Joined: Jan 2011 Gender: Male Posts: 40 Location: Germany
Re: cemcade software « Reply #1 on Feb 9, 2011, 9:21pm »
How???? Contact directly slb. If you are "BIG" client then you have a chance. However, in the past it was easier. Nowdays, they do not provide it. It was through SIS (slb information solutions).
Re: cemcade software « Reply #2 on Feb 9, 2011, 10:05pm »
How???? Contact directly slb. If you are "BIG" client then you have a chance. However, in the past it was easier. Nowdays, they do not provide it. It was through SIS (slb information solutions).
even SLB ppl , they said getting it through internet is much easier
CemCADE Cementing Design and Evaluation Software, Schlumberger
pleaseeee
Are you asking people to provide you with pirated software? SLB, HAL and BHI all have freely available online versions of the redbook and tech facts which include some nifty volume calculators for displacemnts etc. If you want rehology, properties and centriliser spacing you will probably have to shell out some cash and buy the Cemcade software. It will not be cheap.
CemCADE Cementing Design and Evaluation Software, Schlumberger
pleaseeee
Are you asking people to provide you with pirated software? SLB, HAL and BHI all have freely available online versions of the redbook and tech facts which include some nifty volume calculators for displacemnts etc. If you want rehology, properties and centriliser spacing you will probably have to shell out some cash and buy the Cemcade software. It will not be cheap.
Also it will usually give you doubtful data (this is not an objection to Cemcade, by the way, it goes for all such software in my opinion, and learned by experience). Nonsense in equals nonsense out. ALWAYS check such proprietory stuff yourself, and have two other people do so as well, in case your calculations are incorrect. Using pencil, paper and a calculator with big buttons (which reduces the risk of you pushing the wrong one).
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
Re: cemcade software « Reply #5 on Feb 10, 2011, 2:15pm »
Are you asking people to provide you with pirated software?SLB, HAL and BHI all have freely available online versions of the redbook and tech facts which include some nifty volume calculators for displacemnts etc. If you want rehology, properties and centriliser spacing you will probably have to shell out some cash and buy the Cemcade software. It will not be cheap.
am not looking for a pirated software , all the things i wanna know i can do it by hand using pencil paper and calculator ( as adoubleuk said) but thats software save alot of time specially when u are pumping light weight cement where you have to take care of the ECD for example
Are you asking people to provide you with pirated software?SLB, HAL and BHI all have freely available online versions of the redbook and tech facts which include some nifty volume calculators for displacemnts etc. If you want rehology, properties and centriliser spacing you will probably have to shell out some cash and buy the Cemcade software. It will not be cheap.
am not looking for a pirated software , all the things i wanna know i can do it by hand using pencil paper and calculator ( as adoubleuk said) but thats software save alot of time specially when u are pumping light weight cement where you have to take care of the ECD for example
Good that you can do these calculations by hand. You obviously have a good understanding of the calculations pertaining to ECD whilst pumping cement. I suggest you make up an Excell sheet with the formulas you use for manual calculations.
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
Are you asking people to provide you with pirated software?SLB, HAL and BHI all have freely available online versions of the redbook and tech facts which include some nifty volume calculators for displacemnts etc. If you want rehology, properties and centriliser spacing you will probably have to shell out some cash and buy the Cemcade software. It will not be cheap.
am not looking for a pirated software , all the things i wanna know i can do it by hand using pencil paper and calculator ( as adoubleuk said) but thats software save alot of time specially when u are pumping light weight cement where you have to take care of the ECD for example
Good that you can do these calculations by hand. You obviously have a good understanding of the calculations pertaining to ECD whilst pumping cement. I suggest you make up an Excell sheet with the formulas you use for manual calculations.
Ahmed,
While understanding Pupjoint's comments, I'm still curious about your concerns regarding ECD with regard to cementing. This was, after all, an issue which lead to various engineers' downfall last year.
ECD (in my humble opinion) can be an important thing to take into account while drilling.
But it has nothing to do with cementing. The reservoir engineers might think otherwise, but they're wrong. If you have losses during the cement job, just plan for bigger guns when perforating...
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
Re: cemcade software « Reply #8 on Feb 11, 2011, 12:16am »
Ahmed,
While understanding Pupjoint's comments, I'm still curious about your concerns regarding ECD with regard to cementing. This was, after all, an issue which lead to various engineers' downfall last year.
ECD (in my humble opinion) can be an important thing to take into account while drilling.
