University of Kirkuk College of Engineering Pet. Eng.

Department

"Drilling Well Engineering"

Drillers Method vs Wait and Weight Method

By
!a"ar #$dul%khali& '%th stage %B%
1

Drillers Method vs Wait and Weight Method

The two widely used constant bottomhole circulating methods are the Drillers Method and the Wait and Weight (W&W) Method. Well control experts are o ten strongly opinionated on selecting the better method to circulate an in lux out o the wellbore. The purpose o this article is to highlight the ma!or ad"antages and disad"antages o the two methods. The basic principle o both methods is to #eep bottomhole pressure ($%&) constant at or' pre erably' slightly abo"e the ormation pressure. (he Drillers Method re(uires two circulations. During the irst circulation' the in lux is circulated out with the original mud weight. )onstant $%& is maintained by holding circulating drill pipe pressure constant through the irst circulation. * the original mud weight is insu icient to balance the ormation pressure' the well is #illed by circulating a hea"ier mud (#ill mud) in a second circulation. To hold constant $%& during the second circulation' one o two procedures is employed. )asing pressure is held constant while pumping #ill mud rom sur ace to bit' and drill pipe pressure is held constant therea ter until #ill mud is obser"ed returning to the sur ace. +lternately' during second circulation' a drill pipe pressure schedule can be calculated and ollowed while pumping #ill mud rom sur ace to bit' and drill pipe pressure is held constant therea ter. (he W)W Method in"ol"es only one circulation. The in lux is circulated out' and the #ill mud is pumped in one circulation. While pumping #ill mud rom sur ace to bit' a drill pipe pressure schedule has to be calculated and ollowed. The drill pipe pressure is held constant therea ter until #ill mud is obser"ed returning to the sur ace.

(he W)W Method is sometimes called the -ngineers Method because it in"ol"es more calculations compared with the Drillers Method. There is a widespread misconception that the Drillers Method is pre erred only because it is simple. We will discuss "arious reasons why the Drillers Method could be better or circulating an in lux in many or e"en most wells drilled.

C*MP#+,-*.
We will compare the ad"antages and disad"antages o the two methods under speci ic conditions. The di erent applications are "arious types o wells and their geometry. De"iated hole . tapered drill string/ The drill pipe pressure schedule or the W&W Method is airly simple to calculate i the wellbore is "ertical and there is one si0e o drill pipe. The schedule becomes complicated and di icult or rig personnel in complex de"iated well geometries and.or with multiple si0es o drill pipe. * the proper drill pipe pressure schedule is not calculated while per orming the W&W Method' $%& pressure may not be held constant. !ole pro$lems Many wells are drilled in areas with signi icant hole instability problems. * the drill string is #ept static with no mud circulation' the drill string may get stuc# in the hole due to pac#1o problems. * it is decided to #ill the well with the W&W Method' #ill mud may ha"e to be mixed be ore circulation can be established. This long period o non1 circulation with little or no pipe mo"ement may not be desirable in problematic hole sections. The Drillers Method has some ob"ious ad"antages under these circumstances. )irculation can be started as soon as a stabili0ed shut1in casing pressure (2*)&) and shut1in drill pipe pressure (2*D&&) are established. The irst circulation o the Drillers Method is done with the original mud in the hole. * the
3

method is understood and ollowed correctly' non1circulating time in the well is minimi0ed' and any urther hole problems may be minimi0ed. (ime to kill "ell The W&W Method in"ol"es only one circulation while the Drillers Method in"ol"es two circulations. This sounds as i we can always sa"e time by ollowing the W&W Method. $ut other actors need to considered. * the time re(uired to mix #ill mud is signi icant' we may not sa"e any time with the W&W Method. We may not be able to circulate all the in lux out with !ust one circulation due to hole conditions' such as gas remaining in the high poc#ets o the well' poor hole cleaning and bad mud properties. +dditional circulations are almost always re(uired or complete remo"al o the in lux and the addition o sa ety actors in the mud weight. There ore' the time element may not be signi icant' and most experts agree that doing it right is more important than doing it aster. /luid mi0ing 1apa$ility of rigs/ While we are building new rigs and modi ying existing ones to drill wells more e iciently' a "ast ma!ority o wells are still drilled all o"er the world using older rigs with limited capabilities. 4ill1weight mud may not be (uic#ly prepared and.or pumped at a desired rate i the W&W Method is employed. The Drillers Method may be pre erred under these circumstances to a"oid excessi"e increase in sur ace and shoe pressures due to gas migration. We ac#nowledge that on some rigs' #ill mud can be mixed at a ast rate without problem. $ut simultaneous mixing and pumping o #ill mud may ma#e pit "olume gain and loss di icult to trac# and lead to con usion' particularly in the e"ent o complications.

