Send Orders for Reprints to reprints@benthamscience.

net
50 Recent Patents on Engineering, 2014, 8, 50-57

State-of-the-Art Hole-Cleaning Techniques in Complex Structure Wells

Tie Yan, Kelin Wang*, Xiaofeng Sun and Shizhu Luan

College of Petroleum Engineering, Northeast Petroleum University, Daqing 163318, China

Received: January 10, 2014 Revised: February 20, 2014 Accepted: February 21, 2014

Abstract: Complex structure wells are now widely used in the development of marine oilfield, old oilfield and low
permeable oilfield. During drilling operations, if the fluid velocity is lower than a critical value in annulus, cuttings in the
highly-deviated segments and horizontal segments will accumulate and eventually develop cuttings bed, which affects the
rate of penetration (ROP) and downhole safety. As a result, numerous inventions which show different hole-cleaning
detection methods can be applied to determine cuttings concentration or hole-cleaning efficiency, and there are three
methods for good hole-cleaning condition. The fluid rate control methods include increasing flow rate and injecting slug.
The chemical methods include changing the rheology of drilling fluid and adding fiber sweep into drilling fluid. The
mechanical methods include using pipe joint, annulus reducer, and different types of blades tool for rotary drilling, and
centralizer and fluid velocity shift device for non-rotary drilling and rotary drilling. This review presents a summary of the
main United States and Chinese patents available on hole-cleaning techniques.
Keywords: Chemical method, complex structure well, flow rate control method, hole cleaning, mechanical method.

1. INTRODUCTION method were presented in the existing inventions, and these

In China, the old oilfields in the east still serve as the
main contributor to the growth of oil reserves. This has re-
sulted in an annual increase of 460 and 95 million tons for
oil in place and recoverable reserves in 20 years. In North-
west China and offshore area, the annual average growth of
oil in place are 193 and 111 million tons, respectively, while
the annual average growth of recoverable reserves are 39.6
and 23.7 million tons [1]. To keep the steady growth of oil
production, drilling complex structure wells including ex-
tended reach well, horizontal well, highly-inclined well and
multilateral well has been an effective way to develop these
oilfields. During the drilling process (Fig. 1) [2], a cuttings
bed begins to form at an inclination more than 30°. Also, the
cuttings bed is prone to slide along wellbore at inclinations
between 30° and 60°, resulting in stuck pipe, reduced weight
on bit leading to reduced ROP, transient hole blockage lead-
ing to lost circulation conditions, excessive drill pipe wear,
extra cost for special mud additives and wasted time by
wiper trip maneuvers [3]. Once stuck pipe rises, the average
cost per well amounted to 1.7 million dollars for each well
drilled [4]. For example, hole-cleaning problems encoun-
tered in drilling Long 40-1 highly-inclined well of Sichuan
Oilfield resulted in more than one stuck pipes, and jamming
of the drillstring at 2288.87m depth [5]. The poor hole clean-
ing also appeared the 81/2 inch segment of extended reach
well in BP's Wych Farm Oilfield [6]. To determine and solve
hole-cleaning problems, hole-cleaning detect method, flow
rate control method, chemical method and mechanical
*Address correspondence to this author at the College of Petroleum
Engineering, Northeast Petroleum University, Daqing 163318, Heilongjiang,
China; Tel: 0459-6503521; Fax: 0459-6503482;
E-mails: wwangkelin@163.com; wwangkelin@gmail.com
information was addressed by this paper.
2. FLOW RATE CONTROL METHODS
A well-known solution to solve hole-cleaning problem is
to increase the flow velocity of the drilling fluid, which can
decrease cuttings concentration and cuttings bed height in
the annuli [5, 7]. However, on one hand, a high fluid flow
velocity is limited by surface equipments and downhole drill
string. On the other hand, the increment of the annular fluid
velocity results in open hole erosion and uncontrolled losses
after fracturing. This is particularly true in deep water drill-
ing where only a narrow mud window is available. For ex-
ample, cuttings-transport tests with high fluid velocities were
conducted in Li 1-11 well [8]. In these tests, good hole–
cleaning conditions were achieved for flow velocities be-
tween 32-35 L/s and 60 L/s, but soft formation appeared
crumbling and cave-in due to higher flow velocities.
