- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
0
Posted on 5/16/10 at 7:24 pm to BROffshoreTigerFan
quote:
It was also BP that wanted to displace before all the plugs were set. If they had waited, this likely doesn't happen
at the risk of repeating myself -- let me reiterrate:
imagine this: the existing casing that was used to reach TD is an outer tube. the production casing that was run is an inner tube. so you have a string of larger pipe on the outside, an annulus, then a smaller pipe on the inside.
the cement plugs we're talking about go inside the smaller pipe. the well is flowing (if BP's documents submitted to congress is correct), not up the smaller pipe (as it would in conventional production) but up the annulus betwee the two pipes.
so you can see that you could completely fill up the smaller, inner pipe w/ cement and still not effect the flow in the annulus.
how this situation came to be is a littel harder to explain, but i can give it a shot if anyone is interested.
for the record, i am not trying to apologize for anyone involved here, just trying to give people more pertinant details that either need to be clarified or further explained.
This post was edited on 5/16/10 at 7:28 pm
Posted on 5/16/10 at 7:32 pm to oilfieldtiger
I understand all of that. My "argument" (and I'm not disagreeing with anything you said, or even arguing with you because I greatly respect your input and intelligence on the subject) is that there were many different factors that went into what happened. Nobody knows exactly everything that happened fault by fault, and many of them seem to not be connected, as your post points out, much of this was common.
The problem is in an extreme case such as this, if no exact fault is found, everything is going to be blamed. Each little thing caused a bigger problem, and while on its own it can be normal, all combined together caused this disaster. And that's unfortunate because we won't ever be able to explain how those 11 men died, and how we can prevent it in the future.
I guess that's the real point I was trying to get across.
The problem is in an extreme case such as this, if no exact fault is found, everything is going to be blamed. Each little thing caused a bigger problem, and while on its own it can be normal, all combined together caused this disaster. And that's unfortunate because we won't ever be able to explain how those 11 men died, and how we can prevent it in the future.
I guess that's the real point I was trying to get across.
Posted on 5/16/10 at 7:35 pm to oilfieldtiger
quote:
for the record, i am not trying to apologize for anyone involved here, just trying to give people more pertinant details that either need to be clarified or further explained.
Are you a drilling engineer? Do you work offshore deep water? Do you have access to any pertinent facts or details that the rest of us don't?
Posted on 5/16/10 at 7:39 pm to cwill
everything i have said comes from the documents on the house energy committee's investigation webpage.
Posted on 5/16/10 at 7:39 pm to oilfieldtiger
quote:
imagine this: the existing casing that was used to reach TD is an outer tube. the production casing that was run is an inner tube. so you have a string of larger pipe on the outside, an annulus, then a smaller pipe on the inside.
I understand well design (I work in well planning, cased hole), so I get what you're saying (
quote:).
could completely fill up the smaller, inner pipe w/ cement and still not effect the flow in the annulus
quote:
how this situation came to be is a littel harder to explain, but i can give it a shot if anyone is interested.
I'd like to hear it if you have the time. You're more experienced in downhole than I am, and I enjoy your precision in explaining these things in detail.
quote:
if BP's documents submitted to congress is correct
That might be the problem.
Posted on 5/16/10 at 7:49 pm to oilfieldtiger
quote:
damage to the annular's rubber element does not mean it is totally ineffective. it is a rubber good, and the element is replaced every well. this is an understood phenomenon.
it is designed to allow the very thing they described -- what is known as "stripping". when you close the annular against the drill pipe w/ pressure beneath it, then move the drill pipe up or down as needed. as also mentioned -- there are 2 annulars shown in the graphic.
additionally, if the annular is worn or damaged, that's why it is pressure tested every 14 days. if it fails to test, it is either taken out of service or the BOP stack is recovered to surface for repair.
let me also add that the annular has nothing to do w/ the failure of the shear rams to shut in the well.
furthermore, asking the driller to increase ROP is something every co. man has done, and does not necessarily mean anything nefarious was going on.
now, as to what's going on w/ the pod and battery, i would assume these events were reported to the MMS -- as all problems like this w/ the BOP stack should be, but who knows.
and finally, if the casing hanger failed like BP suspects, they could have pumped 20 cement plugs in the production casing and it would not have mattered, as the well is flowing out of the annulus. including halliburton in these discussions is strictly a political red herring.
the issue is the well design, and the bop functionality -- specifically the functionality of the shear rams.
this is a very emotional story, and i appreciate the events as the guy relayed them. but he is the chief electric tech (the chief ET). he is not a part of the drilling department, he is a part of the maintenance department. the functionality of drilling components, mechanics of drilling, etc are not his area of expertise. his job does mandate that he passes any kind of well control training either, so i would take w/ a grain of salt the stuff he has to say about the mechanics of drilling.
amen brother. my father and i were watching it together and talked about all the same stuff you mentioned. everyone must keep in mind the media aims for every bit of sensation possible, and while it is emotional, sad, and extremely unfortunate, this guy, and everyone else really doesn't know what went wrong. we won't for awhile.