Compli1ations and fri1tion 1hanges during "ell 1ontrol While a well is being #illed' complications may occur during the process. When #illing a well with the W&W Method' i one
5

or more o the bit no00les plug while drill pipe pressure schedule is ollowed' the pressure schedule must be recalculated immediately. The ailure to notice the change and to recalculate the proper drill pipe pressure schedule may result in underbalance. 6n1 the1spot recalculation o the drill pipe pressure schedule may be di icult or highly de"iated wells and.or with tapered drill strings. 7urthermore' when a #ic# is ta#en' it is normal that the rig crew become ner"ous. * any complications arise while #illing the well' rig personnel may panic and ma#e poor decisions. * the #ic# is circulated with the Drillers Method and one or more o the bit no00les plug' the response by the cho#e operator is airly simple. The circulating drill pipe pressure should be allowed to increase while temporarily holding casing pressure constant (as during start1up). + ter the drill pipe pressure stabili0es' the new circulating pressure should be held constant during the rest o the irst circulation. * one or more no00les plug during the second circulation o the Drillers Method while pumping #ill mud rom sur ace to bit' the simple response is to continue holding casing pressure constant until #ill1weight mud is at the bit and then switch to hold whate"er drill pipe pressure is shown on the pump gauge. %ence' i complications arise during well #ill operations' it is easier to respond with the Drillers Method. Deep"ater "ells * gas #ic#s are ta#en in deepwater wells' there is a possibility o hydrate ormation in the $6&s or cho#e.#ill lines. The high1pressure and low1temperature conditions in deepwater are ideal or ormation o hydrates when ree water comes into contact with gas. &ossible long periods o non1circulation with the W&W Method will ma#e conditions more a"orable or hydrate ormation due to cooling o mud. %ence' non1circulating times in deepwater wells with a gas in lux should be minimi0ed. $y establishing circulation as

soon as possible with the Drillers Method' the mud can be #ept warm' and hydrate ormation may be pre"ented. -hoe Pressure Maximum shoe pressure o ten occurs when the top o a gas in lux is at the casing shoe. &ressure at the shoe can be lower with the W&W Method i #ill mud gets into the annulus be ore the top o the bubble is at the shoe. $ut' or this to happen' the irst criteria is that the drill string "olume has to be less than the open1hole "olume minus the bubble si0e at the shoe. * the drill string "olume is more than the open1hole "olume minus the bubble si0e at the shoe' then lower shoe pressure cannot occur with the W&W Method. We also ha"e to consider gas migration issues be ore determining whether the W&W Method will ha"e an ad"antage o"er the Drillers Method with respect to maximum shoe pressures. There may be a signi icant amount o wait time to mix #ill mud. During this time' gas may be migrating. Most methods used to control $%& be ore pumping in"ol"es application o a sur ace pressure sa ety actor. These can easily exceed the expected bene it that the early deli"ery o #ill1weight mud to the open1hole annulus is intended to pro"ide. There is an o ten a good chance that a #ic# is not detected when the #ic# is at bottom. Many times' we may circulate or continue drilling with the in lux be ore it is detected. +t times' the gas may already be abo"e the shoe due to delayed detection and gas migration' e"en be ore we start pumping #ill mud. 2ynthetic.oil1base mud (26$M) is now routinely used to drill wells. 9nli#e in water1base mud (W$M)' gas is soluble in 26$M. 4ic# detection with 26$M is not as simple as with W$M. The si0e and time o the #ic# may not be easily determined. :as may stay in solution in 26$M' and the in lux may not be detected until the gas is close to sur ace' o ten well abo"e the shoe.
;

Due to the abo"e reasons' only rarely can lower shoe pressures be achie"ed with the W&W Method compared with the Drillers Method. 6nly i all conditions are a"orable will the W&W Method gi"e us lower shoe pressures. <ealistically' the chances are minimal and the magnitude o this e ect is usually insigni icant. Ma0imum 1asing pressure at surfa1e 2P1Ma03 and peak gas flo" rate Maximum casing pressure during the circulation is obser"ed when the top o the gas bubble gets to sur ace. This may be de ined as &cMax. The gas low rate through the mud gas separator is maximum at the same time when &cMax is obser"ed. &ea# :as 7low <ate must not exceed the gas1handling capacity o the mud1gas separator. &cMax and pea# gas low rate will be lower with the W&W Method i #ill mud gets into the annulus be ore the top o the bubble gets to sur ace. * the W&W Method is ollowed' there is a good chance that #ill mud will enter the annulus be ore the top o the bubble gets to sur ace' and we will li#ely ha"e lower sur ace pressures compared with the Drillers Method. =ower &cMax may be an ad"antage or the W&W Method when we drill %&%T wells where sur ace pressures could be a concern. The sur ace e(uipment may be exposed to high pressures and gas low rates or a long time during well1#illing operations in these wells.

>

C*.C4U-,*.
? The Drillers Method does o er some distinct ad"antages o"er the W&W Method. ? The W&W Method may be ad"antageous to achie"e lower shoe and sur ace pressures in some cases. %owe"er' these ad"antages are o ten exaggerated and' in reality' we may not see a signi icant reduction in maximum shoe and sur ace pressures. Due to gas migration and hole geometry' many times shoe pressure may not be lower at all with the W&W Method. ? +pplication o the W&W Method may e"en gi"e us higher shoe pressures i the drill pipe pressure schedule is not calculated and ollowed properly. <eduction in &cMax may not be signi icant e"en in deep %&%T wells. ?The W&W Method may be di icult to ollow properly in complex' de"iated wells and.or with tapered drill strings. ? The Drillers Method is a pre erred method when hole problems are signi icant and any long non1circulation times could urther compound the problems. %ydrates concern in deepwater wells may re(uire limiting non1circulation times with possible gas in lux in the well Due to the low experience le"el o current drilling personnel' limited ield practice with well control methods by a ma!ority o experienced personnel' exaggerated and o ten unachie"able bene its' the W&W Method may not o er signi icant ad"antages. +dditionally' certain conditions @ ballooning' swabbed #ic#s' hydrate concerns in deepwater and hole stability problems @ may dictate using only the Drillers Method. Due to all these reasons' the Drillers Method is a logical' simple' practical' ade(uate and o ten superior approach to #ill ma!ority o the wells we drill.
A

+eferen1e http/..www.drillingcontractor.org