The only reason to think for 16" casing is annulus influx, Ok than 16" casing must be burst, than next one, than next one, than blowout out outside of the wellhead., obviously there is no flow out from the 36"conductor ....think that the influx coming through the 7"x9 7/8" , your /and all/ concerns are non aligned....but now if the well head is damaged after the blow out /riser collapsed/ , leaning one site, they checking this at the moment. After, only way to kill this well is with the relive wells.
This was my thoughts and their mistake was to cut the bended riser...
What in the world gives you the idea the 16" is burst? Pressure required to actually burst casing and burst rating are absolutely two different numbers.
Holdrill,
Your habitual 'devil's advocate' here, now he's back on line.
Sure you're maybe right. But I'd go by 'burst rating' if it's the lower figure. Who's going to be mad enough to test the potential (unknown) upper figure, and thus risk their well? The same goes for collapse ratings. And also you need to look at how long the stuff's been lying in the pipeyard, how well it's been inspected, and whether it was manufactured recently by a recognised mill, or some cowboy outfit in a third-world country and has been transported from one operational area to another to meet requirements.
One way or another, if you exceed documented burst pressure and your casing bursts, don't expect your insurance company to cover your damages costs.
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.
Where did you read that, on BP presentation there is two way of the influx, 1 - from the shoe track; 2 - from the annulus. Their drilling engineer statement was that they will never now from were is coming the influx. As most of you here on the forum, chose the influx coming from the annulus, is good for BP, no such of blame that they did not set the cement plug before replacing to SW.
Two major mistakes:
BP - Change out Mud with sea water before setting the cement plug. Transocean - Pumping overboard without flowmeter....
P.S. Panicky engaged every ram on the BOP, maybe, but ROV's probably did something on that.
An inflow test had been done. No flow from floats.
Holdril,
Pure speculation once more on my part. Given the depth of the floats. Given the extremely higher pressure used to 'convert' them. Given the possibility that this damaged the assembly, with all that might entail, including compromising of the casing integrity at the level of the floats. And with the cement not set. And the possibility that the hanger seal asembly was already seeing pressure both from the kick, and nitrogen coming from the cement, and was thus unset. This would put the well underbalance both within the casing, and also the annulus.
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: May 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 105 Location: Bulgaria
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1052 on Jun 10, 2010, 7:50pm »
Holdrill,
On slide 19, where did you see inflow check of that 7X97/8 casing. They pump spacer 16ppg? Is this inflow check? Say that in that case, float is working properly.
Maybe I'm wrong, but from BP presentation, they did only positive test 250 psi and 2500psi. After the cement job they were almost at balance, no differential/back pressure on the float. And my opinion, through the information that I had read, the only negative test that had been performed /on 7"x97/8" casing/ was wile they changed to sea water.
Slide 24 -26 shows the reduction in pressure with a sea water column.
So what.....This is the time that something happened /well is under balance, with other words negative test/ , why they doing this without cement plug. In your previous post you said that they checked the float, they did not. From your WCS you know that the influx traveling with speed of 1000ft per hour, do your calculation again. They did not perform negative test for checking the float previously.
After the cement job they bumped the plug, but they are at balance, float could be open, no back pressure to close it....
I'd like to go back to the title of this thread, and forgive me if I state the obvious: What was the cause of the blowout?
For the blow-out to have occurred, there had to be two events: First an influx and secondly failure of the barriers in place to contain the influx. Let's deal with these separately and also let's deal with what was most likely.
There have been several possible causes of the influx mentioned, but all require that the cement job failed to meet it's objective i.e. there is a leak path (the only exception being collapse of the casing directly opposite the pay zone, which is very improbable - do the maths). So, here we have a casing string, which is only cemented over a short interval, and which has a leak path, either to the annulus or to the shoe-track, or perhaps both. The crew then displaced the well above 8969ft to seawater, introducing an under-balance.