To overcome the adverse effect of high flow velocities,
U.S. Patent 4496012 [9] indicated a cuttings bed can be dis-
placed by injecting a slug or series of slugs of a shear thick-
ening fluid into annulus (Fig. 2). The shear thickening fluid
may comprise water, oil, or an emulsion of oil and water as
the continuous phase, together with water or oil soluble
polymer-complexing reagents, mixtures of petroleum sul-
fonates, alcohols, and electrolytes, or mixtures of petroleum
sulfonates and water soluble polymers. In summary, the fluid
should have the characteristics that enable it to dislodge and
disperse the cuttings bed, and undergo a reversible, isother-
mal, increase in viscosity when subjected to an increasing
shear rate. In addition, slug volumes should control between
0.05 and 5 percent of the annulus volume.

/14 $100.00+.00 © 2014 Bentham Science Publishers

State-of-the-Art Hole-Cleaning Techniques
Fig. (1). Cuttings bed buildup in the directional well [2].
Fig. (2). Schematic representation of cuttings displaced by slug.
3. CHEMICAL METHODS
Over the years, various chemical methods have been in-
troduced to control the formation of a cuttings bed. Most of
these methods are to change the rheology of drilling fluid.
For instance, Seeberger et al. [10] found that low shear vis-
cosity should be evaluated to obtain good hole cleaning. Ok-
rajni and Azar [11] observed that in laminar flow, higher
mud yield values and yield point/plastic viscosity(YP/PV)
provide better cuttings transport, and cuttings transport is not
affected by mud rheology in turbulent flow. Rishi et al. [12]
found lower cuttings bed height is achieved as the n/K ratio
increases. Ali et al. [13] indicated increasing the plastic vis-
cosity of the mud results in a remarkable raise in the amount
of recovered cuttings, but the surplus amount of viscosity
inverses the result.
U.S. Patent 6794340 [14] disclosed a method that allows
easy pumpability of a low viscosity fluid with the drill-
cuttings suspension capability of a highly viscous fluid. The
viscosity of this fluid is also easily adjustable so that the
fluid rheology may be adapted during drilling as the subter-
ranean conditions change. The crosslink activator causes
crosslinking after the fluid is in the wellbore, and the
crosslinking is reversed at the surface to reduce the viscosity
of the fluid to enable the cuttings to be easily removed. U.S.
Recent Patents on Engineering, 2014, Vol. 8, No. 1 51
Patent 5715896 [15] developed a solution comprising a
phosphate and a sulfonate according to the formula
(RSO.sub.3).sub.x Me.sup.x. This solution is pumped down
a drill string as a slug in order to coat solids which accumu-
late in the well and allow them to be removed along with the
drilling fluid.
Unfortunately, the above methods aren't only inefficient
in completely preventing the formation of a cuttings bed, but
also cause additional problems. For horizontal and highly
deviated segments, fiber sweep can be applied for cleaning
the borehole and reducing cuttings-bed height.
U.S. Patent 6290001 [16] disclosed a sweep material
comprising barium sulfate that has been ground and sieved,
preferably in the range of about -95% 30 mesh to about
+95% 100 mesh. CN 203128702 [17] showed a clean fiber
made of native monofilament poly propylene material. The
fibers with long strands have a length of 12-13 mm and a
diameter of 21 microns. During drilling of a deviated, direc-
tional or horizontal well, these sweep materials are added
and circulated with the drilling fluid to remove cuttings bed
accumulated on the lower side of the well. After the cuttings
are dislodged, the drilling fluid is sieved or screened to re-
move the barium sulfate to avoid a change in density of the
fluid. Also, the drilling operation doesn't have to be stopped
during the sweep of cleaning treatment.
In order to evaluate the efficiency of a sweep for remov-
ing cuttings, U.S. Patent 6662884 [18] proposed a new
method on a "mass in" versus "mass out" basis. The method
uses downhole density readings taken with a pressure-while-
drilling tool inserted in the drillstring. Measurements of hy-
drostatic pressure are converted into equivalent circulating
density (ECD) measurements (Fig. 3), and the equation of
sweep efficiency (SE) can be expressed by:
52 Recent Patents on Engineering, 2014, Vol. 8, No. 1
Fig. (3). Sweep fiber efficiency evaluation.
