Novo sistema de suspensão de revestimento para poços de petróleo

Prévia do material em texto

Copyright 2000, IADC/SPE Drilling Conference 
 
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2000 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference held in 
New Orleans, Louisiana, 23–25 February 2000. 
 
This paper was selected for presentation by an IADC/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 International Association of Drilling 
Contractors or the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the 
author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the IADC or 
SPE, their officers, or members. Papers presented at the IADC/SPE meetings are subject to 
publication review by Editorial Committees of the IADC and SPE. 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 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 acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was 
presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 
01-972-952-9435. 
 
Abstract 
Establishing and maintaining hydraulic integrity between liner 
hangers and the base casing in which they are set has long 
been one of the most problematic areas facing operators. With 
failure rates on pressure seals in overlaps now exceeding 40% 
in some regions, the need for a solution to this decades-old 
problem has reached a critical level. Although new approaches 
have included turbolizers for cementing overlaps, special 
cements, and liner-top packers, many problems still remain. 
An operator and a service company are working together 
to develop a new drill liner hanger based on patented 
expandable-casing technology. This technology is being used 
to diametrically expand solid tubulars for a variety of drilling, 
completion, and remedial applications. The new liner system 
is designed to totally eliminate the liner lap by expanding an 
elastomer-coated casing into intimate contact with the casing 
from which the liner is being hung. Preliminary results 
indicate the new hanger design can result in load-carrying and 
burst capacities that exceed the capacity of the previous casing 
string. Furthermore, the overlap samples tested to date have all 
resulted in annular seals that have exceeded 10,000-psi 
differential capacities. In fact, casing has always failed during 
large-scale testing before any overlap leaks developed. 
This paper discusses the design and application of the new 
liner hanger and presents laboratory and field-test results. 
 
Introduction 
One of the long-standing challenges facing operators during 
well construction has been the establishment and maintenance 
of hydraulic integrity between liner hangers and the casings in 
which they are hung. In recent years, liner-top packers have 
been used to establish a pressure seal immediately above the 
liner hanger, while traditionally cement has been used to 
establish a pressure seal in the casing/liner overlap directly 
below the hanger. However, both methods of creating 
hydraulic integrity have frequently been unsuccessful, often 
because of inherent weaknesses in the design of conventional 
liner hangers (Fig. 1). A recent informal survey of several 
Gulf of Mexico operators revealed, for example, that 30 to 
50% of the pressure seals in overlaps failed. Such failures not 
only reduce the effectiveness of the applications for which the 
liners are intended, but they also increase well costs because 
of the remedial operations that must be undertaken. 
One operator recently initiated a concerted program to 
improve its liner running and cementing procedures. Data 
from field operations over an 18-month period were compiled 
and analyzed to better understand the cause of liner pressure-
seal failures and to seek ways to reduce their occurrence 
(Fig. 2). 
A first step in the analysis was to differentiate between 
successful and unsuccessful liner jobs. Accordingly, the 
following criteria were established for a successful job: 
• The liner was run to bottom, or to an acceptable 
depth. 
• The liner-hanger and liner-top packer equipment 
functioned properly. 
• The mechanical tools (e.g., the liner-hanger running 
tools) functioned properly. 
• The cement job was performed, and the drill-liner 
shoe was subsequently tested without requiring a 
squeeze. 
• Hydraulic integrity was achieved without requiring a 
squeeze in the lap area. 
An unsuccessful job, or incident, was then defined as a 
situation in which at least one of the criteria for success was 
not met. 
Incident data were examined to determine whether a trend 
could be found relating incidents to factors such as the type of 
equipment, liner size, lap length, inclination at total depth, 
inclination at the liner hanger, annular cross section, mud type, 
mud weight, equipment supplier, and service supplier. The 
data indicated that incidents were not a function of any single 
factor, and that the chance of having an incident on any well 
was essentially the same regardless of the factors associated 
 