Still, the well should have been OK and no influx occurred, unless either one of three barriers failed; casing, float equipment or seal assembly. Despite all that has been written, if pressure built up in the annulus, the 9-7/8" was still stronger than the 16", with its rupture discs, and is unlikely to have collapsed. Also, remember that they had a 5 joint shoetrack and used non-nitrified 16.7ppg slurry as the tail, and bumped the plug/tested the casing without any problems, so shoe failure is unlikely too, though still possible. The most likely problem was seal assembly failure - remember also that the lockdown sleeve which would have confirmed that it was seated correctly, wasn't set, .
So now we have a well which is underbalanced and, due to seal assembly failure is flowing.
Still, it shouldn't have been an uncontrollable problem. All they had to do was close the BOPs right? Well from here on in, what we have is pure conjecture. We do know that by pumping the large 16ppg mud pill and by doing their inflow test down the drill pipe rather than down the kill line, the crew were probably completely at a loss to understand what was going on in the well when the pressures weren't as expected. From the time of the initial influx to the blow-out was around 2 hours. Even in the relative calm of our homes & offices and looking at the data for many days, we have struggled to piece together the events: Imagine the pressure on the rig. So correctly, they shut in the annular. They then continued the displacement on the kill line. Unfortunately, with all of the different fluids weights in the well, they then made the mistake of concluding that the inflow test was satisfactory, and opened the annular. From here onwards, they continued displacing the well to seawater, unaware that the well was flowing.
Too late, 18 minutes before the explosion, the displacement is stopped and 4 calls made to discuss what to do - the well is flowing. At some point the shear rams are activated, but fail. It appears that the test rams are also activated and, in a last desparate attempt to stop the flow, so is the diverter. What went wrong in the stack remains to be determined, though the presence of either two strings of 5-1/2" drill pipe or a joint of casing in the riser may provide a clue.
On reflection, the concerns we've all stated about the well design probably did not contribute significantly to the blow-out, with one possible exception. If the well is flowing up the annulus, this could have been prevented by running and cementing a liner and then tying it back to surface as appears to be the norm in Norway and by Shell et al in the GoM. Similarly, if the shoe track leaked, the blowout probably wouldn't have occurred if they'd set a cement plug before the displacement, as the Toolpusher requested. Both of these point to having sufficient barriers in place, especially if you're about to remove one.
Or am I stating the obvious?
Burenye,
You've stated "the crew were probably completely at a loss to understand what was going on in the well when the pressures weren't as expected. From the time of the initial influx to the blow-out was around 2 hours. Even in the relative calm of our homes & offices and looking at the data for many days, we have struggled to piece together the events: Imagine the pressure on the rig. So correctly, they shut in the annular. "
Although there's nothing wrong with what you say there, nor in the rest of your post, it implies something which bothers me, and which has been brought up many times in previous messages about this event.
The crew is unsure about pressures. Anomalies have been seen. The crew shut in on the annular.
But who was monitoring all this? Who was in charge? Where was the company man? It doesn't matter if it's a deepwater job (which I don't do) or something simple in an African desert, if there are doubts about pressures and flow out, I'd expect to be informed. And if the well has to be shut in, I'd be on the rigfloor within minutes afterwards, congratulating the driller on his quick response, but trying to establish what was happening. That BOP panel isn't a sort of Nintendo on which you just press all the buttons hoping for a winning result.
The bottom line is, who, exactly, was calling the shots and keeping a close eye on what was going on during this exceedingly dodgy operation, while at the same time entertaining a bunch of BP bigwigs who'd come out to the rig for a back-slapping session? They all got away OK, but the fat lady hadn't yet sung, and we have still to hear their testimony.
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 do have a problem with the 9-7/8" liner NOT being tied back before drilling 8-1/2" by 9-7/8" hole."
I would feel a whole lot better if I had confirmation from the MMS that on the relief well the string set prior to intercepting the blowing well was tied back and covered up the 16". The way the diagrams look now for the relief well it is being drilled with almost the exact casing design as the blowing well.
