Mechanical & Industrial Engineering Department

Sultan Qaboos University

College of Engineering
M.Sc. Seminar II

Evaluation of Swelling-Elastomer Seals in Petroleum
Applications : Experimental Investigation
2
Problem Statement and Objective 4
Background 2
Swellable Packers
3
Experimental work 5
Conclusions
6
Motivation and Significance
1
Swellable elastomers have many applications to
improve performance of oil and gas wells.

Real-world applications, especially in Oman (oil
and gas are the main source of countrys income)

Significant cost savings compared to the
conventional methods used in well applications

Analytical approach can predict elastomer
performance for various actual field conditions.
Experimental evaluation can be very costly, and is
not even possible in many cases.
Numerical simulations, if validated, can be more
convenient; but still have to be run for each
condition


3
Solid Expandable Tubular (SET)
SET Technology is a down-hole process consisting
of expanding the diameter of a tubular by pushing
or pulling a cone through it while preserving its
integrity. The tubular deforms beyond its elastic
limit into the plastic region but remains below its
ultimate tensile strength. Sealing elements in SET
applications are generally swelling elastomers.
A new approach in well-bore DESIGN & REMEDIATION
4
5
Cementing
External Casing Packers (ECPs)
Chemical Shutoff
Swellable Packer
Used when primary cement jobs are
difficult, or in critical areas of well
construction to ensure long term well
integrity.
Saves time
Provides zonal insulation instead of
cementing
Reduces the size of well hole
The swelling time can be engineered to
meet the well requirements.

6
A rubber-like material that swells
when immersed in fluids (water,
hydrocarbon, or mixture of both)
Liquid enters elastomer through
osmosis or diffusion mechanism
Volume increases proportionally as
liquid diffuses into elastomer
Swelling process continues until a
swell limit is reached (spatial
confinement or internal rubber stress)
Swell time and volume can be
controlled
7
8
Swell packers are important in
Improving existing wells,
Aiding oil recovery from difficult or
abandoned fields; etc
Failure of swell packers can lead to significant
losses in terms of time and money.
Sealing failure (leakage) can occur if
Swelled thickness is not enough to fill the
gap between the tubular and the
casing/formation.
Differential pressure (p
o
) of well is more
than sealing pressure
Well conditions are beyond the elastomer
limit (eg. high temp).

9
(a)
E
l
a
s
t
o
m
e
r

T
u
b
u
l
a
r

Smooth
surface
geometry
Casing/
formation
(b)
E
l
a
s
t
o
m
e
r

T
u
b
u
l
a
r

Casing/
formation
Smooth
surface
geometry
F
l
u
i
d


P
O

The main aim of the project is
Performance evaluation of swelling elastomer seals
used in oil well applications under different field
conditions.
The work includes
Designing, conducting, and analyzing a series of
experiments for determination of swelling behavior
and mechanical properties of elastomer (before and
after swelling)
Describing the behavior of elastomer seals analytically
by deriving a closed form model for sealing pressure
distribution along axial direction of elastomer seal
Numerical modeling and simulation of elastomer seal
using FEM packages such as ABAQUS, using most
appropriate material model of rubber-like materials
10
Performance of Elastomer Seals
Experimental work
Analytical model
Numerical (finite element) model
11
12
(a)
E
l
a
s
t
o
m
e
r

T
u
b
u
l
a
r

Smooth
surface
geometry
Casing/
formation
(b)
E
l
a
s
t
o
m
e
r

T
u
b
u
l
a
r

Casing/
formation
Smooth
surface
geometry
F
l
u
i
d


P
O

Model sealing pressure distribution along elastomer
seal as a function of
- Seal geometry - Compression ratio - Material properties
- Well conditions (pressure, friction, etc.)
( )
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) cosh
cosh 1
3
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
|
|
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
|
|
.
|