IADC/SPE 59151 
Expandable Liner Hanger Provides Cost-Effective Alternative Solution 
C. Lee Lohoefer and Ben Mathis, Unocal; David Brisco, Halliburton Energy Services; Kevin Waddell, Lev Ring, and 
Patrick York, Enventure Global Technology 
2 L. LOHOEFER, B. MATHIS, D. BRISCO, K. WADDELL, L. RING, P. YORK IADC/SPE 59151 
with that well (Fig. 3). These results suggested that a total-
system approach would be needed to decrease the number of 
liner incidents. 
While studying the liner-seal problem, the operator was 
also evaluating the use of expandable casing. The provider of 
the expandable-casing services informed the operator that an 
expandable liner hanger was under development that could 
help reduce liner incidents. The simple design of the 
expandable liner hanger and features of its running tool 
afforded important advantages in achieving successful liner 
jobs. In particular, 
• The new system could be rotated or reciprocated to 
assist in running the liner hanger to bottom or to an 
acceptable depth. 
• The expandable liner hanger presented less chance of 
mechanical failure than conventional liner hangers. 
• The running tool had a high probability of 
functioning properly. 
• The expandable liner hanger provided a particularly 
competent hanger/casing seal with its elastomeric 
elements, thereby reducing the dependence on 
cement to provide a seal throughout the complete lap 
area, especially at the top. 
Thus, the operator further investigated the particulars of the 
expandable-liner-hanger system and worked with the service 
provider to refine the system for successful commercial use. 
 
System Description 
The technology surrounding the expandable-liner-hanger 
system evolved from recent research and development on 
solid expandable tubulars.1 
 
Overview of Expandable-Tubular Technology. The 
attraction for this technology in the oilfield is that it affords a 
means of progressing from one casing string to a smaller 
string with minimal reduction in internal tubular diameter, i.e., 
the technology conserves hole size. Thus, operators will be 
less likely to run out of hole diameter before evaluating all pay 
zones, an especially beneficial feature in deepwater and 
extended-reach applications.2 
In their simplest form, oilfield expandable-tubular systems 
involve cold-working steel downhole. A cone and the mandrel 
on which the cone is mounted comprise the main components 
of the system’s pig, the device that mechanically and 
permanently deforms the pipe. Hydraulic pressure applied 
directly to the pig, or a pushing or pulling force applied 
through the workstring attached to the pig, propels the pig 
through the pipe, therebydeforming the pipe’s metal into its 
plastic region. Particularly critical to the expansion process are 
the mechanical properties of the pipe (e.g., burst capacity and 
tensile strength), manufacturing tolerances of the pipe (e.g., 
wall thickness and ovality), tubular connection design, cone 
design, and lubricity between the cone and the pipe to be 
expanded. 
Besides expandable liner hangers, two other applications 
are being developed for this technology. The first application, 
the expandable openhole drill-liner system, helps in solving 
lost-circulation problems, such as encountered in subsalt 
rubble zones, and in sealing off trouble zones, such as zones 
where the pore-pressure/fracture-gradient relationship is of 
concern. The second application, the expandable cased-hole 
liner system, is used for remediation work. This system is used 
in older or damaged wells to reinforce or repair casing with 
minimum reduction in hole size and with a resulting liner that 
can be drilled through. 
 