Presumably the mud weight in the relief wells will have to be pretty significant. It will take a fair bit to restore balance in the original well which is currently totally evacuated. Will they be able to get a good enough FIT on their shoe before weighting up enough to enter and kill? The original 16" shoe was only tested to 12.55ppg equiv.
Will they be looking to actually kill the well or just hold it back using ECD enough to permit entry back into the original to get a packer and /or cement in place?
I just hope that they can hit the well first time. It is going to require a full interception and clean punch through of the casing, it will definitely be a case of a near miss is as good as a mile. No opportunity to establish communication by frac-ing.
Presumably they will be trying to magnetise the casing to assist rangeing once they get close.
Rebel tool,
Interesting questions (to which I have no answers, by the way. More seeking them, so I can understand what's happening further on up the road).
I've never been involved with drilling a relief well. But I can comprehend the principles. So yes, I see the problems you've outlined regarding FIT and kill mud density. But using ECD within the relief well(s)? Not sure I completely understand that. It'll take a lot of horsepower, and also (as you state) risk compromising those wells themselves unless they're proved bomb-proof. Why not just pump some sort of coarse LCM stuff (a bit like that 'junk shot' idea), followed by cement?
Also, as you say, it's not an open-hole situation. What does 'magnetising the casing' mean?
One way or another, not only is this evidently the worst offshore drilling problem which has ever happened, but one which is going to require the greatest technical means to get back under control. Hence a certain fascination. (I don't wish for that to sound morbid, considering that lives were lost in the initial accident.)
Fingers crossed, and let's hope the guys drilling the relief wells continue 'thinking safety'.
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.
On slide 19, where did you see inflow check of that 7X97/8 casing. They pump spacer 16ppg? Is this inflow check? Say that in that case, float is working properly.
Slide 24 -26 shows the reduction in pressure with a sea water column.
So what.....This is the time that something happened /well is under balance, with other words negative test/ , why they doing this without cement plug. In your previous post you said that they checked the float, they did not. From your WCS you know that the influx traveling with speed of 1000ft per hour, do your calculation again. They did not perform negative test for checking the float previously.
After the cement job they bumped the plug, but they are at balance, float could be open, no back pressure to close it....
P.S. No sealing on their cap anyway:
A possible scenario - tough time getting to bottom with the casing. Spudded the casing. Tried to circulate and blew the bottom out the hole thinking they were having a tough time getting the fill up valve to shear out. Pumped away all the cement with the fill up valve still in place (would have meant they didn't get circulation or may partial and not full as reported). This would allow for backflow up through the float so a could kick up the casing. Since there is little to no cement in the annulus, the well could also kick up the annulus. Because they spudded the casing they landed off where they could and possibly in compression. Pipe expansion from being static added additional stress onto the hanger and failed upwards. Seals failed as a result.
Unless it comes down to having to re-enter the well as a last desperate (now that we know delta p in the BOP is > 2000 psi) measure so will require far more than just letting the well flow (100,000 bpd?), I don't think we will never know.
Joined: Feb 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 79 Location: Malaysia
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1056 on Jun 10, 2010, 11:04pm »
Adoubleuk,
Just to clear something up, during the hearings in the States, the BP Engineer was asked about the lockdown ring. He confirmed that it was available but not run. A link is posted somewhere on this thread.
Also, this "casing hanger/seal assembly setup" is not bastardised. It's a standard DrilQuip API piece of equipment for their SS15 Big Bore System.
(Not trying to be devil's advocate, just trying to get you back up to speed - welcome back!).
Also, this "casing hanger/seal assembly setup" is not bastardised. It's a standard DrilQuip API piece of equipment for their SS15 Big Bore System.
(Not trying to be devil's advocate, just trying to get you back up to speed - welcome back!).
I hope someone is running finite element analysis on this standard piece of API equipment under the apparent conditions! In fact, if I was the government, I would insist on it being done by a qualified third party since this is a possible point of failure.
Vehicles are sometimes driven for years and million of miles before the problems surface in situations that were not conceived of at the design stage and then are recalled. How many times have you heard of oilfield equipment being recalled?
