US20120001100A1

US20120001100A1 - Blowout preventer-backup safety system

Info

Publication number: US20120001100A1
Application number: US13/066,643
Authority: US
Inventors: Paul Joseph Hubbell, JR.
Original assignee: Individual
Current assignee: Individual
Priority date: 2010-06-01
Filing date: 2011-04-19
Publication date: 2012-01-05

Abstract

This design/system addresses the problem of failed Blowout Preventers that lock an independent backup safety system when encountering a oil/gas well “kick” or blowout and is not reliant on any of the complex, multiple components of the previously claimed safeguards that the B O P's were supposed to prevent such as; the Horizon disaster, but failed drastically, resulting in loss of lives, environmental pollution of the sea, destruction of the marshes/wetlands, thus causing a massive cleanup effort and reconstruction of the damaged areas that was an important link to the various species of habitat such as fowl and the aquatic groups in their food chains and fisheries. This design/system provides a double manifold, double bypass device that is a supplemental connection between the well head and the inlet of the B O P that allows for relief both temporary and /or extended until repairs, replacement or capping procedures are complete.

Description

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention
A self contained double manifold/double by pass piping assembly device/mechanism which serves as a supplemental connection between the sea floor well head and the B O P inlet as well as the B O P outlet discharge connection into the upper manifold inlet that controls the flow of oil into the riser pipe connected to the rig above, on the sea surface. This is an independent, pre engineered, designed and manufactured system that serves as a safety backup to minimize the disastrous effects of failed Blowout Preventers, that includes: loss of life, injury, pollution of the environment of the sea and wetlands, wasted products and the resulting economic impacts associated, including clean up, operations and restoration of the wetlands. Existing and previous B O P's had no independent, separated and controlled devices to achieve this task, only those designed and built into the B O P module itself. Obvious failures have demonstrated the lack of safety backups.
2. Description of the Prior Art
With news reports of over 6,000 oil spills in U.S. waters and approaching 4,000 per year in the Gulf of Mexico alone, it becomes very obvious, considering the demand for oil and its' petroleum products world wide, that prevention and containment of blowouts and spills are necessary to lessen the impact on the environment, economy and public safety.
Prior Art for devices of bypass safety systems relating to containment of oil spills for Drilling operations is virtually, nonexistent.
The only Prior Art for bypass systems found are: U.S. Pat. No. 5,172,557; December/1992 by Hubbell, Jr. 62/292 X. And U.S. Pat. No. 5,396,774 by Hubbell, Jr. 62/77; 62/192. Both of these patents addressed the bypassing, Storage and recovery of refrigerants-liquids and vapors. These were both single bypass manifold devices/systems.
The other Prior Art for a bypass device/system is: U.S. Patent Pending Application No. 61/199, 428:Nov. 18, 2008; 405/51; Publication No. US 2010 0143037, serial No. 592014 by Hubbell, Jr. addresses Water/Fluids Surge/Backflow Protection System and Management and is also a single bypass device/system. If the B O P's that have been used in the drilling of oil and gas wells in the past—that were supposed to have built in mechanisms for the prevention and containment of blowouts and spills could be considered Prior Art, i.e., the Cameron B O P along with some others listed below: U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,300,033 B1; Varco Schaffer Rain B O P No. 6,719,042 B2; Hydril Annular BOP U.S. Patent Application No. 2008/0023917 A1, none of the above mentioned and others do not depict or include a double manifold/double bypass independent system for containment or prevention of a blowout.

