve performed as designed. Flash set proved to be the probable cause of job failure. This article documents the job and includes photographs of the used float shoe and its components.
  • The Electric Power Research Institute research project on common cause failures (CCFS) is the main vehicle for presenting a survey of developments in the field over the last 5 yr. The roles of other organizations worldwide are highlighted to show the international and synergistic character of the work accomplished. Included are aspects of data analysis, modeling approaches, and defensive strategies and tactics that can lessen the impact of CCFs on risk and plant operations. The emphasis is on how the available approaches can be seen to contribute to a more systematic and integrated treatments of CCFs in applied risk andmore » reliability analyses that has been available in the past. Opportunities for future research are also briefly discussed.« less
  • The problem of analyzing and quantifying common-cause failures (CCFs) is fundamental in conducting probabilistic safety studies. The use of experience feedback is crucial in addressing this problem, and it is possible to draw in a complementary manner on national experience feedback data bases and ad hoc on-site audits. These two approaches differ in objectives and methods, but are both equally necessary. In this paper, the use of these two approaches and the results obtained are analyzed and are illustrated by two concrete examples: (1) a national collection of >1200 event and failure records concerning the problem of CCFs in EdFmore » 900-MW (electric) units; and (2) an analysis based on audits carried out at an EdF 1300-MW(electric) reactor site.« less
  • Common-cause failure (CCF) events have occurred in virtually all complex technological systems that use redundancy to help achieve high reliability. In particular, industry experience and the results of probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) have indicated that CCFs are major contributors to the risk posed by nuclear power-plant operation. Although significant efforts are typically devoted to analyzing and preventing CCFs, no standard definition exists for CCFs-CCF means different things to different people. PRA analysts attempt to identify and treat most types of dependencies (sources of CCFs) explicitly in their PRA models; the types that are not treated explicitly are addressed in amore » separate CCF analysis task. Therefore, for the purpose of PRA applications, CCFs are dependent failures resulting from causes that are not explicitly modeled in the PRA. 24 refs., 1 tab.« less
  • Failure-dependent testing implies a test of redundant components (or trains) when the failure of one component has been detected. The purpose of such testing is to detect any common-cause failures (CCFs) of multiple components so that a corrective action, such as repair or plant shutdown, can be taken to reduce the residence time of multiple failures. This type of testing focuses on reducing the conditional risk of CCFs. Formulas are developed for calculating the conditional failure probability of a two-train system with different test, repair, and shutdown strategies. A methodology is presented, with an example calculation, showing the risk effectivenessmore » of failure-dependent strategies for emergency diesel generators in nuclear power plants. Four alternative actions after the identification of a failure of one component are analyzed: (a) not carrying out any additional testing, (b) testing the redundant components and shutting down the plant if a CCF is present, (c) emergency repair of the failed component in a given time (less than the allowed outage time), and (d) additional testing of redundant components after the repair of the failed component.« less