But it has nothing to do with cementing. The reservoir engineers might think otherwise, but they're wrong. If you have losses during the cement job, just plan for bigger guns when perforating...
i totally understand what you are thinking of , yes ECD is mostly calculated while drilling , but in my case its a special cementing case where i have a weak formation and am gona sement it with 1-stage cement , its actually a special case where you i have to do my calculation in order to be below the frac pressure of that formation
i hope the picture is clear now why i mentioned ECD for cement
Good that you can do these calculations by hand. You obviously have a good understanding of the calculations pertaining to ECD whilst pumping cement. I suggest you make up an Excell sheet with the formulas you use for manual calculations.
Ahmed,
While understanding Pupjoint's comments, I'm still curious about your concerns regarding ECD with regard to cementing. This was, after all, an issue which lead to various engineers' downfall last year.
ECD (in my humble opinion) can be an important thing to take into account while drilling.
But it has nothing to do with cementing. The reservoir engineers might think otherwise, but they're wrong. If you have losses during the cement job, just plan for bigger guns when perforating...
AK
AK,
I don't want to hijack this thread but ECD , as just mentioned in Ahmeds most recent response, is a factor, especially when cementing in very soft like butter formations. Most here know that about 4 to 5 bpm may be used to pump the tail component, but with very soft formation this might prove too high. I've dropped it to 3.5 bpm, provided this lower rate can give sufficient lift pressure, followed by a good CBL log Other factors like setting time etc need also to be factored in.
I will stand corrected if you can explain to us why you think ECD has got nothing to do with cementing, after all we are still pumping fluid albeit cement instead of mud ?
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
Re: cemcade software « Reply #10 on Feb 11, 2011, 10:09am »
pupjoint
I don't want to hijack this thread but ECD , as just mentioned in Ahmeds most recent response, is a factor, especially when cementing in very soft like butter formations. Most here know that about 4 to 5 bpm may be used to pump the tail component, but with very soft formation this might prove too high. I've dropped it to 3.5 bpm, provided this lower rate can give sufficient lift pressure, followed by a good CBL log Other factors like setting time etc need also to be factored in.
I will stand corrected if you can explain to us why you think ECD has got nothing to do with cementing, after all we are still pumping fluid albeit cement instead of mud ?
am saying that am caring about the ECD , am not thinking that ECD has nothing to do with cementing
ok , if you gona use light weight sement to cement a weak zone , light weight cement will gain more density when it reaches surface , other than the ECD , so you have to know the ECD to calculate tha hydrostatic pressure on the weak formation , in order not to break it by exceeding the frac pressure
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
I was not referring you to but instead was posting a query to AK regarding AK's statement .............
"ECD (in my humble opinion) can be an important thing to take into account while drilling. But it has nothing to do with cementing"..........
I would like AK to tell us why ECD has nothing to do with cementing.
Pupjoint (and others),
Maybe my quoted statement was somewhat hasty, deliberately provocative, and seemingly foolish.
ECD should obviously be considered when cementing. But it should not become a primary concern. If it does, one may forget the principle aims of the cement job, and how best to achieve them. If you get so worried about potential losses that you decide to reduce your pump rate for ECD reasons, are you still sure that you've got a good enough flow to prevent channelling, for instance? Or maybe it's time to do a complete rethink, maybe involving a lightweight cement, or a multiple-stage job. Or could it be that the budget won't stretch to that?
Let's not mention the 'M word', but surely it's now, (if it wasn't previously), common knowledge that no losses while cementing doesn't equal a good cement job.
It must be remembered that ECD is a purely theoretical value, a mathematical construct. But nevertheless of great significance when drilling, where the fluid system is (hopefully) homogenous. You can play with your mud density and flowrates while taking ECD into account and thus avoid losses.
But just try calculating that for a single-stage cement job. You've got mud, probably a spacer, plus two slurries of differing densities and rheological properties. Not to mention some centralisers which may or may not be slightly clagged-up with gunge picked up on the trip in the hole, especially if it involves a weak, 'buttery' formation. You might be able to get a vague idea of ECD on bottom with a specific flowrate when it's just mud in the annulus. But what happens when the spacer and let's say half the lead is round the corner? What about when the tail is coming through the shoe? At a given flowrate the ECD at bottom constantly changing. And maybe the weak formation you're worried about isn't in fact at bottom, but somewhere further up the hole.
To repeat, I was wrong to say ECD has nothing to do with cementing, and on a public forum like this it could possibly be seen as a misleading point of view. But ECD is not of the same significance as making sure your mud balance has been checked and calibrated before the job, and ensuring that the slurry density actually pumped is that which you planned for... The simple, basic stuff, in other words.
