ThePennsylvaniaStateUniversity

TheGraduateSchool
DepartmentofEnergyandMineralEngineering

DEVELOPMENTOFANALGORITHMTOANALYZETHEINTERRELATIONSHIPAMONG
FIVEELEMENTSINVOLVEDINTHEPLANNING,DESIGNANDDRILLINGOFEXTENDED
REACHANDCOMPLEXWELLS

AThesisin
PetroleumandMineralEngineering
by
ArmstrongLeeAgbaji

2009ArmstrongLeeAgbaji

SubmittedinPartialFulfillment
oftheRequirements
fortheDegreeof
MasterofScience

May2009

ThethesisofArmstrongLeeAgbajiwasreviewedandapproved*bythefollowing:

RobertWilliamWatson
AssociateProfessorEmeritus
PetroleumandNaturalGasEngineering
ThesisAdviser

R.LarryGrayson
ProfessorofEnergyandMineralEngineering;
GeorgeH.Jr.andAnneB.DeikeChairinMiningEngineering;
GraduateProgramChairofEnergyandMineralEngineering

JoseA.Ventura
ProfessorofIndustrialandManufacturingEngineering

*SignaturesareonfileintheGraduateSchool.

ii

ABSTRACT

ExtendedReachDrilling(ERD)isanintegratedmethodologyfordrillinghighanglewellbores
with long horizontal displacements. Typical problems thathave cometo be associated with
this type of operation include: Directional Well Design, Torque and Drag Limitations,
HydraulicsandHoleCleaning,VibrationandWellboreStability,EquivalentCirculationDensity
Management,aswellasMudRheologyandSolidsControl.

Giventheseproblems,thedrillingoperationofERDwellsshouldbeaclosedloopprocessthat
starts at the prejob planning phase, is carried on through the design and execution phase,
and results in the implementation of lessons learned. For high levels of performance
improvement to be achieved, it is essential to analyze the interrelationship among the
elementsinvolvedintheentiredrillingprocess.Thisisbecauseasystemthatconsidersthe
individual elements of the drilling system in isolation is inadequate to deliver desired
performanceimprovement.

Inthisstudy,analgorithmthatsetsforthadesignforadrillingprogramthatissuitabletodrill
anextendedreachwellwasdevelopedusingVisualBasic.Althoughthealgorithmtoucheson
several factors affecting extended reach drilling, the major focus is on the five elements,
which are considered the critical factors. These are: Well Planning and Trajectory Design,
BottomHoleAssembly(BHA)Design,DrillStringDesign,TorqueandDragAnalysis,aswellas
HydraulicsandHoleCleaning.

iii

The proposed algorithm evaluates the interrelationship among these critical factors and
providesdirectionontheprocessesandtasksrequiredatallstagesinthedesignanddrilling
of an ERD well to achieve better drilling performance. It also affords both office and field
personnelthecapabilitytoidentifydrillingperformanceproblemsandbyevaluatingresults,
identifyremedialactionsquicklyandaccurately.

iv

TableofContents

ListofFigures....viii
ListofTables...x
Acknowledgements..xi

Chapter1.INTRODUCTION........................................................1
1.1.DefinitionofExtendedReachDrilling....3
1.2.ExtendedReachDrilling:AHistoricalPerspective.7
1.2.1.HorizontalandERDWells.....9

1.2.2.DualHorizontal/DualLateralWells....10
1.3.StatementoftheProblem..14
1.4.ObjectiveofStudy....15
1.5.ScopeofStudy.15
1.6.SignificanceofStudyandDeliverables..16

Chapter2.LITERATUREREVIEW..............................................17
2.1.WellpathPlanning....19
2.2.TorqueandDrag.20
2.3.HoleCleaning......22
2.4.CuttingsTransport...24
2.5.RotarySteerableDrillingSystems..28
2.6.ConcludingRemarksfromLiterature..31

Chapter3.CRITICALTECHNOLOGIESFORSUCCESSOFEXTENDEDREACHWELLS.33
3.1.WhatisDifferentaboutExtendedReachDrilling?.............................................................34
3.1.1.Torque,DragandBuckling......34
3.1.2.HoleCleaning......35
3.1.3.EquivalentCirculationDensities.....35
3.1.4.RigCapabilityandPowerRequirements.36
3.1.5.WellboreInstability,DifferentialStickingandStuckPipe.....37
3.1.6.WellControl......38

3.2.WellPlanningandTrajectoryDesign...38
3.2.1.TrajectoryDesign........39
3.2.2.CatenaryWellDesign....41
3.3.BuildRate...43
3.3.1.EffectofBuildRate.....43
3.4.HoleSizingandSelection....44

3.5.TorqueandDrag....45
3.5.1.Torque.....45
3.5.2.Drag......48
3.5.3.FrictionalForces.........50
3.5.4.InfluenceofFrictionFactor........52
3.5.5.TorqueandDragReductionMethods......53
3.6.EquivalentCirculationDensityManagement......55
3.6.1.EffectsofECD..........59
3.6.2.ECDManagementandControl..........60
3.7.DrillingHydraulicsandHoleCleaning.......61
3.7.1.FundamentalsofHoleCleaning.......62
3.7.2.FactorsAffectingHoleCleaning.......65
3.7.3.ConsequencesofPoorHoleCleaning..66

vi

3.7.4.TheCleanHoleConcept:WhatisaCleanHole?..67
3.7.5.HoleCleaningMechanism...68
3.8.WellboreStability.....72
3.8.1.Vibrations..72
3.8.2.WellboreStability....73
3.8.2.PreliminaryWellboreStabilityAnalysis....74

Chapter4.EXTENDEDREACHDRILLINGALGORITHM....................76
4.1.AlgorithmDefined....76
4.2.VisualBasicAlgorithmforERD....77
4.2.1.AttributesoftheModel.......79
4.3.AnalysisoftheIndividualModules...82
4.3.1.WellPlanningModule........83
4.3.2.BottomHoleAssembly(BHA)DesignModule....89
4.3.3.DrillStringDesignModule.....92
4.3.4.TorqueandDragAnalysisModule....98
4.3.5.HydraulicsandHoleCleaningModule.....101
4.3.6.EquivalentCirculationDensity(ECD)Module....104
4.4.SensitivityAnalysisExampleProblem...106
4.5.LimitationsoftheModel....116

Chapter5.SUMMARY,CONCLUSIONSANDRECOMMENDATIONS117
5.1GeneralObservations......117
5.2ConclusionsDrawnfromUsingtheModel....118
5.3Recommendations.....119
5.4ConcludingRemarks.....119
5.5TheFutureofExtendedReachDrilling....120
5.6FurtherStudies..121
AppendixA:ProgramCode...122
AppendixB:SampleReport..132
Bibliography.134

vii

ListofFigures
Figure1.1:IndustryExtendedReachDrillingExperience...4

Figure1.2:ERDLimit.6

Figure1.3:LimitofRotarySteerableERD.7

Figure1.4:EvolutionofExtendedReachDrilling.12

Figure3.1:WellTrajectoryProfiles....41

Figure3.2:DiagrammaticRepresentationofTorqueGeneratingForces46

Figure3.3:FrictionalandSurfaceactingForces47

Figure3.4:DrillStringOpposingForces..49

Figure3.5:DragandPickUpForces..50

Figure3.6:CasingShoeECDDetermination......58

Figure3.7:AngularDepictionofExtendedReachWellTrajectory......62

Figure3.8:CuttingsTransportatDifferentInclinations.......63

Figure4.1:TheContinuousImprovementCycle.....78

Figure4.2:DrillingDesignFlowChartforERD...80

Figure4.3:WellPlanningandTrajectoryDesignModule84

Figure4.4:InterrelationshipamongERDCriticalElements..88

Figure4.5:FlowChartfortheDesignofBottomHoleAssembly90

Figure4.6:BottomHoleAssembly(BHA)DesignModule.91
Figure4.7:FlowChartforDrillStringDesign..96
Figure4.8:DrillStringDesignModule.97

viii

Figure4.9:TorqueandDragAnalysisModule.100
Figure4.10:HydraulicsandHoleCleaningModule..103
Figure4.11:EquivalentCirculationDensity(ECD)Module.105

ix

ListofTables
Table3.1:WellTrajectoryOptions,AdvantagesandDisadvantages.....................40
Table3.2:RecommendedMinimumandMaximumFlowRatesforDifferentHoleSizes....71
Table3.3:RecommendedDrillStringRPMforVariousHoleSizes71
Table3.4:TypesofVibration..73

Acknowledgements
I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to my academic adviser, Dr.
RobertWilliamWatsonforhisconsistentadvice,fortitude,andreceptivenesstoopinionsand
ideaswhileIworkedonthisproject.Myappreciationalsogoestotheothermembersofmy
thesis committee, Dr. Larry Grayson and Dr. Jose Ventura for the unflinching support and
encouragementIgotfromtheminthecourseofdoingthiswork.

AlotofcreditgoestoJimOberkircher,PresidentandCEOofGFEagleCorporationwhofirst
gave me the idea and suggestion to conduct research on Extended Reach Drilling. I would
also like to acknowledge the help of individuals and companies in the oil industry that
contributedimmenselytothesuccessofthiswork.ToponthelistisBakerHughesINTEQ.I
wanttothankPeteClarkwhofirsthiredmeasaninternandthusstartedmyrelationshipwith
the company. Special thanks also go to Charles van Lammeren who is the brainchild and
initiatoroftheinvolvementandpartnershipofBakerHughesINTEQinthisresearch.Imust
notfailtothankJohnFabianandCarlCorsonfortheimmenseroletheyplayedinensuring
thatIgotallthematerialsIneededtocarryoutthiswork.Themanymeetingsanddiscussions
IhadwiththeBakerHughesTeamgreatlyensuredthatIstayedoncourseandonmessage
throughoutthedurationofthisstudy.

Of course I would like to thank my wife Elma, for staying strong and focused while I was
severalmilesaway,workingonthisproject.Itisimpossibleformetolistallthepeoplethat
contributed in one way or the other to the success of this work. To all whose names have

xi

beenmentionedandthosenotmentioned,Isay,THANKSisasmallword,butitgoesalong
way to show how much I appreciate your love care and concern while I worked on this
project.

xii

ChapterOne
Introduction

Extended Reach Drilling (ERD) is an integrated methodology for drilling highangle well
bores with long horizontal displacements. ERD wells are typically kicked off from the
verticalnearthesurfaceandbuilttoanangleofinclinationthatallowssufficienthorizontal
displacementfromthesurfacetothedesiredtarget.Thisinclinationisheldconstantuntil
the wellbore reaches the zone of interest and is then kicked off near the horizontal and
extended into the reservoir. This technology enables optimization of field development
through the reduction of drilling sites and structures, and allows the operator to reach
portions of the reservoir at a much greater distance than is possible with conventional
directional drilling technology. These efficiencies increase profit margins on projects and
can make the difference whether or not a project is financially viable (AlSuwaidi, El
Nashar,AllenandBrandao,2001).

ExtendedReachDrillinginvolvespushingdrillingcapabilitiesneartheirlimits,whetheritis
toreachreservesfarfromexistingfacilitiesortoexposereservoirsectionsforproduction
andreservoirmanagementadvantages.Asamatteroffact,ERDneedstobeviewednot
onlyasExtendedDrilling,butalsoasExtendedReservoirDrilling,orbothExtendedReach
andReservoirDrilling(Payne,Wilton,andRamos,1995).Inthisperspective,ERDassumesa
criticalroleincurrentindustryoperations.

Thepurposeofdrillingextendedreach,horizontalandcomplexdesignwellsistoproduce
oilandgasinafieldinthemostcosteffectiveway.Theuseofthesenewtechniquescan
make old nonprofitable fields profitable, prolong an existing fields economic life and
makenewanduncertainfielddiscoveriestechnicallypossible.

ExploitationofERDprocedurescouldalsobemadeto:
1. Developoffshorereservoirsnowconsidereduneconomical;
2. Drillundershippinglanesorunderenvironmentallysensitiveareas;
3. Accelerate production by drilling long sections of nearly horizontal holes in
producingformations;
4. Provideanalternativeforsomesubseacompletionsand
5. Reducethenumberofplatformsnecessarytodevelopalargereservoir.

SomeofthemanyadvantagesofusingERDtoaccessreservesarebasedontheelimination
of high capital cost items. For example, in Alaska, ERD can reduce the need for costly
drillingandproductionislandsandtheinherentlogisticalproblemsassociatedwiththem
(Nelson,1997).Foroffshoredrilling,suchasintheNorthSeaandtheGulfofMexico,ERD
resultsinasubstantialreductioninsubseaequipment,includingfewerpipelines.Thisnot
onlyhasanimpactoneconomicsbutalsoonenvironmentalconcernsandevenpermitting
(MasonandJudzis,1998).

1.1

DefinitionofExtendedReachDrilling

ERD wells are generally associated with accessing reservoirs at locations remote from a
drill site. Generally, a well is defined as extended reachif it has a StepOut Ratio of 2 or
more. Stepout Ratio is defined as the horizontal displacement (HD) divided by the true
verticaldepth(TVD)attotaldepth.

Thedefinitionofwhatexactlyisanextendedreachwellremainsadebatableissue,butas
was mentioned earlier, current consensus says it is a well in which the horizontal
displacementisatleasttwicethetrueverticaldepthofthewell(Economides,Watters,and
DunNorman, 1998). This definition also implies that as the ratio of displacementto TVD
increases,thewelldifficultyincreases.WhilethereisnosuchthingasaneasyERDwell,
it is factual to say that with increased displacement comes increaseddifficulty (Williams,
2008).However,thedepthofthereservestobeaccessedisalsocriticaltheshallowerthe
reserves the more difficult it is to access the well using ERD. Therefore, displacement to
TVDratioprovidesaneffectivemeasureoftotaldifficulty(Williams,2008).Extendedreach
drillingcanthusbeviewedasanintegratedmethodologyfordrillinghighanglewellbores
withlonghorizontaldisplacements(TolleandDellinger,2002).

There has been some debate on what exactly determines the difficulty in drilling an
extended reach well. Some authors have used ERD ratio (HD/TVD) or even (MD/TVD) as
measuresofdifficulty,whereMDisthemeasureddepth.Relativedifficultyisafunctionof
both HD/TVD ratio and absolute TVD and it is commonly referred to as Aspect Ratio.

Williams(2008)clearlysupportsthenotionthatthehighertheratiothemoredifficultthe
wellistodrill.Butinanearlierstudy,MasonandJudzis(1998)propoundedthatthisisnot
true,asdepictedinFigure1.1.

Source:BakerHughesINTEQ

Figure1.1:IndustryExtendedReachDrillingExperience
Figure1:IndustryExtendedReachDrillingExperience

Asseeninthefigure,thelargeststepoutwellshavebeendrilledatthehighestERDratio.
But this issue is far more complicated than this. For example in deepwater fields where
directionalworkisoftennotpossibleuntildrillingdepthisbelowtheseabed,thetotalERD
ratio will normally be less than 1. This is the case even though the element of vertical
depth over which any directional work is carried out would have a very high ERD ratio
(MasonandJudzis,1998).


Inspiteofthesecontroversies,thereisstillnostandardandgenerallyaccepteddefinition
foranERDwell.Thus,thereistheneedfortheindustrytoaddressthisissueandcomeup
withagenerallyacceptablemethodforcharacterizingallwelldesigns.

Itshouldbenotedhowever,thatthegenerallyaccepteddefinitionsofanERDwell
(LongwellandSeng,1996)include:

1. Wellshavinghorizontaldisplacementsgreaterthantwicethewellstruevertical
depth,yieldinginclinationanglesinexcessof63.4degrees;
2. Wellswhichapproachthelimitsofwhathasbeenachievedbytheindustryinterms
ofhorizontaldisplacement;
3. Highangledirectionalwellsthatapproachthecapabilitiesofthecontractedrig.

Typically, the Extended Reach Drilling limit is reached when one of the following occurs
(Demong,RuverbankandMason,2004):

1. The hole becomes unstable, due either to time exposure, geomechanical

interaction, adverse pressure differential, or drilling fluids interaction (or
incompatibility). The onset of these conditions is usually observed in the sudden
increaseoftorqueanddraginthedrillstringnotrelatedtodoglegseverity(DLS)of
theholeorthelengthofthedrilledsection.

2. Thedrillstringwillnolongertraveltothebottomoftheholeduetoexcessivedrag.
Thissituationisdifferentiatedfromthecaseabovebecausethiseffectisnotrelated
to the friction factor which remains unchanged. Instead, it is related to the
cumulativelengthdrilledalongwiththeDLSoftheholeasdrilled,Figure1.2.

Source:Demong,K.,Riverbank,M.,andMason,D.(2004)

Figure1.2:ERDLimitReachedwhenfrictionexceedstheforceavailabletopush
thedrillstringdownthehole

3. Whenrotationisusedtoovercomefrictionandadvancethedrillstring,suchasin
rotary steerable application. The limit is reached when you reach the torque
capacityofthetubularsasshowninFigure1.3.

Source:Demong,K.,Riverbank,M.,andMason,D.(2004)

Figure1.3:LimitofRotarySteerableERDReachedwhenfrictionexceedsthe
torqueavailabletoturnthedrillstring

1.2ExtendedReachDrilling:AHistoricalPerspective
Horizontalwelltechnologyandextendedreachdrillingtechnologyhavebeenimplemented
intheindustrysince1987.Earlyeffortsofmoderndayhorizontalwelltechnologywereled
byAtlanticRichfieldinthelate1970s,ElfAquitaineintheearly1980s,andBPAlaskainthe
mid 1980s. Estimates by Philip C. Crouse and Associates Incorporated (1995) placed
worldwide implementation of horizontal well technology at over 11,000 horizontal wells
duringtheperiodof1986through1996.

Followingtheendoftheeraofeasyoilandwithmajoroilfieldsbeingsituatedindeep
watersanddifficultterrains,welltrajectoriesbeingplannedhadlonghorizontaldepartures
andincreasinglybecamemorecomplex.ExtendedReachDrillingthusbecamethemeans
ofexpandingproductionoftheseagingoilfieldsandmadeitpossibletodrillandproduce
hithertoimpossiblereserves.

The first extendedreach well with a horizontal reach of more than 5,000m was drilled
from Statfjord Well C10 in 19891990 (Rasmussen, Sorheim, Seiffert, Angeltvadt and
Gjedrem, 1991). Statfjord Well C3, which was drilled and completed in 1999, holds the
record of being the first well in the industry to exceed 6,000m (Njaerheim and Tjoetta,
1992). It had a horizontal departure of 6.1km. In 19921993, Statoils Well C2 set new
worldrecordsandbrokethe7kmdeparturebarrierforthefirsttime.WellC2achieved
8.7km MD and a departure of 7.3km at the Statfjord reservoir TVD of 2,700m. In 1994,
Norsk Hydros Well C26 set another world record for well departure. Their Well C26
achieved9.3kmMDwithadepartureof7.85kmat2,270mTVD.

Since the Statfjord development projects, the industry has recorded breakthroughs in
extended reach drilling. Some major industry achievements that followed the Statfjord
successesarechronicledhereunder:

1.2.1HorizontalandERDWells

InSeptember1991,CliffOil&GasdrilledthedeepesthorizontalwellintheNorthBayou
Jack field in Louisiana. The well reached TD at 4,675m TVD (Drilling and Production
Yearbook,1992).

InNovember1991,MaerskOil&GascompletedtheworldslongesthorizontalwellatTyra
WestBravofield,TWB11aintheDanishsectoroftheNorthSea.Thehorizontalextension
recordwas2,500matameasureddepthof4,770mandatotalverticaldepthof 2,040m
(Drilling and Production Yearbook, 1992). At about the same period, Unocal had the
greatest horizontal displacement to true vertical depth ratio, HD/TVD of 3.95. This was
achieved in Well C29 in the Dos Cuadrea Field offshore Santa Barbara in California. The
well had a measured depth of 1,335m (Drilling and Production Yearbook, 1992). The
companyalsodrilledthelongestERDwellintheUSA.ThewellA21wasdrilledinJuly1991
fromtheIreneplatformlocatedinoffshoreCaliforniaandhasalateralreachof4,472m.

About the same period, Woodside Offshore Petroleum drilled a long extended reach gas
wellfromtheNorthRankinAplatforminAustralia.Thewellhadareachof5,009manda
MDof6,180m.

1.2.2DualHorizontalDualLateralWells

In1992,WellA36achieved5kmdepartureintheshallowerGulIfaksreservoirat2,160m
TVD,resultinginaMD/TVDratioof2.79.Itwasamongthehighestatthetime.
In March 1992, Torch Energy Advisors completed the first Dual Horizontal Well, Basden
1H,inFayetteCounty,Texas(DrillingandProductionYearbook,1993).Afterdrillingboth
horizontallaterals,thetwoslottedlinerswererunintoopposinghorizontalwellbores.The
secondlinerwasrunthroughawindowinthefirst.Eachhorizontallateralextended800m.

In 1993, PetroHunt Corporation used a unique horizontal well design to optimize

development of an irregularly shaped lease in the McDennand Well No. 1 in the Austin
Chalk formation in Texas (Cooney, Stacy and Stephens, 1993). Two mediumradius
horizontal bores were drilled in opposite directions from one vertical hole to maximize
horizontaldisplacementinthelease.Thetwoboreshadhorizontalsectionsof825mand
625m, respectively. Underbalanced drilling techniques were used to prevent formation
damage.ThehighmechanicalintegrityoftheAustinChalkformationsuitedanopenhole
completionmethod.