Fig. (4). Pipe joint.
T flow rates are high. As greater amounts of fiber were
ECDtotal  ECDBase 0  ECD dt  ECDBase
SE = =

Pump Rate Pump Rate
Using the above equation can afford real-time estimates at
the wellsite of the quantity of formation cuttings brought out
of a wellbore by a sweep.
In addition, some field applications of fiber sweeps were
also conducted, and made some achievements [19-20]. How-
ever, the flow behavior, hydraulics, and cuttings-transport
efficiency of fiber sweeps is less known, and the following
conclusions were reached based on the experimental obser-
vations [21-23]:
• Adding fiber materials into drilling sweeps significantly
improves sweep efficiency of the fluid in fully eccentric
annuli, especially in the horizontal configuration, and fi-
ber effect is minimal at the 70° configuration.
• High viscous and high density sweep is ineffective to
carry cuttings out of wellbore.
• The increment of fiber concentration improves the
cleaning efficiency if the pipe rotation speeds and/or
Wang et al.
employed, efficiency further decreased, unless com-
bined with adequate rotation speed or flow rate.
• If fiber additives with higher concentration are em-
ployed under high flow rate conditions or with rapid ro-
tation, the number of removal cuttings will be increased
relative to lower concentration sweeps under the same
conditions.
• It was noted that some decrease in sweep efficiency al-
ways accompanied the addition of fiber, given the fluid
properties and inclination utilized for these tests.
4. MECHANICAL METHODS
4.1. Cuttings-Bed Removal Tools for Rotary Drilling
U.S. Patent 7703549 [24] proposed a method of remov-
ing cuttings which is comprised of three steps: disposing a
pipe string in a high-angle wellbore, circulating mud through
the wellbore and creating a viscous coupling layer of mud
spiraling about a section of the pipe string (Fig. 4). The vis-
cous coupling layer desirably extends outwardly beyond the
outside diameter of the tool joint upsets in the section of the
State-of-the-Art Hole-Cleaning Techniques
pipe string. As the pipe joint rotates, a viscous coupling layer
of drilling fluid is created to remove cuttings from high angle
wells. Also, the pipe joint should include an elongated tubu-
lar having an outer surface extending between opposing tool-
joints, tool joint upsets and projections provided on substan-
tially the entire outer surface.
U.S. Patent 4754819 [25] showed a wellbore drillstring
assembly which is formed of a plurality of sections of drill
pipe interconnected at tool joints with a drill bit at its lower
end, and a plurality of annulus reducers located at spaced-
apart positions along the drill string (Fig. 5). During the
process of drilling, drilling fluid through annulus reducers
successively varying in diameter. Also, the drill string is
axially reciprocated and an extension capability to the drill
string maintains continuous weight on the drill bit. This pro-
vides a cyclical pumping action to the flow of drilling fluids
in the axial direction of the wellbore, which can enhance
cuttings transport up the annulus.
To better improve hole–cleaning condition, as shown in
(Fig. 6), an adjustable cuttings-bed tool was designed by
U.S. Patent 7051821 [26]. A drillstring containing the tool is
Fig. (5). Wellbore drillstring assembly.
Fig. (6). Adjustable cuttings-bed tool.
Fig. (7). Straight-shaped cutting-bed removal tool.
Recent Patents on Engineering, 2014, Vol. 8, No. 1 53
rotated to drill a hole. In response to an increase in a hydro-
static pressure of the fluid in the drillstring, cleaning ele-
ments are extended from the device to clean accumulated
cuttings from the wellbore by agitating the circulating fluid.
On the contrary, the cleaning elements may be retracted back
into the device. In response to the increase of hydrostatic
pressure in the drillstring to disperse drilling fluid into the
wellbore to clean accumulated cuttings, the tool may also
include a set of ports which hydraulically open. In addition,
the tool may be deactivated by dropping an object, such as a
ball, into the device to prevent the extension of the cleaning
elements and the opening of the ports.
In the recent patents, blade optimization gradually be-
comes the main direction of research. U.S. Patent 6223840
[27] and U.S. Patent 5937957 [28] designed a straight-
shaped and v-shaped cutting- bed removal tool, respectively.