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
Joined: Jan 2011 Gender: Male Posts: 40 Location: Germany
Re: cemcade software « Reply #13 on Feb 11, 2011, 9:01pm »
ECD is not important while Cementing ? Guys you must be joking.....
Fact Nr.1 : Annular space is smaller while cementing Fact Nr.2: Cementing fluids must (should) be thicker and heavier than mud. That we call hierarchy Fact Nr.3: Conventional cement will have for Lead >25% Solid Volume Fraction and for the Tail >40% SVF Fact Nr.4: Cement I am doing it for the last 10 years. Why is the 1st question of my clients is always ECD? Enough....back to the request to supply Pirated version of cade.
I was not referring you to but instead was posting a query to AK regarding AK's statement .............
"ECD (in my humble opinion) can be an important thing to take into account while drilling. But it has nothing to do with cementing"..........
I would like AK to tell us why ECD has nothing to do with cementing.
Pupjoint (and others),
Maybe my quoted statement was somewhat hasty, deliberately provocative, and seemingly foolish.
ECD should obviously be considered when cementing. But it should not become a primary concern. If it does, one may forget the principle aims of the cement job, and how best to achieve them. If you get so worried about potential losses that you decide to reduce your pump rate for ECD reasons, are you still sure that you've got a good enough flow to prevent channelling, for instance? Or maybe it's time to do a complete rethink, maybe involving a lightweight cement, or a multiple-stage job. Or could it be that the budget won't stretch to that?
Let's not mention the 'M word', but surely it's now, (if it wasn't previously), common knowledge that no losses while cementing doesn't equal a good cement job.
It must be remembered that ECD is a purely theoretical value, a mathematical construct. But nevertheless of great significance when drilling, where the fluid system is (hopefully) homogenous. You can play with your mud density and flowrates while taking ECD into account and thus avoid losses.
But just try calculating that for a single-stage cement job. You've got mud, probably a spacer, plus two slurries of differing densities and rheological properties. Not to mention some centralisers which may or may not be slightly clagged-up with gunge picked up on the trip in the hole, especially if it involves a weak, 'buttery' formation. You might be able to get a vague idea of ECD on bottom with a specific flowrate when it's just mud in the annulus. But what happens when the spacer and let's say half the lead is round the corner? What about when the tail is coming through the shoe? At a given flowrate the ECD at bottom constantly changing. And maybe the weak formation you're worried about isn't in fact at bottom, but somewhere further up the hole.
To repeat, I was wrong to say ECD has nothing to do with cementing, and on a public forum like this it could possibly be seen as a misleading point of view. But ECD is not of the same significance as making sure your mud balance has been checked and calibrated before the job, and ensuring that the slurry density actually pumped is that which you planned for... The simple, basic stuff, in other words.
AK
AK, You have your ass in a crack. You should have left this one alone. If ECD is a purely theoretical number what is the PWD reading? For your info it is HSP + ECD.
Joined: May 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 829 Location: UK
Re: cemcade software « Reply #15 on Feb 11, 2011, 10:55pm »
Quote:
AK, You have your ass in a crack. You should have left this one alone. If ECD is a purely theoretical number what is the PWD reading? For your info it is HSP + ECD.
Cheers
Well I guess in a roundabout way and probably unintentionally, AK is right. Your PWD or your casing shoe or weak zone is only reading pressure. ECD is just a theoretical mud weight that would be applying the same pressure using hydrostatic.
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with individuals qualified in these respective fields.
Maybe my quoted statement was somewhat hasty, deliberately provocative, and seemingly foolish.
ECD should obviously be considered when cementing. But it should not become a primary concern. If it does, one may forget the principle aims of the cement job, and how best to achieve them. If you get so worried about potential losses that you decide to reduce your pump rate for ECD reasons, are you still sure that you've got a good enough flow to prevent channelling, for instance? Or maybe it's time to do a complete rethink, maybe involving a lightweight cement, or a multiple-stage job. Or could it be that the budget won't stretch to that?
Let's not mention the 'M word', but surely it's now, (if it wasn't previously), common knowledge that no losses while cementing doesn't equal a good cement job.
It must be remembered that ECD is a purely theoretical value, a mathematical construct. But nevertheless of great significance when drilling, where the fluid system is (hopefully) homogenous. You can play with your mud density and flowrates while taking ECD into account and thus avoid losses.
