Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 11

SPE 77756

The Effect of Cement Heat of Hydration on the Maximum Annular Temperature of Oil
and Gas Wells
R.L. Dillenbeck, SPE, T. Heinold, and M.J. Rogers, SPE, BJ Services Company and I.G. Mombourquette, SPE,
PROMORE Engineering Inc., Div. of Core Labs Company

Copyright 2002, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

from wells in both North and South America and includes
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and both shallow as well as deep well applications.
Exhibition held in San Antonio, Texas, 29 September2 October 2002.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to Introduction
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at As recent technological advances have pushed the exploration
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of for oil and gas reserves to more extreme locations and
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is conditions, service companies have had to re-evaluate many
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous long held notions with respect to how, and under what
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. conditions well cementing compositions should be tested.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
One prime example would be in deep water exploration. As
numerous authors1, 2,3 have noted, sea floor temperatures near
Abstract or even slightly below the freezing point of fresh water are not
Recent advances in electronics technology have made it uncommon conditions under which cement must be
possible to monitor and record real-time annular temperatures successfully placed and hydrated. In other extreme onshore
in operational wells, both during and after primary cementing. applications at high latitudes, permafrost can expose cement
The advances have allowed operators to record the entire systems to very low temperatures under which cement is
annular temperature history of their wells, including the expected to hydrate. On the opposite end of the spectrum,
critical period when cement hydration occurs. The ability to High Temperature, High Pressure (HTHP) drilling in various
record these actual temperatures can significantly impact the locations throughout the world also pushes the upper
oilfield cementing industry in several ways. Most temperature extremes at which cement must be carefully
significantly, current accepted practice within the industry is placed and hydrated.
to test certain critical aspects of set cement, such as Concurrent with placing annular sealing cement in ever
compressive and tensile strength, at bottomhole static more challenging conditions, the oil and gas industry has also
temperature (BHST). If the short-term maximum annular begun to more closely examine both the short and long-term
temperature is significantly different from the later BHST of mechanical properties of annular sealants, and the effect these
the well, then laboratory tests run on cement at a steady BHST properties have on long-term annular isolation4. In order to
may prove to be inaccurate based on the actual temperature more closely test the mechanical properties of cement under
encountered by a cement slurry down hole. Also of concern is well conditions, the cement must typically be cured, or
the fact that since the maximum temperature spike from hydrated for the appropriate amount of time under temperature
hydrating cement may not occur until after the cement has and pressure conditions as close as possible to downhole
achieved an initial set, the magnitude of any subsequent conditions in the well. If the cement system is not hydrated at
temperature change after the initial set may have profound the correct temperature(s), then the resulting mechanical
effects on induced stress in the cement sheath, as well as the properties tests may yield results that are not consistent with
casing and formation. the properties developed by the cement in the actual well.
Based on actual field measurements of annular temperatures, Further, the actual induced stresses in a set annular cement
the authors will detail how the variable factors of individual sheath have been shown to be impacted by short-term changes
heat of hydration, relative annular geometry, and final BHST in wellbore temperatures4, 5. As Romero and Loizzo6 have
interact to produce short-term maximum temperatures in the noted, one could consider that the cement has set once the
cement sheath. In some instances, these maximum temperature is maximum in the wellbore. Given the annular
temperatures can vary significantly from the stabilized BHST temperature reduction that can occur after cement hydration, it
in a well. The actual annular temperature data was recovered would seem logical that if the change is great enough, then