TECHNICAL FIELDS AND SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

This design/concept addresses the failures of oil/gas well blowout prevention systems. This new invention considers the failure problems and their possible causes and cites designs that could provide backup protection as well as safety issues.
In lieu of the existing failed designs and methods that have caused catastrophic results i.e., the Horizon disaster-the worst blowout/spill in history, for lack of safeguards being built into the current and past systems and questionable methods of operation, poor record keeping, lack of supervision, and lax oversight by regulators in both the areas of permitting and enforcement without a strict set of rules/codes applied by the management agency mandated by the U.S. government and not the Petroleum Institute organization.
The new double manifold/double bypass system design/invention proposed, includes methods of operations that should reduce the probability of failure that has caused; loss of life, injuries, pollution contamination to the water, air and land of the environment, the ecological system that impacts the food chain with possible long range side effects, economic losses to businesses and industries, resulting in job losses, the consumer, which impacts the economic status for survival and governmental subsidies that budgets do not provide for.
The new independent double bypass system is comprised of two manifolds, one below and one above the inline riser blowout preventer, of any make, each having an inlet from the main oil/gas riser from the reservoir of oil/gas and outlet that connects to an isolation shutoff valve on each side of the B O P in the vertical riser. The bottom inlet manifold contains two (manual/automated) bypass valves, one to the right of the centerline riser and one to the left whose respective piping outlets parallels the main vertical riser that contains the B O P in the same plane and passes through said B O P. The distal ends of the right and left parallel piping from the bottom manifold connect to the top manifold that is in the same horizontal and vertical planes. The top manifold has identical shutoff valves as the bottom manifold and has an inlet that connects to the distal end of the isolation valve that is connected to the top of the B O P. The center/top of the upper manifold has an outlet with a distal end connected to an inlet of the riser/rig shutoff valve that terminates at the rig above on the surface of the sea. This is the basic design of the first preferred embodiment for normal operations/positions and also employs some features dealing with the needs of a failed B O P that requires repairs, replacement and/or capping. The drawings detail same along with their description.
This invention is comprised of expanded devices and methods of previously mentioned single bypass patents that include an independent piping arrangement with components being incorporated to provide broader coverage of high pressure and depths associated with the latest exploration into deeper areas and conditions considered virgin territories. While the yet to be tested, newly proclaimed, B O P's and other containment devices, as fail safe methods, with the newest conditions, haven't been proven until a blowout occurs in this new under sea environment.
The first preferred embodiment employs some features that address the more severe methods of containment dealing with the failure of a B O P involving possible replacement and/or capping while allowing some recovery and salvage of oil, fluids and gas, in the interim, as well as possibly averting the drilling of relief wells which has been previously considered as an alternative and the method of last resort to save the well while being a very costly option.
The additional features of the invention includes methods with provisions for cementing/closing of the well through the same components used to salvage, capture the oil, if necessary.
Obviously, as shown in FIG. 1A, the first preferred embodiment is capable of performing the simpler tasks, that is, with the basic, normal flow of products while being in a position to adjust in the event of a blowout or minor repairs, maintenance and/or replacement of a B O P. The normal flow, minus any problems, includes all bypass valves in a closed position while the isolation valves ( MIV 1, 2 and 3) including the B O P are in an open mode.
The first preferred embodiment as shown in FIG. 2A is in the bypassing mode while the B O P is temporarily out of service for some of the reasons stated above. This entails bypass valves No. 1 and No. 2 and MIV 3 isolation valve in the open position with bypass valves 1A and 2A and stub out valves (SOV (L), SOV (R), MIV 1 and MIV 2 in closed positions while the two Flanged shutoff valves 3 (L) and 3 (R) remain in their normal open position.
A similar operation occurs in FIG. 3A for bypassing through valves 1A and 2A, MIV3 in the open position along with the normally open flanged shut off valves 3 (L) and 3 (R) with all other valves closed.
When a determination is made by the drilling engineer that more flow is needed, the option in FIG. 4A is utilized and demonstrated by the use of the double manifold/double bypass operation which requires that bypass valves 1 and IA are utilized along with bypass valves 2 and 2A and MIV3 for increased flow and relief of pressure with these and the two flanged shutoff valves 3 (L) and 3 (R) in open positions with all other valves closed.
When a critical stage has occurred and the driller has determined that the B O P has failed and capping, emergency procedures, have to be implemented; then as shown in FIG. 4B, the preparations to isolate the top manifold section, remove same and set aside for possible use on another rig, later. At the same time, sealing off the two 3 (L) and 3 (R) flanged shutoff valves and closing off the MIV 1 isolation valve on the inlet side of the B O P with drill pipe removed, if possible. Whether that is an option or not, the bypass valves of the bottom manifold, 1 and 1A are opened along with stub out valves SOV (L) and (R) after connections have been coupled to recovery/reclaim lines to the capture/salvage vessels on the surface of the sea.
This independent backup/safety system allows the flow around the failed B O P while capturing the products in the interim as the transporting and installation of a capping device (Cap Stack) is being implemented.
Thereby, this bypass process minimizes the discharge of raw oil/fluids into the environment of the sea, air and wetlands/marshes while the above procedures are in process. In addition, alter the capping device is successfully installed and hopefully, the B O P is closed off, there remains the possibility of utilizing the bypass system to continue the capture of the products. If this is not a viable option, then the system can be utilized to implement the cementing process and seal off the well.
As shown in FIG. 5A, the top manifold section/portion of the double manifold/double bypass system is set aside for future use.
The bottom portion of the bypass system is shown in an elevation cross section, FIG. 6, that displays the various components of the bottom manifold section that performs the multiple operations, as taught.
A schematic layout displays the recovery process as noted in the methods included in the first preferred embodiment, FIG. 7, while FIG. 7A depicts the bypass operation after the Cap Stack is in place. FIG. 8 is an elevation view of FIG. 7A.

DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1A

In the First Preferred Embodiment, the basic normal operating positions of all valves and components are illustrated for a flow in progress with no diversions.

FIG. 2A

Of the First Preferred Embodiment, by pass operations, utilizing No. 1 valve and No. 2 valve of the respective lower and upper right manifolds (right side) discharging through MIV No. 3 valve into the rig riser with all other valves closed as illustrated due to an inoperable B O P for maintenance, repairs and/or replacement causing this diversion.

FIG. 3A

Of the First Preferred Embodiment, by pass operations, utilizing No. 1A and 2A of the respective lower and upper valve manifolds (left side) discharging-through MIV No. 3 valve into the rig riser with all other valves closed as illustrated due to an inoperable BOP for maintenance, repairs and/or replacement resulting in this diversion method.

FIG. 4A

Of the First Preferred Embodiment, depicts double use of

Valves

1, 2, 1A and 2A of the respective lower and upper manifolds discharging into the rig riser through MIV3 valve to compensate for increased flow when necessary for additional relief

FIG. 4B

Of the First Preferred Embodiment, illustrates the options for a back up recovery while the process has begun to place a containment (Cap Stack) on a failed BOP utilizing the stub out valves located between the lower manifold's right No. 1 and left No. 1A by pass valves and the closed shut off valves in the respective parallel pipes on each side of the center well discharge riser line that connects to the BOP.

FIG. 5A

Of the First Preferred Embodiment, illustrates the entire upper section that contains the by pass valves 2 and 2A of the top manifold, the riser from the top of the disconnected BOP and the MIV valves of that section along with the parallel pipes that loop the center riser and are disconnected from the flanged shut off valves that connect to the bottom manifold and are capped off/shut This entire upper section is then removed/set aside (and can be reused again on another drilling installation) by utilizing this new device to allow for a containment capping (Cap Stack) to be connected to the top of a flanged BOP failed unit, if necessary; thus allowing for the capture/recovery of oil/gas through the lower manifold section that remains connected to the well discharge line at the discretion of the Driller, if feasible.

FIG. 6

Of the First Preferred Embodiment, illustrates the frontal elevation of a schematic section of the lower (bottom) manifold section of the double manifold by pass system that serves to provide capture of the oil/gas while a non-functional BOP is in the process of being serviced/maintained, replaced or capped and/or cemented closed and also provides for an alternativ/or alleviation of drilling relief wells.

FIG. 7

Of the First Preferred Embodiment, illustrates the frontal elevation of a schematic of the entire BOP Backup/Safety System connected to the well head on the bottom at sea floor level, as well as the drilling rig and the recovery/capturing facilities/vessels on the top sea surface. This system is in place for both normal and/or diversion methods of operation.

FIG. 7A

Of the First Preferred Embodiment, depicts the inclusion of a containment capping (Cap Stack) device connected to the top of a failed/leaking BOP while employing the recovery-capturing methods of the oil/gas following the procedures described and illustrated in the preceding FIGS. 4B and 5A, in preparation for this event.

FIG. 8

Of the First Preferred Embodiment, shows the completion of the containment capping process with (Cap Stack) in place and all other components isolated/closed off rendering a closed, shutdown, non operational oil/gas well

It is noted that the embodiments described herein in detail for exemplary purposes are of course subject to many different variations in structure, design, application and methodology. Because many varying and different embodiments may be made within the scope of the inventive concept (s) herein taught, and because many modifications may be made in the embodiments herein detailed in accordance with the descriptive requirements of the law, it is understood that the details herein are to be interpreted as illustrative and not in a limiting sense.
It should also be noted that the general rule is for anyone skilled in the subject matter should understand and allow for related improvements and changes that do not change the entire scope and objective of a new invention without a limiting challenge to its object and intention. The latter should include both Provisional and/or Utility patents.
Legend for Drawings 1A through 8
1—Manual/automatic valve on Right Side end of bottom manifold
1A—Manual/automatic valve on Left Side end of bottom manifold
2—Manual/Automatic valve on Right Side end of Top manifold
2A—Manual/Automatic valve on Left Side end of Top manifold
3(R)—Flanged shutoff valve in Right riser between bottom and top manifolds
3(L)—Flanged shutoff valve in Left riser between bottom and top manifolds
4—Wellhead Collar/guide
SL—Support leg
DP—Drill Pipe
C—Casing
MIV 1—Optional Manual/Auto Isolation valve in middle riser below B O P
MIV 2—Optional Manual/Auto Isolation valve in middle riser above B O P
MIN 3—Optional Manual/Auto Isolation valve in discharge outlet to Rig
SOL (R)—Stub Out shut off valve Right
SOL (L)—Stub Out shut off valve Left
B O P—Any type Blowout Preventer Device

Claims

1. A self-contained double manifold/double by-pass assembly that serves as a Blow Out Preventer Backup/Safety System to enhance the oil drilling process in deep water conditions while encountering a faulty/malfunctioning B O P that has not completely failed, but requires maintenance, repairs and/or ultimate replacement. This First Preferred Embodiment device/invention is illustrated in FIGS. 1A through 8.

2. The bottom or inlet manifold is comprised of ASME/PVP specifications for heavy duty oil drilling applications and includes; two main auto/manual shutoff valves, one on each end of the horizontal manifold chamber and provides for a connection in the center bottom, inlet to the drill pipe/casing configuration and a top vertical pipe stub out for a connection in vertical alignment with the bottom inlet to the drill pipe/riser that includes an optional manual/auto shut off valve and is connected to the inlet of a/any B O P device above.

3. The bottom manifold in claim 2 has two additional vertical/parallel risers in the same place as the main center riser that loop around the B O P and are controlled by the respective main shut off valves on each end of the bottom manifold and contain a separate stub out shut off valve each, connected, horizontally, to the respective right and left vertical, loop around, risers.

4. The two vertical parallel risers of claim 3 connect to a top second horizontal double valved manifold in the same plane as the bottom manifold and their distal ends connect to the manifold chambers' bottom.

5. The B O P device outlet of claim 2 connects to the vertical riser optional second isolation manual/auto valve inlet whose distal end connects to the center inlet of the second manifold top assembly and is in direct vertical alignment with the manifold discharge outlet that connects to another optional manual/auto valve inlet whose distal end outlet connects to the vertical riser that exits into the drilling rig ships' operational mechanisms.

6. The isolation and stub out shut off valves of claims 2, 3, 4 and 5 all connect to respective components via heavy duty ASME approved flanged couplings as well as to the welded pipe stub out extensions of the bottom and top manifolds.

7. As noted in claim 1, the first preferred embodiment deals with a faulty B O P that still can be repaired, maintained and returned to basic operation. Also, the -first preferred embodiment is designed to implement a procedure that necessitates a failed B O P be capped with a containment capping device such as a Cap Stack to prevent uncontrolled flow of oil/gas into the sea causing environmental damage and risk to human lives, due to total failure

8. Whereby, the first preferred embodiment includes the same basic designs that illustrate the bottom and top manifolds and piping/valves contained in claims 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 and includes some additional designs and components which allows for the adoption and adjustments incorporated into the pre-assembled mechanism that is flexible and suited to enable the transition and installation of the capping device while at the same time allows salvaging/capture of the oil/fluids and control of discharges to a great extent with the bypass system in operation during the interim of the B O P failure and the transporting and installation of the containment stack.

9. After the containment capping device (cap stack) is installed, the decision to proceed with capturing the oil/discharges via the by pass safety system with it's multiple options which includes utilizing the twin connections that would alleviate the drilling of relief wells as well as the option of cementing/closure of the well that would result in great economic as well as environmental savings.

10. The devices of claim 8 including those exhibited in drawings of FIGS. 1A-8 are isolation shutoff flanged valves that can be serviced and controlled by R O V's that allows for disassembly of the top manifold section and separation from the lower manifold section and set aside to provide the space for the capping stack to be installed on top of the failed B O P.

11. The shutoff valves in the first preferred embodiment of claims 8 and 9 are the point of separation/isolation and are parallel in the vertical plane of the drill pipe riser and B O P and are above the twin parallel vertical riser lines that include a set of left and right stub out shut off valves just above the bottom manifold that provide for connections to the capturing flexible lines of the surface boats when bypass operations are utilized during and/or after separation from the top manifold section.

12. These same two (left and right) stub out shut off valves of claim 11 afford the option of providing the means for mud cementing of the well while resulting as unnecessary, the option to drill relief wells.

13. The design of this invention includes pre engineered concepts for the first preferred embodiment including the manufacture, pre assembly and installation as per ASME (PVP) guidelines/rules for each individual well drilling permit for conditions existing in the confined area including; depth, temperatures, formations beneath the sea floor etc. These proposed improvements are related and necessitated by the exhibited failures of the repeated attempts of the Horizon disaster that extended far beyond reasonably expected time frames caused by improper preparation, implementation and supervision which contributed to deaths, destruction and long term environmental destruction, cleanup and reconstruction of the wetlands, as well as a demand for revised rules and permitting with strict guidelines for inspections, logs, and reports and supervision which are especially more demanding with the extended drilling depths of unknown proportions including the untested new containment devices/remedies under these new virgin conditions and prescribed by the oil industry; and should require adequate back up safety systems, as well.