As seen from (Fig. 7) and (Fig. 8), the tools include a body
portion and a plurality of paddles projecting from the body
portion, at least one of the paddles comprising a radially
outer face extending between a leading edge and a trailing
edge in a normal direction of rotation of the tool. The ra-
54 Recent Patents on Engineering, 2014, Vol. 8, No. 1
Fig. (8). V-shaped cutting-bed removal tool.
Fig. (9). Spiral-shaped cuttings-bed removal tool.
Fig. (10). Composite cuttings-bed removal tool.
dially outer face of one or more of the paddles may be pro-
vided with one or more replaceable wear elements. During
the drilling process, the tools make the cuttings radical force,
which can hinder cuttings settle in the upper annulus, and
resuspends cuttings in the lower annulus. Also, the v-shaped
tool can generate the additional axis velocity and radical
velocity. This results in the easy formation of the vortex and
better hole-cleaning condition.
U.S. Patent 20070278011 [29] designed a spiral-shaped
cuttings-bed removal tool, as shown in (Fig. 9), the tool is
comprised of a sub and an indicator. The sub has a region of
enlarged outer diameter over the string diameters indicated
by its upper end connection. The indicator disposed down-
hole of the region of enlarged outer diameter and has at least
one bypass port extending through the indicator to permit
passage of fluid in an upward direction through the indicator.
The spiral groove can form the additional axis velocity and
radical velocity, which can accelerate cuttings transport. The
spiral blades scoop the cuttings bed and help to bring the
cuttings into suspension with drillpipe rotation.
Based on spiral-shaped tool, as shown in (Fig. 10), a
composite cuttings-bed removal tool which includes two
spiral segments was designed [30]. Laboratory tests of this
tool show improved hole- cleaning efficiency by 60%,
Wang et al.
reduction in torque-and-drag loads by 30%, enhanced ROP
by 25%, optimized hydraulics and pressure management,
reduction of pressure losses by more than 50%. In addition,
to further understand the interaction mechanism between
tool and cuttings or drilling fluid, and study the performance
of the tool in various conditions, the following conclusions
were reached by experiments [31-33]:
• The tool has the greatest effect on cuttings bed erosion
in the horizontal segment, but the effect is limited below
40 degrees.
• The use of tool can reduce the more loss of velocity in
the cuttings bed erosion than standard equipment.
• Bed area is sensitive to differences in tool spacing when
a small number of tools per length of the wellbore is
used.
• The drillpipe rotation has a moderate effect on the per-
formance of the tool.
To date, these cuttings-bed removal tools have carried
out some field tests in the North Sea, Gulf Coast, Middle
East, Far East regions and East China [34-36], and the results
show cuttings-transport efficiency was improved, and ECD,
torque and drag were reduced.
State-of-the-Art Hole-Cleaning Techniques
Fig. (11). Centralizer.
Fig. (12). Fluid velocity shift device.
4.2. Cuttings-Bed Removal Tools for Non-Rotary Drilling
and Rotary Drilling
U.S. Patent 6840337 [37] indicated an apparatus and
method for removing cuttings in a deviated borehole using
drilling fluids. As shown in (Fig. 11), the apparatus includes
a pipe string and a bottom hole assembly having a down hole
motor and bit for drilling the borehole. The pipe string has
one end attached to the bottom hole assembly and does not
rotate during drilling. The apparatus and methods raise at
least a portion of the pipe string in the deviated borehole to
remove cuttings from underneath the pipe string portion.
U.S. Patent 4844182 [38] showed a fluid velocity shift
device that employs a drill string having a plurality of sec-
tions of drill pipe connected together for traversing a well-
bore (Fig. 12). Drilling fluid is circulated down the drill
string and up the annulus to carry cuttings out of the well-
bore, and at least one section of double wall drill pipe with
its outer wall perforated. Drilling fluid flow down the string
into the section of double wall drill pipe is controlled to ef-
fect a desired degree of drilling fluid flow rate through the
perforations in the outer wall of the double wall drill pipe
section, which can provide a stirring action to the cuttings in
the annulus and thereby improve cuttings transport in the
circulating drilling fluid.