this temperature change generated by cement hydration could another purpose. The temperature sensors were run in order to
in itself induce significant stresses into the recently monitor downhole dynamics during the completion and
set cement. production phases of the wells. Because the sensors were
Finally, new advances in completions technology have made active as soon as they were run into the well (on the casing
possible certain tools, such as external casing perforating exterior), it was possible for the authors to monitor and record
guns, which must be sealed in the cemented annulus of a well the actual annular temperatures before, during, and after the
utilizing such technology. While cementing these non- cement hydrated. This temperature tracking ability allowed
symmetrical annuluses can be challenging, it can be for the capture of not just the BHCT and cement hydration
successfully accomplished7. However, the tools that are left induced temperature rise, but also the final stabilized BHST at
cemented into the annulus must obviously be subjected to the the sensor for each well.
same conditions as the cement that hydrates around them in Since the sensors communicated data to the surface via
the annulus. Because most tools, gages, and/or sensors used in annular wireline cables, the authors had to accept one
oil and gas wells have certain design limits for time at limitation on the sensor location. The temperature sensors
temperature and pressure, it can be critical to know what were intended to provide lifetime data for the well. Therefore,
conditions these annular devices are being exposed to at a the data transmission wireline and sensors had to be mounted
given point in time in order to assure their correct operation. just above the primary zone of interest in the annulus. To
Historically, most performance testing of set cement has place any additional sensors below this point would expose the
been undertaken at or very near Bottomhole Static wireline to possible damage during perforation and completion
Temperature (BHST) at the depth the cement is placed. of those zones. Accordingly, even though the sensors were
Typically, cement curing chambers that hydrate the cement typically placed relatively close to the bottom of the well,
and hold it for given amounts of time under downhole there was normally just one sensor used, and it was
conditions (prior to testing) will be slowly heated up (or permanently cemented in place on the casing exterior at some
cooled down for cold BHSTs) from a point near the distance above the shoe of the casing string.
anticipated Bottomhole circulating temperature (BHCT) to
BHST. The BHST will then be held until the end of the Temperature Data Acquisition
curing time, at which point the appropriate testing of the Electrical Resonating Diaphragms (ERD) were used to detect
cements mechanical properties may be performed. all the downhole annular temperatures real-time. Reliability
Likewise, many downhole tools and other mechanisms may is of utmost importance because the instrumentation is not
be tested for extended periods of time at anticipated BHST to retrievable. The sensors and related technology used to
determine their anticipated level of performance in a obtain the data proved to be quite robust and very reliable in
given well. field use8. It represents a step forward in permanent
Fortunately, it has now been generally recognized that the monitoring, and is one of the most reliable systems presently
exothermic nature of Portland cement hydration can inject available. It utilizes the development of the ERD device and
significant amounts of thermal energy into a wellbore once can be reliably applied to operate continuously at temperatures
cement hydration begins to proceed6. Measurements in both of up to 4800 F. This technology has been field proven for
test model wells, as well as certain numerical simulator eight years (over 500 systems) and has operated reliably over
models have suggested that early in the life of a well, this heat 95% of the time in applications up to 3900 F. It has been used
flux can drive the annular temperature above the stabilized successfully in applications where temperatures have reached
BHST for some period of time3, 6. Just how significant the 5000 F, though none of the wells highlighted in this paper
annular temperature increase would be appears to be faced conditions anywhere as extreme as these.
dependant upon several factors, not the least of which would One reason for this high level of reliability is the complete
be the mass of hydrating cement per unit of well depth, the removal of downhole electronics. The only downhole sensing
slurry temperature at the start of hydration, as well as the components of the ERD technology are passive resonators that
composition of the actual cementing system used. are excited from surface. The mode of operation is to excite
Prior to preparing this paper, much of the investigational an independent temperature sensor from surface. The sensor is
literature and other historical data pertaining to cement not exposed to any pressure and its resonant frequency is a
hydration induced annular temperature buildup was found by function only of temperature. The passive resonators will
the authors to be based largely on various computer models, oscillate at frequencies dependent on temperature, which is
very shallow test wells, or single point wireline temperature detected locally and transmitted electrically (not
surveys in the wellbore. Given the previously detailed critical electronically) to surface via permanent annular wireline. The
temperature dependant well issues, the authors felt that they move toward electronics-free technologies started about seven
were very lucky to be involved in a project that allowed them years ago with the development and commercialization of the
to gather and analyze real-time annular temperature data on ERD technology. As illustrated in Fig 1, the ERD technology
actual production wells during the critical cement uses a pulse of electricity down an electrical cable to measure
hydration phase. the response of a passive sensor. The general architecture of
The technology used by the authors to provide annular this technology is similar to fiber optic technology. Each rely
temperatures as the cement hydrated was actually run for on sophisticated measurement electronics being placed at

