TECHNOLOGY FOCUS

Drilling Technology
Unconventional gas, especially shale gas, has generated strong interest recently. Much has been written on shale gas regarding stimulation and fracturing technology, environmental issues, geology, water management, reservoir permeability, gas recovery, and more, but far less has been presented about shale-gas drilling. I am taking this opportunity to write about shale-gas drilling because drilling technology and efficiency contribute to making shale-gas wells even more economical. Shale-gas plays are an excellent place and application where bottomhole-assembly (BHA), drillstring, well-trajectory, and bit-design optimizations play a great role in well economy. Indeed, because the number of horizontal wells drilled is numerous, a small reduction in drilling costs and nonproductive time could result in major cost savings for operators. Whichever US shale-resource basin (e.g., Barnett, Fayetteville, Haynesville, Marcellus, and others) is studied, most of the wells drilled today are horizontal, enabling increasing the production rate significantly compared with vertical wells. These horizontal wells usually comprise a vertical, a curved, and a horizontal section. Depending on the shale basin, vertical depth ranges from approximately 500 to 3000 m, and the lateral horizontal section may be as long as 3000 m. The first challenge is designing a bit that can drill abrasive sandstone or limestone stringers (unconfined compressive strength up to 170 MPa) and soft shale efficiently, while keeping good bit steerability and durability. Steerability is a great concern because build rate, up to 12/30 m, must be reached to maximize horizontal length and, as a consequence, reservoir exposure. These high build rates may be attained by use of steerable mud motors or by some rotary-steerable system specially designed for high-dogleg applications. In shallow horizontal shale-gas wells, the challenge concerns the drillstring design because buckling becomes an issue. Indeed, to reach an acceptable rate of penetration, sufficient weight should be available on the bit without exceeding the critical buckling loads. Therefore, some inverted BHAs are proposed that contain heavyweight drillpipe, or drill collars above drillpipe, to help transfer the weight downhole. With the numerous wells forecasted in the near future, drilling techniques in shale-gas wells will become well established, and drilling efficiencies will conJPT tinue to improve.
Drilling Technology additional reading available at OnePetro: www.onepetro.org SPE 128916 An Intelligent System To Detect Drilling Problems Through Drilled-Cuttings-Returns Analysis by A.N. Marana, So Paulo State University, et al. SPE 135587 The Effect of Drillstring Rotation on Equivalent Circulating Density: Modeling and Analysis of Field Measurements by Ramadan Ahmed, University of Oklahoma, et al. SPE 134306 Numerical Simulation on Three-Layer Dynamic CuttingsTransport Model and Its Application to Extended-Well Drilling by Zhiming Wang, SPE, China University of Petroleum, et al. SPE 134488 Downhole-Vibration Measurement, Monitoring, and Modeling Reveal Stick/Slip as a Primary Cause of PDC-Bit Damage in Todays Applications by L.W. Ledgerwood III, SPE, Baker Hughes, et al. 44 JPT FEBRUARY 2011

Stphane Menand, SPE, is a research engineer at Mines ParisTech in the Geosciences Center and a permanent consultant with DrillScan. He has 13 years of experience as an R&D project manager in drilling engineeringmore specifically, in directional drilling, drillstring mechanics (torque, drag, and buckling), and drill-bit performance. Menand has authored several SPE and other technical papers. He earned a PhD degree in drilling engineering from Mines ParisTech. Menand serves on the JPT Editorial Committee, the SPE Books Development Committee, and the SPE Drilling and Completions Advisory Committee. He is the faculty sponsor of the SPE Student Chapter at Mines ParisTech.

DRILLING TECHNOLOGY

Experimental Studies on the Effect of Mechanical Cleaning Devices on Annular-Cuttings Concentration

In horizontal and highly deviated portions of an extended-reach-drilling (ERD) well, cuttings beds form on the low side of the annulus. The cuttings bed partially blocks the annulus, resulting in excessive pressure loss and a higher equivalent circulating density (ECD). Recently, the use of downhole mechanical cleaning devices (MCDs) has been introduced to mitigate the problem without inducing excessive ECD. The full-length paper presents results of an experimental study that was conducted to evaluate cuttings-removal efficiency of MCDs. Results indicate that the tools significantly reduce the amount of cuttings in the annulus.