But just try calculating that for a single-stage cement job. You've got mud, probably a spacer, plus two slurries of differing densities and rheological properties. Not to mention some centralisers which may or may not be slightly clagged-up with gunge picked up on the trip in the hole, especially if it involves a weak, 'buttery' formation. You might be able to get a vague idea of ECD on bottom with a specific flowrate when it's just mud in the annulus. But what happens when the spacer and let's say half the lead is round the corner? What about when the tail is coming through the shoe? At a given flowrate the ECD at bottom constantly changing. And maybe the weak formation you're worried about isn't in fact at bottom, but somewhere further up the hole.
To repeat, I was wrong to say ECD has nothing to do with cementing, and on a public forum like this it could possibly be seen as a misleading point of view. But ECD is not of the same significance as making sure your mud balance has been checked and calibrated before the job, and ensuring that the slurry density actually pumped is that which you planned for... The simple, basic stuff, in other words.
AK
AK, You have your ass in a crack. You should have left this one alone. If ECD is a purely theoretical number what is the PWD reading? For your info it is HSP + ECD.
Cheers
Holdril,
My posterior is just where it ought to be, thanks, though you mention a subject on which I'm somewhat out of my depth. Not everyone has the use of PWD tools, and I'm unsure what the acronym HSP stands for.
But again, PWD is a tool used while drilling, not (unless I'm mistaken) installed as part of a casing string.
Out of pure curiosity, how often does PWD give a reading which corresponds with a theoretically calculated ECD value?
Maybe I was hasty in my reply about ECD. But I do feel that the initial questioner may be better off spending his money on some cement LCM product (which admittedly is usually expensive) rather than just purchasing some software (which won't come cheap either), and which may simply tell him the kind of news he doesn't want to hear, anyway.
Come to that, how come the cementing company he plans using for the job doesn't possess any modelling software already?
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
Re: cemcade software « Reply #17 on Feb 12, 2011, 9:49am »
Ahmed/AK,
here are a few bits I use to reduce hope, guess work and luck prior to cmt job.
Compare theoretical ECD with actual APWD readings. Ask why the discrepancy if any - investigate the source. Ws the unit thoroughly flushed after the last job. Also run hydraulics for the TD of the section in advance.
Go over the hydraulics modeling and look closely at the operators inputs especially tool (and pipe OD & IDs). Adjust Hole diameter if you dropped carbide or used hole caliper.
Important: Use the tools smallest ID - to do this you must view a good cross sectional diagram of all tools downhole. Do not accept lazy estimates. Also factor in the expected pressure drop. Once you get this to match as closely as possible you know you can rely on both Theoretical ECD and actual APWD readings....to an extent. You can tweak some inputs within limits of error of instrumentation used ex: for digital pressure gauges +/-1, SPM +/1 but do not tweak to beyond these allowances just to make things fit and look nice.
When drilling out the section note the actual losses while drilling, while static and while tripping out bit and RIH csg. All these bits of losses info will give you a better focus of ECD and hole behavior if ECD while pumping cement is of concern. It always is in my book.
When pumping cement watch closely for expected returns and if pressure drops adjust on the fly if this occurs, but note that you cannot drop the rate too much least you lose lifting pressure.
Get the service to factor in your observations and remodel the pumping schedule - I can't see why not but this is sometimes like squeezing blood out of a stone.
Assumptions: all gauges accurately calibrate in advance.
ECD is the dynamic equivalent of EMW and Pressure losses due to frictional resistance.
ECD = MW + (0.1/D)[(YP +PV +ann vely)/300 X D)...units"ppg, in, ft/sec.
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
ECD should exceed your fracture pressure (which have a certain density to do so )
and should be above the pressure where you could hit underbalance situation for hydrostatic pressure
Ahmed,
Please forgive me if I seem impolite, but it's it's not 'all very simple'. It's all quite complicated, in fact,and that's why I enjoy the to-and fro on this site! Because it can be a good learning process, especially when reading mails from those who are very forthright and explicit in their responses.
For instance, 'Analytik' saying in his fourth point:
"Cement I am doing it for the last 10 years. Why is the 1st question of my clients is always ECD?"
I have an answer to that. It's probably because his clients maybe don't understand much about the basic principles of cementing, the ECD element is a big 'engineering' thing they can't work out for themselves, and thus pose such questions. Going to the software, in other words, in the hope that someone running a desk computer in town knows more than the guy standing on a cement unit at two in the morning in a howling rainstorm will miraculously produce a good cement job.