In AugustSeptember 1991, Gemini Exploration Company drilled the longest total

displacement of two lateral wells in the Pearsall field of south Texas (Drilling and
Production Yearbook, 1992). The total combined displacement of the two laterals was
2,687m.

10

As the years went by (especially in the late 1990s), drilling techniques continued to be
developedtopushthelimitbeyondthethenmaximum60degreeinclinedwells.Thiswas
as a result of a combination of engineering research, application of new technology and
fieldexperience.Duringthisperiod,BPalsodrilledwellsthatstretched5km(3miles)then
8km(5miles)andthen10km(6miles)offshorefromtherigsitelocatedonshoreattheir
Wytch Farm development (Williams, 2008). The Wytch Farm project thus broke the
existingrecordandsetanewone.Thetechnicalsuccessofthisprojectopenedtheflood
gatesandextendedreachdrillingnotonlyincreasinglybecamethestandardpracticefor
expanding production of aging oil fields, it also made it possible to drill and produce
hithertoimpossiblereserves.

Figure 1.4 is an evolutionary plot, which shows that the most aggressive ERD activities
indeedtookplaceduringtheearly1990s.TheinnerenvelopedescribesERDwellsdrilledas
of 1992 while the subsequent ones to the right describe the industry achievements over
theyears,basedonrecentindustryliterature.

11

Pre1992

Late90,s

CurrentLimit

Source:OilandGasGraphics,August(2008)

Figure1.4:EvolutionofExtendedReachDrilling

Asaresultofimprovementsinpersonnelcompetencyandtechnologicaladvancement,not
onlyweremoreERDwellsdrilled,thesewellscontinuouslypushedtheenvelopeinterms
of lateral reach and geometric complexity in order to access more challenging geological
targets. The complexity of ERD operations has progressed from 2D to complex 3D
trajectories where, for example, an abandoned 2D ERD well has been sidetracked to tap
shallowersatellitereserves,requiringahighlycomplexuphillwellprofile(Ruszka,2008).

12

In April 2007, Exxon Mobil Corporation announced that its subsidiary, Exxon Neftegas
Limited (ENL), completed the drilling of the Z11 well in the Sakhalin project. It was the
longest measured depth ERD well in the world at the time. Located on Sakhalin Island
offshore Eastern Russia, the recordsetting Z11 achieved a total measured depth of
11,282moroversevenmiles.TheZ11wasthe17thERDproducingwelltobecompleted
as part of the Sakhalin1 Project. It was drilled in 61 days, more than 15 days ahead of
schedule and below expected cost with no safety or environmental incidents. Since the
firstSakhalin1wellwasdrilledin2003,thetimerequiredtodrilltheseworldclasswells
has been reduced by more than fifty percent. When compared to industry benchmarks,
Sakhalin1wellsareamongtheworld'sfastestdrilledERDwells.

However,thecurrentworldrecordforthelongestERDwelldrilledisheldbyMaerskOil
Qatar.InJune2008,thecompanywasreportedtohavedrilledthewellintheAlShaheen
FieldoffshoreQatar.Thiswellbrokethepreviousrecordlengthbyover610m;reachinga
total depth of 12,289m, with a total stepout distance from the surface location of
10,902m.Inall,thewellset10recordsincludingthelongestwelleverdrilled,thelongest
alonghole departure (11, 569m), the longest 8in section (10,805m), the highest ERD
ratio(AHD/TVD=10.485),thehighestdirectionaldifficultyindex(DDI=8.279),thedeepest
directional control, the deepest downlink MWD transmission and LWD geosteering (12,
290m), the deepest batteryless operation, the longest reservoir contact (10,805m.) and
finallythelongestopenhole(DrillingContractorMagazine,July/August,2008).

13

Recordbreakingachievementscontinuetobemadeandthesetendtodemonstratethatit
isindeedpossibletoexceedthecurrentindustrylimitofERD.Whatislesswellunderstood,
however,aretherisksofdrillingsuchwells.Experiencehasshownthattheprobabilityof
encounteringsignificantdrillingproblemsinERDwellsisgenerallymuchhigherthanthat
experiencedinconventionalwells.Drivenbyaneedtominimizeenvironmentalimpactand
improverecoverablereserves,itisanticipatedthatERDactivitywillcontinuetoincrease.
Simultaneously, advances in drilling technology development will continue to lower the
operational risk. As a result, ERD limits will continuously be tested and pushed to new
levelsasthegrowingbenefitsoutweighthediminishingoperationalrisks(Ruszka,2008).

1.3StatementoftheProblem
Wellprofileshavebecomemorechallengingasaresultoftheneedtoreachnewtargets,
depths and departures that in the past seemed improbable. Regardless of our current
levelsofsuccess,thereistheurgencytodevelopmethodsandprocessesthatwillfurther
improvedrillingefficiency.Welltrajectoriesbeingplannedtodayhavesuchdeparturesand
complexity that viability, risk and economics are all vital parts of the evaluation process
priortoinvestingintheproject.Theseinlargepartaredeterminedbytherigdesignand
capacitytodrilltheseextremereachwelldesigns.

To reduce operational costs, the entire drilling process must be improved substantially.
Researchers focusing on these challenges have identified the need for systembased
solutions.Suchanapproachevaluatesalltheelementsthatinfluencethedrillingprocess.

14

Assuch,itisimperativethatasystematic,logicalandquantifiableapproachfordeveloping
andimplementingtechnologiesinthesetypesofapplicationsbedefined.Astheindustry
continues to move toward the more costeffective technologies of computerbased
instrumentation,powerhandlingtools,andautomateddrilling,thereistheneedtohavea
definedandstructuredapproachfordrillingextendedreachwells.

1.4ObjectivesofStudy
Theobjectiveofthisstudyistointegratetheparametersinvolvedintheplanning,design
anddrillingofextendedreachandcomplexwellsintoasinglecomputermodel.Thegoalis
todevelop analgorithmthatwill evaluatetheinterrelationshipamongtheseparameters
duringtheplanninganddesignphasesofthedrillingoperationinatechnicallysoundand
feasibleway.

1.5ScopeofStudy
As was mentioned earlier, the industry has made significant progress in developing
improved technologies especially as it affects the drilling of complex and designer wells.
Thisstudywillconcentrateonthefollowingareas:

WellPlanningofExtendedReachandComplexWells,and
DrillingParameterEvaluationinExtendedReachandComplexWells.

15

Underthesetwobroadheadings,thefollowingtechnologies,whichhavebeenfoundtobe
criticaltothesuccessofERD,wouldbeanalyticallyexamined:

o WellPlanningandTrajectoryDesign
o BottomHoleAssemblyDesign
o DrillStringDesign
o TorqueandDrag
o HydraulicsandHoleCleaning
o EquivalentCirculationDensityManagement

1.6SignificanceoftheStudyandDeliverables
Attheendofthisstudy,aVisualBasicalgorithmwillbedeveloped.Themodelwillhave
thecapabilitytodesignthedrillingprogrammostsuitabletodrillanextendedreachwell.It
willbeversatileandflexiblesuchthatthecomponentsofextendedreachdrillingcaneither
bechosenbytheuserbasedonavailability,orbytheprogramfromitslibrary/databank.
Evaluationofthesecomponentswillresultinanoutputthatwillproduceaviablewellplan
anddesignforthegivenERDwell.

16

ChapterTwo
LiteratureReview
Severalstudieshavebeencarriedoutonthetheoryandpracticeofdrillingextendedreach
andcomplexwells.Areviewoftheliteraturegivesusaninsightintosomeofthesestudies,
thetechnologiesusedandhowtheyhaveimpactedthedrillingindustry.

For any given drilling operation, numerous drilling technologies are typically available to
ensure maximum recovery of the hydrocarbon from the reservoir. Over the years, the
industryhasmadesignificantprogressindevelopingimprovedtechnologiestotacklethe
complexities encountered in drilling extended reach wells. Some of these improvements
are relatedto realtime formation evaluation, directionalcontrol while drilling, improved
bottomholeassembly(BHA)components,anddrillingfluids.

Based on the many lessons learned in recent projects, technologies that have been
identifiedtobevitaltothesuccessofERD(Payne,CockingandHatch,1994)include:

TorqueandDrag

DrillstringandBottomHoleAssemblyDesign

WellboreStability

HydraulicsandHoleCleaning

DrillingDynamics

RigSizing

17

Fromthedrillingfluidperspective,somecrucialissuesthatcanposesignificantchallenges
fortheoperator(Cameron,2001)include:

NarrowMudWeight/FractureGradientWindow

EquivalentCirculationDensity(ECD)Management

LostCirculation

Lubricity

Also related to these are surveying and well profile design. Other technologies of vital
importance are the use of Rotary Steerable Systems (RSS) together with Measurement
WhileDrilling(MWD)andLoggingWhileDrilling(LWD)toolstogeosteerthewellintothe
geologicaltarget(Tribe,Burns,HowellandCickson,2001).

It is well known that ERD introduces factors that can compromise well delivery, and the
firstchallengepriortodrillinganERwellistoidentifyandminimizerisk(Karmaruddin,Lah,
Sering, Good and Khun, 2000). The literature is replete with several experimental and
theoretical studies that have been conducted on extended reach exploration and
developmentdrilling.Researchershavemainlyconcentratedonthecriticalfactorsoutlined
above. This literature survey will be carried out by reviewing the studies that have been
made,basedonthesecriticaltechnologies.

18

2.1WellpathPlanning
Extended Reach Drilling is playing an important role in the economic development of
variousoilreserves.ForsomeERwells,carefulwellplanningandutilizingexistingdrilling
practicesaresufficienttoavoidproblemssuchaswellboreinstability,lostcirculation,and
stuck pipe. However, results from several studies have shown that when well stepout
ratios increase, some operational practices developed while drilling conventional wells
become inadequate to successfully and costeffectively deliver the ER wells. It should be
noted,however,thatcarefulplanningalonecannotalwayspreventdrillingproblems.

ERD well profile design is not just a simple geometric curve design. It is an integrated
processthatrequiresanoptimumwellpathprofilewithrespecttotorqueanddrag.There
are two main principles that should be obeyed when planning an extended reach well
(Shanzhou,Genlu,Jianguo,andZhiyong,1998).Theseare:

MinimizingTorqueandDrag

MinimizingWellLength

Severalpapershavebeenwrittenonthissubject.McClendonandAnders(1985)described
the use of the catenary well plan method for directional drilling. Catenary Wellplan is
explained in detail in Chapter 3. A modified version of this method was used with great
successwhensomeoftheERDandhorizontalwellsontheStatfjordfieldweredrilled.The
method was mainly used to reduce torque and drag by reducing the wall forces in the

19

buildupsection.Thiswasdoneinthetoppartoftheholewherethedrillpipetensionand
sideloadswerehighest.

2.2TorqueandDrag
The ability to confidently predict that you can reach a reservoir target is probably the
biggestproblemwhendrillinganextendedreachwell.Thismakestheaccurateprediction
of torque and drag very essential. Drilling torque losses calculated on various plan
trajectories are a good indication of drillability of a well plan. A review of these torque
valuesandadjustmentstotheplannedtrajectoryisawaytoimprovetheplanorfindthe
easiest path to drill. Selecting the appropriate well profile followed by modifying casing
and tubular designs should be the key initial steps in torque reduction measures (Aston,
Hearn and McGhee, 1998). Torque levels in ER wells are generally more dependent on
wellbore length and tortuousity than tangent angle. Yet, higher angle wells do tend to
reduceoveralltorquelevelswhiledrillingsincemoreofthedrillstringisincompression,
andthetensionprofileinthebuildsectionisreduced.However,highertorquevaluesand
associatedproblemssuchasacceleratedcasingwearandkeyseatsareseenduringback
reamingoperations(Modi,Mason,ToomsandConran,1997).

One of the major factors affecting torque and drag in an extended reach well is the
tortuousityofthehole(Banks,HoggandThorogood,1992).Hightortuousityresultsfroma
lackofcontroloftoolfaceanddeviationrate.Thusifasteerablemotorishardtoorient,
this will result in higher torque and drag, which compounds the original orientation

20

problem.Lowbuilduprates,deepkickoffpoints,eliminationofexcessivetortuousityand
optimum hole cleaning are the main factors that will affect the torque and drag values.
Banksetal.(1992)alsodiscussedtheeffectofexcessivetortuousity.Theystipulatedthat
excessive tortuousity can severely limit the drillable depth and the elimination of this
effectisacriticalfactorinsuccessfulERDoperations.Theyrecommendthatthisshouldbe
usedasanobjectivemeasureofthedirectionaldrillingcontractorsperformance.

High drilling torque can pose significant problems in ERD wells. Meader, Allen and Riley,
(2000) investigated methods of torque reduction at the Wytch farm project. The project
hadusedBarafibre(crushedalmondshell)astheprimemethodoftorquerelief.Butduring
thedrillingofWellM16,atrialofanalternativemudadditivewasconducted.Theproduct
was Lubraglide (small plastic beads). The trial was conducted by stripping out all the
Barafibre from the system and replacing it with Lubraglide. The initial results were quite
impressive. The results showed that as the Barafibre was stripped from the system, the
torque level rose from 40,000 ftlbs to the limit of 45,000 ftlbs where the top drive
stalledout.AstheLubraglideenteredtheopenholethetorqueleveldroppedto25,000ft
lbs.Thisisadramaticresultbutunfortunatelythetorquereductionwasnotsustainedfor
thedurationofthe8holesection.Thetorquewasmanagedfortherestofthewellwith
a combination of Lubraglide and Barafibre. The reasons why Lubraglide alone could not
consistentlyreducethetorquearenotwellunderstood,andthisunderlinestheneedfor
extensivedatagatheringsothatthoroughpostwellanalysiscanbeconducted.

21

Many operators have reported the use of mechanical and chemical friction reducers to
minimize torque and drag. Rubber element and plastic casing protectors have been
reported to be successful in reducing torque. Some operators, (Ikeda, Takeuchi, and
Crouse, 1996) reported torque reductions of over 25% by using NonRotating Drill Pipe
Protectors (NRDPP). Bidirectional rollers for both drillpipe and casing have shown the
most encouraging results especially inside casing while running liners and drill pipe
conveyed logging tools. Other torque reduction strategies that are known to have been
implemented by operators include torque reduction subs, beads, and downhole tractor
systems.ExperienceonpreviousERwellshavealsoindicatedthattheuseoffibrousLost
Circulation Materials (LCM) have a very beneficial effect in improving wellbore cleaning
and reducing both torque and drag (Cocking, Bezant and Tooms, 1997). When torque
values begin to increase in the 8 section, lost circulation materials are known to have
beenusedtoreducetorquebyimprovingholecleaningeffectiveness.

2.3HoleCleaning
ERD wells typically require higher density fluids to maintain stability as compared to
verticalwells.Highinclinationsalsoexposemoresurfaceareaofaparticularzonetothe
drilling fluid for a greater period, thus increasing the potential for differential sticking or
lost circulation. It has been reported that hole cleaning is critical to the success of
extended reach drilling, especially where the hole inclination is high (Payne et al ,1994;
Ryan,ReynoldsandRaitt,1995;EckOlsen,Sietten,ReynoldsandSamuel,1994;Aarrestad,
andBlikra,1994;andIkedaetal.1996).

22

Poorholecleaninghasresultedinproblemsof:

1. Inabilitytotransferweighttothebit
2. Unexplainedandunplannedchangesindirection
3. Lost mud in the pay zone, which limits ultimate productivity due to formation
damage
4. Stuckpipeproblems

Severalpapershaveshowntheimportanceofdrillpiperotationasa meansofimproving
hole cleaning (Brett, Beckett and Holt, 1989; Guild and Jeffrey, 1994; Sanchez, Azar, and
Martins, 1997). As the drillpipe is rotated, cuttings are agitated into the flowstream and
circulatedoutofthewellbore.Toenhanceholecleaning,drillstringrotationisusedwhile
drillingandbackreaming,andwiththepipeoffthebottom.Inanotherstudy,Sanchezet
al.(1997)reportedthatthereductionincuttings'weightintheannuluscouldbeashighas
80% due to pipe rotation. There are obviously many factors involved in modeling hole
cleaning, such as annular velocity and mud rheology. However, having continuous drill
stringrotationispossiblyoneofthemostsignificant.Deviatingtheholebyslidingamotor
willalsohinderholecleaning(Warren,1997;Ikedaetal.1996).

InreportingStatoilsexperiencesindrillinghorizontal,extendedreach,andcomplexwells,
Blikra,DrevdalandAarrestad(1994)propoundedthatdeepkickoffpointandlowbuildup
rates willreduce theinclination inthe larger diameter hole sections. This generally gives
betterholestabilityandimprovesholecleaning.Accordingtothereport,highrotationof

23

the drill string in the region of 150180 rpm have been known to improve hole cleaning,
especially while drilling the 12 and 8 hole sections with oilester or etherbased
mudsystems.Theyalsoreportedthatdisturbingthecuttingsonthelowsideofthehole
andcreatingaturbulentflowpatternaroundthedrillpipecanIeadtoimprovedcuttings
removal. Blikra et al. (1994) also showed that backreaming in open hole and inside
casing/linersathighrotationspeedhasbecomestandardprocedureforERDwellsandhas
also resulted in improved cuttings removal. Other factors that have been known to
enhance hole cleaning include high flowrates, tight control of mud properties (especially
mudrheology)andcontrolleddrillingrates.

Additional research is being conducted to address the problem of lost circulation in ERD
wells. The high wellbore inclination presents significant challenges concerning placement
techniques,sufficientcoverageofthelosszone,andselectionofnondamagingmaterials.
Addition of lost circulation materials (LCM) has been found to greatly reduce openhole
torques through the formation of a lowfriction bed between the drill string and the
formation. Thus current investigations focus on a better understanding of loss and
propagation mechanisms and the application of crosslink polymers and other fluids that
providelowcompressivestrength.

2.4CuttingsTransport
Efficient cuttings transport is one of the primary design considerations for an extended
reachdrillingfluid,especiallyforwellswithhorizontalandhighlyinclinedsectionsofmore

24

than 6,000m (Guild, Wallace, and Wassenborg, 1995; Gao, and Young, 1995; Schamp,
Estes,andKeller,2006).Guildetal.(1995)reportedthat,whilebeingtransportedfromthe
hole,cuttingscanbegroundtofinersandparticles,especiallywhenrotarydrillingisbeing
used. Under these conditions, drilling may not be able to proceed if cuttings transport
remains a problem in the hole. As a result of excessive torque and drag caused by small
cuttings settled at the lower side of the horizontal or inclined section, it may not be
possibletoruncasinginplace,evenifdrillingtothetargetdepthisachievable.Horizontal
and highly inclined wells drilled through unconsolidated sand reservoirs have also been
knowntohavethesesameproblems.

There is the argument that inefficient transport of small cuttings is the main factor for
excessive torque and drag during extended reach drilling. However, very little is known
about the transport behavior of small cuttings. Experimental observations (Parker, 1987;
Ahmed, 2001) show that small cuttings are more difficult to transport under certain
conditions.Ahmed(2001)alsosuggestedthatsmallerparticlestendtomoreeasilystickto
drill pipe due to their cohesive effects. Above all, it is even more difficult to release the
pipe once it gets stuck by small sandsized cuttings. By measuring total annular cuttings
concentration, Parker (1987) observed that smaller cuttings are easier to transport in
verticalwells,butslightlyhardertotransportinhighlyinclinedwells.Thisisconsistentwith
Larsens(1990)observationthatathighholeinclinationangles,smallercuttingsareharder
to clean out. These cuttings need a higher fluid velocity to keep continuous forward
movement.

25

Duan, Miska, Yu, Takach and Ahmed (2006) studied the transport of small cuttings in
extended reach drilling. Their study involved extensive experiments with three sizes of
cuttingsinabidtoidentifythemainfactorsaffectingsmallcuttingstransport.Theeffects
ofcuttingssize,drillpiperotation,fluidrheology,flowrateandholeinclinationwerealso
investigated as part of the study. The results show significant differences in cuttings
transport based on cuttings size. Their study produced some very important conclusions
amongwhichare:

1. Intermsofcuttingsconcentration,smallercuttingsaremoredifficulttotransport
than larger cuttings in the horizontal annulus when tested with water. However,
smallercuttingsareeasiertotransportthanlargercuttingswhen0.25Ibm/bblof
PolyanionicCellulose(PAC)solutionswereused.

2. Piperotationandfluid rheologyarekeyfactorsaffectingsmallcuttingstransport.
Improvementbypiperotationinthetransportefficiencyofsmallcuttingsisupto
twice as large as the improvement in large cuttings transport. Compared with
water, PAC solutions significantly improve smaller cuttings transport, while the
transportoflargercuttingsisonlyslightlyenhanced.

3. Holeanglehasonlyminoreffectsoncuttingsconcentrationandbedheightwithin
therangeof7090degreesfromvertical.

26

Duanetal.(2006)concludedthisstudybyrecommendingthatdrillpiperotationcombined
withpolymericdrillingfluidsshouldbeusedtoefficientlytransportsmallcuttingsduring
extendedreachandhorizontaldrilling.

