The influence of the boreholes’ heat insulation on the determination of the minimal distance between its outfalls at permafrost

About the authors:

Jacob B. Gorelik, Dr. Sci. (Geol.-Mineral.), Head of the Laboratory of Heat and Mass Transfer Events, Earth Cryosphere Institute, Tyumen Scientific Center of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences; eLibrary AuthorID, ORCID, Web of Science ResearcherID, gorelik@ikz.ru

Artur K. Khabitov, Postgraduate Student, Earth Cryosphere Institute of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Engineer, Giprotyumenneftegaz (Tyumen); eLibrary AuthorID, ORCID, Web of Science ResearcherID, prof.power@yandex.ru

Abstract:

This article proposes a method for the calculation of the minimal distance between outfalls of boreholes at permafrost. Based on the analysis and comparison of calculation results, the authors show that the use of heat insulation in the borehole’s construction essentially cuts the minimal distance between outfalls. In these cases, the economy of the construction materials in fill area may run up to 30-50%. For reasonable calculations of the thawed area parameters near the group of boreholes, it is necessary (as opposed to the current practice) to take into account the total heat of the boreholes. This factor is required for all permafrost regions; moreover, as the inaccuracy in the calculations, connected with disregard of this factor, will increase when moving to the North.

References:

1. Vasilevskiy V. V. 2002. “Improving the operation safety of oil and gas wells in permafrost”. Cand. Sci. (Tech.) diss. Moscow. [In Russian]
2. Gorelik J. B., Shabarov A. B., Sysoyev Yu. S. 2008. “The dynamics of frozen ground melting in the influence zone of two wells”. Earth’s Cryosphere, vol. 12, no 1, pp. 59-65. [In Russian]
3. Gorelik J. B., Soldatov P. V., Seleznev A. A. 2015. “Engineering and geocriological conditions of the Yamburg gas and condensate reservoir and dynamics of the ground state of bore-holes”. Earth’s Cryosphere, vol. 19, no 1, pp. 58-69. [In Russian]
4. Gorelik J. B., Pazderin D. S. 2017. “Correctness of formulation and solution of thermotechnical problems in forecasting temperature field dynamics in the foundations of constructions on permafrost”. Earth’s Cryosphere, vol. 21, no 3, pp. 49-59. DOI: 10.21782/KZ1560-7496-2017-3(49-59) [In Russian]
5. Gorelik J. B., Soldatov P. V. 2018. “Method of calculation of axial load on the well’s casing during thawing of frozen host sediments”. Earth’s Cryosphere, vol. 22, no 2, pp. 50-60. DOI: 10.21782/KZ1560-7496-2018-2(50-60) [In Russian]
6. Gorelik J. B., Soldatov P. V. 2016. “Loss of axial stability of casing in permafrost production wells with a lateral support on thawing ice-rich ground”. Earth’s Cryosphere, vol. 20, no 4, pp. 93-104. DOI: 10.21782/KZ1560-7496-2016-4(93-104) [In Russian]
7. Gorelik J. B., Dzik M. I. 1990. “Thermal interaction between a group of production wells with permafrost”. Izvestiya AN SSSR. Energetika i Transport, vol. 36, pp. 143-152. [In Russian]
8. Gorelik J. B., Romanyuk S. N., Khabitov A. K. 2019. “Constraining thaw boundary around multiple wells with regard to their joint thermal effect”. Earth’s Cryosphere, vol. 23, no 2, pp. 79-87. DOI: 10.21782/KZ1560-7496-2019-2(79-87) [In Russian]
9. Isachenko V. P., Osipova V. A., Sukomel A. S. 1969. Heat Transfer. Moscow: Energiya. [In Russian]
10. RF Gosgortekhnadzor. 2013. Safety Regulations in Petroleum Industry. Moscow. [In Russian]
11. Samarsky A. A., Vabishchevich P. N. 2003. Computational Heat Transfer. Moscow: URSS. [In Russian]
12. Working Document SP 25.13330.2012. 2008. Construction Regulations. Basements and Foundations on Permafrost. Moscow: Minregionrazvitiya. [In Russian]
13. Working Document 16-2005. 2005. Company Standard. Design of Production Wells for Permafrost Conditions. Gazprom: Moscow. [In Russian]
14. Tsytovich N. A. 1973. Mechanics of Frozen Soil. Moscow: Vysshaya Shkola. [In Russian]
15. Hirshberg A. J., Moyer M. C., Rickenbach R. M. 1988. “Surface-casing strain capacity for North Slope operations”. SPE Drilling Engineering, vol. 3, no 3, pp. 289-295. DOI: 10.2118/16103-PA