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 that have come to 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
elements involved in the entire drilling process. This is because a system that considers the
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
personnel the capability to identify drilling performance problems and by evaluating results,
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

v
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

x
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.

A lot of credit goes to Jim Oberkircher, President and CEO of GF Eagle Corporation who first
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
contributed immensely to the success of this work. Top on the list is Baker HughesINTEQ. I
wanttothankPeteClarkwhofirsthiredmeasaninternandthusstartedmyrelationshipwith
the company. Special thanks also go to Charles van Lammeren who is the brainchild and
initiator of the involvement and partnership of Baker HughesINTEQ in this research. I must
not fail to thank John Fabian and Carl Corson for the immense role they played in ensuring
thatIgotallthematerialsIneededtocarryoutthiswork.Themanymeetingsanddiscussions
I had with the Baker Hughes Team greatly ensured that I stayed on course and on message
throughoutthedurationofthisstudy.

Of course I would like to thank my wife Elma, for staying strong and focused while I was
several miles away, working on this project. It is impossible for me to list all the people that
contributed in one way or the other to the success of this work. To all whose names have

xi

xii
been mentioned and those not mentioned, I say, THANKSis a small word, but it goes a long
way to show how much I appreciate your love care and concern while I worked on this
project.

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
and reservoir management advantages. As a matter of fact, ERD needs to be viewed not
only as Extended Drilling, but also as ExtendedReservoir Drilling, or both ExtendedReach
andReservoirDrilling(Payne,Wilton,andRamos,1995).Inthisperspective,ERDassumesa
criticalroleincurrentindustryoperations.

1
Thepurposeofdrillingextendedreach,horizontalandcomplexdesignwellsistoproduce
oil and gas in a field in the most cost effective way. The use of these new techniques can
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
drilling and production islands and the inherent logistical problems associated with them
(Nelson,1997).Foroffshoredrilling,suchasintheNorthSeaandtheGulfofMexico,ERD
results in a substantial reduction in subsea equipment, including fewer pipelines. This not
onlyhasanimpactoneconomicsbutalsoonenvironmentalconcernsandevenpermitting
(MasonandJudzis,1998).

2
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 reach if 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 displacement to TVD
increases,thewelldifficultyincreases.WhilethereisnosuchthingasaneasyERDwell,
it is factual to say that with increased displacement comes increased difficulty (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.

3
Williams(2008)clearlysupportsthenotionthatthehighertheratiothemoredifficultthe
wellistodrill.Butinanearlierstudy,MasonandJudzis(1998)propoundedthatthisisnot
true,asdepictedinFigure1.1.

Source:BakerHughesINTEQ

Figure1:IndustryExtendedReachDrillingExperience Figure1.1:IndustryExtendedReachDrillingExperience

Asseeninthefigure,thelargeststepoutwellshavebeendrilledatthehighestERDratio.
But this issue is far more complicated than this. For example in deep water 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.

5
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.

7
Following the end of the era of easy oil and with major oil fields being situated in deep
watersanddifficultterrains,welltrajectoriesbeingplannedhadlonghorizontaldepartures
and increasingly became more complex. Extended Reach Drilling thus became the means
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:

8
1.2.1HorizontalandERDWells

In September 1991, Cliff Oil & Gas drilled the deepest horizontal well in the North Bayou
Jack field in Louisiana. The well reached TD at 4,675m TVD (Drilling and Production
Yearbook,1992).

InNovember1991,MaerskOil&GascompletedtheworldslongesthorizontalwellatTyra
WestBravofield,TWB11aintheDanishsectoroftheNorthSea.Thehorizontalextension
record was 2,500m at a measured depth of 4,770m and a total vertical depth of 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.

