Resistance to Abrasive Wear and Metallurgical Property Assessment of Nine Casing-Friendly Hard-Banding Alloy Chemistries: Abrasion Resistance Assessment Using ASTM G65 Methodology (Standard Test Method for Measuring Abrasion with Dry Sand/Rubber Wheel Apparatus)

Abstract

Modern drilling areas often involve extremely abrasive formations in conjunction with drilling practices that can include high build rates - short radius well bore sections, long extended horizontal sections, laterals, HDLS, spiraling - tortuous wellbores with high torque and drag. Any one of these conditions taken sindividually can contribute to the rapid wear and downgrading of a drill string and down-hole tools. More often though, a combination of the above conditions is the reality, all contributing to accelerated rates of wear oln downhole tubulars and tools. Hardbanding of drill pipe tool joints, BHA, and tools has long been accepted and used in the drilling industry as a means to provide a replaceable wear component to combat the down-hole abrasive wear that can rapidly render pipe and tools unfit for service, increase the risk of failure, and significantly raise drilling costs. The main issues for the end users of any of these hardfacing alloys are how well does each alloy family type actually protect drill string and down-hole components from abrasive drilling conditions, extend the life of the pipe and tools, as well as reduce the number of times a hardfacing material needs to be reapplied during the life of the component. The paper presents the results of metallurgical examinations and abrasion resistance testing performed on various commonly used oilfield casing-friendly hardfacing alloy materials / chemistries. The total test regime included alloy chemistry, hardness, microstructure examination and measured durability / relative life of each hardfacing. Comparative abrasion resistance testing of the alloys was accomplished using ASTM Standard Test Method for Measuring Abrasion with Dry Sand/Rubber Wheel Apparatus (ASTM G-65). All testing was conducted and final comparative results are reported using a blind - numbered designation protocol assigned to each alloy type and each separate test.