The factors that affect cuttings transport have been well described in the literature and
theyinclude:

Drillingfluiddensity

Lowshearraterheology

Flowrate

Cuttingsizeandconcentrationintheannulus

Drillpipesize

Rotaryspeed

Shapeofparticles

Drillstringeccentricityinthewellbore

Studies have also been conducted to determine the critical transport fluid velocity
necessarytopreventcuttingsbedformation(Larson,PilehvariandAzar,1993).However,
cuttingssizeisnottheonlyfactorthataffectseffectiveholecleaning.SiffermanandBecker
(1990) noted that cuttings size in itself only has minor effects on hole cleaning, but its
influenceontheeffectsofotherparametersisnoteworthy.Inalaterstudy,Bassal(1995)
foundthattheeffectsofcuttingssizeoncuttingsconcentrationinahorizontalannulusare
quitedependentonotherparameters.Withlowviscositymud,smallercuttingsareharder
to transport than larger ones at all pipe rotary speeds and flow rates. However, with
highviscositymud,thetendencymayreversedependingondifferentflowrates.

27

Allthestudiesthathavebeenconductedoncuttingstransporthaveuseddifferentcuttings
sizes. Thus, the conclusions about the effects of cuttings sizes on cuttings transport are
quitevariedand,insomecases,contradictory.Theexperimentsuponwhichmostofthese
conclusionsarebasedwereconductedunderseparateandunequalconditions;therefore,
it cannot be unequivocally stated that smaller cuttings are harder or easier to transport
than larger ones. Any conclusion should thus represent a combination of various drilling
parametersbeforeitcanberegardedasdefinitive.

2.5RotarySteerableDrillingSystems

Before the advent of Rotary Steerable Drilling Systems, there were two major means of
directional drilling. The first method was the use of conventional rotary assemblies
designed to give predictable deviation in a certain direction. Typical examples of such
rotaryassembliesarependulum,packedholeandbellyassemblies.Thesecondistheuse
ofadownholesteerablemotor.Thisrequiresthedrillstringtoslidealongthehole,without
drillstringrotation,tocontroldirection.

Variablegauge stabilizers have been used to fine tune control of hole inclination (Odell,
Payne and Cocking, 1995; Bruce, Bezant and Pinnock, 1996), with both of the above
methods,buttheyhavenotbeenknowntocontrolazimuth.Steerablerotarydrillinggives
control of both inclination and azimuth and has a number of advantages over these
methods (Barr, Clegg and Russell, 1996). Rotary Steerable Systems enhance the

28

penetrationrateandincreasethereachofERDwells.Thisbooststheefficiencyandlowers
the overall cost of ERD operations. Using these systems, operators have been able to
optimize hole quality and wellbore placement, achieve faster rates of penetration, and
enhanced reservoir deliverability. Rotary steerable drilling systems were used on several
extendedreachwellsattheWytchFarm(Colebrook,Peach,Allen,andConran,1998).

Oneofthebiggestadvantagesofrotarydrillingisinapplyingweighttothebitinextended
reachwells.Asdepartureincreaseswithrespecttoverticaldepth,itbecomesincreasingly
difficult to apply weight to the bit and subsequently to control that weight, due to axial
friction(Cockingetal.1997;Warren,1997;Payneetal.1994).Drillstringrotationhasbeen
described as a virtual cure all for the general reduction of drag (Payne and Abbassian,
1996)andtheapplicationofweighttothebit(Modietal,1997;Ryanetal,1995).Useof
rotary steerable systems allows the drilling parameters to be optimized for the bit and
formation. The reactive torque from the bit does not disturb the toolface and so both
weightonbitandrotaryspeedcanbeadjustedwithinwidelimits.

ItisastatementoffactthatExtendedReachDrilling,usingrotarysteerablesystems,has
made it possible to drill and produce hitherto impossible wells. Several very deep wells
would not have been possible to drill without rotary steerable systems because steering
beyond 8,500m was not possible as axial drags were too high to allow the oriented
steerablemotorandbittoslide(Colebrooketal.1998;Meaderetal.2000).Inplaceslike
BrazilandNigeriawheremajoroilfieldsarelocatedindeepwaters,ERDwellsmightbe,in

29

somecases,theonlyeconomicallyviabledrillingsolution(Cunha,MartinsandFernandez,
2000).

Ikeda et al. (1996) initiated a study that investigated developments, activities, and
philosophies of the larger oil and gas industry in implementing horizontal well and
extended reach technologies. North American and European operators, contractors,
service companies, government agencies and educational institutions were directly
interviewed.Alongwiththedevelopmentofdataresources,referencesandindustrywell
information,significantfindingsandrevelationswerereported.Amongthemanyfindings
from the investigation is the fact that many operators are now steering their wells with
MWD and LWD tools. According to the report, operators noted that steering a well has
been the best way to maximize pay zone penetration. The report also showed that the
most common failures seen by most operators have been in motor and MWD failures,
whichcausesdowntime.Rotorandstatorproblemswerecommonlydiscussedformotor
failurealongwithothercomponents,anditwasgenerallyagreedthatthefailureratefor
MWDincreasedwith:

o Increaseintemperature
o Increaseinpressure
o Rapidtemperatureincreaseorseverepressurechanges
o Smallerholesize
o Longerholelength

30

In underbalanced drilling situations, motor and MWD problems appeared to be higher.

Operators also pointed out that the biggest improvements over the last couple of years
havebeenmadeinMWDandmotors,eventhoughtheymaystillcontributetodowntime.
Operators cautioned that the limiting boundary for MWD pulsing signals is not currently
well defined by the vendor companies, and they also noted the fact that BHA steering
capabilitiesarereducedastrajectoryincreases.

AllofthefactorsindicatedaboveleadtotheconclusionthatamuchimprovedoverallROP
will be achieved while drilling with a rotary steerable drilling assembly than with a
steerable motor. Indeed in certain extended reach or overbalanced drilling applications,
rotarydrillingisessential.

2.6ConcludingRemarksfromLiteratureReview

Because longterm profitability is a primary concern of the oil and gas industry, major
efforts are under way to optimize drilling procedures to make operations more cost
effective. All phases of drilling are being subjected to economic analysis and, now
emerging, is the possibility of obtaining substantial savings by upgrading conventional
directionaldrillingtechniquesintoadvancedproceduresfordrillinghighangle,extended
reach and designer wells. Such a capability offers a variety of applications with the
potentialforsignificantreductionsincost.

31

Advances in drilling technology now enable the exploration for and development of
offshore oil and gas resources without the installation of facilities and wells in offshore
marine environments. Nowadays, more operators are identifying applications of ERD for
reservoirdevelopmentthatwillprovidesubstantialfinancialbenefit.InAlaska,anumber
of North Slope fields extend offshore and/or away from existing drill sites and reserves.
ThesewillwarrantERDoperations.ExxonMobilandtheCaliforniaStateLandsCommission
both endorse ERD development of the South Ellwood Offshore Field using ERD from
onshore sites (Starzer, Mount and Voskanian, 1994). BP is also considering ERD for its
Liberty Project in Alaska. In the Gulf of Mexico, China, South America, the North Sea,
Indonesia, the Middle East and elsewhere, many other ERD opportunities are being
evaluated to optimize development drilling of new major projects (Payne, Wilton and
Ramos,1995).

Thisstudywilltakeextendedreachdrillingimprovementonestepfurtherbyintegratingall
the critical technologies for success of extended reach drilling into a single model. The
modelwilldesigntheprogrammostsuitabletodrillanextendedreachwell.

32

ChapterThree
CriticalTechnologiesforSuccessofExtendedReachWells
Theliteraturehasshownthatextendedreachexplorationanddevelopmentdrillingusually
involves some significant issues that can pose significant challenges for the operator. As
hasbeenmentionedseverally,technologiesthathavebeenfoundtobevitaltothesuccess
ofERDinclude:

WellTrajectoryDesign

TorqueandDrag

DrillstringDesign

WellboreStability

HydraulicsandHoleCleaning

Casingdesign

DrillingDynamics

RigSizingandSelection

NarrowMudWeight/FractureGradientWindow

EquivalentCirculationDensity(ECD)Management

LostCirculation

Lubricity

Thefollowingsectionswillindividuallyandcollectivelyanalyzethesesuccessfactorswitha
view to understanding the science and technology behind them. However, before this is
done, it is vital to first discuss the difference between the effects these issues have on
extendedreachwells,ascomparedtoconventionalwells.

33

3.1WhatisDifferentaboutExtendedReachDrilling?
There are numerous issues that are different, or more critical for ERD wells when
comparedtoconventionaldirectionalwells.Insomecases,thechallengesonERDwellsare
thesameasthoseofconventionaldirectionalwells,onlythatinextendedreachwells,they
aremagnified.Inothercases,theissuesarespecifictothetypeofERDwellthatisbeing
drilled (K & M Technologies, 2003). There are both general and specific differences in
challenges between ERD and conventional directional wells. Some of the general
differencesareoutlinedhereunder.

3.1.1Torque,DragandBucking
ThesefactorsareregularlyencounteredinERDwellsduringbothdrillingandcompletion
phases.TorqueisgenerallyonlyasignificantlimitingfactoronlongERDwellsoronslim
holeERDwellswheresmalldiameterdrillpipeisused.Itiscommontorotatecasingliners
stringsonERDwellstoensurethatagoodcementjobisobtained.Thisisoftenthecritical
torquelimitation(K&MTechnologies,2003).InERwells,torquelimitscanbereachedina
numberofwaysincluding:

Topdriveorrotarytableoutput

Drillpipetooljoints

Casingconnections

Combinedpowerusage

34

Axialdragoccursduetotheinteractionofthedrillpipeorcasingwiththewellboreasitis
runin(slackoff)orpickedup(pickup)outofhole(K&MTechnologies,2003).InERwells,
slackoff and pickup become problems as the well gets deeper and as inclination
increases.

Bucklingofdrillpipeandcasingresultsfromexcessivecompressionloadsthatbuildupin
the string due to axial friction. Drill string and completion string buckling are common
problems in ERD wells. This is because, as the length of high angle sections becomes
longer,unconstrainedpipetendstobendinthewellbore.Asthissituationbecomesmore
severe,ahelixwilldevelopandeventuallypreventsthepipefrommovingwithinthehole.

3.1.2HoleCleaning
Field experience has demonstrated that hole cleaning practices used for vertical or low
anglewellsaregenerallynotsuccessfulinhighangleERDwells.Athoroughunderstanding
ofthedynamicsofholecleaningisthereforecriticaltothesuccessofERDwells.

3.1.3EquivalentCirculationDensities
Extendedreachwellsgenerallyhavehigherequivalentcirculationdensityfluctuationsthan
conventionalwells.WiththeadventofMeasurementWhileDrilling(MWD)basedPressure
While Drilling (PWD) technology, the industrys understanding of ECDs has been
challenged (K & M Technologies, 2003). Studies have shown that the magnitude of ECD

35

fluctuations in ERD wells is far greater than previously thought. According to findings by
K&MTechnologies,ECDsaremoreseriousinERDwellsbecause:

i.

Themagnitudesofthefluctuationsareworseduetolongermeasureddepth(MD)
relativetotrueverticaldepth(TVD).

ii.

Wellborestability,lostcirculationandotherkeyeffectsaregenerallymoresevere
andlesstolerableinthesewells.

iii.

Temperatureandpressurevariations(andtheireffectsonmudproperties)arealso
moreextremeinthesewells.

3.1.4RigCapabilityandPowerRequirements
Extendedreachwellschallengethecapabilitiesofthedrillingrigmorethanaconventional
directional well of the same measured depth except for pickup loads (K & M
Technologies,2003).Theneedtousecontinuoushigherflowratesathigherpressures,use
of higher pipe RPM and higher torque and drag forces will also continuously task a rigs
outputcapability.Also,powermaybelimited,especiallyinabackreamingscenariowhere
pickup, torque and pumps are all operating at/or near their limit. The combined power
usagewhendeeponalongERDwellmaythusbecomeanissuebecauseitisoftenatthis
pointthatmaximumoutputlevelsarerequiredfromthemudpump,drawworksandthe
rotary system. Many of the industrys rigs that are being utilized for conventional
directional drilling do not have the capability to meet these combined output
requirements.

36

3.1.5WellboreInstability,DifferentialStickingandStuckPipe
WellboreinstabilityisusuallymorecriticalinERDwellsdueto:
o Theincreasedwellboreangle
o Increasedholeexposuretime
o IncreasedECDfluctuationsandeffects

DifferentialStickingisalsoasignificantprobleminERDwellsbecause:

o MudweightisoftenhigherinERDwells(forwellborestabilityathighangles)
o Theexposedreservoirintervalsarelongerinlength
o Theexposedreservoirintervalsareopenforalongerperiodoftime
o The drill string and BHA will be on the low side of the hole and at least partially
buriedincuttingsthroughoutthereservoirsection

Differential sticking is even more important for wells where torque, drag, or buckling
problems exist, since even minor differential sticking increases friction. Furthermore, the
abilitytojarorworkthepipefreeisreducedonERDwells.Thisisasaresultofthereduced
abilitytogetweightortorsiondowntheBHA.

37

3.1.6WellControl
This is generally more challenging in ERD wells because kicks are often more difficult to
detectandmeasureasaresultofthegeometriesofthewells.Notonlyiskickdetection
more difficult in ERD wells, the ability to manage and killthe wellcontrol problem are
evenmoredifficultasaresultoftheflowmechanics.

Other issues that havebeen reported to be, not only different, but more crucial for ERD
wells than for conventional directional wells include: Survey Accuracy and Target
Definition,Logistics,TimeandCost,HSEIssues,andWellPlanning.Havingestablishedthe
differences in the challenges faced in conventional directional wells as compared to
extended reach wells, the following sections will examine the parameters that have the
greatestsignificanceinthesuccessorfailureofanERDproject.

3.2WellPlanningandTrajectoryDesign

As is the case with all drilling operations, detailed engineering preplanning is of critical
importanceinsuccessfullydrillingERDwells.TosuccessfullydrillanERwell,itiscrucialto
beabletoaccuratelypredictthefollowingparametersunderactualdownholeconditions:

1. StaticandDynamicTemperatureProfileintheWell
2. HydraulicPressures
3. AnnularPressureLoss
4. EquivalentCirculationDensity
5. MudRheology

38

The operational requirements to drill extreme reach wells start with extensive planning.
Well planning is usually an iterative process to determine the optimal balance among
wellpath,fluidandhydraulicrequirements,drillstringdesign,torque&draganalysis,casing
settingdepthetc.Theiterativeprocessnotonlycoversthewellpathdesign,butalsothe
operations planning as well. The well design has a large impact on the operation and
planningofERwellsandsincetherearemanyvariablesindesigningawell,suchasKickoff
Point(KOP),DoglegSeverity(DLS),Departure,etc.,itbecomesaniterativeprocessaimed
atyieldinganoptimaldesignwhichshouldresultinthesimplestpathwhilestillachieving
allgeologicaltargets.
Inothertoachieveanoptimumwellpath,severalfactorshavetobeconsideredandput
into perspective. Based on reported industry experience gained from earlier wells, and
confirmedduringthedrillingofmorerecentwells,thefollowingaspectsareconsideredto
bekeyfactorsinwellplanning:

WellTrajectory

BuildRate

SurveyingandTargetSizing

3.2.1WellTrajectoryDesign

Todeterminetheoptimumwelltrajectorythatwillachievedirectionalobjectives,themost
critical operations or wellbore characteristics, which are the limiting factors have to be
identified.Thereareseveralapproachestotrajectorydesigntoachievelongreacheswith
the fewest possible limitations on other downhole operations. Table 3.1 is a general

39

comparison of the major options while Figure 3.1 is a representation of the various
trajectoryprofiles.

Table3.1:WellTrajectoryOptions,AdvantagesandDisadvantages

Option

Advantages

Multiple Build Profile: Rate of Very long

build increases with depth in torque/drag
several discrete steps to casingwear
tangent angle, hold constant
tangentangle

reach,
values,

Build and Hold: Constant build Simple,

long
rate to tangent angle, hold achievable, low
constanttangentangle
angle

Disadvantages
low Hightangentangle
low

reaches Potentiallyhighcontactforce
tangent inbuild(torque,casingwear)

Double Build: Buildholdbuild Very long reaches possible May require deep steering,
hold trajectory, can use two with low contact forces in Highsecondtangentangle
different BURs in the build upperbuild
sections
UnderSection: Build and hold Reducing hanging weight High tangent angle, shorter
withdeepKOP
below build section, reduces reach
contactforceinbuild
Inverted: Tangent angle above Flexibility
for
multiple Higher axial (buckling) loads
horizontal so the wellbore targets,avoidsgascap
to push string uphill, deep
enters the reservoir from
steeringrequired
underneath
3D: Any of the above with Flexibility to handle anti More curvature means more
significantazimuthchanges
collision and multiple target torque and drag, deep
requirements
steering may be required,
shorterreach
Source:BPExtendedReachDrillingGuidelines,1996

40

Figure3.1:WellTrajectoryProfiles

3.2.2CatenaryWellDesign

Another wellbore profile, which is frequently discussed, is the catenary well design that
was first proposed and patented by Dailey Petroleum Services. In a catenary profile, the
rateofinclinationbuildcontinuouslyincreaseswithdepthtomimictheshapeofahanging
cable.Thisdesignstartswithalowbuilduprate(say0.5o1.0o/100ft),andacceleratesto
higherbuildratesastheangleincreases(sayupto4o5o/100ft).Theoretically,acatenary
producesverylowtorqueanddragasaresultoflowcontactforcesbetweenthestringand
the wall of the hole. However, catenaries have not been widely used since creating the

41

catenary shape is impractical and costprohibitive even with the most modern BHA
configurations. One of the downsides of the catenary design is that it considerably
increases both the tangent angle and the overall total depth. This increased angle may
also make wellbore stability more difficult to manage, which in turn can create hole
cleaningproblems.

Inchoosingamongtheseoptions,ausefulconcepttokeepinmindistheCriticalTangent
Angle.Thisanglerepresentsthelimitbeyondwhichatoolwillnotslidedownholeunderits
ownweight,meaningthatitwillhavetobepushedfromabove.TheCriticalTangentAngle
ismathematicallyrepresentedby:
qCos=qSin
Tan=

(3.1)

Where:
q=Pipebuoyantweight,
=Frictionfactor
=Criticaltangentinclinationangle

OneapproachtooptimizingthetrajectoryistotrytopositiontheKickoffPoint(KOP)so
thatthetangentinclinationequalsthecriticalangle.Ifpossiblegivenotherconstraints,this
willallowlongreacheswithreducedslidingproblems.

42

3.3BuildRate

Anextendedreachwellneedsoptimumwelldesignwithrespecttotorqueanddragand
wellbore stability. Utilizing a low build rate is considered to be very important both for
torqueanddragatTD,andforwellborestabilityintheupperpartofthewell.Duetoits
impact on casing wear and torque and drag, build rate can be viewed as the most
importantconsiderationwhendesigninganextendedreachwellprofile.Whencompared
to a path having a single build rate, a combination of build rates usually offers a
compromise.Areviewofrecordextendedreachwellsshowsthatmostofthewellsbegan
withalowbuildrate,thengraduallysteppinguptoamaximumof1.5/100ft.However,in
situationswheretheTVDofthetargetisshallow,asinglemoreaggressivebuildratemay
be the better option. For extended reach wellpath, the industry is gradually moving
towardacatenarydesignwhereverylowbuildratesareusedandsailanglesareathigher
anglesasageneraltrend.

3.3.1EffectofBuildRate

Buildratemayhaveamarginaleffectontorqueanddraglevelsforveryhighratiowells.
Thisisduetotheincreasingpercentageofstringweightsupportedonthelowsideofthe
holeresultinginlowertensileforcesatsurface.Howevercontactforcesmaybesufficient
to promote unacceptable casing wear at the higher build rates, especially when well
operations such as extended backreaming are anticipated due to poor primary hole
cleaning.Asaguideline,buildratesinexcessof2.5o/30mmaycauseconcernwithrespect
tohighcontactforces.Ifhigherbuildratesthanthisareplanned,thedifficultyofachieving

43

asmoothbuildalsohastobeconsideredwhereanincreasingpercentageofthebuildwill
beperformedwhileslidingandnotrotatingtheassembly.Someotherimportantthingsto
noteaboutbuildrateare:
a) HighReach/TVDratiowellsmaytoleratehighBURbecausethestringtensioninthe
curveislowandmayevenbeinmechanicalcompression.
b) LowReach/TVDratiowellsdonottoleratehighBURsincedrillstringtensioninthe
curveishigher.
c) Highbuildratescancausecasingwearproblems,especiallyinhighReach/TVDratio
wellswheretheremaybehightensileloadsthroughthebuildsectionduringtrips
outoftheholeandbackreaming.
d) LowBURsresultinlowercontactforces.Thistypicallymeanslowercasingwear.
e) Low tortuosity is also achievable with low BURs. It tends to be more difficult to
maintainlowtortuositywithahighBUR.
f) Generally,withlowerbuildrate,morecanbeachievedwhilerotatingtheassembly
andthusthechancesofachievingthedesiredsmoothbuildwillbegreatest.