5. HOLE-CLEANING DETECTION METHODS
U.S. Patent 20030057366 [39] disclosed a method deter-
mining a characteristic of a mud mixture. A bottom contact
point of the cross-section of the tool is determined, and the
cross-section is separated into at least two segments. One of
Recent Patents on Engineering, 2014, Vol. 8, No. 1 55
the segments is called a bottom segment of the borehole
which includes the bottom contact point of the cross-section
of the tool with the inclined borehole. Measurement signals
are received at a sensor disposed in the tool from circumfer-
entially spaced locations around the borehole, and an indica-
tion of a characteristic of the mud mixture is derived as a
function of the measurement signals associated with a plural-
ity of the at least two segments of the borehole. The indica-
tions of a characteristic of the mud mixture for the plurality
of segments are compared with at least one of each other and
a known indication, which can determine the cuttings con-
centration in the annulus.
U.S. Patent 6357536 [40] showed a drilling fluid analyz-
ing apparatus which has at least two sensors is used to ana-
lyze cuttings concentration. The sensors are mounted verti-
cally spaced in a well riser and in communication with well
return fluid. Also, two additional sensors may be added to
the drilling fluid input mud pipe to sense the pressure exerted
by the drilling mud before it is contaminated with cuttings.
The sensors convert the pressure exerted by the return fluid
or input mud to signals that are then conveyed to a processor.
The fluid density is obtained by processor, and the difference
of the two fluid density determines hole cleaning efficiency.
In U.S. Patent 2010018701 A1 [41], the cuttings concentra-
tion is also determined by using the sensor.
U.S. Patent 20090145661 [42] disclosed a system to de-
tect a cuttings bed that includes a drill bit, a drillstring and a
cuttings bed detector. The cuttings bed detector is positioned
uphole of the drill bit. The system includes the steps of posi-
tioning a drill bit down hole, and positioning a cuttings bed
detector uphole of the drill bit.
56 Recent Patents on Engineering, 2014, Vol. 8, No. 1
In addition, U.S. Patent 4495803 [43] indicated a method
for monitoring removal efficiency of cuttings generated in
drilling process, which features injection of artificial cuttings
into the well-drilling fluid at a controlled rate and monitors
the return rate of the artificial cuttings in the return drilling
fluid stream. The removal efficiency is obtained by the rela-
tive rate of return with respect to the rate of injection. U.S.
Patent 5327984 [44] provided a method to predict the area of
open region above a bed of cuttings resulting from drilling a
high-angle well. The area of the bit used in drilling is com-
pared with the area of the open region and drill pipe to de-
termine a hole-cleaning ratio.
6. CURRENT AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
Hole–cleaning problem is closely linked with both drill-
ing design and drilling operations, and building a real-time
hole cleaning optimizing system may be an indispensible
part of automatic drilling. The system should consist of de-
sign system, data collecting system, data processing system
and decision making system. Design system makes hole
cleaning problem integrated into hydraulics design, and
eliminates critical inclination if possible. During drilling
operations, data collecting system uses advanced sensors to
rapidly collect the available data such as pipe rotation speed,
annular fluid flow rate, mixture density. Subsequently, the
system can obtain the real-time hole-cleaning parameters
such as cuttings bed height, cuttings concentration and hy-
draulic pressure drop by processing these collecting data.
Finally, decision making system conducts the comprehensive
evaluation, especially for hole-cleaning conditions, and
makes a quick decision whether measures are taken to im-
prove cuttings transport and prevent downhole accidents, and
which measures should be taken if necessary. As a result, in
order to keep better hole-cleaning conditions, the flow rate
control method, chemical method, mechanical method and
other available hole-cleaning techniques need further study-
ing, especially for fiber sweep and cuttings-bed removal tool.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors confirm that this article content has no con-
flicts of interest.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The support of National Science and Technology Major
Project of China (No. 2011ZX05009-005) and the National
Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51174043, No.
51204056) are gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES
[1] K. Zhang, "Analysis of China's oil reserves growth in recent 20
years", Oil. Gas. Geol., Vol. 26, pp. 584-589, 2005.
[2] M. Sorgun, "Modeling of Newtonian fluids and cuttings transport
analysis in high inclination wellbores with pipe rotation", PhD.
thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey 2010.