\
|

+
+
+
=

o
o
o Z
h
p
v
v
t v
E
Z
o
R
13
Casing/
formation
F
l
u
i
d

1

P
o

R
2h
R
2

R
2
-
R
1

t

Z

dZ
Z

( )
4
2
1
4
1 2
2
1 ~
2
and
~
t v R
E R
Kv t R
E R R t
s s
o
o =
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
=
1
2
1
2
2
) ( o = Z p
dZ
p d
( ) ( )
p
v
v
v
E
R R
+
+
+
=
1
3
1
c o
Elastomer
Test
Swelling
Tests
- Hardness
- Volume
- Thickness
- Density
Mechanical
Tests
Compression
test (E)
Bulk test (K)
14
Shear modulus G
Poissons ratio v
15
Hardness
measurement
(Durometer)
Thickness
measurement
(Vernier
calipers)
Volume
measurement
(graduated
cylinder)
Density
measurement
(Digital Balance)
Elastomers
Water-base
35000 ppm
85000 ppm
Oil-base Crude oil
No standard method for
Swelling test
The readings were taken before
swelling and after 1, 3, 7, 15, and
30 days of swelling
If calculated v is 0.495
If the errors in measurement
G is 10%
K 20 %
Errors in calculated v 0.5%
If calculated v is 0.495
If the errors in measurement
E is 10%
K 20 %
Errors in calculated v 0.3%
If calculated v is 0.495
If the errors in measurement
E is 10%
G 20 %
Errors in calculated v 90%
16
K
K
v E
E
v v
A
|
.
|

\
|
+
A
|
.
|

\
|
=
A
2
1
1
2
1
1
v
( ) ( )
G
G
v
v
E
E
v
v
v
A +
+
A +
=
A 1 1 v
G K
G K
2 6
2 3
+

= v
G
G
v
E
E
v
A
c
c
+ A
c
c
= Av
( )( ) ( )( )
G
G
v
v v
K
K
v
v v
v
A
|
.
|

\
|
+

A
|
.
|

\
|
+
=
A
3
1 2 1
3
1 2 1 v
v is highly sensitive to stress
distribution (Yu et al., 2001).
No standard method for direct
measurement of v
Can be measured indirectly
using equations
0.495 < v < 0.5

17
Tensile test
ISO-37
ASTM D412
Universal testing machine; tension
mode
Compression test
ISO-7713
More relevant to elastomer seal
applications
E
C
>>E
T
Universal testing machine;
compression mode
Youngs Modulus E
c o E =
18
No standard method to measure K;
All techniques require
A pressurization chamber,
A means to raise and lower pressure, and
A method to measure volume change.
Pressure system may be mechanical or hydraulic
v
p
K
c
A
=
p
A
F
p =
o
v
V
V A
= c
Bulk Modulus K
19
20
v
p
K
c
=
p
A
F
p =
o
o
o
o
v
t
t t
v
v v
=

= c
Sample configuration: disc (ASTM-D575)
Test temperature: 50
o
C
Transparent sealable jars
Salt concentration of brine
0.6% (low salinity), and 12 % (high salinity).
Testing time: 30 days
Readings before swelling and after 1, 2, 4, 7, 16, 23
and 30 days of swelling.
Tinius Olsen universal testing machine
(compression mode)
28.5 0.5 mm
12.5 0.5 mm
21
22
After comparison, Fishman and Machmer (1994) conclude that Peng
method is best
Fixture was designed in such a way that under compressive loading
specimen is constrained to move only in longitudinal direction and
totally restricted in radial direction
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
F
o
r
c
e

(
N
)

Compression (mm)
bulk experiment _ 1 day swelling elastomer (12% & 50 oC)
sample 1 sample 2 sample 3
23
Hardness
Change
Density
Change
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 10 20 30 40
H
a
r
d
n
e
s
s

Time (Days)
Plates in 85000 ppm water
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 10 20 30 40
D
e
n
s
i
t
y

C
h
a
n
g
e

(
%
)

Days
Plates in 85000 ppm water
Material A Material B
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 10 20 30 40
D
e
n
s
i
t
y

C
h
a
n
g
e

(
%
)

Days
Discs in 85000 ppm water
Material A Material B
0
20
40
60
80
0 10 20 30 40
H
a
r
d
n
e
s
s

Days
Discs in 35000 ppm water
Material A Materail B
24
Thickness
Change
Volume
Change
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 10 20 30 40
T
h
i
c
k
n
e
s
s

(
%
)

Days
Plates in oil
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30 40
T
h
i
c
k
n
e
s
s

(
%
)

Days
Plates in 35000 ppm water
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 10 20 30 40
V
o
l
u
m
e

C
h
a
n
g
e

(
%
)

Days
Plates in 35000 ppm water
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 10 20 30 40
V
o
l
u
m
e

C
h
a
n
g
e

(
%
)

Days
Plates in oil
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0

e
n
g

(
M
P
a
)

eng

Stress strain curve (day 4 , 12 %, 50
o
C)
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
y = 1.4059x - 0.0742
R = 0.9993
y = 1.3029x - 0.0692
R = 0.9973
y = 1.2493x - 0.0236
R = 0.9952
-0.25
-0.2
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
-0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0

e
n
g

(
M
P
a
)

eng
Stress strain curve (day 4 , 12 %, 50
o
C)
25
-1.6
-1.4
-1.2
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
-0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0

e
n
g

(
M
P
a
)

eng
Stress strain curve day 16 , 12 %, 50 oC)
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
y = 0.4088x - 0.0121
R = 0.9717
y = 0.3092x - 0.007
R = 0.9898
y = 0.2672x - 0.006
R = 0.9886
-0.045
-0.04
-0.035
-0.03
-0.025
-0.02
-0.015
-0.01
-0.005
0
-0.12 -0.1 -0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0

e
n
g

(
M
P
a
)

eng
Stress strain curve (day 16 , 12 %, 50 oC)
10 %
10 %
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Y
o
u
n
g
'
s