Posted on 5/16/10 at 7:54 pm to BROffshoreTigerFan
BP's "what we think" and "what we know" outline a scenario where reservoir pressure enterred the annulus and caused the casing hanger to fail.
for those that don't know, after drilling the hole to the desired depth, steel casing is run in the hole. for example, after drilling an 18 1/8" hole, you would probably run 16" OD casing inside of it. the casing is then cemented in place by pumping a cement slurry downt the casing. this slurry exits the bottom of the casing, then continues to go up the annulus between the hole and the outside of the casing. the cement cures and provides long term isolation of the formations behind the casing.
well, in this case BP ran a tapered string of 9 7/8" x 7" casing. the top of the string was landed in the wellhead -- the item immediately beneath the BOP stack -- and the bottom of it was in the 8 1/2" hole drilled through the formation at 18300'
BP suspects something went awry w/ the primary cement job that was supposed to end up between the 7" casing and 8 1/2" hole which allowed some of the reservoir fluids to enter the area behind the 9 7/8" x 7" string.
the casing hanger was set, the seal assembly that provides pressure integrity was set, it was all tested w/ internal and everything seemed okay.
but what they suspect was happening was pressure was building behind the 9 7/8" x 7". this pressure is acting upon a very large surface area (18 3/4" x 9 7/8"). the pressure eventually built to a point where the hanger (or a component very close to the wellhead) was compromised. this put the reservoir in communication w/ the mudline behind the 9 7/8" x 7" casing up to very close to mudline.
nothing new here, this is just an explanation of the public documents.
for those that don't know, after drilling the hole to the desired depth, steel casing is run in the hole. for example, after drilling an 18 1/8" hole, you would probably run 16" OD casing inside of it. the casing is then cemented in place by pumping a cement slurry downt the casing. this slurry exits the bottom of the casing, then continues to go up the annulus between the hole and the outside of the casing. the cement cures and provides long term isolation of the formations behind the casing.
well, in this case BP ran a tapered string of 9 7/8" x 7" casing. the top of the string was landed in the wellhead -- the item immediately beneath the BOP stack -- and the bottom of it was in the 8 1/2" hole drilled through the formation at 18300'
BP suspects something went awry w/ the primary cement job that was supposed to end up between the 7" casing and 8 1/2" hole which allowed some of the reservoir fluids to enter the area behind the 9 7/8" x 7" string.
the casing hanger was set, the seal assembly that provides pressure integrity was set, it was all tested w/ internal and everything seemed okay.
but what they suspect was happening was pressure was building behind the 9 7/8" x 7". this pressure is acting upon a very large surface area (18 3/4" x 9 7/8"). the pressure eventually built to a point where the hanger (or a component very close to the wellhead) was compromised. this put the reservoir in communication w/ the mudline behind the 9 7/8" x 7" casing up to very close to mudline.
nothing new here, this is just an explanation of the public documents.
This post was edited on 5/16/10 at 7:59 pm
Posted on 5/16/10 at 8:02 pm to Mudminnow
quote:
21 days later is speedy?
Yes. It means that not only were contingency plans were in place, but equipment built specifically for the purpose was already built and just had to be prepped.
Last week's attempt to cap the leak failed, but what seems to have escaped your attention is that the cap was very obviously built ahead of time.
Seriously, do you really think it is a spur of the moment thing to even *try* to plug a major oil spill a mile below the ocean?
Posted on 5/16/10 at 8:23 pm to foshizzle
other inaccuracies in the report:
it is stated definitively that the abandonment plugs failed, not proposed
the cal professor said definitely that the damaged annular would pass a BOP test, but would not function properly after the test, i find that hard to believe.
the aerial shots of the atlantis platform are in fact the rig Transocean Development Driller II, which may have been working at Atlantis at the time the photos were taken, but is most definitely NOT the Atlantis structure -- they did have a coupel of still shots of the Atlantis structure mixed in though.
it is stated definitively that the abandonment plugs failed, not proposed
the cal professor said definitely that the damaged annular would pass a BOP test, but would not function properly after the test, i find that hard to believe.
the aerial shots of the atlantis platform are in fact the rig Transocean Development Driller II, which may have been working at Atlantis at the time the photos were taken, but is most definitely NOT the Atlantis structure -- they did have a coupel of still shots of the Atlantis structure mixed in though.
Posted on 5/16/10 at 9:25 pm to foshizzle
quote:
Yes. It means that not only were contingency plans were in place, but equipment built specifically for the purpose was already built and just had to be prepped.
