Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLimaye, Nilesh
dc.date.accessioned2015-08-21T01:16:30Z
dc.date.available2015-08-21T01:16:30Z
dc.date.issued2007-12
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11122/5845
dc.descriptionThesis (M.S.) University of Alaska Fairbanks, 2007en_US
dc.description.abstractNovel chemically bonded phosphate ceramic borehole sealant, i.e. Ceramicrete, has many advantages over conventionally used permafrost cement at Alaska North Slope (ANS). However, in normal field practices when Ceramicrete is mixed with water in blenders, it has a chance of being contaminated with leftover Portland cement. In order to identify the effect of Portland cement contamination, recent tests have been conducted at BJ services in Tomball, TX as well as at the University of Alaska Fairbanks with Ceramicrete formulations proposed by the Argonne National Laboratory. The tests conducted at BJ Services with proposed Ceramicrete formulations and Portland cement contamination have shown significant drawbacks which has caused these formulations to be rejected. However, the newly developed Ceramicrete formulation at the University of Alaska Fairbanks has shown positive results with Portland cement contamination as well as without Portland cement contamination for its effective use in oil well cementing operations at ANS.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents1. Introduction -- 1.1. Purpose of oil-well cementing -- 1.2. Permafrost cementing -- 1.3. Problems associated with convential cements -- 1.4. Ideal permafrost cement properties -- 1.5. Objective of the research -- 2. Literature review -- 2.1. Introduction -- 2.2. Cementing methodology -- 2.2.1. Primary cementing -- 2.2.2. Secondary or remedial cementing -- 2.3. Available permafrost cements -- 2.3.1. API class A, C, or G cement -- 2.3.2. High aluminate content cement -- 2.3.3. Blend of gypsum and Portland cement -- 2.4. Background information of Portland cement manufacturing -- 2.4.1. Clinker formation -- 2.5. Freeze temperature depressants -- 2.6. Cement temperature stability -- 2.7. Novel chemically bonded phosphate ceramic borehole sealant (Ceramicrete) -- 3. Determination of thawed permafrost zone around the well bore -- 3.1. Introduction -- 3.2. Numerical method of determination of thawed permafrost zone around the wellbore -- 3.2.1. Physical system representing permfrost thawing around the wellbore -- 3.2.2. Assumptions -- 3.2.3. Mathematical formulation of physical system -- 3.2.4. Initial and boundary conditions -- 3.2.5. Results and discussion -- 3.3. Determination of thawed permafrost zone around the wellbore using ABAQUS software -- 3.3.1. Material properties used in ABAQUS software -- 3.3.2. Well dimensions of typical well at ANS -- 3.3.3. Thawing of the permafrost zone around the well bore after 3.5 hrs. at 50 degree C -- 3.3.4. Comparison between thawed zones around the wellbore after 3.5 hrs. at 50 degree C and at 32 degree C -- 3.3.5. Freeze back of thawed zone at -1 degree C -- 3.3.6. Continuous thawing of permafrost at 10 degree C for 1 year -- 3.3.7. Results and discussion -- 4. Experimental procedure and testing methodology -- 4.1. Introduction -- 4.2. Formulation of Ceramicrete -- 4.3. Compatibility test -- 4.3.1. Introduction -- 4.3.2. Experimental procedure -- 4.3.3. Results and discussion -- 4.4. Thickening time testing -- 4.4.1. Introduction -- 4.4.2. Results and discussion -- 4.5. Density measurement -- 4.5.1. Introduction -- 4.5.2. Results and discussion -- 4.6. Compressive strength testing -- 4.6.1. Compressive strength measurements using Ultrasonic cement analyzer -- 4.6.2. Results and discussion -- 4.6.3. Compressive strength measurement by curing method -- 4.6.4. Results and discussion -- 4.7. Fluid loss testing -- 4.7.1. Introduction -- 4.7.2. Experimental procedure -- 4.7.3. Results and discussion -- 4.8. Rheology measurements -- 4.8.1. Introduction -- 4.8.2. Experimental procedure 4.8.3. Results and discussion -- 4.9. Expansion test of Ceramicrete slurry at 40 degree F -- 4.9.1. Introduction -- 4.9.2. Experimental procedure -- 4.9.3. Results and discussion -- 5. Determination of optimum amount of MgO in Ceramicrete binder -- 5.1. Introduction -- 5.2. Ceramicrete formulation preparation -- 5.3. Expansion test at 32 degrees F -- 5.3.1. Introduction -- 5.3.2. Results and discussion -- 5.4. Fluid loss testing of Ceramicrete formulations at room temperature and 1000 psi differential pressure -- 5.4.1. Introduction -- 5.4.2. Results and discussion -- 5.5. Uniaxial compressive strength testing -- 5.5.1. Introduction -- 5.5.2. Experimental procedure -- 5.5.3. Results and discussion -- 6. Conclusions and recommendations -- 6.1. Conclusion -- Recommendations -- References.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.titleAnalysis of a chemically-bonded phosphate ceramic as an alternative oilfield cementing system for Arctic regionsen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.type.degreemsen_US
dc.identifier.departmentPetroleum Engineering Departmenten_US
dc.contributor.chairPatil, Shirish L.
dc.contributor.committeeChen, Gang
dc.contributor.committeeKhataniar, Santanu
dc.contributor.committeeChukwu, Godwin A.
refterms.dateFOA2020-03-05T14:42:44Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Limaye_N_2007.pdf
Size:
107.5Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record