surface, a passive sensor placed down hole with a connection two nearly identical wells and see if the results were
between the two being fiber or cable. The ERD technology is repeatable from one well to the other.
well proven and was originally developed for land-based Well #4, with a vertical wellbore, was in Venezuela and
applications where the instrumentation was conveyed was chosen to look at a more conventional casing/hole
externally to the casing and cemented in place as shown in Fig configuration. TD on this vertical well was the deepest of the
1. By developing a sophisticated surface electronics package, wells examined, and was 12,900 ft. The annular temperature
the necessity for downhole electronics was eliminated and, sensor was also located near T.D. at +/- 12,600 ft. The BHST
therefore, could be removed from the sensors. This has at the sensor was 2440 F. Unlike the other wells, the casing
dramatically increased both the reliability and the range of size on this well was 5 -in., and the casing was run in a hole
acceptable temperature of downhole monitoring systems. size of 8 -in. This well utilized a moderately extended, 14.0
Also, by eliminating the electronics from the downhole sensor, ppg (1.68 sg) composite blend cement slurry. With the
problems with possible electronics generated heat possibly smallest annular area, and also a slightly lower cement slurry
corrupting temperature data could be avoided. The sensor density, this well had the lowest CDF of the group, with 23.99
package can be seen at a typical field location just prior to lbs cement/ft depth.
running the casing string in Fig 3.
Cement Heat of Hydration Testing
The Wells An isothermal cement calorimeter was used to carry out the
A total of four wells were selected for review in this paper. cement hydration heat testing. The calorimeter used in the
Since the wells had differing annular configurations and also testing is based on the operational principle of a Seebeck
because they used different cementing systems with different Envelope Calorimeter (SEC). It is designed in such a way that
slurry densities, the authors determined that some type of all heat generated must pass through the walls of the
correlation was needed between the wells and the cement calorimeter. The envelope is maintained at a constant
systems used. In order to accomplish this task, the authors temperature by passing temperature-controlled water through
developed a value called the Cement Density Factor or CDF. the outer jacket of the calorimeter. When heat begins to flow
To determine the CDF for each well, the annular volume for through the calorimeter walls, a temperature difference can be
one foot of the well was calculated based on casing outside established which is directly proportional to the heat flow. In
diameter (O.D.) and drill bit size. This one-foot volume was the course of our investigation for this paper, the original
then multiplied by the cement slurry density to obtain the CDF calorimeter was modified and equipped with commercially
in units of pounds of cement slurry, per foot of well depth. available Heat flux sensors. The heart of this unit is a