9
1.2.2DualHorizontalDualLateralWells

In 1992, Well A36 achieved 5km departure in the shallower GulIfaks reservoir at 2,160m
TVD,resultinginaMD/TVDratioof2.79.Itwasamongthehighestatthetime.
In March 1992, Torch Energy Advisors completed the first Dual Horizontal Well, Basden
1H, in Fayette County, Texas (Drilling and Production Yearbook, 1993). After drilling both
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
horizontal displacement in the lease. The two bores had horizontal sections of 825m and
625m, respectively. Underbalanced drilling techniques were used to prevent formation
damage. The high mechanical integrity of the Austin Chalk formation suited an openhole
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
only were more ERD wells drilled, these wells continuously pushed the envelope in terms
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
first Sakhalin1 well was drilled in 2003, the time required to drill these world class wells
has been reduced by more than fifty percent. When compared to industry benchmarks,
Sakhalin1wellsareamongtheworld'sfastestdrilledERDwells.
However, the current world record for the longest ERD well drilled is held by Maersk Oil
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, are the risks of drilling such wells. Experience has shown that the probability of
encountering significant drilling problems in ERD wells is generally much higher than that
experiencedinconventionalwells.Drivenbyaneedtominimizeenvironmentalimpactand
improve recoverable reserves, it is anticipated that ERD activity will continue to increase.
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,thereistheurgencytodevelopmethods andprocessesthatwillfurther
improvedrillingefficiency.Welltrajectoriesbeingplannedtodayhavesuchdeparturesand
complexity that viability, risk and economics are all vital parts of the evaluation process
prior to investing in the project. These in large part are determined by the rig design and
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. Such an approach evaluates all the elements that influence the drilling process.

14
Assuch,itisimperativethatasystematic,logicalandquantifiableapproachfordeveloping
and implementing technologies in these types of applications be defined. As the industry
continues to move toward the more costeffective technologies of computerbased
instrumentation,powerhandlingtools,andautomateddrilling,thereistheneedtohavea
definedandstructuredapproachfordrillingextendedreachwells.

1.4ObjectivesofStudy
The objective of this study is to integrate the parameters involved in the planning, design
anddrillingofextendedreachandcomplexwellsintoasinglecomputermodel.Thegoalis
to develop an algorithm that will evaluate the interrelationship among these parameters
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
At the end of this study, a Visual Basic algorithm will be developed. The model will have
thecapabilitytodesignthedrillingprogrammostsuitabletodrillanextendedreachwell.It
willbeversatileandflexiblesuchthatthecomponentsofextendedreachdrillingcaneither
be chosen by the user based on availability, or by the program from its library/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
industry has made significant progress in developing improved technologies to tackle the
complexities encountered in drilling extended reach wells. Some of these improvements
are related to realtime formation evaluation, directional control 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
various oil reserves. For some ER wells, careful well planning and utilizing existing drilling
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
reduce overall torque levels while drilling since more of the drill string is in compression,
andthetensionprofileinthebuildsectionisreduced.However,highertorquevaluesand
associated problems such as accelerated casing wear and key seats are seen during back
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
lack of control of toolface and deviation rate. Thus if a steerable motor is hard to orient,
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.
Banks et al. (1992) also discussed the effect of excessive tortuousity. They stipulated that
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
consistently reduce the torque are not well understood, and this underlines the need for
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. Experience on previous ER wells have also indicated that the use of fibrous Lost
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
vertical wells. High inclinations also expose more surface area of a particular zone to the
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

Several papers have shown the importance of drillpipe rotation as a means of improving
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
circulated out of the wellbore. To enhance hole cleaning, drillstring rotation is used while
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 will reduce the inclination in the larger diameter hole sections. This generally gives
better hole stability and improves hole cleaning. According to the report, high rotation of

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
mud systems. They also reported that disturbing the cuttings on the low side of the hole
and creating a turbulent flow pattern around the drill pipe can Iead to improved cuttings
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. In terms of cuttings concentration, smaller cuttings are more difficult to transport

than larger cuttings in the horizontal annulus when tested with water. However,
smaller cuttings are easier to transport than larger cuttings when 0.25 Ibm/bbl of
PolyanionicCellulose(PAC)solutionswereused.

2. Pipe rotation and fluid rheology are key factors affecting small cuttings transport.
Improvement by pipe rotation in the transport efficiency of small cuttings is up to
twice as large as the improvement in large cuttings transport. Compared with
water, PAC solutions significantly improve smaller cuttings transport, while the
transportoflargercuttingsisonlyslightlyenhanced.

3. Hole anglehas only minor effectson cuttings concentration and bedheight within
therangeof7090degreesfromvertical.

26
Duanetal.(2006)concludedthisstudybyrecommendingthatdrillpiperotationcombined
with polymeric drilling fluids should be used to efficiently transport small cuttings during
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
rotary assemblies are pendulum, packed holeand belly assemblies. The second is the use
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.