Just to clear something up, during the hearings in the States, the BP Engineer was asked about the lockdown ring. He confirmed that it was available but not run. A link is posted somewhere on this thread.
Also, this "casing hanger/seal assembly setup" is not bastardised. It's a standard DrilQuip API piece of equipment for their SS15 Big Bore System.
(Not trying to be devil's advocate, just trying to get you back up to speed - welcome back!).
Burenye,
I beg to differ. DrilQuip is a recognised and reputable manufacturer. I've used their kit in the past with no problems. But nevertheless, all these 'dummy hangers' and weird diameters give me pause for thought. Especially if one vital component wasn't run. It was all designed and built according to what the customers wanted and were prepared to pay for. Oilfield equipment manufacturers are not like the people who invented and sold the hoola-hoop: ie something you didn't possess before, but suddenly thought you needed. Nope, this wellhead system was customer-specification driven. But this time the customer decided that (for whatever reason) he didn't require putting on the purple hubcaps, or rather, the seal assembly lockdown ring. Without realising that those hubcaps were in fact a cunning way of ensuring his brakes would work.
Also, given the stuff we've learned over the last couple of months, give me a good reason to believe why API should be trusted not to 'rubber stamp' things in the interest of expediency, just like MMS... And that also goes for IADC. I fully understood and support the feelings expressed in the message IADC sent to the US administration. But the IADC well-control examination is a joke of the first (and frightening) order. Anyone who doesn't pass it with more than 95% should go back to roughnecking. The MMS one is only slightly better. And that's not to say that IWCF is good, because it's compiled by wordy people who just want to catch you out in a classroom / exam situation, ensuring a suitable failure rate so that a proportion of candidates have to pay for a re-sit, and thus keep the entire organisation in employment.
Macondo must force everyone to go back to basics, and re-think all their ideas. It's going to continue blowing out (with a certain amount of 'collection') for another couple of months. I completely disagree with this 'moratorium on offshore drilling' idea proposed by the US government, especially as those same politicians will be the first ones to start weeping when their domestic oil production starts to decrease, and the national debt increases accordingly. But simply quoting 'API' won't work in the future. The world has changed. This is the drilling industry's 9/11. A serious wake-up call.
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.
Also, this "casing hanger/seal assembly setup" is not bastardised. It's a standard DrilQuip API piece of equipment for their SS15 Big Bore System.
(Not trying to be devil's advocate, just trying to get you back up to speed - welcome back!).
I hope someone is running finite element analysis on this standard piece of API equipment under the apparent conditions! In fact, if I was the government, I would insist on it being done by a qualified third party since this is a possible point of failure.
Vehicles are sometimes driven for years and million of miles before the problems surface in situations that were not conceived of at the design stage and then are recalled. How many times have you heard of oilfield equipment being recalled?
Auto,
This stuff was no more 'standard equipment' than were the 'O' rings for the booster rockets on the Challenger space shuttle. The two (completely separate industry) events are curiously similar. Except that in this case the livelihoods of many uninvolved people are affected and the initial material capital loss was not furnished by the taxpayer...
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.
Is this a duct tape test I see? from Skandi 2 at 20:35 June 10, 2010
Auto,
I think not. 'Horizon 14' (aka ROV 2 deployed from the Skandi Neptune) is pumping dispersant, and meanwhile filming. I fear that what looks like a big bit of duct-tape is in fact part of the rubber sealing element forced over the flange, and which is beginning to break up. I wouldn't be surprised if this 'containment cap' isn't replaced by a different one in the next few days. But which will require its removal, meaning full-bore flow of the well fluids into the sea until the new one is installed.
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.
Is this a duct tape test I see? from Skandi 2 at 20:35 June 10, 2010
Auto,
I think not. 'Horizon 14' (aka ROV 2 deployed from the Skandi Neptune) is pumping dispersant, and meanwhile filming. I fear that what looks like a big bit of duct-tape is in fact part of the rubber sealing element forced over the flange, and which is beginning to break up. I wouldn't be surprised if this 'containment cap' isn't replaced by a different one in the next few days. But which will require its removal, meaning full-bore flow of the well fluids into the sea until the new one is installed.