3.4HoleSizingandSelection

ThemajorityofERDwellsdrilledaroundtheworlduseacombinationof17,12,and
8holesizes(K&MTechnologies,2003).AccordingtoK&MTechnologies,thereasons

44

for this include the availability of tools and equipment, ability to drill smaller hole sizes,
andsimplythedepthofexperienceinthesesizes.

However,therearesomebenefitsassociatedwithtwostringwelldesignsand97/ 8 holein
particular. In ERD applications where two casings strings can be reliably used to TD,
consideration may be given to using 13 and 97/ 8 hole sizes (as an alternative to the
traditional17x12x8design).Thesmallerholesizesrequirelessflowrateto
keepthemclean,ortheycanbecleanedfasterwiththesameflowrate,therebyallowing
for faster penetration rates (97/ 8 hole has 50% less volume than 12 hole). Where
stabilityisaprimaryconsideration,thesmallerholesizesarealsoinherentlymorestable.

Thedownsideofthisstrategyhowever,isitsinabilitytoaffectpipemovementduringthe
cement job and therefore, limiting the probability for successful zonal isolation. It has
thereforebeensuggestedthatwhendesigninganERDwell,standardholesizesthathave
beenusedinthepastshouldnotjustbeautomaticallyselected.Thisisbecause,theremay
beadvantagesthatmightbegainedbyevaluatingdifferentholesizesandcombinations.

3.5TorqueandDrag
3.5.1Torque
Torqueisarotationalforceanditcanbedescribedastheabilitytoovercomeresistanceto
rotation. Its magnitude is measured by multiplying the perpendicular component of the
forceappliedbythedistancebetweentheaxisofrotationandthepointwheretheforceis

45

applied. In drilling applications this distance would of course be the drill pipe radius. As
depictedbyFigure3.2below,torqueismathematicallyrepresentedas:

Torque=ForcexDistance

Where:d=DrillpipeOD

Figure3.2:DiagrammaticRepresentationofTorqueGeneratingForces

Torquecanalsoberegardedasaforcethatproducestorsionorrotation.Itisgeneratedby
power equipment from surface, as well as by friction working against the pipe rotation.
Drillstring torque is the force required to rotate the pipe. (Unit: Nm (metric), ftlbs
(imperial)1ftlbs=1.3558Nm).Figure3.2isarepresentationoftheforcesresponsiblefor
creatingtorque.

46


RotationalForce=M

OpposingForceDue
toFriction=M

Figure3.3:FrictionalandSurfaceactingforces

Indrillingoperations,thetorqueatthesurfaceisgivenby:

TQ@Surface=TQ@Bit+TQalongthewellbore+MechanicalTQ

Where:
TQ@Bitorbittorque=theproductivecomponentofthetorqueanditdependsonbit
aggressiveness,WOBandbitdiameter.

TQ bit =WOB*BitDiameter*BitAggressiveness

TQalongthewellboreorfrictionalstringtorque=theresultoftheinteractionbetween
thedrillstringandtheboreholewall.Itincreaseswithincreasedtorsionalfrictionlossesas
the drilling progresses and this is a function of friction factor and side forces (axial load,
well profile ...etc.). Mechanical Torque = is generated by cutting beds, stabilizer effects,
linercentralizeretcandisdifficulttoquantify.

47

Dependingonwelldesignanddrillingoperation,thetorquewilldevelopindifferentways
alongthewellbore.Analysisandprojectionsoftorqueshouldrecognizethattotalsurface
torqueiscomprisedof:
TotalSurfaceTorque=Stringtorque+Bittorque+Mechanicaltorque+Dynamictorque
Clearly,separatingthesetorquecomponentsallowsmoreaccuratedefinitionoffrictionfor
torqueprojectionsandforprioritizingmeasuresfortorquemanagement.Withtechniques
available for predicting bit torque, the implications of using different bit types can be
assessed.

3.5.2Drag

Dragisaresistanceforcetothemotionofanobjectanditactsintheoppositedirectionof
its axial movement. It is as a force that resists motion along a straight path. In drilling
operations,dragresultsfromcontactbetweendrillstringcomponentsandboreholewall
or casing as the string moves up or down. It is generated by friction of drill pipe against
holewalloragainstinsideofcasing.Dragwillalwaysoperateintheoppositedirectionto
thatinwhichthedrillstringisbeingmoved.Dragisexperiencedasanextraloadoverthe
rotatingstringweightwhentrippingoutofthehole.UnitN(metric),lbsf(imperial)1lbsf
=0.4448N.

Itaccumulatesmainlywhenpickingup,slackingofforduringorienteddrillingwithmotor.
It increases with increased hole inclination and curvature due to the gravity effect and
compressionpushingthedrillstringagainstthelowsideoftheboreholeandduetodrill

48

stringtensionpullingupthedrillstringtothehighsideofthehole.Dragistheincremental
force required to move the pipe up or down in the hole. Figures 3.3 and 3.4 shows the
forcesresponsibleforcausingdrag:

Forcestoliftdrill
string=F

OpposingForceDue
toFriction=Drag

Figure3.4:DrillStringOpposingForces

49

Drag=SideForcexFrictionFactor
PickUpForce=Drag+AxialForce

Figure3.5:DragandPickUpForces

Dragwhiledrillingawellisaresultofacombinationofseveralfactorslikewellpathdesign,
drilling fluid properties (lubricity), wellbore quality, tortuosity, formation type and drill
stringbuckling.

3.5.3FrictionForces

ThekeyfeaturesofERDarethathorizontaldepartureislongandinclinationishigh.These
typically gives rise to considerable torque and drag for drillstring and casing string, thus
makingtorqueanddragamajorlimitationforhorizontalreachinERD.Thisalsomakesthe
effective transmission of drill string weight and rotation to the Bottom Hole Assembly
(BHA),majorconsiderationsintheplanningofERwells.

50

Apuzzlethatstillremainsunansweredinextendedreachdrillingis:Whatmakeshighratio
ERDwellssodifficulttodrill?Theanswer,accordingtoWilliams(2008)isfrictionandhow
besttoovercomeit.

Frictionisafunctionofbothtorqueanddrag.Fromthedefinitionsaboveitcanbeseen
thattorqueistherotationalelementwhiledragistheaxialelement.Torquelossesareof
prime importance while drilling, and drag losses are more important while tripping and
running casing strings. In other words: Axial Friction (Drag) acts along the length of the
pipebody(longitudinalaxis)intheoppositedirectiontothedirectionofpipetravel(POOH,
RIH) while Torsional Friction (Torque) acts along the circumference of the pipe body
oppositetothedirectionofrotation.

WhilethereareamyriadofchallengesinERD,minimizingtorqueanddragwhiledrilling,
runningcasing,andduringcompletionscontinuetobeoneofthegreatestchallenges.As
thelengthandpercentageofanywellathighangleincreases,frictionalsoincreasesdueto
the increased contact area between any string (drilling or casing) and the wellbore wall.
This is further compounded by the mass of this string at high angle. The meaning and
implicationofthisisthat,whenrunningdrillstringinandoutofthehole,wegettoapoint
where enough weight (push) from surface cannot be exerted to move the string. The
conventionalapproachtosolvingthisproblemistorotatesoastoreducedrag.Whilethis
temporarilysolvestheproblem,asdrillingprogresses,wewillreachanotherpointwhere
enoughtorquecannotbegeneratedatthesurfacetoturnthestring.Thereistherefore,

51

the need to come up with techniques to reduce torque and drag if we want to reduce
downtimeandsuccessfullydrillERwells.

3.5.4InfluenceofFrictionFactor

FrictionFactor(FF)alsoknownasfrictioncoefficient,expressestherelationshipbetween
theforcesneededtoovercomefrictionalforceandthenormalforceoftheelement.Itis
defined by the interaction between two materials. Since torque and drag can be the
limiting design parameters, the optimum trajectory design depends heavily on our
representationofwellborefriction.Weusecasedholeandopenholefrictionfactorsinour
torqueanddragstudies,buttheyarenotnecessarilyreflectiveofthecoefficientsofsliding
friction one might measure in a lab. Friction factors should thus be calculated from field
torqueanddragdatawhichdependuponanumberofconditionsincluding:
o Mudcomposition
o Holecleaning(cuttingsbeds)andcuttingtype
o Operationalproceduresandtypeofoperation(e.g.slidingorrotating)
o Wellboretortuosity
o Formationtype

Thereareseveralissuesthataffectfrictionfactor.Theyinclude:

Drillstinginteractionwithcasingorwithopenhole.
TypeofDrillingFluid(WBM,OBM,Foam,Air)
Mud rheology and properties, which might change while drilling particularly in
HTHPapplications.

52

Bythesametoken,therearesomeissuesthatdonotaffectFrictionFactor.Theyinclude:

Drillingmode(WhetherRotatingorSliding)
Theloadapplied

ItshouldbenotedthatTorqueandDragpredictionsareonlyasgoodasthefrictionfactors
applied.Thus,itisrecommendedthateachdrillingprojectattheverybeginningestablisha
database of local casing and open hole friction factors for the mud type used. Standard
defaultfrictionfactorshavebeenderived(usingcommerciallyavailablesoftwarepackages)
fromanalysesofwelldatacoveringnormaldrillingoperationsinarangeofwells.

3.5.5TorqueandDragReductionMethods

Therearemanywaystoreducetorqueanddrag.Optimizationofthewellprofileisone.
We should select well trajectory that makes torque and drag values as low as possible.
Mud additives and drillstring tools can also be used to reduce torque and drag.
Constructionofhigherspecificationrigscapableofgeneratingenoughweightandtorque
torunstringsinandoutoftheholeandalsotorotatethepipeisanothertorquereduction
method.

BasedonfieldexperienceandendofwellreportsfromseveralERDprojects,thefollowing
hasbeenrecommendedforreducingtorqueanddrag:

53

ToreduceTorque:
UseofalighterBHA,andreducethenumberofHWDPandDC's.Makesurethereis
enoughWOBavailable,
Useamudsystemwithlowerfrictionfactor(semioilbasedoroilbased),
UseNonRotatingDrillPipeProtectors(NRDPP)forcasedholetorquereductionor
bearingsubforopenholetorquereduction,
Redesign the well when possible and consider designer wells with catenary curve
buildsections(gradualincreaseincurvature).

ToreduceDrag:
Optimizewelltrajectoryanddrillstringdesign
InhorizontalwellsuseHWDP/DCneartheverticalsection.
Userotarysteerablesystems
Usehighpowermotorstoincreasestallingresistance
Considercasingflotation.

Mechanical and chemical friction reducers are used by operators to reduce torque and
drag. Rubber element and plastic casing protectors have also been reported to be
successfulinreducingtorque.Severaloperatorshavereportedtorquereductionsofover
25%byusingnonrotatingdrillpipeprotectors.Othertorquereductionstrategiesthathave
beenmentionedbyoperatorsincludetorquereductionsubs,beads,anddownholetractor
systems.

54

NonRotating Drill Pipe Protectors have also been used to reduce casing wear. Although
there is a significant torque reduction with these tools, there is also an increase in drag.
Whenthedrillpipeprotectorsareused,theremustbeacompromisebasedonexpected
requirementsforrotaryororienteddrilling.

Torque and Drag values will increase with the well length up to the point where a rig
equipmentupgrade will berequired. New techniques willalso be required. Forexample,
runningthe95/ 8 casinginflotationwillbenecessarybeyondagivendepartureandsailing
angle,whereallavailableweightisabsorbedbythedrag.

3.6EquivalentCirculationDensityManagement

For easy comparison to critical mud density limits, the annulus pressure is often
transformed into a virtual density value called Equivalent Circulating Density (ECD). ECD
can be defined as the additional mud weight seen by the hole, due to the circulating
pressurelossesofthefluidintheannulus.

ECD is the density a static fluid needs to have in order to create the same pressure the
actualfluidcreateswhilecirculatingintheannulusatacertaindepth.Ittakesintoaccount
theinfluenceofpressurelossesofthefluidflowinguptheannulusaswellaschangesof
thefluidsaveragedensityduetothecuttingsloadintheannulus.

55

EquivalentCirculationDensitycanbecalculatedasfollows:

ECD=MW(ppg)+

PA ( psi )
(3.2)
0.052 * TVD( ft )

Where:ECD=EquivalentCirculatingDensity[ppg]
MW=MudWeight[ppg]

P A =MeasuredAnnulusPressure[Psi]

TVD=TrueVerticalDepth[ft]

The principal variable in this equation is annulus pressure loss. This is affected by the
followingfactors:

Drillpipeconfiguration

Mudweight

Mudrheology

Flowrate

StringRPM

Holecleaningefficiency

Tripspeed

AnnularClearance

Duringdrilling,themudcolumnpressurehastobecontrolledandregulated.Wedothisby
comparingit(i.e.themudcolumnpressure)tothe:

PorePressureGradient(PPG)

FormationBreakGradient(FBG)

FracturePressureGradient(FPG)

56

Weneedtocontrolthemudcolumnpressurebecause:

1. Wedonotwantporefluidstoentertheborehole
2. Wedonotwanttofracturetheformation

TheECDisusedtoanalyzetherelationshipofthedownholepressuretotheporepressure
and the fracture pressure and has to be looked at in connection with pore and fracture
pressuregradients.Itneedstobeinsidethewindowcreatedbythedifferencebetween
pore and the fracture pressure gradient. If the ECD is lower than the pore pressure
gradient, the well is prone to well control problems. If it is higher than the fracture
pressuregradient,thewellispronetoholestabilityproblems.

A critical ECD issue to look out for when drilling deviated wells is the casing shoe ECD,
whichisthepressureatthecasingshoe.Aspreviouslynoted,thisisbecausetheformation
pressure and the pore pressure are a function of the TVD and the pressure drop
contributingtotheECDisafunctionofthemeasureddepth.ThisisexplainedinFigure3.5.

57

Figure3.6:CasingShoeECDDetermination

FromFigure3.5,wecanseethatsolvingoneproblembycreatinglowpressureatthebit
willcreateanotherproblem.Wewillbeindangerofcreatingacriticallowpressureatthe
casingshoeasthepressuredropoverthislongdistance(L2)isbiggerthanthechangein
formationpressureoverthisverticaldepth(TVDL1).Fromtheabove,itcanbeseenthat
overarelativelysmallverticaldepthchange,i.e.asmallformationpressurechange,there
isabigECDchange.Thiscouldleadtoacollapsingholeorincomingporefluids.Theriskof
thishappeningismostrelevantatthecasingshoe,sincetheECD(mudpressure)isatits
lowesttherewithoutbeingprotectedbythecasing.

58

SomeotherimportantfactstonoteaboutECDare:

1. IfpipeODandwellboreIDdonotchangeandinclinationiszero,ECDisconstant.

2. TheECDincreasesintheopenhole,wheretheannularclearanceislessthaninthe
casing.Ifthewellisverticalandinfinitelylong,theECDwillreachaconstantvalue
again.

3. IfthewellboreIDdoesnotchange,butthedrillstringcontainsdrillcollarswithlarge
OD,theECDincreases.

4. If the wellbore opens up, or if thedrillstring changes to smaller IDs, the ECD will
decrease.

5. ECD increases with increasing inclination. This is due to the fact that the annular
pressuredropisafunctionofmeasureddepthwhileECDisafunctionofTVD.

6. Inaverticalwell,ifPressureGradientisconstant,theECDwillbeconstantaswell.

7. IftheopenholehaslargerIDthantheCasingabove,thetotalannularpressuredrop
isless,comparedtoaconventionallydrilledwell.Therefore,theECDisalsoless.

3.6.1EffectsofECD
ECDsaregenerallyamoresignificantissueinERDwellsthanforconventionalwells.Thisis
asaresultoftheirlongmeasureddepthintervalsrelativetotheverticaldepths.Also,ERD
wellsaregenerallyshallowinnature.ThismakesthemparticularlypronetoECDproblems
as their formations are often so shallow as to have very little integrity. Other reasons
include the fact that extended reach wells generally use larger diameter drill pipe to

59

combat hydraulics or buckling problems; they require more aggressive parameters (flow
rateandrpm)forholecleaning;andtheyhavelongerexposuretimeswithlongintervals.

SomeoftheeffectsofECDsare:
i.

HighECDsincreasetheriskoflostcirculation,especiallywhile(a)drillingthe8or
smaller diameter hole size, or (b) while running or circulating long casing strings.
Also,ifECDsarenotminimized,itcouldleadtoreservoirdamage.

ii.

The constant flexing and relaxing of the wellbore when the pumps are turned on
andoffcanleadtowellboreinstability.Thisisparticularlytrueiftheformationis
brittle.

iii.

Casing collapse can be initiated by ECDs while running buoyancy assisted casing
stringsonlongdeepERDwells.

3.6.2ECDManagementandControl
Reducing flow rate is generally the first option if ECD becomes an issue while drilling an
extended reach well. It is important that any reduction in flow rate is within the hole
cleaninglimitationsofthedrillingsystem.Theminimumallowableflowrateisdependent
onmanyfactorsincludingmudrheology,RPM,slidefrequency,holesize,ROP,andother
practices.Aswasmentionedearlier,piperotationalsoaffectsECDsespeciallyinthe8
hole or smaller. As with flow rate above, reducing pipe RPM is also an option to lower
ECDs.

60

3.7DrillingHydraulicsandHoleCleaning

Hydraulics calculations are generally carried out to estimate the required rig pumps
capacitytodrilltheobjectivewell.Thedrillinghydraulicsystemisafunctionofthedrilling
fluidcharacteristicsanditsabilitytodeliverefficientdrillingandensurewellboreintegrity
andstability.Thereforetherequiredpumppressuremustbecapableofprovidingtheflow
rate needed to transport the cuttings up and out of the wellbore, aswell as overcoming
the accumulated pressure losses associated with the surface equipment, the drill string,
thebitandtheannulus.

Thehydraulicsapplicationsandanalysesarebasedondrillingfluidbehavior.Thisbehavior
is governed by rheology and hydraulics studies, which interrelate between each other.
Rheology is the study of how matter (substance) deforms and flows while Hydraulics
describeshowfluidflowcreatesandusespressures.

AsidefromECDManagement,othercriticaldrillingfluidsuccessfactorsintheplanningand
constructionofextendedreachwellsinclude:

BoreholeStabilization

HoleCleaning

Lubricity

61

TheselectionprocessforERDdrillingfluidsmustconsideranumberofcriticalfactors.The
fluidmust:

a) Provideastablewellborefordrillinglongopenholeintervalsathighangles.
b) Maximizelubricitytoreducetoqueanddrag
c) Developproperrheologyforeffectivecuttingstransport
d) Minimizethepotentialforproblemssuchasdifferentialstickingandlostcirculation
e) Minimizeformationdamageoftheproductionintervals

3.7.1FundamentalsofHoleCleaning

Hole angle determines the mechanisms for cutting removal. Figure 3.6 is an angular
depictionofatypicalextendedreachwelltrajectory.

Figure3.7:AngularDepictionofExtendedReachWellTrajectory

62

Indeviatedwells,cuttingstendtosettleonthelowsidewallandformcuttingsbeds.These
cuttingsareoftentransportedalongthelowsideoftheholeeitherasacontinuousmoving
bedorinseparatedbeds/dunes.
Holecleaningcanbedividedintothreecategoriesbasedonthewellboreinclination.Figure
3.7belowshowsthemovementofcuttingsinthevariousangularregionsofthewellbore.
From the figure, it is obvious that the cuttings transport, and by extension the hole
cleaningstrategy,willbedifferentforeachinclinationrange.

Figure3.8:CuttingsTransportatDifferentInclinations

63

Based on the following references [Azar and Okrajni, SPE 14178; Clark and Bickham, SPE
28306; Saasen and Loklingholm, SPE 74558], the cuttings characteristics of the various
inclinationanglescanbegivenas:

035deg:Cuttingsdonotform
3545deg:Cuttingsbedstarttoform
4565deg:Avalanchingstarts
6590deg:Stablebeds

NearverticalWells(0350):CuttingBedsdonotforminthisholesection.Thisisbecause
transport velocity is greater than slip velocity, thus the cuttings are effectively carried in
suspension. The annular fluid velocity acts to overcome the cuttings settling force and
thereisanetupwardmovementofthecuttings.Holecleaningissimplyprovidedbythe
viscosity and flowrate of the drilling fluid. When the pumps are turned off, cuttings are
suspendedbytheviscousdrillingfluid,althoughsomesettlingwilloccurwithtime.

IntermediateAngles(35650):Inthissection,thereisunstable,movingcuttingsbed.This
is because transport is via lifting mechanism. In this inclination range, cuttings begin to
form dunes, as the distance for them to fall to the bottom is now very minimal. The
cuttingsmoveuptheholemostlyonthelowside,butcanbeeasilystirredupintheflow
regime. The most notable feature of this inclination range is that when the pumps are
shutoff,theduneswillbegintoslide(oravalanche)downhole.Thissignificantlychanges
the hole cleaning strategy with respect to the vertical well scenario. Typically most

64

problems associated with hole cleaning in deviated wells occur in this section. This is
because;itistheregionwheregravityeffectscancausecuttingsbedstoslumpdownthe
hole.

HighAngles(greaterthan650):Stationarycuttingsbedforminstantaneouslyinthisregion.
This is because transport is via a rolling mechanism. This presents a different set of
operational circumstances. Here, cuttings will fall to the low side of the hole and form a
long, continuous cuttings bed. All of the drilling fluid will move above the drillpipe, and
mechanical agitation is required to move the cuttings, regardless of the flowrate or
viscosityofthemud.