Components of the Expandable-Liner-Hanger System. The 
expandable-liner-hanger system comprises 
• an expandable-liner-hanger joint 
• an expandable-liner-hanger running tool 
• a cementing wiper-plug system 
• a crossover sub from the expandable-liner-hanger 
joint to the liner 
Fig. 4 and Fig. 5, respectively, show these components and 
compare the design of conventional liner hangers with 
expandable liner hangers. 
Expandable-Liner-Hanger Joint. The expandable-liner-
hanger joint is machined from 4140-grade materials. Several 
bands of elastomeric material are coated to the joint, with the 
bands being separated by ribs that are an integral part of the 
hanger body (Fig. 6). When the liner hanger is expanded, the 
elasotomer provides the primary anchoring force for the 
hanger and attached liner, with the ribs furnishing a secondary 
anchoring force (Fig. 7). 
Finite-element analysis (FEA) was used in determining the 
required mechanical properties of the joint and in designing 
the expansion cone (Fig. 8). The use of FEA shortened the 
time needed to develop a system that could address the 
operator’s problems and reduces well-construction and 
remediation costs. 
When the liner hanger is expanded, the elastomer furnishes 
the desired hydraulic seal between the hanger and the previous 
casing string. Sealing designs and materials used in other 
proven oilfield applications, such as packers and plugs, were 
studied during the development of the expandable system. An 
available elastomer was selected, further shortening concept-
to-market time. Testing was conducted to assess the 
elastomers' sealing capabilities after expansion. 
The expandable-liner-hanger joint design is similar to the 
top joint of the expandable-openhole-liner system that was 
successfully installed for another operator in a Gulf of Mexico 
well. In that well, the liner was installed over an interval from 
12,185 to 13,131 ft, and the liner-hanger joint met the top 
mechanical and hydraulic-seal functional specifications for the 
expanded drill liner. The entire expanded liner was 
hydraulically tested to 3,500-psi positive pressure and to 
2,130-psi negative pressure. 
Expandable-Liner-Hanger Running Tool. The running 
tool allows for circulation and rotation while the liner hanger 
and liner are being conveyed downhole and for subsequent 
pumping of cement before the liner hanger is expanded. The 
IADC/SPE 59151 EXPANDABLE LINER HANGER PROVIDES COST-EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION 3 
running tool is designed withstand a 400,000-lb axial load and 
10,000-psi pressure containment at 400o F. 
Cementing Wiper-Plug System. The wiper-plug system 
utilizes an established dual-wiper-plug design. One wiper plug 
displaces drilling fluid ahead of cement that is being pumped, 
and the other plug removes residual cement from the interior 
of the casing. Experience with these plugs has been 
documented many times in other cementing operations. 
Because the wiper-plug system does not directly affect the 
liner-hanger expansion process, no further discussion is 
merited in this paper. 
Crossover Sub. The crossover sub connects the 
expandable liner hanger to the liner directly or the connection 
can accommodate a polished bore receptacle (PBR). The 
design is common of industry crossover subs and thus will not 
be discussed further in this paper. 
 
System Specifications. The current 9 5/8-in. system is 
designed for hanging a 7- or 7 5/8-in. liner in 9 5/8-in., 47- or 
53.5-lb/ft casing. The system has a static mechanical load 
capacity of 250,000 lb. Working burst and collapse ratings are 
8,000 and 4,000 psi, respectively. With standard elastomer, the 
system can be used in wells with temperatures up to 250°F, 
and a high-temperature elastomer is available for hotter wells 
up to 400°F. A 7 5/8-in. system will be developed for hanging a 
5- or 5 1/2-in. liner in 7 5/8-in. casing. 
 
System Qualification 
To qualify the system for field service, a systematic step-by-
step process was utilized. This approach was absolutely 
necessary to arrive at a viable solution and involved four 
phases. Testing was conducted in accordance with ISO/DIS 
14310 guidelines for packers and plugs used in the petroleum 
and natural gas industry. 
 
Phase 1. This phase focused on identifying operational 
requirements and environment, including temperature, burst 
pressure, collapse pressure, fluid exposure, and load 
requirements. 
 
Phase 2. In this phase, the initial design was created by 
leveraging proven technology, where possible. 
 
Phase 3. Here, components for the system were qualified. 
This step required a series of rigorous laboratory, metallurgy, 
and pressure chamber testing to 
• test potential liner-body materials 
• test potential elastomers to determine temperature 
and fluid exposure characterization 
• test the coating quality of the elastomer to the hanger 
joint 
• determine expansion characteristics of the liner-
hanger joint when coated with the different 
elastomers 
• qualify lab-expanded liner-hanger segments in fluid 
and gas environments for mechanical integrity 
• qualify hydraulic-pressure integrity of the hanger 
body to determine its material yield point 
As a Phase 3 test example, a 1-ft section of 7 5/8-in. liner 
hanger was expanded and sealed to a piece of 9 5/8-in. casing 
that had been cemented into a section of 13 3/8-in. casing. The 
resulting expanded liner hanger with its surrounding casings 
was placed in a laboratory text fixture (Fig. 10). The fixture 
was fitted with two end caps: one cap was welded onto the end 
of the expanded 7 5/8-in. liner-hanger material, and the other 
cap was welded onto the end of the 9 5/8-in. casing. Hydraulic 
pressure was then applied to the 9 5/8-in. casing while the end 
of the 7 5/8-in. liner-hanger section was sealed. During this test, 
the liner-hanger joint was loaded to over 580,000-lb hanging 
weight, and a hydraulic seal was maintained to over 11,400 psi 
(Fig. 11). 
 