Well #1 was a shallow 2,543-ft vertical well in Alberta, differential thermocouple sensor. A thin foil, 40-junction
Canada. Due to the well having multiple pays, it had the thermopile is bonded to either side of the Kapton barrier with
annular temperature sensor set at +/- 1,500 ft. This well known thermal characteristics. Since, as described above, the
utilized 3 -in. casing set in a 7 7/8-in. hole. The well also heat flow is directly proportional to the temperature
had a very low Bottomhole Static Temperature (BHST) at the differential across this thermal barrier, an exact heat flow rate
sensor of only 660 F. The cement slurry used on this well was can be calculated and displayed by measuring this difference.
a 15.0 ppg (1.8 sg) composite blend system, which had a CDF The senor is directly interfaced with a data acquisition system
of 30.46 lbs cement/ft of depth in this well. The well was and requires no cold-junction compensation. The data
chosen for this paper because it represented a break from the acquisition unit (DAU) was setup to display the rate of heat
norm, where BHSTs are usually significantly greater than the flow directly in BTU/ft2hr. Figure 4 shows the general layout
inlet fluid temperature at surface. In this well, instead of the of the modified test apparatus used.
fluids being gradually heated up during their journey down The actual cement slurry used on each of the four wells was
and back out of the wellbore, they actually tended to cool off, carefully blended and mixed in the laboratory for Heat of
much as would be the case in certain offshore deep Hydration (HOH) testing. As others have done in published
water wells. accounts6, the cement slurries were mixed outside the cell.
Wells #2 and #3 were in the U.S.A. in the State of Alaska. Therefore, any instantaneous heat generated would not be
These two land wells were of a medium depth; both having a captured or recorded in these tests. However, each slurry was
T.D. of approximately 7,700-ft measured depth (MD). quickly conditioned in an atmospheric consistometer in order
However, these wellbores included significant deviation, to bring it up to the curing temperature for that particular
which at one point, in one of the wellbores, was as much as downhole test, and then added to the HOH test chamber. In
260. True Vertical depth (TVD) on these wells was +/- 7,400 most of the tests, the test chamber held about 85 grams of
ft. Both wells had annular temperature sensors set at +/- 5,500 slurry and each test was run for approximately 70 hours. After
ft MD, due to multiple pays. Both wells utilized 15.7 ppg this period of time had elapsed, the systems were typically
(1.88 sg) class G based cement slurries. A 3 -in. casing generating very little if any additional hydration energy, and
was run in 8 -in. hole in both wells and this gave a CDF of hydration process was deemed to be complete as far as
38.43 lbs cement/ft of depth. The BHST at the sensors was +/- significant heat generation was concerned.
1130 F on the two wells. By using these two wells, which The HOH was determined twice for each slurry. First, each
offset each other, the authors were able to look at data from system was tested with the ambient temperature of the