It is a statement of fact that Extended Reach Drilling, using rotary steerable systems, 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. Along with the development of data resources, references and industry well
information, significant findings and revelations were reported. Among the many findings
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,
which causes downtime. Rotor and stator problems were commonly discussed for motor
failure along with other components, and it was generally agreed that the failure rate for
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
directional drilling techniques into advanced procedures for drilling highangle, 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
reservoir development that will provide substantial financial benefit. In Alaska, a number
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
are magnified. In other cases, the issues are specific to the type of ERD well that is being
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
These factors are regularly encountered in ERD wells during both drilling and completion
phases. Torque is generally only a significant limiting factor on long ERD wells or on slim
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.

Buckling of drill pipe and casing results from excessive compression loads that build up in
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. Wellbore stability, lost circulation and other key effects are generally more severe
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
point that maximum output levels are required from the mud pump, drawworks and the
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
detect and measure as a result of the geometries of the wells. Not only is kick detection
more difficult in ERD wells, the ability to manage and kill the well control problem are
evenmoredifficultasaresultoftheflowmechanics.

Other issues that have been 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
setting depth etc. The iterative process not only covers the wellpath design, but also the
operations planning as well. The well design has a large impact on the operation and
planningofERwellsandsincetherearemanyvariablesindesigningawell,suchasKickoff
Point (KOP), Dogleg Severity (DLS),Departure, etc., it becomes an iterative process aimed
atyieldinganoptimaldesignwhichshouldresultinthesimplestpath whilestillachieving
allgeologicaltargets.
In other to achieve an optimum well path, several factors have to be considered and put
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 Disadvantages
Multiple Build Profile: Rate of
build increases with depth in
several discrete steps to
tangent angle, hold constant
tangentangle
Very long reach, low
torque/drag values, low
casingwear
Hightangentangle
Build and Hold: Constant build
rate to tangent angle, hold
constanttangentangle
Simple, long reaches
achievable, low tangent
angle
Potentiallyhighcontactforce
inbuild(torque,casingwear)
Double Build: Buildholdbuild
hold trajectory, can use two
different BURs in the build
sections
Very long reaches possible
with low contact forces in
upperbuild
May require deep steering,
Highsecondtangentangle
UnderSection: Build and hold
withdeepKOP
Reducing hanging weight
below build section, reduces
contactforceinbuild
High tangent angle, shorter
reach
Inverted: Tangent angle above
horizontal so the wellbore
enters the reservoir from
underneath
Flexibility for multiple
targets,avoidsgascap
Higher axial (buckling) loads
to push string uphill, deep
steeringrequired
3D: Any of the above with
significantazimuthchanges
Flexibility to handle anti
collision and multiple target
requirements
More curvature means more
torque and drag, deep
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(say0.5
o
1.0
o
/100ft),andacceleratesto
higherbuildratesastheangleincreases(sayupto4
o
5
o
/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=

1
(3.1)
Where:
q=Pipebuoyantweight,
=Frictionfactor
=Criticaltangentinclinationangle

One approach to optimizing the trajectory is to try to position the Kick off Point (KOP) so
thatthetangentinclinationequalsthecriticalangle.Ifpossiblegivenotherconstraints,this
willallowlongreacheswithreducedslidingproblems.

42
3.3BuildRate

An extended reach well needs optimum well design with respect to torque and drag and
wellbore stability. Utilizing a low build rate is considered to be very important both for
torque and drag at TD, and for wellbore stability in the upper part of the well. Due to its
impact on casing wear and torque and drag, build rate can be viewed as the most
important consideration when designing an extended reach well profile. When compared
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

Build rate may have a marginal effect on torque and drag levels for very high ratio wells.
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,buildratesinexcessof2.5
o
/30mmaycauseconcernwithrespect
tohighcontactforces.Ifhigherbuildratesthanthisareplanned,thedifficultyofachieving

43
asmoothbuildalsohastobeconsideredwhereanincreasingpercentageofthebuildwill
beperformedwhileslidingandnotrotatingtheassembly.Someotherimportantthingsto
noteaboutbuildrateare:
a) HighReach/TVDratiowellsmaytoleratehighBURbecausethestringtensioninthe
curveislowandmayevenbeinmechanicalcompression.
b) LowReach/TVDratiowellsdonottoleratehighBURsincedrillstringtensioninthe
curveishigher.
c) Highbuildratescancausecasingwearproblems,especiallyinhighReach/TVDratio
wells where there may be high tensile loads through the build section during trips
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,therearesomebenefitsassociatedwithtwostringwelldesignsand9
7
/
8
holein
particular. In ERD applications where two casings strings can be reliably used to TD,
consideration may be given to using 13 and 9
7
/
8
hole sizes (as an alternative to the
traditional 17 x 12 x 8 design). The smaller hole sizes require less flow rate to
keepthemclean,ortheycanbecleanedfasterwiththesameflowrate,therebyallowing
for faster penetration rates (9
7
/
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

