- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Govm shutting down BP
Posted on 7/17/10 at 10:11 am to tigerdup07
Posted on 7/17/10 at 10:11 am to tigerdup07
i think you have to keep in mind the false sense of security. you have cemented casing, tested casing, and what was interpreted as an acceptable negative test. all of that info makes you think there's just no way you're going to lose control of the well, and makes you question what you're seeing when the riser is flowing. also, it's the temporary abandonment phase -- not terribly technically challenging, and it's time to start gearing up to spud the next well.
in reality, you had potentially poorly cemented casing -- potentially allow reservoir pressure to migrate behind pipe to the casing hanger or to enter the casing through a bad shoe -- and two very suspect negative tests -- at best meaning you can't confirm you're as isolated as you need to be, and at worst indicating there is not the kind of integrity required to proceed. couple that w/ going far underbalance without any mechanical barrier in place in the production casing, relying 100% on the shoe track. then also add on the fact that you're transferring mud to the boat during the displacement, so it's very difficult to track volumes in vs. volume out.
the centralization, the foam cement, the cement volume, the abandonment procedure, the negative tests, the inability to track volumes, not recognizing the loss of well control quickly, the reluctance to shut-in quickly, and finally, whatever happened to cause the BOP stack not to shut-in the well -- they all line up to this tragic end result.
in reality, you had potentially poorly cemented casing -- potentially allow reservoir pressure to migrate behind pipe to the casing hanger or to enter the casing through a bad shoe -- and two very suspect negative tests -- at best meaning you can't confirm you're as isolated as you need to be, and at worst indicating there is not the kind of integrity required to proceed. couple that w/ going far underbalance without any mechanical barrier in place in the production casing, relying 100% on the shoe track. then also add on the fact that you're transferring mud to the boat during the displacement, so it's very difficult to track volumes in vs. volume out.
the centralization, the foam cement, the cement volume, the abandonment procedure, the negative tests, the inability to track volumes, not recognizing the loss of well control quickly, the reluctance to shut-in quickly, and finally, whatever happened to cause the BOP stack not to shut-in the well -- they all line up to this tragic end result.
This post was edited on 7/17/10 at 10:13 am
1
Posted on 7/17/10 at 10:12 am to oilfieldtiger
quote:
i think you have to keep in mind the false sense of security. you have cemented casing, tested casing, and what was interpreted as an acceptable negative test. all of that info makes you think there's just no way you're going to lose control of the well, and makes you question what you're seeing when the riser is flowing.
another word for this is complacency. and, on the rigs, we try to avoid complacency at all costs. however, it seems that transocean didn't in this case.
Posted on 7/17/10 at 10:19 am to MountainTiger
quote:
This report will not further describe events during or after the blowout because many accounts have been published and the best accounts come from the stories and testimony from the workers that were on the rig. However, it is important to note that all of the workers that died during the blowout would have known they were in a dangerous situation and had time to flee. Instead, they elected to stay on position to try to regain control of the well. The consequences of the blowout have been so extreme that the American public owes great respect and gratitude to the brave and dedicated men who fought to prevent that outcome.
I had posted MUCH earlier that I was told this very thing ... people responded by saying that "they say that to make the families feel better". Well, I guess not ... God bless them.
Posted on 7/17/10 at 10:28 am to tigerdup07
quote:
another word for this is complacency
i'm especially surprised by the decision to proceed without a definitive, bulletproof negative test.
This post was edited on 7/17/10 at 10:29 am
Posted on 7/17/10 at 11:15 am to oilfieldtiger
I've gotten the sense all along that the rig workers, particularly the company man and maybe the toolpusher too, were in a mode of thinking where they were really eager to get off of this well. Things were wrapping up and maybe they were looking ahead to some time off, or getting started on the next one. And so in that frame of mind it seems like they interpreted things the way they wanted to see them. In particular I'm talking about the negative test. They saw what they wanted to see and didn't think of other scenarios that could cause the same readings to appear. I know when you do research you look at the results you got from an experiment and if they were what you expected to see based on some theory, you also have to try to think of other ways those same results would appear that would NOT confirm your theory. I wonder if much the same thing is true here and that the folks in charge (or at least some of them) didn't go through that critical analysis step in trying to find other, less benign, scenarios that would generate similar data to what they observed.
Posted on 7/17/10 at 11:23 am to MountainTiger
quote:
I've gotten the sense all along that the rig workers, particularly the company man and maybe the toolpusher too, were in a mode of thinking where they were really eager to get off of this well. Things were wrapping up and maybe they were looking ahead to some time off, or getting started on the next one. And so in that frame of mind it seems like they interpreted things the way they wanted to see them. In particular I'm talking about the negative test. They saw what they wanted to see and didn't think of other scenarios that could cause the same readings to appear. I know when you do research you look at the results you got from an experiment and if they were what you expected to see based on some theory, you also have to try to think of other ways those same results would appear that would NOT confirm your theory. I wonder if much the same thing is true here and that the folks in charge (or at least some of them) didn't go through that critical analysis step in trying to find other, less benign, scenarios that would generate similar data to what they observed.
it doesn't matter how the well plan succeeded or, in this case, failed, you never let your guard down on the well.
as a driller, i will not even leave my driller's shack to take a piss without someone relieving me to watch my gauges. the company man can tell me to drill the damn hole with a candycane and i will still be able to shut it in whenever i am ready if all goes wrong.
they teach you this when you go to well control. NEVER LET YOUR GUARD DOWN!!!!
This post was edited on 7/17/10 at 11:28 am
Posted on 7/17/10 at 11:52 am to tigerdup07
Of course you shouldn't let your guard down but clearly they did. And they've had the same well control classes you have. So I was trying to go beyond that and get inside their heads a bit to see why they let their guard down.
Posted on 7/17/10 at 7:27 pm to GREENHEAD22
quote:
10 Million in fines is not hard to rack up.
11 dead is.
Posted on 7/17/10 at 9:04 pm to ottothewise
Otto im not even going to waste my breath.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News