calorimeter held at a constant 800 F. This was to allow the Accordingly, on those two wells, the decline portion of the
authors to directly compare the heat evolution curves and annular temperature curve, after its peak, is a projection only.
HOH of the various systems at the same temperature. Next, Several days after the drilling rigs were removed from these
each cement system was again tested for HOH, but this time wells, and data acquisition was restored, annular temperature
the test cell in the calorimeter was heated to, and maintained, data was used to determine the final stabilized static
at approximately the same temperature that the curing cement temperature data at the sensor depth. On wells # 1 and # 4,
was exposed to in the well. However, due to the upper annular temperature data acquisition was un-interrupted
temperature limitations of the submersible pump used to throughout the entire period of time that the cement
circulate heated fluid through the calorimeter cell, the was hydrating.
maximum temperature used on any of the tests was limited to The second aberration noted by the authors was that on well,
about 1500 F. Also, the authors noted that as test temperatures #4, which was the deep well in Venezuela, no definitive
increased, the accelerated rate of mix water evaporation from temperature spike above BHST at the sensor was noted, even
the slurry sample, along with subsequent condensation at the though the data acquisition was un-interrupted through the
top of the chamber gave very erratic test results. This time period that the cement was hydrating. At first this
phenomenon was overcome by adding a small layer of light development puzzled the authors, but once all the data was
mineral oil on top of the cement slurry, prior to the start of the analyzed, some very intriguing solutions presented
higher temperature tests. While this step eliminated the themselves. Even though the possibility exists that an
problems caused by water evaporation and re-condensation, it incomplete cement sheath near the annular sensor did not
also reduced the mass of cement used in the elevated allow for cement HOH to be detected, there were no recorded
temperature HOH tests to something less than the previously indications, other than the lack of temperature spike from the
mentioned 85-gram sample size. At first, this slightly reduced sensor to suggest to the authors that this might have occurred.
mass of cement in the higher temperature tests was not Instead, there is data from testing performed for this paper that
deemed to be a problem since the HOH calculations used by suggests other possible answers. First, the HOH energy yield
the authors took into account the mass of cement used in each on the cement slurry pumped on this well was near the lowest
individual test. However, as will be covered in more depth of the four wells examined when compared with the other
later in this paper, the authors would later learn that this step slurries at 800 F. This was undoubtedly due to the fact that the
did in fact likely impact the cumulative HOH of the cements at composite slurry blend used on this well included significant
higher temperatures, for at least one slurry. portions of extenders and other non-exothermic materials.
These materials were used both to reduce the density of the
Results system, and to increase the systems resistance to gas migration
The annular temperature histories, starting after the cement during hydration. The authors also noted that even though the
was left static in the annulus and running until either cement total HOH for the Venezuelan slurry was very similar to the
hydration was obviously complete, or data acquisition was total HOH of the slurry used on the Canadian well, the
temporarily terminated to move the drilling rig, is presented in evolution of heat curve on the Venezuelan slurry was flatter,
Figures 5 through 8 for wells 1-4, respectively. Figures 9 with a significantly lower peak, such that the energy yield was
through 11 are a graphical representation of both the 800 F, spread out over a longer time interval. Also, by virtue of a
and the static temperature evolution of heat curves generated smaller annulus and higher cement yield, the CDF for this well
in the lab for the cements used on wells 1-4. In addition, was by far the lowest of the four wells. Another point that
each graph has been overlaid with a curve representing the should be noted is that even though this well was the hottest
cumulative energy yield vs. time at both 800 F and static well of those examined (BHST = 2440 F), its average BHCT
temperature at the sensor for that well. Finally, Figure 12 during cementing (from the sensor) of 1860 F left a significant
summarizes the following tabular results for each well: temperature rebound of 580 F that had to occur even before
Maximum annular temperature during cement hydration, equilibrium BHST was again achieved. In other words, given
Stabilized static temperature at the sensor, temperature the low relative HOH for the slurry used, coupled with the
differential between stabilized static temperature at the sensor lowest CDF of the four wells examined in this paper, the
and maximum temperature achieved during cement hydration, authors feel that it is at least possible that the limited amount
Heat of hydration for each cement, and the Cement of energy yielded by the cement in this well served only to
density factor. push the annular temperature back to BHST more rapidly than
would naturally occur with out cement hydration proceeding.
Discussion Without additional energy injected into the annulus from the
Before entering into the ramifications of the results, a few hydrating cement, the annular temperature may not have ever
aberrations in the data should be addressed. been able to exceed the BHST at the sensor.
First, even though annular temperature data was recorded on Based on their earlier literature reviews and other related
both of the Alaska wells (well #s 2 and 3) until after the peak research they had done, the authors expected that the
cement hydration temperature was observed, the data maximum annular temperatures achieved in the wells during
acquisition had to be temporarily terminated after recording cement hydration would be noticeable. However, they were
this peak in order to remove the drilling rig from the wells. not necessarily expecting to see temperature differentials of