Toareasonableextent,holecleaningoperationcanberemediedbyagoodcombination
of:

1.

AppropriateMudProperties

2.

Optimizedwellprofile

3.

Standarddrillingpracticesprocedures.

However, continuous ECD measurement remains the best method to monitor hole
cleaningandminimizelostcirculationproblemsorstuckpipe.

3.7.2FactorsAffectingHoleCleaning

Perhaps the single most important aspect of ERD well planning is ensuring that the rigs
pumps, solids control equipment, drillstring components and selected mud system are

65

adequate to keep the hole clean. Hole cleaning is one of the most crucial areas in
successfullydrillinganERDwell.Theparameterswhichaffectholecleaningmorethanany
other(Payneetal,1994);(EckOlsenetal,1994)are:
o FlowRateDeterminestransportandannularvelocity
o HoleAngleDeterminesmechanismofremoval
o Fluidrheologyandflowregime
o MudDensity
o Rateofpenetration
o Drillpiperotation
o Geometry
o Eccentricity
o CuttingsSize
o CuttingsShape
o CuttingsDensity
o Formation

3.7.3ConsequencesofPoorHoleCleaning

Cuttings generated while drilling needs to be removed from the hole and transported
throughtheannulustothesurface.Apoorlycleanedholewillleadtoabuildupofcutting
bedsandareductionintheannulusarea.Thismayresultinmanydrillingproblemssuch
as:

i.

Formationofastationarycuttingsbed

ii.

Reductioninrateofpenetration

66

iii.

HighTorqueandDragandExcessiveOverpull

iv.

Difficultyinrunningcasing

v.

Fracturingoftheformation

vi.

Stuckpipeorstabilizerhanging

vii.

Mudlossduringcementjobs

viii.

Increasedcosts

ix.

Possiblelossofhole

x.

IncreaseinECDcausingwellboreinstabilityissues

3.7.4TheCleanHoleConcept:WhatisaCleanHole?

Every high angle wellbore will certainly have cuttings bed of some thickness and
distribution.Cuttingsbedswillforminthehighanglewellbores,regardlessofhowthehole
cleaningpracticesarecarriedout.FromFigure3.7,itisobviousthatthemethodofcuttings
removalisafunctionofhowthecuttingsaredistributedinthehole.However,awellbore
doesnothavetobe100%clean(orfreeofcuttings)beforeiswillbeconsideredclean.
K&MTechnologiesdefinesaCleanHoleas:Awellborewithacuttingsbedheightand
distributionsuchthatoperationsaretroublefree.

Itshouldbenotedthatacuttingsbedthatiscleanfordrillingmaynotnecessarilybethe
same as that for tripping a BHA or casing. This is mainly due to the differences in the

67

annular clearance seen in these various operations and also the ability to trip the pipe
throughthecuttingsbed.

3.7.5HoleCleaningMechanism

Therearetwomainmechanismsforholecleaning.Theseare:

Dispersion

MechanicalRemoval

Dispersion effectively dissolves cuttings into the mud, which allows them to be easily
removedfromthehole.Ingeneral,dispersiononlyappliesinlargediameterholesections
thataredrilledwithlowcostwaterbasedmud.

With mechanical removal, many different parameters work together to clean the hole.
However,byfar,thetwomostimportantparametersarerotationandflowrate.Rotation
controlstheholecleaningefficiency,whileflowratecontrolstheholecleaningrate.

DrillPipeRotation

Rotationisthekeyparameterinholecleaningefficiencyforthehighanglesections,where
thedrillpipeanddrillcuttingswilllieonthelowsideofthehole.Undertheseconditions,
movement of the drill pipe (rotation and/or reciprocation) will mechanically disturb
cuttings beds and assist in cleaning the hole. Rotation is more effective since this helps

68

equalize fluid velocities on the low and high side of the hole. The influence of drill pipe
rotationismorepronouncedinviscousmudsandinsmallerholes(lessthan17).Incases
where the pipe is not rotated (e.g. slide drilling), cuttings beds are more difficult to
remove. Under these special circumstances, increased flow rate or changes in operation
practicesmaybenecessarytoimproveholecleaning.

The rotary speed used is also critical for effective hole cleaning. According to K & M
Technologies, there are at least two distinct hurdle rotary speeds at which step
improvementsincuttingsreturnwilloccurinhighanglewellbore.Theseoccurat100120
RPM and at 150 180 RPM. They claim that these speeds have proven to be quite
consistent for different hole sizes and mud types. However, some operators like Baker
HughesINTEQ have a problem with this practice because it essentially ignores the
increasedwear,theeffectsofthevibrationsitcreatesondownholeequipment,aswellas
the increased possibility of tool failures and subsequent trips. Baker HughesINTEQ thus
propound that higher RPM may not be necessary to effectively clean the hole. This has
been partly corroborated by other operators as available information shows that several
operatorshaveexperimentedwithrotaryspeedsofupto220RPM.Whilesomebenefits
wererecordedforRPMsgreaterthan120,verylittlebenefitswererecordedatRPMsover
180.

69

MudFlowRate

Themudflowrateisthemostimportantfactorforholecleaningindeviatedwells.Simply
put,thefasteryoupump,thefasteryoumovecuttingsoutoftheholewhencoupledwith
ample rotary speed. Thus, mud pumps and liner sizes should be selected to ensure a
sufficiently high flow rate when drilling ERD wells. Pump pressure is often the limiting
factor for achieving the required flow rate. Consideration should thus be given to this
during the bottom hole assembly (BHA) design and bit nozzle selection to reduce pump
pressure.

Ideally,maximumavailableflowratesshouldbeusedforeverysectionofanERDwell,up
to the surface pressure or downhole tool limits. As hole angle increases from vertical,
cuttingstransportbecomesmoredifficult.Theflowraterequiredtocarrycuttingsoutof
theholeincreasesrapidlyfrom0oto60o.Above60otherateofflowrateincreaselevels
off. Hole angles between 45o and 60o frequently present the most problems because
cuttingstendtoslidebackdowntheannulusandpackoff.

Thereareseveralcommerciallyavailabledrillinghydraulicscomputerprograms,whichcan
beusedtodeterminetheachievabledrillingcirculationratesgiventherigpumpcapacity,
drillstring/wellboreconfigurationanddrillingfluidrheology.Theseflowratescanthenbe
evaluatedusingavailableholecleaningmodelsforhighanglewellbores,whicharecapable
ofpredictingoverallholecleaningeffectiveness.

70

However,fieldexperiencesaswellasvarioussimulationsbyindustryexpertshavecomeup
withwhatcanbereferredtoasrecommendedpracticesandtypicalflowratestoaimforin
ERD wells. Table 2 is the industry recommended minimum and maximum (realistic)
flowratesfordifferentholesizes.

Table3.2:RecommendedMinimumandMaximumFlowRatesforDifferentHoleSizes

HoleSize DesirableFlowRate(gpm)

MinimumWorkableFlowRate

17

9001200

800gpm,withROP@20m/hr(65/hr)

12

8001100

650700gpm,withROP@1015m/hr(3050/hr)

97/ 8

700900

500gpm,withROP@1020m/hr(3365/hr)

450600

350400gpm,withROP@1020m/hr(3365/hr)

Source:DrillingDesignandImplementationforExtendedReachandComplexWell,K&M
Technology,3rdEdition,2003,Pg86

Aswasmentionedearlier,flowratealoneisineffectiveunlessthepipeisbeingrotatedfast
enough to stir the cuttings into the flow regime. Table 3 presents the industry
recommendeddrillstringRPMforthedifferentholesizes.

Table3.3:RecommendedDrillStringRPMforVariousHoleSizes

HoleSize

DesirableRPM

MinimumForEffectiveHoleCleaning

17

120180rpm

120rpm

12

150180rpm

120rpm

97/ 8

120150rpm

100rpm

70100rpm

60rpm

Source:DrillingDesignandImplementationforExtendedReachandComplexWell,K&M
Technology,3rdEdition,2003,Pg87

71

3.8VibrationandWellboreStability

3.8.1Vibrations
Comparedtolowangleandverticalwells,downholevibrationsareoftenlesssevereinERD
wells.However,theyareofparticularconcernduetotheirdirectandindirectimpacton
theoveralldrillingoperation.Someoftheeffectsofdownholevibrationare:
1. BHAfailures
2. ReducedBitLife
3. ReducedROP
4. ReducedDrillStringlifeandTwistoffs
5. PoorHoleCondition
6. Longerdrillingtimeandcost

Vibrationscanbeminimizedoreliminatedbydownholemonitoring,andadjustingdrilling
parametersandpracticesaccordingly.Itmustbeemphasizedthatitisnotenoughtojust
monitor surface vibrations. This is because; it is highly unlikely that what is happening
downholewillbeseenatthesurface.Inordertorespondtovibrationsandeliminatethem,
itishelpfultounderstandthedifferenttypesofvibrationsandwhatcausesthem.Table4
isadescriptionofthevarioustypesofvibrations.

72

Table3.4:TypesofVibrations

TypeofVibration

DescriptionandSymptom

Oftenseenaslargesurfacevibrationsinshortorverticalwells

Oftenaresultofdrillinghardformations

Bitdamage

BitandBHAWhirl

Verycomplexanddestructive

(Lateral)

AmajorproblemwithearlyPDCbits

Impactdamagetobitgaugepads

Localizedtooljointwear

Erraticsurfacetorque

Cyclicsurfacetorquefluctuations/topdrivestalling

MWDsensorshaveshownfluctuationsof0300rpmdownhole

Overtorquedtooljoints

BitBounce(Axial)

StickSlip(Torsional)

Source:DrillingDesignandImplementationforExtendedReachandComplexWell,K&M
Technology,3rdEdition,2003,Pg133

3.8.2WellboreStability
ERD wells have hole sections of greater inclination than conventional directional wells.
Hence, the risk of instability in an ERD well is greater. The very nature of extending the
reachofwellsinagivenareawilloftenincreasetheriskofinstability.Therefore,greater
careduringtheplanninganddrillingofanERDwellisrequired.

HoleinstabilityreferstotwoextremesofFormationCollapseandFormationBreakdown.
Formation Collapse can lead to spalling and/or hole closure. A number of factors can be
responsibleforthis,butthemostcommonreasonsare:

73

o Insufficientsupportnotprovidedtothewellborewallasaresultoflowmudweight
o Incompatibilityofthemudchemistrywiththeformation.

FormationBreakdownontheotherhanddescribesthecreationofaninducedfracture(or
openingofanaturalfracturesystem)leadingtomassivemudlosses.Theprimaryreason
forformationbreakdownisuseoftoohighamudweight.

3.8.3PreliminaryWellboreStabilityAnalysis

Toconductanalysesofstressinducedwellboreinstability,thebasicinformationrequired
includes:

o Strength and deformation response of the formation material to stress changes

imposedbycreationofthewellbore;and
o Knowledgeoftheinsitustressregime.

Toconductananalysisofstressinducedwellboreinstabilitythebasicinformationrequired
includes:

o Knowledgeoftheorientationandmagnitudeoftheprincipalinsitustressesand
o Strengthandelasticpropertiesoftherockmaterial.

These input data are primarily obtained from geophysical logs and drilling data and are
associatedwithvaryingdegreesofuncertainty.

74

There are several commercially available software for monitoring vibration and wellbore
instability. Because of the highly technical nature of this analysis, vibration and wellbore
instabilitywillnotbediscussedanyfurtherastheyarebeyondthescopeofthiswork.

75

ChapterFour
ExtendedReachDrillingAlgorithm

4.1AlgorithmDefined

An algorithm is essentially a finite sequence of instructions. It is an explicit, stepbystep

procedureforsolvingaproblem.Technically,analgorithmmustreacharesultafterafinite
numberofsteps.However,forsome,aprogramisonlyanalgorithmifiteventuallystops.
Forothers,aprogramisonlyanalgorithmifitstopsbeforeagivennumberofcalculation
steps.Thus,thetermisalsousedlooselyforanysequenceofactions(whichmayormay
notterminate).
Becauseanalgorithmisapreciselistofprecisesteps,theorderofcomputationwillalways
becriticaltothefunctioningofthealgorithm.Instructionsareusuallyassumedtobelisted
explicitly and are described as starting "from the top" and going "down to the bottom."
However,transitionfromonestatetothenextisnotnecessarilydeterministic.

Ingeneral,theoverallchallengeofthepetroleumindustryhasbeenandstillistheefficient
recoveryofoilandmaximizationofnetpresentvalueforthelifetimeofthefield.Forthis
tobeachieved,itisessentialtohaveastructuredapproachtothedrillingprocess. This
concept formed the basis for the development of an algorithm that can be used for the
planning,designanddrillingofextendedreachandcomplexwells.

76

4.2TheVisualBasicAlgorithmforERD

Several experimental and theoretical studies have been conducted on extended reach
drilling.Intheprecedingchapters,anextensivereviewofmostofthesestudiesaswellthe
critical technologies for their success were done. Based on the findings of the review, a
Visual Basic Algorithm that integrates many of the elements of the planning, design and
drillingofERDwellsintoonesinglepackagehasbeendeveloped.Theseelementsinclude:
Well Planning and Trajectory Design, BHA Design, Drill String and Casing Design, Torque
andDrag,HydraulicsandHoleCleaning,EquivalentCirculationDensity,BitHydraulicsand
Optimization,RigSizingandSelection,StuckPipePrevention,PressureManagement,Well
Control, Surveying and Target Sizing, Rotary Steerable Systems Considerations, Vibration
andWellboreStabilityandWellCompletion.

Of these five elements, this project will consider five of these factors and evaluate their
interrelationship.Thefactorsare:
1. WellPlanningandTrajectoryDesign
2. BHADesign
3. DrillStringDesign
4. TorqueandDragAnalysis
5. HydraulicsandHoleCleaning

77

The model is designed in accordance with industry Continuous Improvement Cycle (CIC)
Principles. The continuous improvement cycle for drilling a well consists of three stages
that follow one after another planning, drilling, and postwell analysis. This cycle is
representedinFigure4.1below.Fromthefigure,itcanbeseenthattheoutputfromone
stageservesastheinputtothenext,andthisistheunderlyingprinciplethatguidedthe
developmentofthismodel.

Drilling

Planning

Analysis

Figure4.1:TheContinuousImprovementCycle

78

4.2.1AttributesoftheModel

TheVisualBasicmodeldevelopedisahighlystructuredalgorithmthatprovidesdirection
on processes and tasks required atall stages in the designand drillingof an ERDwell to
achieve good drilling performance. The knowledgebase structure of the algorithm
facilitates examination of the interrelationships of drilling parameters and operating
practices. Figure 4.2 is a flow chart that shows the interrelationship of these drilling
parameters.Thisfigureisthebuildingblockforthesoftware.

79

Figure4.2:DrillingDesignFlowChartforExtendedReachDrilling

80

Thealgorithmisdividedintomodules,eachtreatingaspecificissuethatcomesintoplay
whendrillinganextendedreachwell.Mostofthecalculationsdoneinthevariousmodules
overlap each other and there may appear to be some redundancy. This is intentional
because most of these calculations are closely interlinked, so it is difficult and
inappropriatetodiscussthesesubjectsinisolation.

The model evaluates the drilling process by presenting a structured approach, which
enables office and field personnel to identify drilling performance problems as easily as
possible.Byevaluatingresults,theusercanidentifydrillingproblemsearlyandisableto
accurately take remedial actions. As a result of using the program, better and quicker
informationisobtained.Itisthentheusersdiscretiontoutilizetheinformationandmake
informeddecisions.

TheoutputfromthemodelisareportthatisessentiallyanimplementableWellPlan.This
is made possible because common problems that could be encountered during the well
planning and design phases would be mitigated by the programs smart engineering
knowledge.

Several flags have also been integrated into the code. These flags will pop up if an
input/output that is incompatible with the preset standards is noticed by the program.
Whenaflagpopsup,theuserwillneedtomakethenecessarychangessoastorectifythe
anomaly. Numerous iterations can be made until a technically feasible scenario is
obtained.Thiswillbenoticedwhentheprogramuserisallowedtoproceedwithoutany
flags popping up. In this way, the user can correct his/her mistakes as soon as they are

81

made,insteadofwaitingforthefinalreporttolearnifindeedamistakeorincompatible
selectionhasbeenmade.Iffollowedsequentiallyandwithappropriateinputs,themodel
willbeabletoproduceaworkablewellplananddesignthatcanbeusedtodrillthewell.

4.3AnalysisoftheIndividualModules

Themodelfocusesonwelldesign,wellplanningandimplementationbothattheofficeand
fieldlocations.Uponlaunchingtheprogram,avisualinterface,whichdisplays20tabs,is
presented. Each tab brings a technology to the process that is necessary for success of
extended reach drilling. Each tab is a module in itself and contains enhanced graphics
depictingtheparameterthatisbeinganalyzed.Eachtabperformsvariouscalculations.The
resultsofthesecalculationsarestoredandcarriedforwardtothenexttab.Dependingon
whatisbeingcalculatedinthesucceedingtab,datacaneitherbecalledintothenewtabor
referenced during the calculations. Results obtained from the current tab are internally
referencedtothoseofprevioustabs.Ifnewinformationthatisnottechnicallycompatible
with previous information is observed, a flag pops up and notifies the user so that
appropriate adjustments can be made. In this way, the model continually updates the
processuntilatechnicallyfeasiblewelldesignisachieved.Thefollowingsectionsdescribe
thecontentsofthetabs/modulesthathaveearlierbeenidentifiedascriticaltothesuccess
ofextendedreachwells.

82

4.3.1WellPlanningModule

An often overlooked area of importance, in ERD wells in particular, is the measurement

processassociatedwithfixingthephysicalpositionofthewellbore.Therearenumerous
inherenterrorswithinthemeasurementsusedtocalculatethebottomholelocation(BHL).
Thesemeasurementsinclude:

Depth

Inclination

Azimuth

Also of prime importance is the BuildUp Rate (BUR). Builduprates are selected to: (a)
limitthefatigueloadingonthedrillstring,and(b)reducecasingandtooljointwear.The
selection of BUR will influence the final inclination, which maximizes production and/or
avoids collision with other existing or planned wells. The builduprate is related to the
buildupradiusinthefollowingequation:

R=

360 CharateristicLength
x
(4.1)
2
BUR

WhereR=BuildUpRadius

Source:ShellDrillingandTransportHandbook,Vol.2,1991,Pg.179

Figure4.3isthevisualinterfacedesignoftheWellPlanningModule.

83

Figure4.3:WellPlanningandTrajectoryDesignModule

84

This module shows the most important parameters we need to know from the outset
beforeawellisplanned.Itcalculatesthefollowing:

1. DoglegSeverity:Thisisgivenby:
DLS=

AC 100
(4.2)
CL

Where:DLS=DoglegSeverity(Deg/100ft)
AC=AngleChange(degrees)
CL=CourseLength(ft)

Source:ShellDrillingandTransportHandbook,Vol.2,1991,Pg.181

2. BuildUpRate:ThisisdividedintotheBuildSectionandtheTangentSection.
TheBuildSectionisgivenby:
BS=

i 2
xR (4.3)
360

Where:BS=BuildSection(Deg/100ft)
i=InclinationAngle(degrees)
R=BuildUpRadius(ft)

TheTangentSectionisgivenby:
TS=RSinei
Cosi(4.4)

Where:TS=TangentSection(Deg/100ft)
R=RadiusofCurvature
i=InclinationAngle(degrees)

Source:ShellDrillingandTransportHandbook,Vol.2,1991,Pg.180

85

3. TargetAzimuth:Thisisgivenby:

E
A t =Tan N (+1800)(4.5)
1

Where:A t =TargetAzimuth(Deg)
E=SurfaceCoordinates(Deg)
N=TargetCoordinate(Deg)
EandNcanbeNegativeSouthorNegativeWest
Source:ShellDrillingandTransportHandbook,Vol.2,1991,Pg.169

4. HorizontalDeparture:Thisisgivenby:
HD=Sinei*DistancefromKickoffPointtoMeasuredDepth(4.6)
Where:i=InclinationAngle(Degrees)

Source:FormulasandCalculationsforDrilling,ProductionandWorkover,Lapeyrouse2ndEd.,Pg.200

5. CurrentTrueVerticalDepth:Thisisgivenby:
CurrentTVD=(Cosi*CourseLength)+LastTVD(4.7)
Where:i=InclinationAngle(Degrees)

Source:DirectionalandHorizontalDrillingEquations,roughneckcity.com

Havingdeterminedtheabove,projectionscanthusbemadeforthefollowing:

1. BuildUpRateNeededtoReachTarget:Thisisgivenby:
(SineDesiredAngle)(SineCurrentAngle)*5730(4.8)
(TargetTVD)(CurrentTVD)

Where:TVD=TrueVerticalDepth(Ft)
5730=ConversionFactor(FieldUnits)

Source:DirectionalandHorizontalDrillingEquations,roughneckcity.com

86

2. ProjectedAngleNeededtoReachTarget:Thisisgivenby:
(TargetTVD)(PresentTVD)=ArctanofAngle(4.9)
(UsableVS)

Where:VS=VerticalSection
UsableVS=TargetVSPresentVS
IfArctanofAngle>900,Add900
IfArctanofAngle<900,Subtract900

Source:DirectionalandHorizontalDrillingEquations,roughneckcity.com

3. ProjectedMeasuredDepth:Thisisgivenby:
(TargetInc)(PresentInc)(4.10)
(DLS)

Where:Inc=Inclination(Degrees)
DLS=DoglegSeverity(Degrees)

Source:DirectionalandHorizontalDrillingEquations,roughneckcity.com

AswasmentionedinChapter3,WellPlanningisadesignprocess,whichutilizesasetof
criteria(dataandinformation)todevelopanoptimumdirectionalwellplan.Astheprime
criticalsuccessfactorforERDwells,wellplanningisconnectedtotheothercriticalfactors
asshowninfigure4.4.