M
o
d
u
l
u
s

(
E
)


Time (Days)
Young's modulus
0.6 % saline water 12 % saline water
26
Only low strain (10%)
portion of curve used for
slope (Gent ,2000)
E values drops by more
than 90% in the first few
days, and then remain
nearly constant during
the rest of the one-
month period
Stress values are higher
for 12% salinity as
compared to 0.6%, but
become almost identical
with more swelling.
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1 1.05
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
M
P
a
)

v
Pressure vs. volumetric strain (day 1, 12%, 50 oC)
Samlpe 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
y = -521.3172x + 510.1458
R = 0.9929
y = -557.9617x + 547.5220
R = 0.9983
y = -564.5443x + 556.8094
R = 0.9993
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0.86 0.88 0.9 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98 1
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
M
P
a
)


pressure vs. volumetric strain for SE (day 1, 12%, 50 oC)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0.93 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.98 0.99 1 1.01
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
M
P
a
)


Pressure vs. volumetric strain (day 23, 6%, 50oC)
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
y = -561.85x + 556.6
R = 0.998
y = -489.73x + 486.77
R = 0.9934
y = -525.29x + 521.61
R = 0.9959
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0.93 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.98 0.99 1
Pressure vs. volumetric strain (day 23, 6%, 50oC)
-K
-K
28
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
K

(
M
P
a
)

Time (days)
Bulk modulus variation with swelling time
0.60% 12%
K shows approximately
linear behavior on p-
v

graph
With more swelling, K is
fluctuating in the
beginning; becomes
almost steady-state after
10 days.
K-value in 12 %
concentration is slightly
higher than the 0.6 %
solution.
29
K
E
6 2
1
= v
) 1 ( 2 v +
=
E
G
0.4975
0.498
0.4985
0.499
0.4995
0.5
0.5005
0 10 20 30 40
v

Time (days)
v(t)
0.60% 12%
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 10 20 30 40
G

(
M
P
a
)

Time (days)
G (t)
0.60% 12%
v increases sharply in first
few days of swelling, and
then becomes steady-state at
about 0.4999.
v follows opposite trend to
that of E
V dropped in the 4th day of
swelling due to reduction in
K
Value of G drops by more
than 90% in first few days,
then remains almost
constant during rest of the
swelling period.
G follows same pattern as E
HVTD vs. swelling time for 35000 and 8500 brine
solution and crude oil at 60
o
C
Swelling in lower salinity> higher salinity
VT swelling of disc samples >> plate samples, (both oil
and water)
H of both elastomers drops down sharply in the first
few days, then remains almost constant.
Swelling Test
Only low strain (10%) portion of curve used for slope
(Gent ,2000)
Stress values are higher for 12% salinity as compared to
0.6%, but become almost identical with more swelling.
Compression
Test
K shows approximately linear behavior on p-
v
graph
With more swelling, K is fluctuating in the beginning;
becomes almost steady-state after 10 days.
K-value in 12 % concentration is slightly higher than the
0.6 % solution.
Bulk Test
30
Thank You
32
1. Gent, A.N., Lindley, P.B., 1959. The compression of bonded rubber
blocks. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers 173, 111
122.
2. Gent, A.N., Meinecke, E.A., 1970. Compression, bending and shear of
bonded rubber blocks. Polymer Engineering and Science 10, 4853.
3. Gent, A.N., Henry, R.L., Roxbury, M.L., 1974. Interfacial stresses for
bonded rubber blocks in compression and shear. Journal of Applied
Mechanics 41, 855859.
4. S.A. Al-Hiddabi, T. Pervez, S.Z Qamar and F.K Al-Jahwari; Analytical
solution of elastomer seals in oil wells; SQU, 2009.
5. Yeoh, O.H., Pinter, G.A., Banks, H.T., 2002. Compression of bonded
rubber blocks. Rubber Chemistry and Technology 75, 549561.
6. Rutger Evers, Dustin Young, Greg Vargus, and Kristian Solhaug,
Halliburton; Design Methodology for Swellable Elastomer Packers in
Fracturing Operations, Offshore Technology Conference, 4-7 May
2009