Introduction Efficient cuttings transport is an important issue in drilling highly deviated and horizontal wells. In directional wells, drilled cuttings tend to accumulate on the low side of the annulus and form a thick cuttings bed when the flow velocity becomes insufficient to suspend the
This article, written by Assistant Technology editor Karen Bybee, contains highlights of paper SPE 134269, Experimental Studies on the Effect of Mechanical Cleaning Devices on Annular Cuttings Concentration and Applications for Optimizing ERD Systems, by Ramadan Ahmed, SPE (currently with the University of Oklahoma), Munawar Sagheer, SPE, Nicholas Takach, SPE, Reza Majidi, SPE, Mengjiao Yu, SPE, and Stefan Miska, SPE, University of Tulsa, and, Christophe Rohart, SPE, and Jean Boulet, SPE, VAM Drilling, originally prepared for the 2010 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Florence, Italy, 1922 September. The paper has not been peer reviewed.

cuttings-bed particles. Particularly in high-angle and horizontal boreholes, the formation of a thick cuttings bed can give rise to numerous difficulties such as lost circulation, differential sticking, and high torque and drag. Recently, hydromechanical hole-cleaning devices (HHCDs) have been developed to enhance cuttingstransport efficiency in directional wells. These tools are introduced in the drillstring with different spacing arrangements. These tools have helical grooves or blades on their surface to assist cuttings-bed removal. A negative angle also is designed on each blade to improve the scooping effect on the cuttings bed. While rotating the drillpipe, the blades scoop the cuttings bed and help to bring the cuttings into suspension. At the same time, the circulation of the drilling fluid allows the suspended cuttings particles to be carried away, thus leading to better hole cleaning. Because of hydrodynamic and hydromechanical effects, the tools help to reduce the cuttings accumulation in highly deviated and horizontal sections of the wellbore where the buildup of a cuttings bed cannot be avoided. Thus, several of these tools are used in a typical drilling application to reduce the in-situ cuttings concentration and, hence, reduce the occurrence of hole-cleaning-related problems. HHCDs improve hole cleaning by creating more turbulence, bringing cuttings into suspension, and scooping the cuttings bed. The interaction between the tools and the slurry that contains cuttings particles and drilling fluid is a complex fluid-mechanics problem for which an analytical solution would be difficult to develop. Therefore, an experimental approach is the best option to provide practical

solutions, perform sensitivity analysis, and obtain a better understanding of the use of these tools. To achieve the objectives of the investigation, extensive cuttingstransport experiments were performed using a water-based fluid that contains 1.25 ppb polyanionic cellulose (PAC) as a viscosifier. Table 1 in the full-length paper presents the test matrix that specifies test parameters for each experiment. Two, designs/ generations (Fig. 1) of these tools (G1 and G2) were considered in the investigation, and their performance was compared to standard drillpipe without MCDs. The second-generation (G2) tool was developed recently. The tool is expected to perform better than the first-generation (G1) tool in terms of cleaning the wellbore and reducing drillstring mechanical friction and required torque at the surface. The new design of G2 has a bearing system that allows the blades to rotate freely without touching the wellbore wall, and as a consequence, both the blades and wellbore are protected. Although mechanical benefits are apparent from its design, it is important to determine hole-cleaning efficiency of the tool quantitatively and perform a qualitative comparison between the two generations under different operating conditions. At the same time, it is necessary to determine the effect of drilling parameters, such as mud flow rate, tool spacing, drillpipe-rotation speed, rate of penetration (ROP), inclination angle (i.e., measured from the vertical axis), and annular diameter ratio, on the efficiencies of these tools. This would help to optimize the performance of the tool through careful control of these parameters. Hence, this study focuses on determining experimentally the efficiencies of these down-

For a limited time, the full-length paper is available free to SPE members at www.spe.org/jpt.
JPT FEBRUARY 2011 45

(a)

(b)

Fig. 1G1 is the first-generation tool (a), and G2 is the second-generation tool (b).

hole cleaning devices (G1 and G2) and studying parameters that affect their performance. Experimental Study Cuttings-transport experiments were performed using the low-pressure ambient-temperature flow loop developed by Tulsa University DrillingResearch Projects. The tests were intended to obtain experimental data that can provide useful information to improve the performance of MCDs and yield valuable insights into the use of these devices for improving cuttings transport while drilling. Therefore, experiments were performed to cover a wide range of test parameters, as shown in Table 1 in the full-length paper. According to the test matrix, 30 experiments with 10 different loop assemblies were conducted. Each experiment was repeated three times to ensure result reliability. Thus, a total of 90 tests were performed. The effects of seven operating parameters (i.e., diameter ratio, flow rate, tool spacing, tool design, drillpipe-rotation speed, ROP, and inclination angle) were studied. Three different drillpipe sizes were considered in the investigation. The following three types of tool spacings were considered: (1) Type 1two MCDs in the test section; (2) Type 2three MCDs in the test section; and (3) Type 36 MCDs in the test section. Experiments also were conducted with only a conventional drillstring (i.e., no MCDs). All experiments were performed with one test fluid (1.25-lbm/bbl PAC suspension) that has acceptable rheological properties and is fully transparent to allow flow visualization and bedheight measurements. The experiments were performed in a large-scale flow loop that has an 8-in. transparent test section.