Phase 4. Finally, the system was qualified for operational 
functionality, load requirement, and pressure requirement at 
temperature in oil and gas environments. This testing included 
• expansion of the liner-hanger assembly on the surface 
• expansion of the liner-hanger assembly in a 
downhole test chamber 
• testing of the liner-hanger assembly under 
temperature and pressure conditions (Fig. 9) 
• field testing the liner-hanger joint in both test-well 
and commercial applications 
As a Phase 4 test example, a 7 5/8-in. liner-hanger and 
running-tool configuration was run into a test fixture of 9 5/8-
in. casing set in a well simulator. Included in the liner hanger 
assembly was a setdown profile. The test was designed to 
functionally qualify the liner-hanger-setting and running-tool-
retrieval processes. The simulation utilized a field pumping 
unit and hydraulic jack with rotary mandrel for assembly 
manipulation. The liner hanger was successfully set, and therunning tool retrieved according to specified procedures. A 
packed hole assembly was then run down to the setdown 
profile, and a load was applied to the assembly through a 
hydraulic jack. The load-carrying capability of the liner hanger 
was thus qualified to 250,000 lb with a total downhole 
movement of 0.75 in. 
 
Running Procedure 
Once the expandable-liner-hanger system is positioned at the 
proper depth in the wellbore, a top-down expansion technique 
is used to anchor the liner hanger and establish a hydraulic 
seal (Fig. 12). Compared to a bottom-up expansion technique 
used with expandable openhole and cased-hole liner systems, 
the top-down technique allows for more flexibility in running 
the system and for additional contingency options. Unlike the 
openhole and cased-hole liner systems, in which the full liner 
is expanded, only the upper 10-ft interval of machined liner-
hanger material is expanded with the expandable-liner-hanger 
system. 
 
Running Sequence. The running sequence for the 
expandable-liner-hanger system follows and is very similar to 
4 L. LOHOEFER, B. MATHIS, D. BRISCO, K. WADDELL, L. RING, P. YORK IADC/SPE 59151 
the running sequence for a conventional liner hanger. 
1. Make up cement float shoe to liner, run in liner to total 
length of liner required, and hang off liner in slips. 
2. Install a swivel and dual-wiper-plug set onto expandable-
liner-hanger running tool. Use PBR option as required. 
3. Install crossover sub between conventional liner casing 
and expandable-liner-hanger running tool. 
4. Make up liner to expandable- liner-hanger running tool. 
5. Make up workstring to expandable-liner-hanger running 
tool 
6. Run assembly in hole to setting depth. Rotate and 
circulate as required. 
7. Drop sealing dart for drilling-fluid wiper plug. 
8. Displace required cement volume and drop sealing dart 
for cement wiper plug 
9. Drop primary setting ball into running tool. 
10. Increase pressure to shear pins in crossover ports and 
divert flow into flow paths to pig. (Note: Three crossover 
ports provide triple redundant fluid flow for setting 
operation.) 
11. Pressure up until pig propagation pressure is obtained. 
12. Maintain expansion pressure and clad liner hanger to 
previous string of casing. 
• Observe pressure readout on surface pumping unit 
for indications of cladding. 
• Note that full travel of the pig mandrel will result in 
a shifting of the bypass port and a consequent 
pressure drop. 
13. Set down on workstring to release running tool. 
14. Pressure test liner-top seal. 
15. Pull out of hole with running tool (Fig. 13). 
 
Contingency Options. Contingency options for the 
expandable-liner-hanger system include the following: 
1. Should the primary setting ball not provide an adequate 
seal, a secondary setting ball is available. 
2. In the event that release from the running tool is not 
gained by the straight setdown method, a secondary 
release procedure can be used that involves a setdown and 
rotation of 15 to 30 degrees and pickup for release. 
3. If the liner becomes stuck at an unplanned depth, an 
emergency release ball can be dropped into the retaining 
sleeve in the running tool. Once the ball seals, pressure is 
applied, set screws are sheared, and the sleeve shifts to 
allow removal of the running tool. 
 