I was very glad to read 'Pupjoint's' last message, balanced, reasonable, informed, as usual. Though I do have a question for him. From the (dinosaur) school which I come from, ECD (Equivalent Circulating Density) is the same thing as EMW (Equivalent Mud Weight), except there's a tendency not these days not to talk about mundane things like 'mud weight' because it doesn't sound so scientific. But maybe I'm wrong.
But possibly not. Try calling the derrickman and asking him what the active mud weight is and he can probably give you an answer within a minute or two. Ask him for an 'input fluid density' and he'll think you're coming from another planet.
But I digress.
Coming back to your recent message, saying
"ECD should exceed your fracture pressure (which have a certain density to do so ) and should be above the pressure where you could hit underbalance situation for hydrostatic pressure"
This seems sort of 'wobbly' to me. I don't think ( and I may be way wrong in this) that you should deliberately exceed fracture pressure based on ECD. But I do believe it would be extremely unwise to go underbalance on that basis. 'Drilling for kicks' is an old-time thing: but 'cementing for kicks' (in other words, getting a bad cement job) is a new one in my dictionary.
It's a question of balance between how much losses you can withstand without completely screwing-up your formation, and also not taking a kick and screwing-up your cement job.
I also quite agree with PJ about taking guesswork and luck out of any cementing (or drilling) equations. But I disagree about Hope, because youve always got to hope that you've used the right calculations and data to start with!
You've started what is, in fact, a quite interesting thread. Hope your cementing goes OK.
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
Joined: Jun 2003 Gender: Male Posts: 933 Location: PERTH WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Re: cemcade software « Reply #21 on Feb 15, 2011, 1:50pm »
AK EMW is just that. ECD is different to EMW. We use EMW when we conduct a leak-off test The EMW is calculated on a static fluid with pressure added at the surface to determine what static column of mud would fracture - Leak Off into - a newly exposed surface.
It has nothing to do with un-scientific terminology it refers to two totally separate measurements
AK EMW is just that. ECD is different to EMW. We use EMW when we conduct a leak-off test The EMW is calculated on a static fluid with pressure added at the surface to determine what static column of mud would fracture - Leak Off into - a newly exposed surface.
It has nothing to do with un-scientific terminology it refers to two totally separate measurements
Sorry, Holdril, my brain had gone on holiday, possibly a result of being on leave from a not very enjoyable hitch, and writing after a four hundred mile day of driving!
You're quite right, although (without wishing to seem pedantic), I still feel that ECD and EMW are the same beast wearing different disguises. The latter measured in static conditions, and the former, dynamic.
And here I could really 'muddy up the waters' if you'll excuse the pun, and the fact that I'm getting way off the purpose of this thread for a moment. But why oh why do we get into all these acronyms which make our lives so unnecessarily difficult? (I blame it on Shell.) Why not instead use EHMD (Equivalent Hydrostatic Mud Density) and ECMD (obvious) instead? Or replace the 'D' with a 'W', but still remaining consistent ?
Oh bother. Now I've created some more acronyms...
But sometimes you might be approaching your EMW measured at the leakoff test, having had to increase your fluid density further along the hole. And (yes there are still dinosaurs around!) you may be drilling with a bunch of hevi-wate (with those big tooljoints and so on) in the upper section of the hole to push your motor along, not having the luxury of a rotary steerable system. In such circumstances, your ECD at the shoe may (unless you're keeping a close track of things) exceed your EMW limits without anyone noticing. Because most often your mud-logger's readout in your office is only giving you ECD at the bit. At which point you may have to go and spend a while in their shack having them do some calculations about what it is elsewhere in the hole, maybe with a freebie baseball hat or a company keyring as a peace-offering for the extra work...
Nothing of which has anything to do with cementing casing, which was the start of this thread.
Information or opinions are solely provided for educational and/or discussion purposes on an informal public forum and should not be interpreted as a recommendation for a specific treatment plan, course of action or product/ service. Use of any of this information does not replace consultations with qualified individuals in these respective fields.
The Driller’s Club is constructed around many oil field forums that allow drilling and oil field oriented people to ask and answer questions relating to subjects within the industry. Membership is free and you can pick your own user name
![[image]](http://www.drillfloor.com/the%20driller%27s%20club.jpg "[image]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
Author
Logged
![[avatar]](http://i416.photobucket.com/albums/pp243/PrecambrianMollusc/SCC-1-1.jpg "[avatar]")
?![[avatar]](http://www.tellumo.co.uk/brent%20storm%20100.jpg "[avatar]")