The rheology of the test fluid best fits the power-law model. The average cuttings size (river gravel with 2.6 specific gravity) used in the experiments was 3.35 mm in diameter. Conclusions Analysis of the experimental results shows some interesting trends and provides better understanding of the effect of mechanical hole-cleaning tools on cuttings transport at different operating parameters. It shows the performance of the tools compared with that of standard drillpipe. The study focused on investigating the effect of most of the drilling parameters considered in the field. As a result, the test matrix was developed on the basis of the Taguchi method. The Taguchi approach was implemented to reduce the number of experiments while covering the mostrelevant parameters such as flow rate, ROP, diameter ratio, tool design, and drillpipe-rotation speed. For each test, the amount of cuttings accumulated in the test section was determined from weight measurements. Analysis of the results by the analysis-of-variance (ANOVA) approach shows that the flow rate and holeinclination angle are the most-critical parameters that dictate hole-cleaning performance of the tools. In addition to the ANOVA results, a generalized correlation was developed on the basis of dimensional analysis. An extensive sensitivity analysis, which was conducted using the correlation, shows that: MCDs are effective in cleaning highly deviated and horizontal wellbores. Hole-cleaning performance of the two tools (G1 and G2) investigated in this study is comparable. Performance of the first-generation tool is slightly better than that of the second-gener-

ation tool, depending on operating parameters; however, G2 tools rotate freely without touching the wellbore wall and thus reduce the torque and drag required at the surface and limit wear considerably. In horizontal wellbores, use of the tools improves hole cleaning regardless of the bed area in the annulus. The effect of ROP on the annular-bed area is minimal. Flow-loop experiments simulate only the effect of cuttings-generation rate at the bit, which is related directly to the ROP. The contribution of axial tool movement to the removal process could be substantial, but it was not studied during these experiments. A preliminary model that includes axial tool movement has been proposed; field or experimental data now are required to determine model parameters. Annular-bed area is very sensitive to differences in tool spacing when a small number of tools per length of the wellbore is used. The drillpipe-rotation speed has a moderate effect on the performance of the tools. MCDs improve hole cleaning by scooping cuttings-bed particles and resuspending, them into the highvelocity flow zone, thus, achieving further transportation by drilling fluid. Mud-carrying capacity remains an important factor for the overall holecleaning performance with MCDs. Visual observation of the bed profiles in the annulus indicates that the bed height in the tool zone is very low compared to locations where there is no tool and that the bed height is maximized between two adjacent tools. The axial tool movement implies a cumulative scooping effect of these tools, providing an additional increase of the overall cleaning performance of JPT the MCD drilling system.

46

JPT FEBRUARY 2011

DRILLING TECHNOLOGY

Real-Time Optimization of Drilling Parameters

The objective of real-time optimization of drilling parameters is to optimize weight on bit (WOB) and bit rotational speed to achieve maximum drilling rate and to minimize drilling cost. An extensive literature survey of drilling-optimization research was conducted for the study described in the full-length paper. The general equation for rate of penetration (ROP) was optimized using actual field data.

Sensors
D/A Converter

Sensors
D/A Converter

Introduction The objective of optimizing drilling parameters in real time is to arrive at a methodology that considers past drilling data and predicts drilling trends to advise of optimum drilling parameters to save drilling costs and reduce the probability of encountering problems. To achieve effective optimization, an extensive literature survey was conducted and the results of previous researchers were considered in developing a drilling-optimization methodology in a real-time environment. The linear drilling-ROP model introduced in 1974 that is based on multiple regression analysis was used in real time to: Achieve coefficients of multiple regression specific to the formation. Determine an ROP-vs.-depth prediction as a function of certain drilling parameters.
This article, written by Assistant Technology editor Karen Bybee, contains highlights of paper SPE 129126, Real Time Optimization of Drilling Parameters During Drilling Operations, by Tuna Eren, SPE, Eni E&P, and M. Evren Ozbayoglu, SPE (currently with the University of Tulsa), Middle East Technical University, originally prepared for the 2010 SPE Oil and Gas India Conference and Exhibition, Mumbai, 2022 January. The paper has not been peer reviewed.

Rigsite Network

Rigsite Network Operation Center Network

Optimization

Fig. 1Drilling-optimization data-transmission process; D/A=digital to analog.