over 500 F between the maximum annular temperature and the cementing operations. With the wells studied in this
stabilized static temperature at the sensors on wells # 2 and #3. paper, the amount of temperature increase above BHST
In his work on Deep Water cementing, Ravi3 documented a ranged from none to 520 F.
large scale test model temperature increase in the center of the 2. Cement HOH values that are obtained at ambient
cement sheath of about 100 C ( +/- 500 F). However, that temperatures will likely be significantly lower than the
model was designed to simulate a Deep Water application actual heat yield for a given slurry when hydration
which, due to larger diameter casings and holes would occurs at the temperatures encountered down hole.
typically involve cement density factors (lbs cmt/ft depth) Likewise, the rate of hydration energy release will
greater than in a completion casing cement operation. typically be much faster at elevated downhole
Also worth noting in the results is the fact that the total temperatures.
amount of heat liberated by each pound of cement is 3. The change in annular temperature that occurs after the
apparently very much dependant upon the temperature at cement achieves initial set and HOH peaks, can be of
which the cement hydration is maintained. An example would sufficient magnitude to induce significant stresses in the
be that the cement system used in well #1 apparently cement sheath. The authors would therefore suggest that
generated about 42% more total energy in the 70 hour, 800 F it would be prudent to model such temperature change
ambient test than it did under the (cooler) test conducted at the induced stresses and include them in the anticipated
660 F static temperature of the annular sensor. This fact may well history during the cement design process.
help to explain why even though the CDFs in these wells 4. Both the downhole HOH and the CDF play significant
should have been lower than those encountered in a conductor roles in determining maximum annular temperatures
casing for deepwater applications, the actual maximum during cement hydration.
annular temperature increases were similar. The higher 5. It appears possible that with some well designs that
formation temperatures in these completion strings would have a wide temperature spread between BHCT and
appear to generate a higher total heat yield per unit of cement BHST and that also utilize lower HOH cement systems
than would occur at the relatively lower sea floor temperatures and have a low CDF, maximum annular cement
of a deep water well. Interestingly, the authors did take note temperature may not exceed BHST.
that on wells #2 and #3 in Alaska, the HOH tests yielded 70- 6. By better understanding how downhole HOH and CDF
hour cumulative totals at BHST that were less than the 70 hour can affect maximum annular temperatures during
800 F HOH tests. It would appear that though the maximum cement hydration, cement systems can be better fit for
energy flux from these slurries was almost 40% higher under purpose designed. Some examples of extreme
downhole temperatures than at 800 F, the small slurry sample conditions that could benefit from such insight might be
size allowed for the exhaustion of chemical reactants that artic/permafrost cementing and deepwater cementing.
drive the exothermic hydration process long before the 70-
hour test was stopped. One can note in Figure 10 that until Nomenclature
about the 50-hour point of the test, the cumulative total under HOH = heat of hydration
downhole temperatures is still higher. BHCT = bottomhole circulating temperature
Once the results of the cement HOH tests were compiled, BHST = bottomhole static temperature
the authors compared that data with the actual well BHA = bottomhole assembly
temperature data, to see if they could determine which factors I.D. = internal diameter
seemed to have a larger impact on the actual temperatures O.D. = outside diameter
achieved in the wells. They had speculated that both the ERD = electrical resonating diaphragm
amount of Portland cement surrounding the casing (expressed ECD = equivalent circulating density
in this paper as the CDF) and the actual slurry heat of FDP = finite difference program
hydration would impact the annular temperatures during MWD = measure while drilling
cement hydration, but the question to them was which (if T.D = total depth
either) would have the largest effect. Even though both MD = measured depth
appeared to impact maximum annular temperatures achieved, TVD = true vertical depth
based on the results obtained, it would appear that given T.G. = temperature gradient
similar HOH values, the CDF had a larger impact on the FT = feet
maximum temperature occurring in the annulus of the wells as HTHP = high temperature high pressure
the cement hydrated. ERD = electrical resonating diaphragm
CDF = cement density factor
Conclusions SEC = Seebech Envelope Calorimeter
From the investigations and results discussed in this paper, the DAU = data acquisition unit
authors made the following conclusions: PPG = pounds per gallon
1. Caution must be exercised when trying to apply BTU = British Thermal Units
universal rules of thumb to estimate maximum SG = specific gravity
cement hydration driven temperatures after primary