AK
Darn! We need duct tape! Probably only a marginal seal anyway. Maybe they will leave it until they have their new super duper recovery system ready to go.
I hope someone is running finite element analysis on this standard piece of API equipment under the apparent conditions! In fact, if I was the government, I would insist on it being done by a qualified third party since this is a possible point of failure.
Vehicles are sometimes driven for years and million of miles before the problems surface in situations that were not conceived of at the design stage and then are recalled. How many times have you heard of oilfield equipment being recalled?
Auto,
This stuff was no more 'standard equipment' than were the 'O' rings for the booster rockets on the Challenger space shuttle. The two (completely separate industry) events are curiously similar. Except that in this case the livelihoods of many uninvolved people are affected and the initial material capital loss was not furnished by the taxpayer...
AK
Quite agree - I should have used quotes as well. A standard piece of equipment in a substandard environment much like the Challenger o-rings then.
Also, as you say, it's not an open-hole situation. What does 'magnetising the casing' mean?
AK
When trying to hit a string of casing with a relief well you can vector in using the distortion of the earth's magnetic field. In the same way that drilling past a fish or another well will distort your MWD rmagnetometer readings. If you rely on this effect it is known as passive ranging, but if you have access to the wellhead as in this case, you can induce a magnetic field into the casing to amplify the effect and therefore make vectoring easier, this is known as active ranging
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.
Joined: Nov 2003 Gender: Male Posts: 42 Location: Maadi Cairo Egypt
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1065 on Jun 11, 2010, 6:22am »
The Cause will be debated forever BP and its leagacy will stain The Gulf forever My thoughts are where are the Americans who talk and cry lots I havent seen and good from them other than make BP payon killing this well other than a relief well and BP moved on that Day 1 by filing and starting to move the first rig they had followed by a second incase. But here we are with a conductor into the well all the way to surface and no one has talked about running Coil into this thing and killing it from below I know one or two things are in the way but Coil can drill through most things to get there. Thats why well intervention was developed
And how did BP get so big in the USA Buy buying up cash broke American companies like ARCO AMOCO May be thats why the People like the step on the neck and squeeze BP dry talk from the preseident Cause They seem to have lost that lets fix it and let God sort it out later attitude
Joined: Aug 2009 Gender: Male Posts: 55 Location: Stavanger
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1066 on Jun 11, 2010, 7:55am »
I doubt any other operator could do anything else than what BP are doing. Drilling relief wells are the primary contingency when something like this happens all over the world. That was known when they got the approval to drill. I plan wells myself here in Norway and contingency releif wells is a part of the game as last option. But these images from the flow is devastating shown live from the gulf.
The Cause will be debated forever BP and its leagacy will stain The Gulf forever My thoughts are where are the Americans who talk and cry lots I havent seen and good from them other than make BP payon killing this well other than a relief well and BP moved on that Day 1 by filing and starting to move the first rig they had followed by a second incase. But here we are with a conductor into the well all the way to surface and no one has talked about running Coil into this thing and killing it from below I know one or two things are in the way but Coil can drill through most things to get there. Thats why well intervention was developed
And how did BP get so big in the USA Buy buying up cash broke American companies like ARCO AMOCO May be thats why the People like the step on the neck and squeeze BP dry talk from the preseident Cause They seem to have lost that lets fix it and let God sort it out later attitude
Pumper, We talked about coil tubing back on maybe page 7 to 12(not sure/not looking)?..you said "coil can drill through most things to get there"..what kind of drill bit are you going to use to drill through drill pipe?.. The rams are partially closed in the BOP, they had the bent riser pinching off tubulars , now we have no riser and opening rams with no definite knowledge of what lies below doesnt seem like an option. Keep in mind that you do have a well kill operation at surface.Nobody with knowledge or experience of available coil equipment gave any input into what was available. At the depth of the well are there coil units that can go that deep? Would they have to run a tractor to get there? And what about required pump displacement to kill the well is this feasable with coil equipment, without hydraulicing issues?I cant answer these questions but Im sure that to consider that option some operating perameters would need to be answered. Untill relief wells are drilled containing as much oil as possible will be the direction they are going.