[3] J. Li and S. Walker, "Sensitivity analysis of hole cleaning parame-
ters in directional wells", In SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Roundtable,
Houston, Texas, 1999.
[4] W. B. Bradley, D. Jarman, R. S. Plott, R. D. Wood, T. R.
Schofleld, R. A. Aufllck and D. Cooking, "A task force approach to
reducing stuck pipe costs", In SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Am-
sterdam, Netherlands, 1991.
Wang et al.
[5] H. G. Wang, X. S. Liu, H. Q. Li and G. Ding, "An experimental
study of transport of drilling cuttings in a horizontal well", Acta.
Petrolei. Sinica., Vol. 16, pp. 125-132, 1995.
[6] C. S. Lu, "Numerical calculation of cuttings transportation in
inclined borehole and flow field calculation of cuttings removing
tool", M.S. thesis, China University of Petroleum (East China),
Dongying, China, 2008.
[7] M. E. Ozbayoglu, Z. M. Stefan, T. Reed and N. Tahach, "Analysis
of the effects of major drilling parameters on cuttings transport ef-
ficiency for high-angle wells in coiled tubing drilling operations",
In SPE/ICoTa Coiled Tubing Conference and Exhibition, Houston,
USA, 2004.
[8] H. Q. Zhang, Z. Q. Ren and M. J. Dong, "Methods to solve cuttings
bed in high-inclination, long-reached well", Petrol. Drill. Tech.,
Vol. 17, pp. 7-8, 1999.
[9] J. G. Savins, "Method for improving cuttings transport in deviated
wells," U. S. Patent 4496012, 1985.
[10] M. H. Seeberger, R. W. Matlock and P. M. Hanson, "Oil muds in
large diameter, highly deviated wells: solving the cuttings removal
problem", In SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, New Orleans, USA,
1989.
[11] S. S. Okrajni and J. J. Azar, "The effects of mud rheology on annu-
lar hole cleaning in directional wells", SPE Drill. Eng., Vol. 1, pp.
297-308, 1986.
[12] B.A. Rishi, M. Stefan, K. Ergun, B. Peter and S. Arild, "Selecting
drilling fluid properties and flow rates for effective hole cleaning in
high-angle and horizontal wells", In SPE Annual Technical Confer-
ence and Exhibition, Dallas, USA, 2000.
[13] P. Ali, I. Issham, Y. Zulkefli, B. Parham and S. Ahmad, "Impact of
drilling fluid viscosity, velocity and hole inclination on cuttings
transport in horizontal and highly deviated wells", J. Petrol.
Explor. Prod. Technol., Vol. 2, pp. 149–156, 2012.
[14] P. D. Nguyen, P. C. Harris and T. E. Becker, "Method for removing
drill cuttings from wellbores and drilling fluids," U. S. Patent
6794340, 2003.
[15] A. Naraghi, "Method and composition for reducing torque in
downhole drilling," U. S. Patent 5715896, 1998.
[16] G. C. West, R. Valenziano and K. A. Lutgring, "Method and
composition for sweep of cuttings beds in a deviated borehole,"
U. S. Patent 6290001, 2000.
[17] Z. G. He, J. H. Liu, C. Y. Lao and A. R. Wen, "Cleaning fiber,"
C.N. Patent 201320124154.2, 2013.
[18] A. T. Hemphill, "Method for determining sweep efficiency for
removing cuttings from a borehole," U.S. Patent 6662884, 2003.
[19] R. V. Bulgachev and P. Pouget, "New experience in monofilament
fiber tandem sweeps hole cleaning performance on Kharyaga Oil-
field, Timan-Pechora Region of Russia", In SPE Russian Oil and
Gas Technical Conference and Exhibition, Moscow, Russia, 2006.
[20] C. Cameron, H. Helmy and M. Haikal, "Fibrous LCM sweeps
enhance hole cleaning and ROP on extended reach well", In Middle
East Oil Show, Bahrain, 2003.
[21] S. G. Valluri, S. Z. Miska, R. Ahmed, M. Yu and N. E. Takach,
"Experimental study of effective hole cleaning using "sweeps" in
horizontal wellbores", In SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, San Antonio, USA, 2006.