87

Figure4.4:InterrelationshipamongERDCriticalElements

88

4.3.2BottomHoleAssembly(BHA)DesignModule

Figure4.5istheBottomHoleAssembly(BHA)Designmodule.Inthismodule,APIStandard
Drill Pipe and Drill Collar Specifications have been preentered. Using the drop down
combo box, the user can simply select the specification that is applicable to the given
project.ItalsocontainsalistofdownholetoolsthataretypicallyusedinBHAdesign.The
check boxes are used to select any particular tool. All other critical BHA calculations are
provided by the operator or Service Company. Values for these calculations are not
calculated by the program, but are simply entered by the user. This is because the
mathematics behind these calculations could not be obtained. Several attempts were
made to get the underlying equations for these parameters but the custodians of the
equations would not release them because they are regarded as proprietary/classified
information.Thus,itisassumedthattheuseralreadyhastheminhandandsimplyneeds
to enter the values in the appropriate spaces. The program will then use these values
duringtheevaluationprocess.

BHA design is also an iterative process that involves developing a BHA strategy that
considersthekeyissuesoftheoveralldrillingandholecleaningprocess.Figure4.6shows
theinterrelationshipamongthesekeyissuesandhowtheyarefactoredintothedesignof
thebottomholeassembly,whilefigure4.7isthemodulethatimplementstheflowchart.

89

Figure4.5:FlowChartfortheDesignofBottomHoleAssembly

90

Figure4.6:BottomHoleAssembly(BHA)DesignModule

91

4.3.3DrillStringDesignModule

TheDrillStringDesignModulecalculatesalltherequiredparametersfordesigningthedrill
string.Amongothers,itcalculates:

1. TheBuoyancyFactor:Thisisgivenby:
BF=65.5MudWeight(ppg)(4.11)
65.5
Where:BF=BuoyancyFactor(Dimensionless)
Source:FormulasandCalculationsforDrilling,ProductionandWorkover,Lapeyrouse2ndEd.,Pg.20

2. TheLengthofBHANecessaryfortheRequiredWeightonBit:Thisisgivenby:
Length(ft)=WOB*SF
Wdc*BF(4.12)

Where:WOB=DesiredWeightonBittobeusedwhiledrilling
SF=SafetyFactortoplaceneutralpointsindrillcollars
Wdc=WeightofDrillCollar(Ib/ft)
BF=BuoyancyFactor

Source:FormulasandCalculationsforDrilling,ProductionandWorkover,Lapeyrouse2ndEd.,Pg.42

3. TheMaximumAllowableTensionintheDrillPipe:Thisisgivenby:
MaxTension(Ib)=(Y m *A)*0.85(4.13)
Where:Y m =MinimumTensileYieldStrength(psi)
A=CrossSectionalArea(in.2)
0.85=85%ofminimumyieldstrengthofmaterial

Source:ShellDrillingandTransportHandbook,Vol.2,1991,Pg.93

92

4. TheMaximumAllowableTorsionintheDrillPipe:Thisisgivenby:
MaxTorsion(Ib/ft)={C*J*Y m } *0.85 (4.14)
D

Where:Y m =MinimumTensileYieldStrength(psi)
J=PolarMomentofInertia:

(D4d4)(in.4)

32
D=OutsideDiameterofDrillPipe(in.)
d=InsideDiameterofDrillPipe
C=0.096167(fieldunits)
0.85=85%ofminimumyieldstrengthofmaterial

Source:ShellDrillingandTransportHandbook,Vol.2,1991,Pg.97

5. MinimumTorsionYieldStrengthUnderTension:Thisisgivenby:

Q T =C*J *(Y2 m P2)1/2 (4.15)

DA2

Where:Q T =MinimumTorsionYieldStrengthUnderTension
J=PolarMomentofInertia:

(D4d4)(in.4)

32
D=OutsideDiameterofDrillPipe(in.)
d=InsideDiameterofDrillPipe(in.)
C=0.096167(ConversionFactorFieldUnits)
Y m =MinimumUnitYieldStrength(psi)
A=CrossSectionalArea(in.2)
P=MinimumTensileYieldStrength(psi)

Source:ShellDrillingandTransportHandbook,Vol.2,1991,Pg.97

93

6. TheMaximumAllowableDoglegSeverityforAvoidanceofDrillPipeFatigue:Thisis
givenby:

C=432,000 b tanhKL(4.16)
EDKL

T
;I= (D4d4);tanhKL=eklekl
EI
64
ekl+ekl
Where:K=

t =T/A;A=

(D 1 2d 1 2)

ForGradeEDrillPipe;
10
0.6
b =19,500
t
[ t 33,500]2
67
(670) 2

ForGradeSDrillPipe;
b =20,000[1 t /145,000]

Where:C=Maximumpermissibledoglegseverity(deg/100ft)
E=YoungsModulus(psi)
D=DrillPipeOD(in.)
d=DrillPipeID(in.)
L=Halfthedistancebetweentooljoints(in.)
T=BuoyantWeight(includingtooljoints)suspendedbelowthedogleg(Ib)
b =Maximumpermissiblebendingstress(psi)
I=DrillpipemomentofInertiawithrespecttoitsdiameter(in.4)

Source:ShellDrillingandTransportHandbook,Vol.2,1991,Pg.107

94

7. TheLateralForceforAvoidanceofCasingWear:Thisisgivenby:
F(Ib)=*c*LT
108,000(4.17)

Where:F=Lateralforce
C,LandTareasabove

Source:ShellDrillingandTransportHandbook,Vol.2,1991,Pg.107

Like Well Planning and BHA design, drill string design is also an iterative process that
involves designing a drill string strategy that considers the key issues relating to Friction
Factors, Torque and Drag, Hole Cleaning and a host of others. Figure 4.8 shows the
interrelationshipamongthesekeyissuesandhowtheyarefactoredintothedesignofthe
drillstring,whilefigure4.9isthemodulethatimplementsthisflowchart.

95

Figure4.7:FlowChartforDrillStringDesign

96

Figure4.8:DrillStringDesignModule

97

4.3.4TorqueandDragAnalysisModule

ThismoduleperformsTorqueandDragAnalysisforthewelldesign.Sincethereisamyriad
of commercially available torque and drag analysis software, it is anticipated that one of
the packages will be used. Examples of available Torque and Drag Analysis software
include: Baker Hughes Advantage Torque and Drag, Halliburtons WellPlan Torque and
Drag,andPetrisDDRAGTorqueandDragAnalysisModel.Thesemodelswillprovidethe
inputsnecessaryforthissoftware.

However,inadditiontotheinputsprovidedbycommerciallyavailablesoftware,this
modulealsoperformsthefollowingcalculations:

1. TorqueGeneratedattheBit:Thisisgivenby:
TQ@Bit=BitDiameter*BitAggressiveness(4.24)

2. TotalSurfaceTorque:Thisisgivenby:
TST=StringTorque+MechanicalTorque+DynamicTorque(4.25)

3. Fracture Gradient: There are two principal methods of calculating Fracture

Gradient Mathews and Kelly and the Ben Eaton method. This model uses the
MathewsandKellymethodwhichismathematicallyrepresentedas:

98

 FG=

P
+ Ki (4.26)
D
D

Where:FG=FractureGradient(psi/ft)
P=Formationporepressure(psi)
=Matrixstress@pointofinterest(psi)
D=Depthofinterest[TVD](ft)
Ki=Matrixstresscoefficient,(Dimensionless)

Fromtheabove,FracturePressurecanbecalculatedby:
FracturePressure(psi)=FG*D(4.27)
Where:FG=FractureGradient(psi/ft)
D=DepthofDeterminingKi
AndMaximumMudDensitycanbecalculatedby:
Max.MudDensity=

FG
(4.28)
0.052

Where:FG=FractureGradient(psi/ft)

Source:FormulasandCalculationsforDrilling,ProductionandWorkover,Lapeyrouse2ndEd.Pgs.190192

Figure4.9isthevisualinterfacedesignoftheTorqueandDragAnalysisModule.

99

Figure4.9:TorqueandDragAnalysisModule

100

4.3.5HydraulicsandHoleCleaningModule

This module predicts the flow rates and RPMsthat are needed to clean the various hole
sections.Itwasdevelopedforholesectionsfrom8to17.Itisalsoabletocalculate
annularvelocityaswellaspredictthecharacteristicsofthecuttingsthatwillbegenerated
in the various hole sections. Once a hole section selection is made from the drop down
combobox,theprogramautomaticallydisplaystherequiredflowrateandRPMthatwill
berequiredtocleanthatholesection.TheflowratesandRPMsgenerateduponselection
of a hole size have been adapted from the recommended values in Tables 3.2 and 3.3,
reproducedhereunder:

RecommendedMinimumandMaximumFlowRatesforDifferentHoleSizes

HoleSize DesirableFlowRate(gpm)

MinimumWorkableFlowRate

17

9001200

800gpm,withROP@20m/hr(65/hr)

12

8001100

650700gpm,withROP@1015m/hr(3050/hr)

97/ 8

700900

500gpm,withROP@1020m/hr(3365/hr)

450600

350400gpm,withROP@1020m/hr(3365/hr)

Source:DrillingDesignandImplementationforExtendedReachandComplexWell,K&M
Technology,3rdEdition,2003,Pg86

RecommendedDrillStringRPMforVariousHoleSizes

HoleSize

DesirableRPM

MinimumForEffectiveHoleCleaning

17

120180rpm

120rpm

12

150180rpm

120rpm

97/ 8

120150rpm

100rpm

70100rpm

60rpm

Source:DrillingDesignandImplementationforExtendedReachandComplexWell,K&M
Technology,3rdEdition,2003,Pg87

101

ThismodulealsocalculatestheAnnularVelocity(ft/min),whichisanotherveryimportant
variableintheholecleaningprocess.Bymaintainingtheannularvelocityatcertainratesin
conjunctionwiththerheologicalproperties(density,viscosity,yieldstrength,gelstrength)
of the drilling fluid, the wellbore is kept clean of the drill cuttings to prevent them from
settlingbackdowntotheholebottomandcausingdrillingproblems.

TheAnnularVelocitycanbecalculatedusingoneofthefollowingformul:

OR(4.29)

Where:AV=AnnularVelocity(ft/min)
PO bpm =PumpOutput(bpm)
PO gpm =PumpOutput(gpm)
ID=InsideDiameterofthewellboreorcasing(in2)
OD=OutsideDiameterofthedrillpipeortubing(in2)
1029.4=Conversionfactor(FieldUnits)
24.5=Conversionfactor(FieldUnits)

Source:FormulasandCalculationsforDrilling,ProductionandWorkover,Lapeyrouse2nd Ed.Pg.170

Figure4.10isthevisualinterfacedesignoftheHydraulicsandHoleCleaningModule.

102

Figure4.10:HydraulicsandHoleCleaningModule

103

4.3.6EquivalentCirculation(ECD)DensityModule

ThismodulecalculatesbothEquivalentCirculationDensityaswellastheEquivalentStatic
Density.TheformulaforcalculatingEquivalentCirculationDensitywasgiveninEquation
3.2onpage57andisreproducedhereunder:
ECD=MW(ppg)+

PA ( psi )
(3.2)
0.052 * TVD( ft )

TheEquivalentStaticDensityontheotherhandisgivenby:
ESD=P StaticMeasured (4.30)

g*TVD

Where:ESD=EquivalentStaticDensity(Dimensionless)
g=Accelerationduetogravity(m/s2)
TVD=TrueVerticalDepth(ft)

Based on these two calculations, the model is able to predict the equivalent circulation
density that is needed to clean the hole. It does this by backchecking it with the pore
pressure gradient, formation break gradient and the fracture pressure gradient that was
earliercalculatedbytheTorqueandDragModule.Itessentiallycheckstomakesurethat
ECDisbelow(andalwaysremainsbelow)thefracturegradient.
Figure4.11isthevisualinterfacedesignoftheEquivalentCirculationDensityModule.

104

Figure4.11:EquivalentCirculationDensity(ECD)Module

105

Whilethemodulesthathavebeendescribedaboveareconsideredcriticalfactorsforthe
successofERDwells,itdoesnotinanywaymeanthattheotherfactorslistedamongthe
tabs, namely: Casing Design, Bit Hydraulics and Optimization, Rig Sizing and Selection,
Stuck Pipe Prevention, Pressure Management, Well Control, Surveying and Target Sizing,
RotarySteerableSystems(RSS)Considerations,VibrationandWellboreStabilityandWell
Completion; are less important. Information and relevant data associated with these
parameterswillbeprovidedbytheoperatingorserviceCompany.

4.4SensitivityAnalysisExampleProblem

Inthissection,thesequenceofiterationsimplementedbythealgorithmwhenappliedto
different scenarios is presented. The interrelationship among the five identified critical
factors in the planning and design of an extended reach well is seen as changes are
continually made to the original well proposal until a technically feasible well plan and
designisachieved.Duringtheiterationprocess,variousparameterswillbetestedforthe
selecteddecisionvariables,amongtheseare:

1. IsproposedBURachievable?
2. IstheproposedBHAachievable?
3. IsBHAbendinglimitexceeded?
4. Willtheproposeddesignresultinvibrationissues?
5. Willtheholebeeffectivelycleanedwiththeproposeddesign?
6. Willtheproposeddesignresultincomponentswear?

106

7. WillTorqueandDragvaluesexceedoperatinglimitsoftheproposedrig?
8. Willdrillstringmateriallimitsbeexceeded?

These decision variables will be individually and collectively analyzed and the
interconnectivity between the variables evaluated. In this way, the effects of changes in
these variables and how they affect the final design will be seen. To show how the
algorithmachievesthis,letusconsideraproposedERDprojectintheGulfofMexico.

Operator:ArmstrongOilandGas
Field:LaCorona
WellNumber:A101
WellType:ExtendedReach

ObjectiveFunctions:

To drill an Extended Reach Well from top hole to a measured depth of 2900ft @
1150ftTVD.

Todeterminetheappropriatewellpathfordrillingthewell.

TodesigntheappropriateBHAandDrillStringforthegivenwell.

TodetermineiftheholecanbeeffectivelycleanedwiththedesignedBHAanddrill
string.

107

Giventhefollowingdata:
ProposedWellPlan
InclinationAngle
5Deg
CourseLength
2,900ft
BuildupRadius
3ft
TVD
1150ft
ProposedWellpath
BuildandHold
KickoffPoint
600ft
ProposedDrillStringComponents
DrillPipe
Weight=29.63Ib/ft
HWDP
Weight=70.5Ib/ft
OuterDiameterofDrillPipe
65/8in.
OuterDiameterofHWDP
65/8in.
InnerDiameterofDrillPipe
5.97in.
InnerDiameterofHWDP
4.5in.
DrillCollar
Weight=136.31Ib/ft
OuterDiameterofDrillCollar
7in.
InnerDiameterofDrillCollar
3in.
MaximumAllowableHookLoad
805.5psi
DrillStringWeightinAir
517.6KIbf
ProposedBottomHoleAssemblyTools
DrillingBit
NearBitReamer
SteeringUnit
ModularStabilizer
NonMagneticDrillCollar
StringStabilizer
HeavyWeightDrillPipe
ShockSub
Jars

MWDTools

FrictionFactors
LocalFrictionFactor
0.17
WellFrictionFactor
0.22

ProposedMudProperties
MudType
Oilbased
MudWeight
13ppg

OtherRelevantInformation
AnnulusPressure
200psi
FormationPorePressure
6,692psi
Stress@TVD
7309psi
MatrixStressCoefficient
0.522psi/ft

108

Theinformationgivenaboveisusedasinputsintherelevanttabsofthemodeltoperform
therequiredcalculations.
Step1:DetermineWellPlanningParameters

START

WellPlanning

Given:

WellPath/Trajectory=BuildandHold
KickoffPoint=600ft
AngleChange=5Deg
CourseLength=2900ft

Determine:
DoglegSeverity
BuildUpRatefortheBuildSection

DoglegSeverityisgivenby:
DLS=

AC 100
(4.2)
CL

Where:DLS=DoglegSeverity(Deg/100ft)
AC=AngleChange(degrees)
CL=CourseLength(ft)

Fromthegivendata:DLS=(5*100)/2,900=0.17Deg/100ft

BuildUpRateforBuildSectionisgivenby:
BS=

i 2
xR (4.3)
360

Where:BS=BuildSection(Deg/100ft)
i=AngleChange(degrees)
R=BuildUpRadius(ft)

109

Fromthegivendata,AngleChange=5degrees,BuildupRadius=3ft

BURforBuildSection=((5*2)/360)*3=0.26Deg/100ft

ProceedtoStep2:BHADesign

BHADesign

GiventhefollowingDownholeTools:

DrillingBit
NearBitReamer
SteeringUnit
ModularStabilizer
NonMagneticDrillCollar
StringStabilizer
HeavyWeightDrillPipe
ShockSub
Jars

MWDTools

1. Usingavailableindustrysoftware(e.g.BHASysPro),designtheBHAwiththesetools.
From the proposed wellplan data, the buildup rate has been calculated to be 0.26
deg/100ft.
2. Determine if this is achievable with the BHA designed withthe above downhole tools.
AlsodetermineifBHAbendinglimitisexceeded;ifsideforcescancauseBHAwearandif
thecurrentdesignwillresultinBHAvibration.
3. IftheBURisnotachievable,considerreducingtheBURbyraisingtheKOPfrom600ftto
500 ft. Recalculate the BUR @ KOP of 500 ft and check if this is achievable with the
designedBHA.Ifnot,continuereducingBURandraisingKOPuntilanachievableBURis
obtained.
4. IfBURremainsunachievable,reconsidertheplacementand/orsizeofthestabilizersor
useflexsubs/flexstabs.

110

ConditionofSTOPfor
BHADesign

Continueiterations14as
showninFigure4.6untila
BHAdesignthatis
compatiblewiththe
modifiedwellplanis
achieved.

StopBHADesign

ProceedtoStep3:DrillStringDesign

111

DrillStringDesign

Giventhefollowing:

LocalFrictionFactor
WellFrictionFactor
MudDensity
DepthofInterest(TVD)
FormationPorePressure
Stress@PointofInterest
MatrixStressCoefficient

0.17
0.22
13ppg
1150ft
6692psi
7309psi
0.522psi/ft

Thefollowinginformationwillbeprovidedbytheoperator:

RigOperatingLimit
DrillStringMaterialLimits
YieldSafetyFactor
FatigueSafetyFactor
SideForces

UseTorqueandDragModuletoperformFractureGradientCalculations:
1. FractureGradientUsingBenEatonMethodisgivenby:
FG=

P
+ Ki (4.26)
D
D

Where:FG=FractureGradient(psi/ft)
P=Formationporepressure(psi)
=Matrixstress@pointofinterest(psi)
D=Depthofinterest[TVD](ft)
Ki=Matrixstresscoefficient

112


Usingthisequation,thefracturegradientiscalculatedasfollows:
(6692/1150)+0.522(7309/1150)=9.14psi/ft
Fromtheabove,FracturePressurecanbecalculatedby:
FracturePressure(psi)=FG*D(4.27)
Where:FG=FractureGradient(psi/ft)
D=DepthofDeterminingKi
Therefore,FracturePressure=9.14*1150=10511psi

2.UsingthecombinationoftheToqueandDragModuleandindustrysoftware(e.g.
AdvantageTorqueandDrag),determine:
a) IfTorqueandDragValuesexceedRigOperatingLimits
b) IfthisleadstoDrillStringBuckling
c) IfDrillStringMaterialLimitsareexceeded
d) IfalltheabovearecompatiblewiththemodifiedwellplananddesignedBHA.

3.Foreachofadthatisdeterminedtobetrue,gobackandredesignthedrillstringby:
i. ConsideringchangesintheDCandHWDPnumberandplacement
ii. ConsideringSurfaceEquipmentUpgrade
iii. Consideringhigherstrengthpipes
iv. ConsideringRotarySteerableSystems
OR
Gobacktothewellplanandconsidereither:
i. ReducingtheBURand/orHoleAngle
ii. PlanningdeeperBURifpossible
iii. ChangingthewellpathtoCatenaryWellProfile
4.CalculatetheEquivalentCirculationDensityusingtheECDModule:
ComparetheCalculatedECDwithfracturegradient.ECDshouldalwaysremainbelow
fracturegradient.

113

ConditionofSTOPforDrill
StringDesign
Continueiterations14as
showninFigure4.8untilaDrill
Stringdesignthatis
compatiblewiththemodified
wellplananddesignedBHAis
achieved.