OpposingForceDue
toFriction=M
Figure3.3:FrictionalandSurfaceactingforces
RotationalForce=M

Indrillingoperations,thetorqueatthesurfaceisgivenby:
TQ@Surface=TQ@Bit+TQalongthewellbore+MechanicalTQ
Where:
TQ @ Bit or bit torque = the productive component of the torque and it depends on bit
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
along the wellbore. Analysis and projections of torque should recognize that total surface
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, drag results from contact betweendrill string components and bore hole wall
or casing as the string moves up or down. It is generated by friction of drill pipe against
hole wall or against inside of casing. Drag will always operate in the opposite direction to
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
compression pushing the drill string against the low side of the bore hole and due to drill

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

PickUpForce=Drag+AxialForce
Figure3.5:DragandPickUpForces
Drag=SideForcexFrictionFactor

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.

Friction is a function of both torque and drag. From the definitions above it can be seen
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.

While there are a myriad of challenges in ERD, minimizing torque and drag while drilling,
running casing, and during completions continue to be one of the greatest challenges. 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
temporarily solves the problem, as drilling progresses, we will reach another point where
enough torque cannot be generated at the surface to turn the string. There is therefore,

51
the need to come up with techniques to reduce torque and drag if we want to reduce
downtimeandsuccessfullydrillERwells.

3.5.4InfluenceofFrictionFactor

Friction Factor (FF) also known as friction coefficient, expresses the relationship between
the forces needed to overcome frictional force and the normal force of the element. It is
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

There are many ways to reduce torque and drag. Optimization of the well profile is one.
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.
Construction of higher specification rigs capable of generating enough weight and torque
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
successful in reducing torque. Several operators have reported torque reductions of over
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.
When the drillpipe protectors are used, there must be a compromise based on expected
requirementsforrotaryororienteddrilling.

Torque and Drag values will increase with the well length up to the point where a rig
equipment upgrade will be required. New techniques will also be required. For example,
runningthe9
5
/
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
the influence of pressure losses of the fluid flowing up the annulus as well as changes of
thefluidsaveragedensityduetothecuttingsloadintheannulus.

55
EquivalentCirculationDensitycanbecalculatedasfollows:

ECD=MW(ppg)+
) ( * 052 . 0
) (
ft TVD
psi P
A
(3.2)

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
this happening is most relevant at the casing shoe, since the ECD (mud pressure) is at its
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 the drillstring 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
and off can lead to wellbore instability. This is particularly true if the formation is
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
on many factors including mud rheology, RPM, slide frequency, hole size, ROP, and other
practices. As was mentioned earlier, pipe rotation also affects ECDs especially in the 8
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, as well 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
y
6590deg:Stablebeds

NearverticalWells(035
0
):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
there is a net upward movement of the cuttings. Hole cleaning is simply provided by the
viscosity and flowrate of the drilling fluid. When the pumps are turned off, cuttings are
suspendedbytheviscousdrillingfluid,althoughsomesettlingwilloccurwithtime.

IntermediateAngles(3565
0
):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;itistheregionwheregravityeffectscancausecuttingsbeds toslumpdownthe
hole.

HighAngles(greaterthan65
0
):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.

To a reasonable extent, hole cleaning operation can be remedied by a good combination

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
beds and a reduction in the annulus area. This may result in many drilling problems such
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
does not have to be 100% clean (or free of cuttings) before is will be considered clean.
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
operators have experimented with rotary speeds of up to 220 RPM. While some benefits
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, maximum available flowrates should be used for every section of an ERD well, up
to the surface pressure or downhole tool limits. As hole angle increases from vertical,
cuttings transport becomes more difficult. The flow rate required to carry cuttings out of
the hole increases rapidly from 0
o
to 60
o
. Above 60
o
the rate of flow rate increase levels
off. Hole angles between 45
o
and 60
o
frequently present the most problems because
cuttingstendtoslidebackdowntheannulusandpackoff.