Joined: Nov 2003 Gender: Male Posts: 42 Location: Maadi Cairo Egypt
Re: Cause of Blowout/Fire on Horizon « Reply #1069 on Jun 11, 2010, 3:54pm »
Sorry Blazzer I have been last 60 days In Albania working and haven't kept up with page 12..lol But if the well has a flow path for 20 plus K a day oil there is an opening my friend and its bigger than all the pages you fellows have written up stacked on top of each other and something tried is better than talk Thats just experience having done coil in 20,000 bbl a day wells before they find a way to bottom and the speed things are moving you will see oil on your east coast before the relief well kills it cause the hurricane season is about to start and the gulf without the black oil was always to hot now just think about how much warmer it is now with all that black oil absorbing the heat it will be interesting times ahead in next 30 days
Sorry Blazzer I have been last 60 days In Albania working and haven't kept up with page 12..lol But if the well has a flow path for 20 plus K a day oil there is an opening my friend and its bigger than all the pages you fellows have written up stacked on top of each other and something tried is better than talk Thats just experience having done coil in 20,000 bbl a day wells before they find a way to bottom and the speed things are moving you will see oil on your east coast before the relief well kills it cause the hurricane season is about to start and the gulf without the black oil was always to hot now just think about how much warmer it is now with all that black oil absorbing the heat it will be interesting times ahead in next 30 days
Pumper, The coil could probably overcome the flow easily enough but is there coil equipment capable of getting to the depth required? What is the state of the casing/tubulars downhole? Once you open the rams you may be throwing gasoline on the fire,unless there is room to get through the rams? Im not saying it isnt possible, I dont know how they could get coil down there? You would need a bha with floats(underbalanced well/flow to surface) And is it going to be deep enough that they can kill the well?How much volume can you pump through the coil? We threw around the idea before and then it just kind of went away, thankyou for letting everyone know about your experience with running coil in 20000bbl a day. . I would think if they tried this it would be wise to put something in place at the bop to shear it off. Any input from someone in coil snubbing/service/production equipment? I dont think you can pump enough volume to kill this well through coil without it turning into a bottle rocket, but I could be wrong?
Sorry Blazzer I have been last 60 days In Albania working and haven't kept up with page 12..lol But if the well has a flow path for 20 plus K a day oil there is an opening my friend and its bigger than all the pages you fellows have written up stacked on top of each other and something tried is better than talk Thats just experience having done coil in 20,000 bbl a day wells before they find a way to bottom and the speed things are moving you will see oil on your east coast before the relief well kills it cause the hurricane season is about to start and the gulf without the black oil was always to hot now just think about how much warmer it is now with all that black oil absorbing the heat it will be interesting times ahead in next 30 days
Pumper, The coil could probably overcome the flow easily enough but is there coil equipment capable of getting to the depth required? What is the state of the casing/tubulars downhole? Once you open the rams you may be throwing gasoline on the fire,unless there is room to get through the rams? Im not saying it isnt possible, I dont know how they could get coil down there? You would need a bha with floats(underbalanced well/flow to surface) And is it going to be deep enough that they can kill the well?How much volume can you pump through the coil? We threw around the idea before and then it just kind of went away, thankyou for letting everyone know about your experience with running coil in 20000bbl a day. . I would think if they tried this it would be wise to put something in place at the bop to shear it off. Any input from someone in coil snubbing/service/production equipment? I dont think you can pump enough volume to kill this well through coil without it turning into a bottle rocket, but I could be wrong?
Just a personal opinion, but my feeling is that although (small diameter) coil could be useful, it would only be as a means of transporting instrumention downhole. Absolutely no way one could pump anything down coil at a rate which would have a hope of killing this thing with the current blowout flow, let alone its potential full-open rate.