Determine optimum drilling parameters specific to the formation being drilled. The following assumptions are considered to be satisfied so that the equations given in this study function properly: Bottomhole cleaning is achieved effectively. The bit and bottomhole-assembly combination in use is one that is selected properly for the formation being drilled. The formation interval being drilled is considered to be homogeneous. The rig and auxiliary equipment are functioning efficiently. Data from three directional offshore wells in the Mediterranean area were used to test the methodology. Literature Survey Numerous detailed research studies have been performed for optimization of drilling activities with the objec-

tive of maximizing footage drilled and minimizing drilling costs. Drilling optimization can be achieved by preselecting the magnitudes of the controllable drilling parameters. Most of the early studies described in the literature have foreseen a static drilling-optimization process. In the past, drilling parameters were required to be investigated off site because of the lack of ability to transfer data in real time. Recent studies have performed drilling optimization in real time; however among the investigated references, there is no work with statistical correlations in a real-time environment. Fig. 1 in the full-length paper gives the time line of some important achievements in drilling and optimization history. In the 1950s, the scientific period began, with expansion in drilling research, better understanding of hydraulic principles, signifi-

For a limited time, the full-length paper is available free to SPE members at www.spe.org/jpt.
48 JPT FEBRUARY 2011

cant improvements in bit technology, improved drilling-fluid technology, and, most importantly optimized drilling. After the 1970s, rigs with fully automated systems and closed-loop computer systems with the ability to control the drilling variables began to be used in oil and gas fields. In the mid-1980s, operator companies developed drilling-optimization techniques in which their field personnel could perform optimization at the site, referring to graph templates and equations. In the 1990s, different drilling-planning approaches were introduced to identify the best-possible well-construction performances. Later, drilling-the-limit optimization techniques also were introduced. Toward the end of the millennium, real-time monitoring techniques began to be used (e.g., drilling parameters started to be monitored off site). A few years later, real-time operations/support centers started to be constructed. Some operators proposed advanced techniques in monitoring drilling parameters at the rigsite. In recent years, drilling parameters became easily acquired, stored, and transferred in real time. Following the invention of the sophisticated and automated rig and data-acquisition microelectronic systems linked to computers, a range of drilling-optimization and -control services began to be available. With advanced smart-computer systems, drilling ROP and bit lives were optimized by performing drilloff tests. Currently, state-of-the-art, high-speed Internet-protocol communication systems are functioning with microwave broadband networks as useful tools for oil and gas operations, enabling deployment of faster, more-efficient networks to the fields. Drilling-ROP Model and Theory The drilling-ROP model adapted for this study is a function of eight independent variables, as in the model introduced in 1974. The reason this model was selected is that it is one of the most complete mathematical drilling-ROP models that has found wide acceptance within the drilling industry. Optimization of Drilling Parameters A drilling-ROP model is defined to accomplish the unique objective of this studythat is, to conduct real-time analysis for drilling-ROP optimization. The objective of the study is to opti-

mize applied WOB and string rotation. Optimization is to be formation specific. A multiple-linear-regression technique is used for the optimization methodology, which is a statistical approach. Multiple regression is used to find those parameters of an equation that cause the equation to represent the data best. A computer program has been created to find the coefficients of the model, mathematically correlating the ROP with the controllable and uncontrollable drilling parameters. The task is to acquire drilling data at a rigsite network, transmit the acquired data to the operation center, perform the analysis at the operation center, and send feedback to the rigsite. Fig. 1 shows the data-transmission methodology of the process. The data-processing technique is performed on the drilling dataset to achieve the general-linear-ROP-equation constants. The equation constants determined are used in the general equation to predict drilling ROP as a function of input drilling parameters. Fig. 4 in the full-length paper shows a schematic representation of the workflow for a multiple-regression analysis. The minimum number of datasets for a multiple regression to solve an 88 matrix is five. The coefficients for the first five datasets are solved first, and then the loop is repeated to solve for coefficients, each time including one more set of data. The loop is continued until the number of requested datasets is processed. A computer program has been created to perform the necessary calculations. The multiple-regression technique is based on a regression model that contains more than one regressor variable. Multivariate data analysis is characterization of an observation unit by several variables. Multivariate-analysis methods are affected by the changes in magnitude of several properties simultaneously. Multiple regression considers all possible interactions within combinations of variables as well as the variables themselves. Representation of Results Table 1 in the full-length paper gives the minimum, maximum, and average data-input ranges of three important drilling parameters for the wellboresection results presented. The well was drilled directionally in the target formation, which was dominated mainly by shale and sand in a 12-in. hole. One of the most important outputs for the data analysis is the observed-