Operational Benefits 
The expandable-liner-hanger system provides operators with a 
simpler alternative to conventional liner hangers and liner-top 
packers. This system combines the functional requirements of 
a liner hanger and liner-top seal, while eliminating the 
possible need for costly liner-top squeezes. The solid 
construction of the system minimizes potential leak paths into 
the annulus during cementing, setting and for the life of the 
hanger. The combination of the metal-to-metal and elastomer-
to-metal contacts that are created during expansion of the liner 
hanger produce a very reliable seal. Once the expandable liner 
is set, the minimal annular profile increases the interior cross 
section available for flow and forms a potential PBR for a 
monobore completion or for other kinds of tie-backs. 
 
Economic Justification 
The total cost of the drill-liner-hanger system utilized by the 
operator is the ultimate driver of the use of the expandable 
liner hanger. Being able to depend on a consistent positive seal 
at the drill-liner-hanger lap can mean significant savings over 
both the life of a well and the life of a field. 
While as many as 70% of conventional liner-hanger 
systems may not require any remediation, the cost of 
remediating the systems that fail can add significantly to 
operational costs. Although the cost of a squeeze job alone 
may be reasonable, the total cost of a liner incident can be 
considerable when the costs of the rig, liner-top packer, 
multiple squeeze jobs, and lost production that may never be 
regained are included. For example, when the 18 months of 
data mentioned earlier in this paper were analyzed and all 
costs were considered, the cost per installation nearly tripled 
when liner incidents occurred. Thus, the ability to be proactive 
in managing these and other well costs, especially in high-risk 
areas such as deepwater applications, makes good economic 
sense. 
 
Conclusions 
A 9 5/8-in. expandable-liner-hanger system has been 
developed for deployment in 9 5/8-in. casing at temperatures up 
to 400°F. The system’s liner-hanger joint has been tested to 
over 580,000-lb/ft hanging weight and to over 11,400-psi 
hydraulic seal, attesting to the system’s anchoring and sealing 
capabilities. Because of its robustness and high load capacity, 
the system is expected to be a cost-effective alternative to 
conventional liner-hanger systems, especially in high-risk 
areas. 
 
References 
 1. Filippov, A., et al.: “Expandable Tubular Solutions,” paper SPE 
56500 presented at the 1999 SPE Annual Technical Conference 
and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, U.S.A., 3–6 October 1999. 
 2. Haut, R.C., and Sharif, Q.: “Meeting Economic Challenges of 
Deepwater Drilling With Expandable-Tubular Technology,” 
paper presented at the 1999 Deep Offshore Technology 
International Conference and Exhibition, 19–21 October 1999, 
Stavanger, Norway. 
 
 
IADC/SPE 59151 EXPANDABLE LINER HANGER PROVIDES COST-EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION 5 
 
 
Fig. 1—Because of their complex design and loading, liner-top packers 
can be expected to be less robust and reliable than the new, simpler 
expandable-liner-hanger design. 
Potential Leak Paths 
6 L. LOHOEFER, B. MATHIS, D. BRISCO, K. WADDELL, L. RING, P. YORK IADC/SPE 59151 
 
 
Fig. 2—An operator collected quarterly data on liner-hanger failures over an 18-month period. 
 
 
 
 
 
Fig. 3—Data from liner-hanger failures over an 18-month period were analyzed according to 
factors involved in the failures. 
 