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 doubt any other operator could do anything else than what BP are doing. Drilling relief wells are the primary contingency when something like this happens all over the world. That was known when they got the approval to drill. I plan wells myself here in Norway and contingency releif wells is a part of the game as last option. But these images from the flow is devastating shown live from the gulf.
Relief wells may be the primary method of stopping blowouts, however BP has shown that they can get over the well, but only to the point of collecting some of the oil. I am sure they could devise a way of re-entering the well since they are apparently so darn smart and in a more timely manner than drilling relief wells (wouldn't be as expensive either).
Why BP is going to the trouble of using these exotic methods of stopping the oil flow is beyond me as well. Why can't the get they flow the well from the various points below the riser flange, get the flange off and put on a spool with a proper outlet in order to capture 100% of the oil? Seems fairly straight forward to me Is it that the ROV's are not able to remove the nuts. Of course I have recommended removing some of the nuts in other postings!
This upper spool could also be a foundation for building a stripping stack to re-enter the well. The huge spool they are building now may well be suitable for that if they are installing side outlets.
Do you think you are able to push a closed end coil tubing down the live well ?
Yes, if the injector head can be installed above the BOP somehow or there is a sufficient conduit to surface. Using what they have now it may be possible. Challenges are that the drill pipe is crimped at the top and probably all the rams are closed.
Opening the rams would reduce the pressure drop that is currently about 2200 psi and would result in a significant increase in production - likely in the order of 20,000 - 40,000 bpd (I am thinking of doing a rough model because I'm getting really curious what the maximum flow potential of the well is) BP could tell us but they only release information when threatened.
In my other post I mention installing a spool with side outlets that could provide a foundation for something like this.
I doubt any other operator could do anything else than what BP are doing. Drilling relief wells are the primary contingency when something like this happens all over the world. That was known when they got the approval to drill. I plan wells myself here in Norway and contingency releif wells is a part of the game as last option. But these images from the flow is devastating shown live from the gulf.
Relief wells may be the primary method of stopping blowouts, however BP has shown that they can get over the well, but only to the point of collecting some of the oil. I am sure they could devise a way of re-entering the well since they are apparently so darn smart and in a more timely manner than drilling relief wells (wouldn't be as expensive either).
Why BP is going to the trouble of using these exotic methods of stopping the oil flow is beyond me as well. Why can't the get they flow the well from the various points below the riser flange, get the flange off and put on a spool with a proper outlet in order to capture 100% of the oil? Seems fairly straight forward to me Is it that the ROV's are not able to remove the nuts. Of course I have recommended removing some of the nuts in other postings!
This upper spool could also be a foundation for building a stripping stack to re-enter the well. The huge spool they are building now may well be suitable for that if they are installing side outlets.
Auto, Has there been any update on the bolt situation? They must have a solution by now. Someone suggested splitting the washers, they dont have washers,maybe split the 1 " steel .It also seems that they are not capable of processing full flow yet, they may attempt a solid seal assembly soon? With the ability to adjust flow at the cap & surface? Capturing full flow and where it is going to go seems to be the issue they have now.thx.
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
Gordon, Elias & Seely, LLP are
maritime lawyers serving injured offshore oilfield workers throughout the world
![[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]")
Author
Logged
Probably only a marginal seal anyway. Maybe they will leave it until they have their new super duper recovery system ready to go.
![[avatar]](http://www.tellumo.co.uk/brent%20storm%20100.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://images.proboards.com/avatars/devil.gif "[avatar]")
![[yim]](http://images.proboards.com/yim.gif "[yim]")
![[avatar]](http://images.proboards.com/avatars/boyandpc.gif "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
. I would think if they tried this it would be wise to put something in place at the bop to shear it off. Any input from someone in coil snubbing/service/production equipment? I dont think you can pump enough volume to kill this well through coil without it turning into a bottle rocket, but I could be wrong?