vs.-predicted ROP comparison chart, shown in Fig. 6 in the full-length paper. The chart includes three different datasets for the same database. The available data section is composed of approximately 900 data points. The first dataset is the one without any correction. The second dataset is the one with only WOB normalization. There is a two-fold improvement in the coefficient-of-determination magnitude (R2) between the first and the second dataset. The third dataset is the interpolated form of data. The number of points in the dataset has been reduced to approximately 100 by interpolating the data points at a regular depth interval. All parameters have been sampled accordingly to have the mostrepresentative magnitude in reference to what the actual data readings were. Also, the bit-rotation correction caused by the mud motor has been performed for the third data group. The coefficient of determination is within a two-fold magnitude in reference to the latter. Conclusions Data quality is very important for realtime drilling optimization. Data should be representative and accurate when used as an input for multiple-regression analysis. Results indicate that instead of including all available data points, a reduced number of sampled data points (i.e., representative of the existing data trend) could give much more accurate results. This is attributed to the spiky trend of the raw data. During real-time operations, the data could be sampled at certain intervals. Another important point is consideration of the wellbore inclination in the analysis. The WOB was converted into the vertical component of the WOB, to use the normalized magnitude of the applied WOB. It was observed that use of the normalized WOB resulted in greater accuracy of the ROP prediction and, consequently, more-accurate results for the optimum drilling parameters. This study demonstrated that drilling ROP could be predicted at relatively accurate levels, on the basis of past drilling trends. The optimum WOB and bit-rotation speed could be determined to achieve minimum-cost drilling. It is believed that by means of effective communication infrastructures and through team efforts, efficient real-time drilling optimizations based on statistical syntheses are not JPT too far in the future.

JPT FEBRUARY 2011

49

DRILLING TECHNOLOGY

Modeling Transient Vibrations While Drilling By Use of a Finite-Rigid-Body Approach

Vibrations are a common contributor to premature drillstring failure. The need for a better understanding of the phenomenon has driven the implementation of real-time downhole drilling mechanics measurements. The full-length paper describes a numerical-modeling tool developed to enhance understanding of the transient dynamics experienced by a drillstring during drilling operations. A finite-rigid-body approach was chosen for modeling simplicity, computational cost, and physical relevance of the computed results.

Introduction The drillstring is modeled as a chain of cylindrical segments. Adjacent segments are held together through sets of axial, shear, torsion, and bending springs. The spring constants are computed on the basis of material properties, and the segment geometry (cross sections and segment lengths) are computed by use of standard linear elastic theory, to capture the respective axial, shear, torsion, and bending stiffness of the drillstring. At any moment in time, the spring forces and moments are computed on the basis of their spring constants and the deviations in relative position and orientation of the adjacent segments with respect to a reference undeformed state.
This article, written by Assistant Technology Editor Karen Bybee, contains highlights of paper SPE 137754, Modeling Transient Vibrations While Drilling Using a Finite Rigid Body Approach, by J. Pabon, N. Wicks, SPE, Y. Chang, SPE, B. Dow, and R. Harmer, SPE, Schlumberger, originally prepared for the 2010 SPE Deepwater Drilling and Completions Conference, Galveston, Texas, 56 October. The paper has not been peer reviewed.

Segment lengths are chosen sufficiently short (typically two to four times the local tool diameter) so they effectively can be treated as rigid bodies. At any moment in time, the movement of a segment (i.e., linear and angular accelerations) follows the classical Newtonian laws of dynamics. Forces and moments acting on each segment include the internal forces and moments and the forces and moments caused by the mud and interaction with the borehole wall. When updating linear and angular velocities, some external forces acting on the bottomhole assembly (BHA) segments, such as mud drag and damping as a result of an assumed viscoelastic nature of the borehole wall, can influence respective velocities, and their effect is considered by use of an implicit iterative scheme. The interaction of the drillstring with the circulating mud can be complex, requiring computationally expensive fluid-dynamics models to capture the full drilling-fluid effect. This would make computational times impractical without dedicated computational resources, so a simplified lumpedparameter model of mud effects was used at the segment level. This includes linear approximations of axial, lateral, and torsional drag caused by fluid inside the drillstring and annulus. The drag is proportional to mud viscosity, effective area of contact between tool segment and mud, and relative speeds. The proportionality constants were chosen on the basis of comparison of the model to field cases. Accurate representation of the borehole wall is important to capture representative accelerations and motions such as whirl. The borehole wall is modeled as a viscoelastic boundary with friction by use of a modified Hertzian contact formulation, which takes into

Fig. 1Viscolastic boundary; m= buoyed mass of drillstring segment, =friction coefficient, B= viscoelastic damping coefficient, and K=a stiffness constant characterizing the elastic interaction between tool and borehole wall.

account the compliance resulting from the hollow geometry of the tool cross section (Fig. 1). Three parameters determine the interaction between the drillstring and the borehole wall: The first parameter represents the combined stiffness of the tool/rock twobody system. This results in a force normal to the borehole wall and whose magnitude is a function of the instantaneous interference depth between the tool and the rock. The interference depth is a geometric measurement of how far the tool would have penetrated into the rock wall if the two bodies were perfectly rigid. The equivalent representation of the combined stiffness is that of two springs in series, one the result of the linear flexing stiffness of the tool cross section, and the second the result of the effective nonlinear stiffness of the cylinders in contact. The second parameter defining the tool/wall interaction is the restitution coefficient, which is the ratio of the bounce speed to the approach speed