[22] R. M. Ahmed and N. E. Takach, "Fiber sweeps for hole cleaning",
SPE Drill. Complet., Vol. 24, pp. 564-573, 2009.
[23] E. Cheung, N. Takach, E. Ozbayoglu, R. Majidi and B. Bloys,
"Improvement of hole cleaning through fiber sweeps", In SPE
Deepwater Drilling and Completions Conference, Galveston, USA,
2012.
[24] A. N. Krepp, M. G. Mims and B. M. Foster, "Method and apparatus
for removing cuttings in high- angle wells," U.S. Patent 7703549,
2010.
[25] T. B. Dellinger, "Method for improving cuttings transport during
the rotary drilling of a wellbore," U. S. Patent 4754819, 1988.
[26] R. Samuel, "Adjustable hole cleaning device," U.S. Patent
7051821, 2006.
[27] G. Swielik, "Cutting bed impeller," U.S. Patent 6223840, 2001.
[28] G. Swielik, "Cutting bed impeller," U.S. Patent 5937957, 1999.
[29] R. Barnett, "Cuttings Bed Removal Tool," U.S. Patent
2007278011A1, 2007.
[30] L. V. Puymbroeck, H. Williams and C. Bayne, "Increasing drilling
performance for ERD wells using new generation hydro-
mechanical drill pipe", In 2013 AADE National Technical Confer-
ence and Exhzibition, Cox Convention Center, Oklahoma, 2013.
State-of-the-Art Hole-Cleaning Techniques
[31] J. G. Boulet, J. A. Shepherd, J. Batham and L. R. Elliott, "Im-
proved hole cleaning and reduced rotary torque by new external
profile on drilling equipment", In IADC/SPE Drilling Conference,
New Orleans, Louisiana, 2000.
[32] L. V. Puymbroeck, "Increasing drilling performance using hydro-
mechanical hole cleaning devices", In SPE Middle East Unconven-
tional Gas Conference & Exhibition, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman,
2013.
[33] R. Ahmed, M. Sagheer, N. Takah, R. Majidi, M. J. Yu and S.
Miska, "Experimental studies on the effect of mechanical cleaning
devices on annular cuttings concentration and applications for
optimizing ERD systems", In SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Florence, Italy, 2010.
[34] W. R. Reinhardt, N. W. Roger, F. E. Luke and C. A. Stephen,
"Magnolia deepwater development- striving for best in class drill-
ing performance", In SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam,
Netherland, 2005.
[35] M. Hapiztuddin, E. Raymond, B. Jean and M. Anthony, "Maximiz-
ing drilling efficiency in Bunga-Kekwa's high-angle wells", World.
Oil., Vol. 229, pp. 4-10, 2008.
[36] Z. F. Wang, "Cuttings bed clearage of complex structural wells",
Oil. Drill. Prod. Technol., Vol. 31, pp. 102-104, 2009.
Recent Patents on Engineering, 2014, Vol. 8, No. 1 57
[37] J. B. Terry, C. J. Naquin, P. Laursen, J. Estep, M. Paulk, A. Coats,
R. Crook and R. L. Morgan, "Method and apparatus for removing
cuttings," U.S. Patent 6840337, 2005.
[38] G. C. Tolle, "Method for improving drill cuttings transport from a
wellbore," U.S. Patent 4844182, 1989.
[39] K. Gzara and I. M. Cooper, "Method of kick detection and cuttings
bed buildup detection using a drilling tool," U.S. Patent
20030057366, 2003.
[40] H. Schrader and F. Reiber, "Method and apparatus for measuring
fluid density and determining hole cleaning problems," U.S. Patent
6357536, 2002.
[41] A. Peter and R. N. Ritter, "Apparatus and method for detecting
poor hole cleaning and stuck pipe," U.S. Patent 2010018701A1,
2010.
[42] B. P. Jeffryes and B. W. Boyle, "Cuttings Bed Detection," U. S.
Patent 20090145661, 2009.
[43] R. D. Beasley and J. H. LaGrone, "Method of monitoring the
growth of cuttings beds in angled well bores," U.S. Patent
4495803, 2003.
[44] M. R. Houston and E. A. Sikirica, "Method of controlling cuttings
accumulation in high-angle wells," U.S. Patent 5327984, 1994.