To: 21twelve; Cold Heat
Sorta late to your discussion and I'm not sure what the correct data is as we all know it is being gathered or at least attemtps are being made to gather data. Here is a little info from a posting on FR a few days back that came from 'The Oil Drum'. These clips indicate that apparently several things may have been potential causes or at least impacted the final results of this blowout.
From the following posted article: Congressional Testimony and the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill (Best summary yet - Technicals )
- The next bullet says: After 16.5 hours waiting on cement, a test was performed on the wellbore below the Blowout Preventer. BP explained to us what this means. Halliburton completed cementing the well at 12:35 a.m. on April 20 and after giving the cement time to set, a negative pressure test was conducted around 5:00 p.m. This is an important test. During a negative pressure test, the fluid pressure inside the well is reduced and the well is observed to see whether any gas leaks into the well through the cement or casing.
According to James Dupree, the BP Senior Vice President for the Gulf of Mexico, the well did not pass this test. Mr. Dupree told Committee staff on Monday that the test result was not satisfactory and inconclusive. Significant pressure discrepancies were recorded.
As a result, another negative pressure test was conducted. This is described in the fourth bullet: During this test, 1,400 psi was observed on the drill pipe while 0 psi was observed on the kill and the choke lines.
According to Mr. Dupree, this is also an unsatisfactory test result. The kill and choke lines run from the drill rig 5,000 feet to the blowout preventer at the sea floor. The drill pipe runs from the drill rig through the blowout preventer deep into the well. In the test, the pressures measured at any point from the drill rig to the blowout preventer should be the same in all three lines. But what the test showed was that pressures in the drill pipe were significantly higher. Mr. Dupree explained that the results could signal that an influx of gas was causing pressure to mount inside the wellbore.
Another document provided by BP to the Committee is labeled What Could Have Happened. It was prepared by BP on April 26, ten days before the first document. According to BP, their understanding of the cause of the spill has evolved considerably since April 26, so this document should not be considered definitive. But it also describes the two negative pressure tests and the pressure discrepancies that were recorded.
What happened next is murky. Mr. Dupree told the Committee staff that he believed the well blew moments after the second pressure test. But lawyers for BP contacted the Committee yesterday and provided a different account. According to BPs counsel, further investigation has revealed that additional pressure tests were taken, and at 8:00 p.m., company officials determined that the additional results justified ending the test and proceeding with well operations.
- Congressman Stupak: Our investigation is at its early stages, but already we have uncovered at least four significant problems with the blowout preventer used on the Deepwater Horizon drill rig.
First, the blowout preventer apparently had a significant leak in a key hydraulic system. This leak was found in the hydraulic system that provides emergency power to the shear rams, which are the devices that are supposed to cut the drill pipe and seal the well.
I would like to put on the screen a document that the Committee received from BP. This document states: leaks have been discovered in the BOP hydraulics system.
The blowout preventer was manufactured by Cameron. We asked a senior official at Cameron what he knew about these leaks. He told us when the remote operating vehicles (ROVs) tried to operate the shear rams, they noticed a loss of pressure. They investigated this by injecting dye into the hydraulic fluid, which showed a large leak coming from a loose fitting, which was backed off several turns.
The Cameron official told us that he did not believe the leak was caused by the blowout because every other fitting in the system was tight.
We also asked about the significance of the leak. The Cameron official said it was one of several possible failure modes. If the leak deprived the shear rams of sufficient power, they might not succeed in cutting through the drill pipe and sealing the well.
Second, we learned that the blowout preventer had been modified in unexpected ways. One of these modifications was potentially significant. The blowout preventer has an underwater control panel. BP spent a day trying to use this control panel to activate a variable bore ram on the blowout preventer that is designed to seal tight around any pipe in the well. When they investigated why their attempts failed to activate the bore ram, they learned that the device had been modified. A useless test ram not the variable bore ram had been connected to the socket that was supposed to activate the variable bore ram. An entire days worth of precious time had been spent engaging rams that closed the wrong way.
BP told us the modifications on the BOP were extensive. After the accident, they asked Transocean for drawings of the blowout preventer. Because of the modifications, the drawings they received didnt match the structure on the ocean floor. BP said they wasted many hours figuring this out.