For a limited time, the full-length paper is available free to SPE members at www.spe.org/jpt.
50 JPT FEBRUARY 2011

when there is a collision between the two bodies. The speeds are measured along the direction normal to the contacting surfaces. This parameter effectively captures the viscous nature of the boundary. The last parameter in the lumped tool/wall-interaction model is the friction coefficient. This is used to compute an effective friction force on the tool at the point of contact with the wall and in a direction opposite to the instantaneous tangent component of the velocity of the tool at the point of contact. The drill-bit interaction with the rock is modeled using an extension of an empirically based formulation in which reaction forces and torques predominantly are dependent on the depth of cut of the bit, rock strength, and bit geometry. The purpose of this extension is to characterize all six degrees of freedom of the bit movement. For instance, natural bit imbalance, sideways cutting action, and rock reactions to changes in bit-axis direction are included in the formulation. Two additional parameters are used to characterize what usually is called the bit walking tendency. Representative models are supported for a wide range of drilling tools. Model Validation As part of the validation of the model, a range of static and dynamic cases was analyzed including comparisons to: Analytical beam equations Empirical buckling equations A field-proven finite-element torqueand-drag model A frequency-domain vibration model High-frequency downhole data from the field Case Studies Case 1: Helical Buckling During Drilling an Extended-Reach-Drilling (ERD) Well. A post-event root-cause analysis was undertaken on a twistoff event that occurred while backreaming out of the hole during the drilling of the 121/4-in. section of an ERD well. Analysis of the drilling-mechanics data in conjunction with torque-and-drag modeling indicated that during drilling of the section, before the drillstring failure while backreaming, significant periods of time were spent drilling with weight on bits (WOBs) that was expected to be greater than the buckling limit of the drillstring.

Simulations were run with the transient model at 23,750 ft to visualize the helical buckling of the drillstring, to evaluate the loading that the drillstring would have been expected to be under in this condition in a gauge and a 2-in.-overgauge hole, and to evaluate the torque signature that would have been seen at surface in response to the drillstring transitioning from sinusoidal to helical buckling. Within a simulation, the surface rotational speed was ramped up to 120 rev/min, and then after a delay of 6 seconds, the surface WOB was ramped up slowly from 0 to 60,000 lbf over 60 seconds. The results of the simulations are shown in Figs. 7a through 7f in the full-length paper. The model quantified, given a number of assumptions, the loading on the drillstring as it transitioned into and was operated in a helically buckled state. In this case, the expected change in surface torque when transitioning into a helically buckled state was relatively low, which highlights the risk that the drillstring easily could have been operated in a helically buckled state without clear surface-torque indications. Case 2: Whirl-Related Drillstring Failures Vertically Drilling 171/2-in.Hole Sections With Packed MudMotor Assemblies. A number of catastrophic vibration-related drillstring failures were experienced in BHAs in a field where vertical 171/2-in.-hole sections were being drilled with packed mud-motor assemblies. Analysis of the downhole drilling-mechanics data, which included lateral and axial root-mean-squared accelerations from a multivibration cartridge within a measurement-while-drilling tool, and stick/slip measurements indicated the BHA was in backward or chaotic whirl for sustained periods. Simulations were run within the transient model with the goal of understanding the possible motions of the BHA and the sensitivity of the system to excitation from the nutation of the mud motor and to downhole friction factor at contact points. Results from the model indicated: The downhole friction factor at contact points between the BHA and the borehole wall is a key driver in kicking the system into whirl, and roller reamers potentially are beneficial in offsetting the point at which the drillstring enters whirl.

At lower surface rotational speed, the system is less likely to enter whirl and when in whirl is exposed to lower bending moments and fatigue compared with whirl at higher surface rotational speed. In a low-damping large-hole-size environment, the the mud motor is an important source of excitation, especially because the rotor whirls counterclockwise within the stator. In the case of a heavily stabilized assembly, there is a risk that the vibrational energy becomes trapped within the BHA, increasing the risk of the BHA entering whirl, although the increased stabilization reduces lateral motions when in whirl. The model was used to develop and support a recommendation to drill with lower surface rotational speed. Lower rates of penetration were experienced, but in this environment the levels of vibration were reduced dramatically with no significant change in formation properties, and it was clear that the assembly no longer was entering backward/chaotic whirl. JPT

RESOURCES

JPT FEBRUARY 2011

51

DRILLING TECHNOLOGY

A Review of Cuttings Transport in Directional-Well Drilling

Hole cleaning during directional-well drilling is a major concern in the oil field and must be monitored and properly controlled during the entire drilling operation. Inadequate drilledcuttings removal can cause many costly problems. Low annular-fluid velocity, lack of drillpipe rotation, and the wrong mud properties are primary factors in ineffective hole cleaning. The full-length paper presents a review of previous hole-cleaning studies and discusses an approach that is better suited for monitoring and controlling hole-cleaning problems.