Stop DrillStringDesign

ProceedtoStep4:PrepareWellProposal

114

PrepareWellProposalShowingthetechnically

feasibleandrecommendedWellplan,BHA

DesignandDrillStringDesign

STOP

END

115

4.5LimitationsoftheModel

The most significant limitation of this model is its inability to selfcalculate certain
parameters in the modules. This is because the mathematics behind some of these
parameters could not be obtained. As a result of this, the model had to rely on already
generatedinputsfromotherindustrysoftware.Insomecases,insteadoffirstprovidingall
the necessary input values before calculation, the user is simply asked to enter the final
valuewhichhasbeenobtainedfromsomeothermodel.Thispartiallyreducestheabilityof
themodeltoindependentlyiteratecertainparameters.Thatnotwithstanding,itgenerates
anoutputinExcel,inawellreportformatwhichgivesareevaluatedandmodifiedversion
of the original proposal. This new version of the proposal is a more technically feasible
design that can be used to drill the well. An example of the report format is shown in
AppendixB.

Anotherlimitationofthismodelistheinabilityoftheauthortosecurerelevantfielddata
tocarryoutfurthersensitivityanalysis.AswasmentionedinSection4.3.2onpage89,this
is because these data are regarded as proprietary/classified information and therefore,
couldnotbereleased.Ascanbeseen,onlyonesetofdatawasavailable,assuch,onlyone
runwasmade;asagainstseveralrepeatedruns.Eventhoughitwouldhavebeenniceto
havemorevalidationdata,thefactthatonlyonedatasetwasuseddoesnotsignificantly
affectthefunctionalefficacyofthemodel.

116

ChapterFive
Summary,ConclusionsandRecommendations

AVisualBasicalgorithmthatshowstheinterrelationshipamongthefivecriticalelements
involvedintheplanning,designanddrillingofextendedreachandcomplexwellshasbeen
developed. The development of the model is based upon information gathered from
severalsources,manynewideasfromtechnicalpublications,alongwithinformationand
feedback from fieldbased personnel. The ideas, suggestions and recommendations
gatheredfromallthesesourceshavebeenincorporatedintothemodel.

Based on findings from the literature and results obtained from using the model, the
followingsummary,conclusionsandrecommendationscanbemade:

5.1 GeneralObservations
1. Welllengthisdifferentfordifferenttypesofcurveshapesandwellprofiledesignis
oneofthecriticaltechnologiesinERD.Weshouldthereforeselectawelltrajectory
thatisasshortaspossible.Thisisbecausesignificantbenefitscomefromreduction
offootage.

2. Deepkickoffpointandlowbuilduprateswillreducetheinclinationinthelarger
diameter hole sections and this generally gives better hole stability and improves
holecleaning.

117

3. The principles of planning are making torque and drag as small as possible and
makingwelllengthasshortaspossible.

4. ECDmeasurementiscrucialtoECDmanagementandunderstandingofthevariety
ofdownholeconditionsthataffectit.

5. Therecognitionofholecleaningproblemsintheplanningphaseandthetakingof
immediate remedial action when the problems occur on the rig can lead to
successfulcompletionofdrillingobjectives.

5.2 Conclusionsdrawnfromusingthemodel
While the model that has been developed is not a substitute for an experienced drilling
engineer, it will greatly assist in the well planning and design process by automatically
proposing sound technical solutions and providing a smooth path through the well
planningworkflow.Theuseofthemodelhasalsorevealedthat:

1. ThefrictionfactorisoneofthemostcrucialinputsinaTorqueandDraganalysis.

2. ThereisadirectcorrelationbetweenECDandFrictionFactor.Thisisasaresultof
thefactthatbotharefunctionsofHoleCleaning.

118

5.3Recommendations

The testing of the program as well as key lessons learned and success factors identified
fromthisstudyhasalsoledtothefollowingrecommendations:
1. While using the model, when specifying changes or requesting modifications to a
specific parameter, keep in mind that the systems are not independent and a
changetoonesystemmayrequireachangetoanother.
2. Determiningthebestwellplananddesignisaniterativeprocess.Alwaysconsider
the factors affecting critical or marginal components. Determine if your
assumptions were reasonable or overly conservative. Evaluate the well
requirementsanddesigntodeterminehowchangesmayaffectyourspecifications.
3. Theiterationprocessisbasedonengineeringprinciplesandwillyieldaquantitative
resultbasedonmanyassumptions.Whenmakingtheseassumptionsitisimportant
tobeawareoftheobjectivesandconstraintsoftheparticularERDproject.

5.4ConcludingRemarks

In the light of the foregoing, it is this authors conclusion that the definition of ERD will
remaindynamicandshouldbeupdatedasoperatorsexpandtheERDenvelope.ERDwells
drilledinspecificfieldsandwithspecificrigs,equipment,personnel,projectteams,etc.do
notnecessarilyimplywhatmaybereadilyachievedinotherareas.Becauseofthemyriad
of variables, which control drilling mechanics and performance, local ERD definitions

119

shouldbedevelopedintermsoftheextentofexperiencewithinspecificfieldsandwith
specificrigs.Thus,ERDwellsshouldnotbetreatedasjustanotherwell.Designsmust
be fitfor purpose and specific to the well in question. Time spent on detailed planning
and design will definitely pay off in the operational phase in both performance
improvementsandtheavoidanceofNonProductiveTime(NPT)andtherecordingofNo
DrillingSurprises(NDS).

5.5TheFutureofExtendedReachDrilling

ExtendedReachDrillingisincreasinglybecomingthemeansofrevivingandexpandingthe
productivity of aging oil and gas fields. The careful application of ERD technology will
provide an opportunity for reservoirs to add value beyond what would ordinarily be
possible through conventional directional drilling. While it looks like we can solve the
problems posed by the other critical technologies for success of ERD wells, torque and
drag, hole cleaning, as well as vibration and wellbore stability will continue to remain a
problem.

However,asdrillingtechnologycontinuestoevolve,andasoperatorsstrivetoextendthe
life of existing structures and reduce the number of such structures on new field
developments, the industry will continue to break drilling records and the limits of
extended reach drilling will continue to be pushed further. And with records being
continually broken, the obvious question will be: How Far Can We Go with Existing
Technology?

120

Reliable rotary steerable tools have had a significant effect on drilling efficiency and
flexibilityespeciallyatextremedepartures.WiththepotentialofRotarySteerableDrilling
technology, the limits for extended reach wells may now lie with the ability to complete
andmaintainproductionfromawellratherthantodrillit.Asdrillingtechnologycontinues
toimproveandasthelimitingfactorsidentifiedinthisstudyaregraduallyovercome,the
finalconstraintmaywellbeeconomicratherthantechnical.AdvancesinERDtechniques
are a continuous process, thus research on how to optimize ERD operations will be a
continuousprocessthatwillbeevolvingalongsideitsdevelopment.

5.6FurtherStudies
Beyond drilling, it is suggested that further studies should be carried out on Extended
ReachCompletions,InterventionsandotherLifeCycleissuesthatimpactonthetotalvalue
of Extended Reach Drilling. Studies should also be conducted on Vibration and Wellbore
Stability, Rotary Steerable System Considerations, Stuck pipe prevention, Rig Sizing and
Selection,PressureManagement,aswellasSurveyingandTargetSizing.

121

AppendixA:ProgramCode

Option Explicit
Dim Pi As Double
Private Sub CmdAnnularVelocity_Click()
'CALCULATING ANNULAR VELOCITY
Dim MFR As Double, IDCH As Double, ODPT As Double, ANV As Double
MFR = TxtMFR.Text
IDCH = TxtIDCH.Text
ODPT = TxtODPT.Text
ANV = (24.5 * MFR) / (IDCH ^ 2 - ODPT ^ 2)
TxtANV.Text = Round(ANV, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub CmdBF_Click()
'CALCULATING BUOYANCY FACTOR
Dim MW As Double, RBF As Double
MW = TxtMW.Text
RBF = (65.5 - MW) / 65.5
TxtRBF.Text = Round(RBF, 3)
End Sub
'CALCULATING THE BUILD SECTION
Dim INCA As Double, RAD As Double, BSEC As Double
INCA = TxtINCA.Text
RAD = TxtRAD.Text
BSEC = ((INCA * 6.285 / 360) * RAD)
TxtBSEC.Text = Round(BSEC, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub cmdCalculateCurrentTVD_Click()
Dim LastTVD As Double, CurrentTVD As Double
Dim CourseLength As Double, IncAngle As Double
LastTVD = Me.txt_Current_LastTVD.Text
CourseLength = Me.txt_Current_CourseLenght.Text
IncAngle = Me.txt_Current_InclinationAngle.Text
CurrentTVD = (Cos(IncAngle * Pi / 180) * CourseLength) + LastTVD
Me.txt_Current_CurrentTVD.Text = Round(CurrentTVD, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub cmdCalculateProjectedAngle_Click()
Dim TTVD As Double, PTVD As Double
Dim TVS As Double, PVS As Double
Dim UVS As Double
Dim Res1 As Double
Dim Res2 As Double
TTVD = Me.txtTargetTVD.Text
PTVD = Me.txtPresentTVD.Text
TVS = Me.txtTargetVS.Text

122

PVS = Me.txtPresentVS.Text
UVS = (TVS - PVS)
Res1 = (TTVD - PTVD) / UVS
Res2 = Atn(Res1) * 180 / Pi
If Res2 > 90 Then
Res2 = Res2 + 90
Else
Res2 = Res2 - 90
End If
txtProjectedAngle.Text = Res2
End Sub
'COMBINED MAXIMUM TENSION AND TORSION IN DRILL PIPE
Dim MTYS As Double, IDDP As Double, ODDP As Double, CSAP As Double,
CMATT As Double, MAT As Double
MTYS = TxtMTYS.Text
IDDP = TxtIDDP.Text
ODDP = TxtODDP.Text
MAT = TxtMAT.Text
CSAP = TxtCSAP.Text
CMATT = (0.096167 * (0.0981875 * (ODDP ^ 4 - IDDP ^ 4))) * (MTYS ^
2 - (MAT ^ 2 / CSAP ^ 2)) ^ 0.5 / (ODDP)
TxtCMATT.Text = Round(CMATT, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub CmdDoglegSeverity_Click()
'CALCULATION OF DOGLEG SEVERIY'
Dim AC As Double, CL As Double, DLS As Double
AC = TxtAC.Text
CL = TxtCL.Text
DLS = (AC * 100) / CL
TxtDLS.Text = Round(DLS, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub CmdEquivalentCirculationDensity_Click()
'CALCULATING EQUIVALENT CIRCULATION DENSITY
Dim MWT As Double, ANP As Double, TVD1 As Double, ECD As Double
MWT = TxtMWT.Text
ANP = TxtANP.Text
TVD1 = TxtTVD1.Text
ECD = MWT + (ANP / (0.052 * TVD1))
TxtECD.Text = Round(ECD, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub CmdEquivalentStaticDensity_Click()
'CALCULATING EQUIVALENT STATIC DENSITY
Dim MSP As Double, TVD2 As Double, ADG As Double, ESD As Double
MSP = TxtMSP.Text
TVD2 = TxtTVD2.Text
ADG = TxtADG.Text
ESD = (MSP / (ADG * TVD2))
TxtESD.Text = Round(ESD, 2)

123

End Sub
Private Sub CmdFractureGradient_Click()
'CALCULATING FRACTURE GRADIENT
Dim FPP As Double, SPI As Double, DOI As Double, MSC As Double,
FRAG As Double
FPP = TxtFPP.Text
SPI = TxtSPI.Text
DOI = TxtDOI.Text
MSC = TxtMSC.Text
FRAG = (FPP / DOI) + MSC * (SPI / DOI)
TxtFRAG.Text = Round(FRAG, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub CmdFracturePressure_Click()
'CALCULATING FRACTURE PRESSURE
Dim FRAP As Double, FRAG As Double, DOI As Double
FRAG = TxtFRAG.Text
DOI = TxtDOI.Text
FRAP = FRAG * DOI
TxtFRAP.Text = Round(FRAP, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub CmdHorizontalDeparture_Click()
'CALCULATION OF HORIZONTAL DEPARTURE
Dim IA As Double, KOP As Double, HD As Double
IA = TxtIA.Text
KOP = TxtKOP.Text
HD = Sin(IA * Pi / 180) * KOP
TxtHD.Text = Round(HD, 3)
End Sub
'LENGTH OF BHA NECESSARY FOR REQUIRED WEIGHT ON BIT
'SAFETY FACTOR = 1.15
Dim WOB As Double, WODC As Double, LBHA As Double, RBF As Double
WOB = TxtWOB.Text
WODC = TxtWODC.Text
RBF = TxtRBF.Text
LBHA = (WOB * 1.15) / (WODC * RBF)
TxtLBHA.Text = Round(LBHA, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub CmdMaximumAllowableDLS_Click()
'CALCULATING MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DOGLEG SEVERITY FOR AVOIDANCE OF
DRILL PIPE FATIGUE
Dim IDDP As Double, ODDP As Double
Dim L As Double, MPBS As Double
Dim DPMI As Double, T As Double, C As Double
Dim E As Double, AngleChange As Double
ODDP = TxtODDP.Text
L = Me.txtHalfDistance.Text 'Half distance btw tool joint
MPBS = Me.txtMPBS.Text 'Maximum permissible bending stress

124

DPMI = Me.txtDPMI.Text 'Drill pipe moment of inertia

T = Me.txtBouyantWeight.Text 'Bouyant Weight
E = Me.txtYoungModulus.Text 'Young Modulus of Elasticity
AngleChange = Me.txtAngleChange.Text 'Angle Change
C = (432000 / Pi) * MPBS / (E * ODDP) * AngleChange
Me.txtMPDLS = Round(C, 2) 'Maximum Permissible Dog Leg
Severity
End Sub
Private Sub CmdMaxMudDensity_Click()
'CALCULATING MAXIMUM MUD DENSITY
Dim MMD As Double, FRAG As Double
FRAG = TxtFRAG.Text
MMD = FRAG / 0.052
TxtMMD.Text = Round(MMD, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub CmdMeasuredDepth_Click()
'CALCULATING PROJECTED MEASURED DEPTH
Dim TAGI As Double, PRESI As Double, DLS2 As Double, PMD As Double
TAGI = TxtTAGI.Text
PRESI = TxtPRESI.Text
DLS2 = TxtDLS2.Text
PMD = (TAGI - PRESI) / DLS2
TxtPMD.Text = Round(PMD, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub cmdNRTVD_Click()
Dim DA As Double, CA As Double
Dim TTVD As Double, CTVD As Double
Dim Res1 As Double, Res2 As Double
DA = Me.TxtDA.Text
CA = Me.TxtCA.Text
TTVD = Me.TxtTTVD.Text
CTVD = Me.TxtCTVD.Text
Res1 = Sin(DA * Pi / 180) - Sin(CA * Pi / 180)
Res2 = Res1 / (TTVD - CTVD)
Me.TxtNRTVD.Text = Round(Res2, 4)
End Sub
Private Sub cmdOptimize_Click()
Dim ECD As Double, PPG As Double
Dim FPG As Double, FBG As Double
ECD = Me.TxtECD.Text
PPG = Me.txtPPG.Text
FPG = Me.txtFPG.Text
FBG = Me.txtFBG.Text
If ECD > FPG Then
Me.txtOptimizeECD.Text = "ECD is greater than Fracture
Gradient. Check Mud Weight or Annulus Pressure"
Else
Me.txtOptimizeECD.Text = "ECD is good enough to clean the hole"

125

End If
End Sub
Private Sub cmdPredictCC_Click()
Dim A As Integer
A = Me.txtHoleAngle.Text
Select Case A
Case 0 To 34
Me.txtDisplayCC.Text = "Cuttings do not form. Transport
velocity is greater than slip velocity; the cuttings are
effectively carried in suspension"
Case 35 To 45
Me.txtDisplayCC.Text = "Cuttings bed starts to form. There
is unstable, moving cuttings bed and transport is via lifting
mechanism."
Case 46 To 65
Me.txtDisplayCC.Text = "Avalanching starts. Most problems
associated with hole cleaning will occur in this section."
Case 66 To 90
Me.txtDisplayCC.Text = "AStable beds. Stationary cuttings
bed form instantaneously and transport is via a rolling mechanism."
Case Else
Me.txtDisplayCC.Text = ""
MsgBox "Angle out of range, Please enter hole angle between
0 and 90 degrees", vbExclamation
End Select
End Sub
Private Sub cmdPredictFlowRate_Click()
Dim I As Integer
I = Me.cboHoleSize.ListIndex
Select Case I
Case 0
txtDFR = "DESIRABLE FLOW RATE:"
txtDFRV = "900 - 1200 gpm"
lblMWFR = "MINIMUM WORKABLE FLOW RATE:"
lblMWFRV1 = "800 gpm, with ROP @"
lblMWFRV2 = "20 m/hr (65'/hr)"
Case 1
txtDFR = "DESIRABLE FLOW RATE:"
txtDFRV = "800 - 1100 gpm"
lblMWFR = "MINIMUM WORKABLE FLOW RATE:"
lblMWFRV1 = "650 - 700 gpm, with"
lblMWFRV2 = "ROP @ 10-15 m/hr (30-50' /hr)"
Case 2
txtDFR = "DESIRABLE FLOW RATE:"
txtDFRV = "700 - 900 gpm"
lblMWFR = "MINIMUM WORKABLE FLOW RATE:"
lblMWFRV1 = "500 gpm, with ROP"
lblMWFRV2 = "@ 10-20 m/hr (33-65' /hr)"
Case 3
txtDFR = "DESIRABLE FLOW RATE:"

126

txtDFRV =
lblMWFR =
lblMWFRV1
lblMWFRV2
End Select
End Sub

"450 - 600 gpm"

"MINIMUM WORKABLE FLOW RATE:"
= "350-400 gpm, with"
= "ROP @ 10-20 m/hr (33-65' /hr)"

Private Sub cmdPredictRotarySpeed_Click()

Dim I As Integer
I = Me.cboHoleSize2.ListIndex
Select Case I
Case 0
txtDFR1 = "DESIRABLE RPM:"
txtDFRV1 = "120 - 180 rpm"
txtMWFR1 = "MINUMUM FOR EFFECTIVE HOLE CLEANING:"
txtMWFRV1 = "120 rpm"
Case 1
txtDFR1 = "DESIRABLE RPM:"
txtDFRV1 = "150 - 180 rpm"
txtMWFR1 = "MINUMUM FOR EFFECTIVE HOLE CLEANING:"
txtMWFRV1 = "120 rpm"
Case 2
txtDFR1 = "DESIRABLE RPM:"
txtDFRV1 = "120 - 150 rpm"
txtMWFR1 = "MINUMUM FOR EFFECTIVE HOLE CLEANING:"
txtMWFRV1 = "100 rpm"
Case 3
txtDFR1 = "DESIRABLE RPM:"
txtDFRV1 = "70 - 100 rpm"
txtMWFR1 = "MINUMUM FOR EFFECTIVE HOLE CLEANING:"
txtMWFRV1 = "60 rpm"
End Select
End Sub
Private Sub CmdPressureLoss1_Click()
'PRESSURE LOSS AT BIT..1
Dim MW1 As Double, FLR As Double, BNZA As Double, BNPL As Double
MW1 = TxtMW1.Text
FLR = TxtFLR.Text
BNZA = TxtBNZA.Text
BNPL = (FLR ^ 2 * MW1) / (10858 * BNZA ^ 2)
TxtBNPL.Text = Round(BNPL, 1)
End Sub
'This sub calculates the length of the tangent section.
'inclination should be in degrees.