Thereareseveralcommerciallyavailabledrillinghydraulicscomputerprograms,whichcan
beusedtodeterminetheachievabledrillingcirculationratesgiventherigpumpcapacity,
drillstring/wellbore configuration and drilling fluid rheology. These flow rates can then be
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)
9
7
/
8
700900 500gpm,withROP@1020m/hr(3365/hr)
8 450600 350400gpm,withROP@1020m/hr(3365/hr)
Source: Drilling Design and Implementation forExtended Reach and Complex Well,K & M
Technology,3
rd
Edition,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
9
7
/
8
120150rpm 100rpm
8 70100rpm 60rpm
Source:DrillingDesignandImplementationforExtendedReachandComplexWell,K&M
Technology,3
rd
Edition,2003,Pg87

71
3.8VibrationandWellboreStability

3.8.1Vibrations
Comparedtolowangleandverticalwells,downholevibrationsareoftenlesssevereinERD
wells. However, they are of particular concern due to their direct and indirect impact on
theoveralldrillingoperation.Someoftheeffectsofdownholevibrationare:
1. BHAfailures
2. ReducedBitLife
3. ReducedROP
4. ReducedDrillStringlifeandTwistoffs
5. PoorHoleCondition
6. Longerdrillingtimeandcost

Vibrationscanbeminimizedoreliminatedbydownhole monitoring, andadjustingdrilling

parameters and practices accordingly. It must be emphasized that it is not enough to just
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
BitBounce(Axial) Oftenseenaslargesurfacevibrationsinshortorverticalwells
Oftenaresultofdrillinghardformations
Bitdamage
BitandBHAWhirl
(Lateral)
Verycomplexanddestructive
AmajorproblemwithearlyPDCbits
Impactdamagetobitgaugepads
Localizedtooljointwear
Erraticsurfacetorque
StickSlip(Torsional) Cyclicsurfacetorquefluctuations/topdrivestalling
MWDsensorshaveshownfluctuationsof0300rpmdownhole
Overtorquedtooljoints
Source:DrillingDesignandImplementationforExtendedReachandComplexWell,K&M
Technology,3
rd
Edition,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.

Hole instability refers to two extremes of Formation Collapse and Formation Breakdown.
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
opening of a natural fracture system) leading to massive mud losses. The primary reason
forformationbreakdownisuseoftoohighamudweight.

3.8.3PreliminaryWellboreStabilityAnalysis

To conduct analyses of stressinduced wellbore instability, the basic information required

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, the term is also used loosely for any sequence of actions (which may or may
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
to be achieved, it is essential to have a structured approach to the drilling process. 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
and Drag,Hydraulics and HoleCleaning, Equivalent Circulation Density, Bit Hydraulics and
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
stage serves as the input to the next, and this is the underlying principle that guided the
developmentofthismodel.

Drilling Planning

Analysis

Figure4.1:TheContinuousImprovementCycle

78

79
4.2.1AttributesoftheModel

The Visual Basic model developed is a highly structured algorithm that provides direction
on processes and tasks required at all stages in the design and drilling of an ERD well 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.

Figure4.2:DrillingDesignFlowChartforExtendedReachDrilling

80
The algorithm is divided into modules, each treating a specific issue that comes into play
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. By evaluating results, the user can identify drilling problems early and is able to
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. This will be noticed when the program user is allowed to proceed without any
flags popping up. In this way, the user can correct his/her mistakes as soon as they are

81
made, instead of waiting for the final report to learn if indeed a mistake or incompatible
selection has been made. If followed sequentially and with appropriate inputs, the model
willbeabletoproduceaworkablewellplananddesignthatcanbeusedtodrillthewell.

4.3AnalysisoftheIndividualModules

Themodelfocusesonwelldesign,wellplanningandimplementationbothattheofficeand
field locations. Upon launching the program, a visual interface, which displays 20 tabs, 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

process associated with fixing the physical position of the well bore. There are numerous
inherenterrorswithinthemeasurementsusedtocalculatethebottomholelocation(BHL).
Thesemeasurementsinclude:
Depth
Inclination
Azimuth

Also of prime importance is the BuildUp Rate (BUR). Builduprates are selected to: (a)
limit the fatigue loading on the drill string, and (b) reduce casing and tool joint wear. 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=
2
360
x
BUR
ticLength Charateris
(4.1)

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=
CL
AC 100
(4.2)
Where:DLS=DoglegSeverity(Deg/100ft)
AC=AngleChange(degrees)
CL=CourseLength(ft)

2. BuildUpRate:ThisisdividedintotheBuildSectionandtheTangentSection.
TheBuildSectionisgivenby:
BS= xR
i
360
2
(4.3)
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.181
Source:ShellDrillingandTransportHandbook,Vol.2,1991,Pg.180