Introduction The rotary-drilling process consists of a rock-cutting tool (drill bit) upon which a downward force is applied [weight on bit (WOB)] and rotation (rev/min) is imposed. The drilled cuttings generated by the drill bit are removed by circulating a drilling fluid from surface to bottomhole and back to surface (cuttings transport) (Fig. 1). During directional-well drilling, cuttings removal becomes more difficult and if not controlled properly can result in serious problems such as mechanical pipe sticking (fishing or hole loss), excessive frictional torque (increase in rotary-power requirement) and frictional drag (inability to reach target), difficulty in landing casing, channeling problems
This article, written by Assistant Technology Editor Karen Bybee, contains highlights of paper SPE 132372, Review of Cuttings Transport in Directional-Well Drilling: Systematic Approach, by T. Nazari, SPE, and G. Hareland, SPE, University of Calgary, and J.J. Azar, SPE, University of Tulsa, originally prepared for the 2010 SPE Western Regional Meeting, Anaheim, California, 2729 May. The paper has not been peer reviewed.

during cementing, and difficulty in logging. The factors that are known to affect hole cleaning include annular eccentricity, inclination angle, drillpipe rotation, fluid flow rate (annular velocity and flow regime), rate of penetration (ROP), mud rheology and density, and cuttings (i.e., size, shape, and density). It is well documented that flow rate and drillpipe rotation have the most positive effect on hole cleaning. However, an increase in flow rate causes an increase in frictional pressure losses, which in turn causes an increase in equivalent circulating density (ECD), pump-pressure requirement, and potential hole erosion. An increase in pipe rotation can result in premature pipe fatigue failures caused by the induced cyclic stresses. Cuttings-Transport Problem In contrast to other industrial processes, the cuttings-transport problem in the drilling industry is more complex because of the many parameters that are interconnected nonlinearly. In simpler processes, some of the steps could be neglected. Comparing this scheme to a drilling process results in the following correlations: Processdrilling procedure ReferenceECD limitation, pump hydraulic-horsepower limitation, hole erosion, ROP limitation, geological-target limitation, rotary-power limitation Process inputsflow rate, rev/min, hookload Process outputspressures, ROP, torque Internal statesWOB, eccentricity, hole cleaning Monitoring/controllost circulation, drag, torque, cuttings returns, ROP, circulating standpipe pressure For a complete and reliable automated design process, the following steps must be taken:

1 Mud pumps 2 Swivel 3 Kelly 4 Drill bit 5 Drillpipe

6 Annular space 7 Cuttings 8 Shakers 9 Mud pits 10 Rotary table

Fig. 1Drilling-rig schematic.

Signal measurements Monitoring of critical parameters Modeling Control Design Parameters In any system, including drilling, there are various design parameters to be considered. There are parameters that are referred to as effective parameters or control signals, which are process inputs, and there are affected parameters, which are the internal-process states or the outputs. Any change in the effective parameters will cause a change in the affected parameters. The affected parameters are divided into two groupsinternal states and outputs. The outputs are measured parameters such as circulating standpipe pressure, while internal states such as annular cuttingsbed height or pipe eccentricity cannot be measured while drilling is taking place. During drilling, it is essential to maintain certain drilling parameters (e.g., bottomhole pressure, flow rate, annular cuttings concentration, and torque) within the proper range. The desired value of any of the affected parameters

For a limited time, the full-length paper is available free to SPE members at www.spe.org/jpt.
52 JPT FEBRUARY 2011

will be designated as the reference. Comparing the measured signals with the references, the controller will adjust the effective parameters automatically so that the reference values will be satisfied. In most cases, it is essential for the controller to optimize the effective parameters so that they are in some specific operational range. For example, flow rate as an input cannot be greater than some specific value determined by pump characteristics. The controller and some of the monitoring methods are based on real time or an offline model. A verified general model can be presented on the basis of the physical relations of the process parameters or measured datasets of process parameters. Hybrid methods for modeling of different drilling processes also have been presented. If there were no limitations on the internal states, the monitoring process would be less complicated. Because some important drilling parameters that cannot be measured have to be kept in specific working regions, the monitoring process becomes important for the drilling process. Monitoring also is important in setting up alarms to alert

when undesirable conditions occur. Measurement and monitoring during drilling operations have been practiced for a long time. However, to ensure a systematic control of the process, an automated monitoring by use of internal-states estimation must be carried out first. In the full-length paper, the focus is on hole cleaning as an internal state that should be monitored. Cuttings Removal Drilled-cuttings removal (cuttings transport) from the annulus during drilling has been the subject of research for several decades. Different investigators have taken different approaches in dealing with the hole-cleaning problem. To set the stage for the present work, it is important to summarize the drillingprocess parameters, which leads to a detailed review of past studies. Past studies investigated the effects of some or most of the process inputs on hole-cleaning parameters such as cuttings concentration. A summary of their results includes: Mud flow rate has a significant positive effect.