Acknowledgements Figure #1
The authors would like to acknowledge the assistance in
gathering well data of Ms. Janet Emr and Mr. Phil Snider with
Marathon Oil Company and Mr. Ed Post, Mr. Jay Garner, Mr.
Bill Wood, all with BJ Services. Finally, the authors would
like to thank Mrs. Doris Porter, Mrs. Marion Hertzbach, and
Mrs. Loretta Vadell of BJ Services Company for their
assistance in reviewing this paper and also the management of
BJ Services Company and PROMORE Engineering Inc., for
their permission to prepare and present this paper.


1. Campbell, Dillenbeck, and Smith: Engineering and Logistical

Considerations for Cementing operations in West Africas Rapidly
Expanding Offshore Oilfield development paper 14281 presented at the
2002 Offshore technology Conference, Houston, Texas, May 6-9.
2. Mueller, D.T.: Redefining the Static Gel Strength Requirements for
Cements Employed in SWF Mitigation paper 14282 presented at the
2002 Offshore technology Conference, Houston, Texas, May 6-9.
3. Ravi, Krishna et al: Deepwater Cementing Challenges paper SPE
56534 presented at the 1999 SPE Annual Technology Conference,
Houston, Texas, October 3-6
4. Thiercelin, M.J. et al: Cement Design Based on Cement Mechanical
response paper SPE 38598 presented at the 1997 SPE Annual
Technology Conference, San Antonio, Texas, October 5-8
5. Di Lullo, Gino and Rae, Phil: Cements for Long Term Isolation
Design Optimization by Computer Modeling and Prediction paper SPE
62745 presented at the 2000 IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling
Technology, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, September 11-13
6. Romeo, J. and Loizzo, M.: The Importance of Heat on Cement Strength
Development for Deep Water paper SPE 62894 presented at the 2000
SPE Annual Technical Conference, Dallas, Texas, October 1-4
7. Dillenbeck, Robert L. and Cooper, Dwayne: Successful Optimization
and Application of Primary Cement Designs Enables Annular Placement
of Casing Perforating Guns for Multiple Zone Completions paper SPE
64526 presented at the 2000 SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference
and Exhibition, Brisbane, Australia, October 16-18
8. Bulchwalter, J. and Calvert, R., Gemini Solutions. McKay, C. and
Thompson, S. Wood Group: Maximizing Profitability in Reservoirs
Using New Technologies for Continuous Downhole Pressure Systems.

Figure #2 Figure #4


Figure #3

Figure #5

Well #1 - Realtime Temperature



Temperature (F)





10:58 PM 12:10 AM 12:17 AM 2:05 PM 6:45 AM 11:25 PM 4:05 PM 8:45 AM 1:25 AM 6:05 PM

Figure #6

Figure #7

Figure #8

Well #4 - Realtime Temperature



Temperature (F)




4:05 AM 4:34 AM 5:03 AM 5:32 AM 7:22 AM 10:23 AM 6:15 PM 1:05 AM 6:55 AM 2:14 PM 9:44 PM 7:13 PM

Figure #9

Well 1 Canada - Composite Blend 15.0 ppg

4.0 70


Heat Evolution 80 F Heat of Hydration 80 F

Heat Evolution (BTU/lbm*hr)

Heat of Hydration (BTU/lbm)


2.0 Heat of Hydration 66 F




Heat Evolution 66 F

0.0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Time (hrs)

Figure #10

Well 2 & 3 Alaska - Class 'G' 15.7 ppg

8.0 80

7.0 70

Heat Evolution 112 F

6.0 60
Heat of Hydration 112 F
Heat Evolution (BTU/lbm*hr)

Heat of Hydration (BTU/lbm)

5.0 50

4.0 40
Heat of Hydration 80 F

3.0 30

2.0 20

Heat Evolution 80 F
1.0 10

0.0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Time (hrs)

Figure #11

Well # 4 Venezuela - Composite Blend 14.0 ppg

20.0 100

18.0 90
Heat of Hydration 150 F

16.0 80

14.0 70
Heat Evolution (BTU/lbm*hr)

Heat of Hydration (BTU/lbm)

12.0 60

Heat of Hydration 80 F
10.0 Heat Evolution 150 F 50

8.0 40

6.0 30

4.0 Heat Evolution 80 F 20

2.0 10

0.0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Time (hrs)

Figure #12

Well Sensor Max Annular Maximum Cement Heat of Cement Heat of Cement
BHST- Hydration Temperature Hydration @ Hydration @ Sensor Density
F Temperature-F Differential-F 800F-BTU/lbm Temperature-BTU/lbm Factor-lbs
cmt/ft depth
#1 66 92 26 65.5 46.2 30.46
#2 113 164 51 76.0 63.4 38.43
#3 112 164 52 76.0 63.4 38.43
#4 244 N.A. N.A. 66.3 93.0 23.99