127

Private Sub cmdTangentSection_Click()

Dim R As Double, IncAngle As Double
R = Me.txtTanTVD.Text 'this is the radius but used as TVD
because of compactibility
'with earlier naming convention.
IncAngle = Me.txtTanIncAngle.Text
Dim R_IncAngle As Double 'Inclination angle converted to radians
R_IncAngle = IncAngle * Pi / 180
Me.txtTangentSectionResults.Text = Round(R * Sin(R_IncAngle) /
Cos(R_IncAngle), 2)
End Sub
Private Sub cmdTargetAzimuth_Click()
'this sub calculates the Tangent Azimuth.
'Assumption is that the SurfaceCoordinate and TargetCoordinate are
in degrees
Dim SurfaceCoordinate As Double, TargetCoordinate As Double
Dim Pi As Double, X As Double, GetTangentAzimuth As Double
Pi = 3.14159265358979
SurfaceCoordinate = Me.txtTargetSurfaceCoordinate.Text
TargetCoordinate = Me.txtTargetcoordinate.Text
X = Atn(SurfaceCoordinate / TargetCoordinate) * 180 / Pi
GetTangentAzimuth = X + 180
Me.txtTargetAzimuth.Text = GetTangentAzimuth
End Sub
Private Sub CmdTensionInDrillPipe_Click()
'MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TENSION IN DRILL PIPE
Dim MTYS As Double, CSAP As Double, MAT As Double
MTYS = TxtMTYS.Text
CSAP = TxtCSAP.Text
MAT = (MTYS * CSAP) * 0.85
TxtMAT.Text = Round(MAT, 2)
End Sub

Private Sub CmdTorqueAtBit_Click()

'TORQUE AT BIT
Dim WOB2 As Double, BD As Double, BAG As Double, TQB As Double
WOB2 = TxtWOB2.Text
BD = TxtBD.Text
BAG = TxtBAG.Text
TQB = WOB2 * BD * BAG
TxtTQB.Text = Round(TQB, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub CmdTorsionInDrillPipe_Click()
'MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TORSION IN DRILL PIPE
Dim MTYS As Double, IDDP As Double, ODDP As Double, MTOYS As Double
MTYS = TxtMTYS.Text

128

ODDP = TxtODDP.Text
IDDP = TxtIDDP.Text
MTOYS = ((0.096167 * (0.0981875 * (ODDP ^ 4 - IDDP ^ 4) * MTYS)) /
ODDP) * 0.85
TxtMTOYS.Text = Round(MTOYS, 2)
End Sub

Private Sub CmdTotalDragForces_Click()

'CALCULATING TOTAL DRAG FORCES
Dim STEN As Double, PUW As Double, SOW As Double, OBT As Double,
FRT As Double, FRW As Double, TDF As Double
STEN = TxtSTEN.Text
PUW = TxtPUW.Text
SOW = TxtSOW.Text
OBT = TxtOBT.Text
FRT = TxtFRT.Text
FRW = TxtFRW.Text
TDF = STEN + PUW + SOW + OBT + FRT + FRW
TxtTDF.Text = Round(TDF, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub CmdTotalSurfaceTorque_Click()
'TOTAL SURFACE TORQUE
Dim TQB As Double, STRT As Double, MET As Double, DYT As Double,
TSTQ As Double
TQB = TxtTQB.Text
STRT = TxtSTRT.Text
MET = TxtMET.Text
DYT = TxtDYT.Text
TSTQ = TQB + STRT + MET + DYT
TxtTSTQ.Text = Round(TSTQ, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub cmdTransfer_Click()
Me.txtMPDLS2.Text = Me.txtMPDLS.Text
Me.txtBouyantWeight2.Text = Me.txtBouyantWeight.Text
Me.txtHalfDistance2.Text = Me.txtHalfDistance.Text
End Sub
Private Sub CmdWeightOnBit_Click()
Dim IA As Double, TWOC As Double
Dim Res As Double
IA = Me.txtInclinationAngle.Text
TWOC = Me.txtTWOC.Text
Res = TWOC * Cos(IA * Pi / 180)
Me.txtAvailableWOB.Text = Round(Res, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub CmdYSC_Click()
'CALCULATING YIELD STRENGTH COLLAPSE
Dim MYS As Double, NWT As Double, ODC As Double, YSC As Double

129

MYS = CboMYS.Text
NWT = TxtNWT.Text
ODC = TxtODC.Text
YSC = (2 * MYS) / ((ODC / (NWT - 1)) / (ODC / NWT) ^ 2)
TxtYSC.Text = Round(YSC, 2)
End Sub
Private Sub Cbo1_Change()
Call Display_Data_From_Combo_to_TextBox2
End Sub
Private Sub cmdCreateReport_Click()
'Report dog leg severity
Sheets("Reports").Range("B11") = Me.TxtDLS
'Report Build up rate
Sheets("Reports").Range("B13") = Me.TxtBSEC.Text
'Report tangent section
Sheets("Reports").Range("B14") =
Me.txtTangentSectionResults.Text
MsgBox "Reports Created Successfully"
End Sub

'This function calculates the length of the tangent section.

'inclination should be in degrees.
Function GetTangentSection(ByVal TVD As Double, ByVal IncAngle As
Double) As Double
Dim Pi As Double
Pi = 3.14159265358979
Dim R_IncAngle As Double 'Inclination angle converted to radians
R_IncAngle = IncAngle * Pi / 180
GetTangentSection = TVD / Cos(R_IncAngle)
End Function
Sub Display_Data_From_Combo_to_TextBox1()
Dim I As Integer
I = Me.Cbo1.ListIndex
Select Case I
Case 0
Me.Txt1.Text = "This"
Case 1
Me.Txt1.Text = "That"
End Select
End Sub
Sub Display_Data_From_Combo_to_TextBox2()
Dim I As Integer
I = Me.Cbo1.ListIndex
Me.Txt1.Text = Cells(65520 + I, 2)
End Sub

130

Private Sub UserForm_Activate()

Pi = 3.14159265358979
End Sub
Private Sub UserForm_Initialize()
Pi = 3.14159265358979
End Sub
Private Sub UserForm_MouseMove(ByVal Button As Integer, ByVal Shift
As Integer, ByVal X As Single, ByVal Y As Single)
Pi = 3.14159265358979
End Sub

131

AppendixB:ReportFormat

132

133

Bibliography

1. AlSuwaidi,A.S.,ElNashar,R.A.,Allen,F.,andBrandao,F.J.:WorldClassExtended
Reach Drilling Performance in Abu Dhabi A Case Study in How to Beat the
Learning Curve, paper SPE 72279 presented at the 2001 IADC/SPE Middle East
DrillingTechnology,Bahrain,2224October.

2. Payne, M. L., Wilton, B. S. and Ramos, G. G.: Recent Advances and Emerging
Technologies for Extended Reach Drilling, SPE 29920, presented at the
International Meeting on Petroleum Engineering held in Beijing, PR China, 1417
November,1995

3. Nelson, K. Comparing Push Envelope of the Possible Without Costly New

Technology.PetroleumNewsAlaska,pages78,April1997.

4. Mason, C.J. and Judzis, A.: ExtendedReach Drilling What is the Limit?, paper
presentedattheatthe1998SPEAnnualTechnicalConferenceandExhibition,held
inNewOrleans,Louisiana,September2730,1998

5. Economides, M.J., Watters, L.T., and DunnNorman, S.: Petroleum Well

Construction,JohnWiley&SonsLtd.,London(1998).

6. Williams, M.: Extending the Drilling Horizon Offshore Magazine, February 2008,
pg132

7. Tolle, G., and Dellinger, T: Mobil Identifies Extended Reach Drilling Advantages,
PossibilitiesinNorthSeapaperpresentedatthe2002SPEInternationalPetroleum
ConferenceandExhibition,Villahermosa,Mexico,1012February

134

8. Longwell, H.J. and Seng, N.K.: Extended Reach Drilling Experience at Tabu B,
Paper presentation at the 1996 lADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology
ConferenceheldinKualaLumpurMalaysiaSeptember911,1996.

9. Demong,K.,Riverbank,M.,andMason,D.:BreakthroughsUsingSolidExpandable
Tubulars to Construct Extended Reach Wells, paper presented at the IADC/SPE
DrillingConferenceheldinDallas,Texas,March24,2004.

10. ReportonTechnologyandReportedProblemAreasandOperationalPractice,
PhilipC.CrouseandAssociatesIncorporated,InternalReport,February1995.

11. Rasmussen,B.,Sorheim,J.O.,Seiffert,E.,Angeltvadt,O.,andGjedrem,T.,.:World
Record in Extended Reach Drilling, Well 33/9C10, Statfjord Field, Norway Paper
SPE21984presentedatthe1991SPE/IADCDrillingConference,March1114.

12. Njaerheim, A and Tjoetta, H: New Word Record in Extended Reach Drilling From
Platform Statfjord C, paper SPE 23849 presented at the 1992 IADC/SPE Drilling
Conference,February1821.

13. Drilling and Production Yearbook, 1992, Petroleum Engineer International, March
1992Pg6341

14. Drilling and Production Yearbook, 1993, Petroleum Engineer International, March
1993Pg2223

15. Cooney, M. F., Rogers, C.T., Stacy, E.S., and Stephens R.N.: Case History of an
OpposedBoreDualHorizontalWellintheAustinChalkFormationofSouthTexas,
SPEDrilling&Completion,March1993

135

16. Ruszka, J.: Reducing Risk in Extended Reach Drilling: People, Technology Hold
Key,OffshoreMagazine,February2008,pg72.

17. Payne, M., Cocking, D.A., and Hatch, A.J.: Critical Technologies for Success in
Extended Reach Drilling, paper SPE 28293 presented at the 1994 SPE Annual
TechnicalConferenceandExhibition,NewOrleans,2528September.

18. Cameron,C.:DrillingFluidsDesignandManagementforExtendedReachDrilling,
paperpresentedattheIADC/SPEMiddleEastDrillingTechnologyConferenceheld
inBahrain,October22242001.

19. Tribe, I.R., Burns, L., Howell, P.D., and Cickson, R.: Precise Well Placement Using
RotarySteerableSystemsandLWDMeasurements,paperSPE71396presentedat
the 2001 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, 30
September3October.

20. Kamaruddin, S., Lah, M.Z.C., Sering, L., Good, A., and Khun, L.H.: Pushing the
EnvelopeExtendingtheLimitsofCurrentDrillingTechnology,paperSPE64696
presented at the 2000 SPE International Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition,
Beijing,China,710November.

21. Shanzhou,M.,Genlu,H.,Jianguo,Z.,andZhiyong,H.:StudyonDesignofExtended
ReachWellTrajectory,paperpresentedatthe1998SPEInternationalConference
andExhibitionheldinBeijing,China,November26.

22. McClendon R.T and Anders E.O.: Directional Drilling Using the Catenary Method,
PaperSPE13478,presentedattheSPE/IADC1985DrillingConference

136

23. Aston,M.S.,Hearn,P.J.andMcGhee,G.:TechniquesforSolvingTorqueandDrag
ProblemsinTodaysDrillingEnvironment,SPE48939,NewOrleans,September27
30,1998.

24. Modi, S., Mason, C.J., Tooms, P.J., and Conran, G.: Meeting the 10km Drilling
Challenge, paper SPE 38583 presented at the 1997 SPE Annual Technical
ConferenceandExhibitionheldinSanAntonio,TX,Oct.58.

25. Banks,S.M.,Hogg,T.W.,Thorogood,J.L.:IncreasingExtendedReachCapabilities
Through Wellbore Profile Optimization, paper SPE 23850 presented at the 1992
SPEDrillingConferenceheldinNewOrleans,LA,Feb.1821.

26. Meader,T.,Allen,F.,andRiley,G.:TotheLimitandBeyondTheSecretofWorld
ClassExtendedReachDrillingPerformanceatWytchFarm,paperpresentedatthe
2000IADC/SPEDrillingConferenceheldinNewOrleans,Louisiana,2325February
2000.

27. Ikeda,S.,Takeuchi,T.,Crouse,P.C.:AnInvestigativeStudyonHorizontalWelland
Extended Reach Technologies with Reported Problem Areas and Operational
PracticeinNorthAmericaandEurope,paperSPE35054presentedatthe1996SPE
DrillingConferenceheldinNewOrleans,LA,March1215.

28. Cocking,D.A.,Bezant,P.N.,andTooms,P.J.:PushingtheERDEnvelopeatWytch
Farm, paper SPE 37618 presented at the 1997 SPE Drilling Conference held in
Amsterdam,TheNetherlands,March.46.

29. Ryan,G.,Reynolds,J.,andRaitt,F.:AdvancesinExtendedReachDrillingAnEye
to 10 km Stepout, paper SPE 30451 presented at the 1995 SPE Annual Technical
Conference&ExhibitionheldinDallas,TX,Oct.2225.

137

30. EckOlsenJ.Sietten,H.,Reynolds,J.T.,andSamuel,J.G.RecentAdvancesIncrease
DrillingReachintheNorthSea,WorldOil,May1994,pp.4553.

31. Aarrestad T. V, and Blikra H.: Torque and Drag Two Factors in Extended Reach
Drilling,JPTSeptember1994,pp.800803.

32. Brett,J.F.,Beckett,A.D.andHolt,C.A.:UsesandLimitationsofDrillstringTension
andTorqueModelsforMonitoringHoleConditions,SPEDrillingEngineering,Vol.4,
No.3,September1989,pp223229

33. Guild, G.J. and Jeffrey, J.T.: Drilling ExtendedReach/High Angle Wells Through
OverpressuredShaleFormation,SPEDrillingEngineering,Vol.9,No.3,September
1994,pp161166.

34. Sanchez, R. A., Azar, J. J., and Martins, A. L.: The Effect of Drillpipe Rotation on
HoleCleaningDuringDirectionalWellDrilling,paperSPE37626presentedatthe
1997SPEDrillingConferenceheldinAmsterdam,TheNetherlands,Mar.46.

35. Warren, T. M.: Trends Toward Rotary Steerable Directional Systems, World Oil,
May1997pg.4347.

36. Blikra,H.,Drevdal,K.E.,andAarrestad.,ExtendedReach,HorizontalandComplex
DesignerWells:Challenges,AchievementsandCostBenefits,14thWorldpetroleum
Congress,SPE28005,29May1June1994.

37. Guild, G.J., Wallace, I.M., and Wassenborg, M.J.: Hole Cleaning Program for
Extended Reach Wells, paper SPE 29381 presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling
Conference,heldinAmsterdam,TheNetherlands,February28March2,1995.

138

38. Gao,E.andYoung,A.C.:HoleCleaninginExtendedReachWellsFieldExperience
andTheoreticalAnalysisUsingaPesudoOil(Acetal)BasedMud,paperSPE29425
presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, held in Amsterdam, The
Netherlands,February28March2,1995.

39. Schamp, J.H., Estes, B.L., and Keller, S.R.: Torque Reduction Techniques in ERD
Wells,paperIADC/SPE98969presentedatthe2006IADC/SPEConference,heldin
Miami,Florida,February2123.

40. Parker,D.J.:AnExperimentalStudyoftheEffectsofHoleWashoutandCuttingSize
onAnnularHoleCleaninginHighlyDeviatedWells,MSThesis,UniversityofTulsa,
Tulsa,Oklahoma(1987)

41. Ahmed, R.M.: Mathematical Modeling and Experimental Investigation on Solids

and Cuttings Transport, PhD Dissertation, Norwegian University of Science and
Technology,Norway(2001).

42. Larsen,T.I.:AStudyoftheCriticalFluidVelocityinCuttingsTransportforInclined
Wellbores,MSThesis,UniversityofTulsa,Tulsa,Oklahoma,(1990).

43. Duan, M., Miska, S., Yu, M., Takach, N., and Ahmed, R.: Transport of Small
Cuttings in Extended Reach Drilling, paper presented at the SPE International Oil
andGasConferenceandExhibition,heldinBeijing,China,December57,2006

44. Larsen.T.,Pilehvari,A.A.andAzar,J.J.:DevelopmentofaNewCuttingsTransport
Model for HighAngle Wellbores Including Horizontal Wells paper SPE 25872
presented at the SPE Rocky Mountain Regional Symposium Denver, April 12Il.
1993.

139

45. Sifferman, T.R. and Becker T.E.: Hole Cleaning in FullScale Inclined Wellbores,
paper SPE 20422 presented at the 1990 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition,NewOrleans,Louisiana,September2326.

46. Bassal, A. A.: The Effects of Drillpipe Rotation on Cuttngs Transport in Inclined
Wellbore,MSThesis,UniversityofTulsa,Tulsa,Oklahoma(1995).

47. Odell II, A. C., Payne M.L., and Cocking, D. A.: Application of a Highly Variable
Gauge Stabilizer at Wytch Farm to Extend the ERD Envelope, paper SPE 30462
presentedattheSPEAnnualTechnicalConferenceandExhibitionheldinDallas,TX,
October.22251995.

48. Bruce,S.,Bezant,P.,andPinnock,S.:AReviewofThreeYearsWorkinEuropeand
Africa withan Instrumented Motor, paper SPE 35053 presented at the 1996 SPE
DrillingConferenceheldinNewOrleans,LA,March,1215.

49. Barr, J. D., Clegg, J. M., and Russell, M. K.: Steerable Rotary Drilling With an
ExperimentalSystem,JournalofPetroleumTechnology,March.1996,pg.237238.

50. Colebrook,M.A.,Peach,S.R.,Allen,F.M.,andConran,G.:ApplicationofSteerable
Rotary Drilling Technology to Drill Extended Reach Wells, paper SPE 39327
presentedatthe1998IADC/SPEDrillingConference,Dallas,36March.

51. Payne,M.L.,Abbassian,F.AdvancedTorqueandDragConsiderationsinExtended
ReachWells,paperSPE35102presentedatthe1996SPEDrillingConferenceheld
inNewOrleans,LA,Mar.1215.

52. Cunha,J.C.,Martins,A.L.,Sa,C.H.M.,andDoreFernandes,P.:PlanningExtended
Reach Wells for Deep Water, paper SPE 74400 presented at the 2002 SPE

140

International Petroleum Conference and Exhibition, Villahermosa, Mexico, 1012

February.

53. Kunze, K.R. and Steiger, R.P.: "Extended Leakoff Tests to Measure InSitu Stress
During Drilling". Proceedings of the 32nd U.S. Symposium on Rock Mechanics,
(1991),pp.3544.

54. Jeffrey,R.G.:HydraulicFractureStressTestingAPCRCUnrestrictedReportNo.3,
CSIRODivisionofGeomechanics,Melbourne,(1992).

55. Stephansson, O., Savilahti, T. and Bjarnason, B.: "Rock Mechanics of the Deep
Borehole at Gravberg, Sweden". Rock at Great Depth, Maury & Fourmaintraux
(eds.),(1989),863870.

56. Rummel, F.: "Stresses and Tectonics of Upper Continental Crust A Review".
Proceedings of the International Symposium on Rock Stress and Rock Stress
Measurements.O.Stephansson(ed.):177186.CentekPubl.Lulea,(1986).

57. Starzer, M. R., Mount, P. B., and Voskanian M. M.: Onshore Exploration and
Development of California Offshore Resources Through Extended Reach Drilling,
SPE/IADCpaper27526,presentedatthe1994SPE/IADCDrillingConference,1518
February,1994,Dallas,Texas.

58. Prentice, G., Extended Reach Wells and their Application West of Shetland, 8th
AnnualDrillingConference.Aberdeen,Scotland,2223November1994.

59. Payne, M. L., Wilton, B. S. and Ramos, G. G.: Recent Advances and Emerging
Technologies for Extended Reach Drilling, SPE 29920, presented at the

141

International Meeting on Petroleum Engineering held in Beijing, PR China, 1417

November,1995

60. EckOlsen,J.,Sleuen.H.,Reynolds,J.T.Jr.andSamuel,J.G.:NorthSeaAdvancesin
ExtendedReachDrilling,SPE/IADC25750,presentedatthe1993SPE/IADCDrilling
Conference.Amsterdam.2325February,1993.

61. Alfsen T. E., Heggen S., Blikra, H., and Jotta, H.: Pushing the Limits for Extended
ReachDrilling:NewWorldRecordfromPlatformStatfjordC,WellC2,SPE26350,
presented at the 68th Annual SPE FalI Conference. 36 October, 1993. Houston
Texas.

62. Sorheim J. O. and Skogseth, O., Extended Reach and Complex Designer Wells
Demonstrate Innovation, Petroleum Engineer International, November 1994, pp.
2328.

63. Guild,G.J.,Jeffrey,J.T.andCarter,J.A.:DrillingExtendedReach/HighAngleWells
Through OverPressured Shale Formation in the Central Graben Basin, Arbroath
Field: Block 22/17. UK North Sea, SPWIADC 25749, presented at the 1993
SPE/IADCDrillingConference.Amsterdam,2325February.1993.

64. Smith,K.R.:MaerskSetsHorizontalWorldRecordsinQatar,DrillingContractor,
July1994,pg19.

65. Reid.P.I.etal:ReducedEnvironmentalImpactandImprovedDrillingPerformance
with WaterBased Muds Containing Glycols paper SPE 25989 presented at the
1993SPE/EPAExplorationandProductionEnvironmentalConference,SanAntonio.
March710

142

66. Bland, R. G.: Quality Criteria in Selecting Glycols as Alternatives to OilBased

Drilling Fluid Systems paper SPE 27141 presented at the Second International
ConferenceonHealth.Safety&Environment,Jakana,January2527,1994

67. Growcock,F.B.,Sinor,L.A.,Reece,A.R.,Powers,andJ.R.:InnovativeAdditives
CanIncreasetheDrillingRatesofWaterBasedMuds,paperSPE28708presented
attheSPEInternationalPetroleumConferenceandExhibitionofMexico.Veracruz,
October10131994

68. Andresen, S., Hovda, S and Olsen, T.L.: Experience With Drilling C26A, A World
RecordExtendedReachHorizontalWellintheOsebergField,NorthSea,paperSPE
30463presentedatthe1995SPEAnnualTechnicalConference&Exhibition,Dallas
2225October.

69. Belaskie, J.P., Dunn, M.D. and Choo, D.K., Distinct Applications of MWD Weight
onBitandTorque,IADC/SPE19968,Houston,February27March2,1990.

70. EckOlsen, J., Drevdal, K.E, Reynolds J.T, and Samuel, J.G.: Designer Directional
DrillingToIncreaseTotalRecoveryandProductionRates,PaperIADC/SPE27461,
presentedattheIADC/SPEDrillingConference,February1994.

71. Drilling Design and Implementation for Extended Reach Wells, K & M Technology
Group,ThirdEdition,2003.

72. Production Handbook: Drilling and Transport (Volume 2), Shell Internationale
PetroleumMaatschappijB.V.,TheHague,1999.

73. Lapeyrouse, N.: Formulas and Calculations for Drilling, Production and Workover,
GulfProfessionalPublishing,NY,2002,2ndEdition.
74. Bourgoyne, A.T., Chenevert, M.E., Millhem, K.K., Young Jr., F.S.: Applied Drilling
Engineering,SPETextbookSeries,Vol.2

143