Third, we learned that the blowout preventer is not powerful enough to cut through joints in the drill pipe. We found a Transocean document that I would like to put on the screen. It says: most blind shear rams are designed to shear effectively only on the body of the drillpipe. Procedures for the use of BSRs must therefore ensure that there is no tool joint opposite the ram prior to shearing.
This seemed astounding to us because the threaded joints between the sections of drillpipe make up about 10% of the length of the pipe. If the shear rams cannot cut through the joints, that would mean that this so-called failsafe device would succeed in cutting the drillpipe only 90% of the time.
We asked the Cameron official about the cutting capacity of the blowout preventer on the Deepwater Horizon. He confirmed that it is not powerful enough to cut through the joints in the drillpipe. And he told us this was another possible explanation for the failure of the blowout preventer to seal the well.
And fourth, we learned that the emergency controls on the blowout preventer may have failed. The blowout preventer has two emergency controls. One is called the emergency disconnect system or EDS. BP officials told us that that the EDS was activated on the drill rig before the rig was evacuated. But the Cameron official said they doubted the signals ever reached the blowout preventer on the seabed. Cameron officials believed the explosion on the rig destroyed the communications link to the blowout preventer before the emergency sequence could be completed.
In other words, the emergency controls may have failed because the explosion that caused the emergency also disabled communications to the blowout preventer.
Still, the blowout preventer also has a deadman switch which is supposed to activate the blowout preventer when all else fails. But according to Cameron, there were multiple scenarios that could have caused the deadman switch not to activate. One is human oversight: the deadman switch may not have been enabled on the control panel prior to the BOP being installed on the ocean floor. One is lack of maintenance: the deadman switch wont work if the batteries are dead. The deadman switch is connected to two separate control pods on the blowout preventer. Both rely on battery power to operate. When one of the control pods was removed and inspected after the spill began, the battery was found to be dead. The battery in the other pod has not been inspected yet.
And one appears to be a design problem. The deadman switch activates only when three separate lines that connect the rig to the blowout preventer are all severed: the communication, power, and hydraulic lines. Cameron believes the power and communication lines were severed in the explosion, but it is possible the hydraulic lines remained intact, which would have stopped the deadman switch from activating.
These are not the only failure scenarios that could impair the function of the blowout preventer. The Cameron official we met with described many other potential problems that could have prevented the blowout preventer from functioning properly. Steel casing or casing hanger could have been ejected from the well and blocked the operation of the rams. The drill pipe could have been severed successfully, but then dropped from the rig, breaking the seal. Or operators on the rig could have tried to activate the shear rams by pushing the shear ram control button. This would have initiated an attempt to close the rams, but it would not have been successful. The shear rams do not have enough power to cut drill pipe unless they are activated through the emergency switch or the deadman switch.
end snips Another article I've read indicated that the BOP is believed to have been manufactured in the Cameron International facility in Beziers France.
We may never know the actual facts but seems a lot of info is still needed to get a better handle on the events.
150 posted on
06/05/2010 7:43:38 AM PDT by
deport
To: deport
Thanks for the detailed testomony on the BOP. Their were problems before that thoguh, and the company man saying something like “that’s what the pinchers are for”. (The BOP).
I liken it to the guy doing the driving (the driller) telling his passenger that he’s going as fast as he can but he has to drive slow as it is raining, his tires are bald, they’re on a mountain road, and the brakes aren’t vey good and the seatbelts are crap. But the passenger tells him - “Step on it. I’m the boss, and that is what the airbags are for”.
You know you’re in a bad situation when your method of last resort kicks in. But to rely on that.....
155 posted on
06/05/2010 10:52:26 AM PDT by
21twelve
( UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES MY ARSE: "..now begin the work of remaking America."-Obama, 1/20/09)
To: deport
"But lawyers for BP contacted the Committee yesterday and provided a different account." Beware landsharks bearing gifts of new information.
To: deport
Good post, thank you.
French blowout preventers.
Made by low-paid French Moslems who care.
Think about that one for a while.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson