1. Long Term Integrity of Cement Systems Feb 13, 2003

2. Agenda Participants/Financials Project Focus/Management Project Tasks Summary Action Items

3. Participants Commitments MMS, Petrobas, Unocal, BP, ExxonMobil Saudi Aramco, ONGC, Conoco, AGIP DOE, Anadarko, PDVSA, HES Potentials Marathon, Stat Oil, Devon, BHP, DS, BJ, Newfield, Dominion MMS #2 (Additional $75k)

4. Financials Commitments - $50k each $650k 13 Companies Potential additional $100 to 150k To date - $450 Project Timing – 18 months Addition Testing $75k Expanding Cementing Gas and Crystalline

5. Management of Project Fred Sabins – Project Manager Bryan Simmons – Operations Manager Lab support CSI Westport Rock Mechanics Mathematical Analysis – University of Houston Rock Properties Instruments - Chandler

6. Project Communications Steering Committee – Voting Members Meeting notes/ voting privileges Quarterly Progress Report/Meeting June 2003

7. Project Objective Determine the cement system properties that effects the ability of cements to seal fluids Primarily in Deep Water General application Develop a correlation of the cement properties to performance Determine laboratory methods to determine key properties

8. Tasks Task 1 – Problem Analysis Task 2 – Property Determination Task 3 – Mathematical Analysis Task 4 – Testing Baseline Task 5 – Refine Procedures Task 6 – Composition Matrix Task 7 – Conduct Tests Task 8 – Analyze Results Task 9 – Decision Matrix

9. Testing Program Deep Water/All Conditions Cement Slurries Class A Foamed Cement Bead Cement Class H Latex Cement Fibers, Expansion additives

10. Mechanical Integrity Issues Flow of Fluids Around the Cement Bonding, Microannulus, Deformation Through the matrix of the Cement Cracking, Permeability changes Stress Pressure, Temperature, Pipe Buckling, Formation Compaction Cycling Conditions

11. Testing Program Mechanical Properties Testing Unconventional Performance Testing Mathematical Modeling

12. Mechanical Properties Rock mechanics/Acoustic Measurements Tensile Strength/Tensile Young's Modulus (T) Compressive Young’s Modulus Poisson's Ratio Hydrostatic Pressure Cycling Testing Device

13. Tensile Strength Brazilian Test Method Tensile Strength Young’s Modules Maximum Yield

14. Tensile Strength and Young’s Modulus Slurry Tensile Strength(psi) Young’s Modulus Foam(12ppg)2533.23 E 4 Type I394/21319.15/8.16 E 4 Type I with Fibers 10719.6 E 4 Latex5395.32 E 4 Latex with Fibers 9028.5 E 4

15. C Young’s Modules Compressional Tests Confining Loads – Defined by 0psi break Base line 14 day cure Acoustic Data Poisson’s Ratio

16. Type 1 CYM Confining Pressure Effective Strength psi Young’s Modules psi 0864516.7 E 5 1500816011.1 E 5 500089009.1 E 5

17. 12 ppg Foam CYM Confining Pressure Effective Strength psi Young’s Modules psi 028855.8 E 5 50039506.8 E 5 100045106.1 E 5

18. 12 ppg Bead CYM Confining Stress Effective Strength psi Young’s Modules 051509.5 E 5 50060008.1 E 5 100061501 E 6

19. Latex CYM Confining Stress Effective Strength psi CYM psi 035005.6 E 5 25052508.9 E 5 50060009.4 E 5

20. Possions Ratio Variable depending on: Stress Rate Slurry Type Air entrainment Others ????

21. Poisson Ratio, 50 psi 250 psi/min SlurryFailure psi V Radial Foam31000.000* Bead4100-0.01* Class H64500.0012 SMS9200.005 Type 165000.1

22. Hydrostatic Pressure Cycles

23. Strain Amounts/Cycling Slurry1000 psi 2000 psi 3000 psi 4700 psi Foam 0.002610.00167------- Bead 0.001910.001580.00115 Class H 0.001610.001500.00102 Type 1 0.001080.000800.00069

24. Acoustic Measurements Chandler’s New Mechanical Properties Device

25. Chandler Device SlurryPRComp. YM Type 10.202.3 E 6 Beads0.311.5 E 6 Latex0.391.4 E 6 Latex/Fibers0.192.5 E 6 Class H0.242.2 E 6 Class H Fibers 0.252.3 E 6

26. Rock Mechanic Data SlurryPRComp. YM Type 10.11.7 E 6 Type 1 Beads0.09.5 E 5 Type 1 Latex5.6 E 5 Type 1 Latex/Fibers Class H0.01.0 E 6 Class H Fibers

27. Performance Tests Shear Bond Measurements (Cycling conditions) Soft formations Hard Formations Annular Seal/Hassler Sleeve (Cycling Conditions) Soft Formations Hard Formations

28. Temperature Cycling Procedures Samples are then cured at 45°F for 14 days. Samples are then temperature cycled from 45°F to 180°F to 45°F as described below: Samples are placed in a 96°F water bath for 1 hour. Samples are placed in a 180°F water bath for 4 hours. Samples are placed in a 96°F water bath for 1 hour. Samples are placed back in a 45°F water bath. The samples are cycled once per day during the cycling period.

29. Shear Bonds SystemType 1FoamBeadsLatex Base P1194127/98109/78---- Base S198233143223 Temp P165299/215191/269---- Temp S72756149 Press P194/106276/228294/170----- Press S2322 C23 C11

30. Annular Seal Test Configurations Plastisol Sleeve Pipe-in-soft configurationPipe-in-pipe configuration

31. Annular Seal Tests Annular SealClass AFoamedBead Initial Flow- Pipe in Pipe 0 Flow Initial Flow- Pipe in Soft 0 Flow0.5K(md)0 Flow Temperature Cycled- Pipe in Pipe 0 Flow Temperature Cycled- Pipe in Soft 0 Flow123K md/(2200 md) 43K(md)(cracked during cycling) Pressure Cycled- Pipe in Pipe 0 Flow Pressure Cycled- Pipe in Soft 27K(md) 0.19K (md)(cracked during cycling) 3K(md)

32. Annular Seal Test Model N 2 In N 2 Out Confining Pressure Seal for Confining Pressure Rubber Sleeve

33. Pipe in Pipe Testing 10’ models of 2” pipe Pressurized to 1000 psi Cured for 8 days 100 psi Measured Flow rates for months

34. New Method of Testing Temperature Cycling

35. New Testing Method Pressure Testing

36. Mathematical Model Presented by: University of Houston

37. Future Work