3D Nonlinear Flow-Induced Vibration Model of Tubing Strings in High-Pressure, High-Temperature, and High-Yield Curved Gas Wells

Guo, Xiaoqiang; Li, Jun; Dai, Liming; Zhang, Xiaohong

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-97328-5_5

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[1][2][3][4][5] With the continuous development of these HTHP oil and gas wells, the difficulty of oil and gas production continues to increase, which puts forward higher requirements for the integrity of the gas wellbore. [6][7][8][9][10] During the production process of HTHP gas wells, the fluid flow rate in the tubing string is very fast, which not only applies to the start-up and shut-in conditions, [11][12][13] but also accounts for the continuous changes in production of gas well overtime. Under these conditions, the fluid flow rate in the tubing string will change greatly and cause momentum conversion, resulting in severe pressure fluctuation in the tubing string.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Instantaneous Shut‐In on the Safety of Tubing String in Ultra‐Deep High‐Temperature and High‐Pressure Gas Well

Zhang,

Zheng,

Yang

et al. 2024

Energy Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, considering the factors such as well trajectory and tubing string structures, the transient shut‐in tubing string pressure fluctuation model of ultra‐deep high‐temperature and high‐pressure (hereinafter referred to as HTHP) gas well is established, the propagation of pressure wave along the well depth is obtained, and the effects of different production and shut‐in time on the fluctuating pressure and its variation range are analyzed. Through calculation and analysis, it can be seen that there are differences in pressure waveforms at different well depths. The closer to the bottom of the well, the more delayed the occurrence of water hammer, and the smaller the water hammer pressure value. The larger the production, the greater the pressure wave velocity, and the closer to the wellhead, the more obvious the change. For well X, the pressure wave velocity in the well section below 6500 m varies greatly with the increase of production. When the production is 140 × 104 m3 D−1, the difference of pressure wave velocity between the bottom hole and the wellhead is 105.19 m s−1. After instantaneous shut‐in, the wellhead pressure increases by 3.2% compared with the initial pressure and the bottom hole pressure increases by 0.6%.

show abstract