Mud rheology has a moderate positive or negative effect, depending on cuttings size, pipe rotation, hole inclination, and annular eccentricity. Hole angle has a significant negative effect with increase in inclination. Mud weight has a small positive effect. Mud type has a small-to-moderate positive effect. Hole size has a small-to-negligible effect for the same annular fluid velocity. Rotation speed has a significant positive effect. Eccentricity has a significant negative effect. ROP has a moderate negative effect. Drill-bit type has an unknown influence as a result of the regrinding of cuttings after they have been generated. Cuttings size has a small negative or positive effect, depending on several conditions. Parameter Combinations Investigation of the sensitivities of combinations of parameters results in the following points:

Drill safer, drill greener AND save rig days

Riserless Mud Recovery (RMR) from AGR Drilling Services

Visit us on Stand 224 at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, March 1 - 3 agr.com/ds

JPT FEBRUARY 2011

53

 Hole inclination, annular mud velocity, and drillpipe rotation are the most important parameters. Consideration of combinations of fluid velocity and mud rheology reveals that low viscosity in turbulent flow has the same result as high viscosity in laminar flow in vertical wells. A turbulent flat flow profile is more effective in inclined wellbores. Increasing the viscosity causes a peak in the minimum transporting velocity. Low flow rate and high rotary speed in horizontal wells provide an enhancement in cuttings transport. In an attempt to find a global condition for sufficient hole cleaning, water-based, low-gel-strength, lowviscosity mud with pipe rotation was introduced. Conclusions and Recommendations Some of the weak and strong points of research in addition to some recommendations for future investigations are listed below. There currently is no generalized systematic model developed for hole cleaning; therefore, the development
Organized by

of a universal model can be very beneficial. Some powerful investigations of sensitivity analysis have been conducted, with confirmed conclusions released on controllability of hole cleaning by input vectors. Previously, misinterpretations of inputs have occurred. Adding and clearly defining more parameters as inputs, internal states, or outputs will generalize the structure of drilling holecleaning processes. Some datasets in previous experimental investigations caused uncertainties that cannot be removed using statistical analysis. Gathering of complete datasets with field and experimental data will be highly useful in sensitivity analysis or verification of new systematic hole-cleaning models. Different data-mining methods such as principalcomponents analysis can be used to find a confirmed mathematics-based sensitivity-analysis measurement. Previously presented models of hole cleaning were confirmed on the basis of some specific condition of drilling or by a limited number of experiments. Because the drilling process is

highly nonlinearly dependent, a generalized model of this process, or at least part of it, can be obtained by a hybrid data-/physics-based method, such as fuzzy modeling. For design of an automatic monitoring system for hole cleaning, complete datasets including different failure points or a complete set of models that covers different failures and their results on outputs is required. A reliable monitoring system is a must for an automatic and online holecleaning control package. Steps toward automation of a holecleaning process are initiated by discovering all the effective and critical affected parameters. More research on presenting a drilling process (or part of it) in a systematic view will increase the generality of the results. The relations between effective and affected parameters can be reached by both theoretical and data-mining methods, or even a combination of the two. Any efforts toward global modeling of the different drilling processes will help the other steps of hole-cleaning-monitoring automation (such as real-time JPT torque-and-drag modeling).

THE ONLY SHALE EVENT TO FOCUS ON WATER MANAGEMENT IN THE MARCELLUS

v Sa 00 $2

April 13-14, 2011, Hilton Garden Inn, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Examining Cutting Edge Technologies And Best Practices To

Optimize Water Sourcing, Maximize Re-Use & Efficiently Manage Flowback Water In Shale Gas Production
Ray Walker
SVP Marcellus Shale

Expert Insight From 25+ Industry Professionals Including Major E&P Companies and Regulatory Authorities

e ot qu

11 T - JP 25 de b co Fe n re tio fo ra be ist g re

Margaret Hoffman
Chief Environmental Council,

Jeff Formica
VP Production

Tim Svarczkopf
Director Water Management

Dawn Coughlin
Senior Manager Environment

Douglas Brett
CEO

Bryce Yeager
Lead Technical Engineer

Kathryn Klaber
President and Executive Director

RANGE RESOURCES

CHEVRON

SENECA RESOURCES

ATLAS ENERGY

HESS CORPORATION

CANADIAN QUANTUM

ENERGY CORPORATION OF AMERICA

MARCELLUS SHALE COALITION

www.shale-gas-water-management-2011.com
call: 1-800-721-3915 mail: info@american-business-conferences.com

Co-Sponsors

54

JPT FEBRUARY 2011