Liner-Incident Factors
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
La
p S
qe
ez
e
Sh
oe
 Sq
ue
ez
e
St
uc
k L
ine
r
W
ipe
r P
lug
Ru
nn
ing
 To
ol
Di
sp
lac
em
en
t
Pk
r/H
ng
r/C
en
t
Cir
cu
lat
ion
Ce
me
ntP
er
ce
nt
 o
f A
ll 
of
 C
om
pa
ny
 X
's
 In
ci
de
nt
s
Company A
Company B
Company C
Liner Incident Rate
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2Q
97
3Q
97
4Q
97
1Q
98
2Q
98
3Q
98
4Q
98
1Q
99
2Q
99
3Q
99
Li
ne
rs
 In
st
al
le
d
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
In
ci
de
nt
 R
at
e
# Liners Incident Rate
IADC/SPE 59151 EXPANDABLE LINER HANGER PROVIDES COST-EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION 7 
 
 
Fig. 4—The expandable-liner-hanger system comprises an 
expandable-liner-hanger joint, an expandable-liner-hanger 
running tool, a cementing-wiper-plug system, and a crossover 
sub from the expandable-liner-hanger joint to the liner. 
 
 
 
 
 
Fig. 5—Because of its simple design, the expandable-liner-hanger 
can be expected to provide a more reliable hydraulic seal than 
conventional liner hangers. 
 
Expandable-
Liner-Hanger
System
ConventionalLiner Hanger 
and 
Liner-Top 
Liner-Hanger 
Assembly 
Running Tool 
Liner-Hanger Joint 
Crossover Sub 
Wiper-Plug Assembly 
8 L. LOHOEFER, B. MATHIS, D. BRISCO, K. WADDELL, L. RING, P. YORK IADC/SPE 59151 
 
 
 
Fig. 6—When the expandable hanger joint is expanded, the elastomer coating on the joint provides a hydraulic seal and helps anchor 
the liner system to the previous casing string. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 7—Upon expansion of the expandable liner hanger, ribs machined on the 
surface of the hanger engage the previous casing string, providing an anchor for the 
liner string. 
 
Before Expansion After Expansion 
IADC/SPE 59151 EXPANDABLE LINER HANGER PROVIDES COST-EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION 9 
 
 
Fig. 8—During the design of the expandable-liner-hanger system, finite-element analysis was used to study stresses. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Fig. 9—A test fixture was constructed to 
determine the hanging weight and seal 
effectiveness of an expandable liner hanger 
that had been test-deployed inside a dual 
casing string. 
10 L. LOHOEFER, B. MATHIS, D. BRISCO, K. WADDELL, L. RING, P. YORK IADC/SPE 59151 
 
 
Fig. 10—Testing the expandable liner hanger with the fixture depicted in Fig. 9 loaded the joint to over 580,000-lb hanging 
weight and showed that a hydraulic seal could be maintained to over 11,400 psi. 
 
 
 
 
Fig. 11—During development, expandable-liner-
hanger assemblies are tested in a downhole 
temperature and pressure chamber. 
Liner Hanger Test
HNBR - Test 1
5% Expansion
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
00
:0
0
02
:0
0
04
:0
0
06
:0
0
08
:0
0
10
:0
0
12
:0
0
14
:0
0
16
:0
0
18
:0
0
20
:0
0
22
:0
0
24
:0
0
26
:0
0
28
:0
0
30
:0
0
32
:0
0
34
:0
0
36
:0
0
38
:0
0
40
:0
0
42
:0
0
44
:0
0
46
:0
0
48
:0
0
50
:0
0
52
:0
0
Elapsed Time (min.)
Pr
es
su
re
 (p
si
.)
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
500,000
550,000
600,000
650,000
700,000
750,000
800,000
Pu
llo
ut
 F
or
ce
 (l
bs
.)
Yielded @ 11,449 psi.
Corresponding Hanging Load: 584,200 lbs.
IADC/SPE 59151 EXPANDABLE LINER HANGER PROVIDES COST-EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION 11 
 
 
Fig. 12—The running procedure for the expandable-liner-hanger system involves a top-down expansion method. 
 
Drill 
Hole 
Section 
Pump 
Cement 
Initiate 
Hanger 
Expansion
Fully 
Expand
Hanger
Drill 
Out
POOH With 
Running Tool 
12 L. LOHOEFER, B. MATHIS, D. BRISCO, K. WADDELL, L. RING, P. YORK IADC/SPE 59151 
 
 
 
Fig. 13—This top-down view shows a 7 5/8-in. 
expandable liner hanger that had been expanded 
in a test well in 9 5/8-in. casing and subsequently 
milled. The casing and liner hanger had been 
pulled from the well for evaluation when this 
photo was taken.