Last week's attempt to cap the leak failed, but what seems to have escaped your attention is that the cap was very obviously built ahead of time.
bullshite
according to BP, this is an unforseeable and unprecedented occurrence so nothing was in place to stop this leak after the explosion besides the BOP. it took fabricators and welders 3 days to build the large dome in Port Fourchon so
This post was edited on 5/16/10 at 9:25 pm
Posted on 5/16/10 at 10:34 pm to oilfieldtiger
Now what are your expert qualifications beyond your TD name of oilfieldtiger? Are you a drilling engineer?
Posted on 5/16/10 at 10:49 pm to cwill
Posted on 5/16/10 at 11:11 pm to cwill
quote:
It's not an indictment of the the O&G industry to say that BP fricked up royally.
It will be...eventually.
Posted on 5/16/10 at 11:17 pm to Luke4LSU
"The morning of the disaster, according to Williams, there was an argument in front of all the men on the ship between the Transocean manager and the BP manager. Do you know what that argument is about?" Pelley asked.
Bea replied, "Yes," telling Pelley the argument was about who was the boss.
In finishing the well, the plan was to have a subcontractor, Halliburton, place three concrete plugs, like corks, in the column. The Transocean manager wanted to do this with the column full of heavy drilling fluid - what drillers call "mud" - to keep the pressure down below contained. But the BP manager wanted to begin to remove the "mud" before the last plug was set. That would reduce the pressure controlling the well before the plugs were finished.
Asked why BP would do that, Bea told Pelley, "It expedites the subsequent steps."
"It's a matter of going faster," Pelley remarked.
"Faster, sure," Bea replied.
Bea said BP had won that argument.
"If the 'mud' had been left in the column, would there have been a blowout?" Pelley asked.
"It doesn't look like it," Bea replied.
Bea replied, "Yes," telling Pelley the argument was about who was the boss.
In finishing the well, the plan was to have a subcontractor, Halliburton, place three concrete plugs, like corks, in the column. The Transocean manager wanted to do this with the column full of heavy drilling fluid - what drillers call "mud" - to keep the pressure down below contained. But the BP manager wanted to begin to remove the "mud" before the last plug was set. That would reduce the pressure controlling the well before the plugs were finished.
Asked why BP would do that, Bea told Pelley, "It expedites the subsequent steps."
"It's a matter of going faster," Pelley remarked.
"Faster, sure," Bea replied.
Bea said BP had won that argument.
"If the 'mud' had been left in the column, would there have been a blowout?" Pelley asked.
"It doesn't look like it," Bea replied.
Posted on 5/16/10 at 11:18 pm to cwill
quote:
Now what are your expert qualifications beyond your TD name of oilfieldtiger? Are you a drilling engineer?
Why are you being a dickbag?
I can vouch for the fact that this dude knows, specifically, what he's talking about.
Posted on 5/17/10 at 12:55 am to oilfieldtiger
quote:Noticed this too. Dummies. It even had Transocean's logo on the derrick...
the aerial shots of the atlantis platform are in fact the rig Transocean Development Driller II, which may have been working at Atlantis at the time the photos were taken, but is most definitely NOT the Atlantis structure -- they did have a coupel of still shots of the Atlantis structure mixed in though.
Posted on 5/17/10 at 1:11 am to Mudminnow
(no message)
This post was edited on 6/15/10 at 12:22 am
Posted on 5/17/10 at 2:36 am to Tigerpaw123
quote:
Williams' survival may be critical to the investigation. We took his story to Dr. Bob Bea, a professor of engineering at the University of California, Berkeley.
Last week, the White House asked Bea to help analyze the Deepwater Horizon accident. Bea investigated the Columbia Space Shuttle disaster for NASA and the Hurricane Katrina disaster for the National Science Foundation. Bea's voice never completely recovered from the weeks he spent in the flood in New Orleans. But as the White House found, he's among the nation's best, having investigated more than 20 offshore rig disasters.
I think Bob Bea is a self promoting bullshite artist.
WTF does a flood do to your voice? Did he do that many interviews?
20 offshore rig disasters??? He must be "investigating" worldwide.
In last Tuesday's T-P, he was quoted saying he had spent "over 200 hours" investigating the accident. That's over 10 hours per day. When does this guy find time to teach his classes?
Posted on 5/17/10 at 4:50 am to cwill
quote:
Now what are your expert qualifications beyond your TD name of oilfieldtiger? Are you a drilling engineer?
yes.
i'd also like to re-iterrate that i don't have any inside info, i am just working off of the publically available documents - which include theories as to what happened.
we won't know w/ 100% certainty what happened until the investigation is completed (after the well is secured).
This post was edited on 5/17/10 at 5:01 am
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News