85
3. TargetAzimuth:Thisisgivenby:
A
t
=Tan
1
N
E

(+180
0
)(4.5)
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,Lapeyrouse2
nd
Ed.,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>90
0
,Add90
0
IfArctanofAngle<90
0
,Subtract90
0

Source:DirectionalandHorizontalDrillingEquations,roughneckcity.com

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

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

Source:DirectionalandHorizontalDrillingEquations,roughneckcity.com

As was mentioned in Chapter 3, Well Planning is a design process, which utilizes a set of
criteria (data and information) to develop an optimum directional well plan. As the prime
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)

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,Lapeyrouse2
nd
Ed.,Pg.20
Source:FormulasandCalculationsforDrilling,ProductionandWorkover,Lapeyrouse2
nd
Ed.,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:
32

(D
4
d
4
)(in.
4
)
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

*(Y
2
m
P
2
)
1/2

(4.15)
DA
2

Where:Q
T
=MinimumTorsionYieldStrengthUnderTension
J=PolarMomentofInertia:
32

(D
4
d
4
)(in.
4
)
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

Where:K=
EI
T
;I=
64

(D
4
d
4
);tanhKL=e
kl
e
kl

e
kl
+e
kl

t
=T/A;A=
4

(D
1
2
d
1
2
)
ForGradeEDrillPipe;

b
=19,500
67
10

2
) 670 (
6 . 0
[
t
33,500]
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=
D
Ki
D
P
+ (4.26)

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=
052 . 0
FG
(4.28)
Where:FG=FractureGradient(psi/ft)

Source:FormulasandCalculationsforDrilling,ProductionandWorkover,Lapeyrouse2
nd
Ed.Pgs.190192

Figure4.9isthevisualinterfacedesignoftheTorqueandDragAnalysisModule.

99

Figure4.9:TorqueandDragAnalysisModule

100
4.3.5HydraulicsandHoleCleaningModule

This module predicts the flow rates and RPMs that 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
combo box, the program automatically displays the required flow rate and RPM that will
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)
9
7
/
8
700900 500gpm,withROP@1020m/hr(3365/hr)
8 450600 350400gpm,withROP@1020m/hr(3365/hr)
Source: Drilling Design and Implementation for Extended Reach and Complex Well, K & M
Technology,3
rd
Edition,2003,Pg86

RecommendedDrillStringRPMforVariousHoleSizes

HoleSize DesirableRPM MinimumForEffectiveHoleCleaning

17 120180rpm 120rpm
12 150180rpm 120rpm
9
7
/
8
120150rpm 100rpm
8 70100rpm 60rpm
Source: Drilling Design and Implementation for Extended Reach and Complex Well, K & M
Technology,3
rd
Edition,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(in
2
)
OD=OutsideDiameterofthedrillpipeortubing(in
2
)
1029.4=Conversionfactor(FieldUnits)
24.5=Conversionfactor(FieldUnits)

Source:FormulasandCalculationsforDrilling,ProductionandWorkover,Lapeyrouse2
nd
Ed.Pg.170

Figure4.10isthevisualinterfacedesignoftheHydraulicsandHoleCleaningModule.

102

Figure4.10:HydraulicsandHoleCleaningModule

103
4.3.6EquivalentCirculation(ECD)DensityModule

ThismodulecalculatesbothEquivalentCirculationDensityaswellastheEquivalentStatic
Density. The formula for calculating Equivalent Circulation Density was given in Equation
3.2onpage57andisreproducedhereunder:
ECD=MW(ppg)+
) ( * 052 . 0
) (
ft TVD
psi P
A
(3.2)

TheEquivalentStaticDensityontheotherhandisgivenby:
ESD=P
StaticMeasured
(4.30)
g*TVD

Where:ESD=EquivalentStaticDensity(Dimensionless)
g=Accelerationduetogravity(m/s
2
)
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
earlier calculated by the Torque and Drag Module. It essentially checks to make sure that
ECDisbelow(andalwaysremainsbelow)thefracturegradient.
Figure4.11isthevisualinterfacedesignoftheEquivalentCirculationDensityModule.

104

Figure4.11:EquivalentCirculationDensity(ECD)Module

105
While the modules that have been described above are considered critical factors for the
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,
Rotary Steerable Systems (RSS) Considerations, Vibration and Wellbore Stability and Well
Completion; are less important. Information and relevant data associated with these
parameterswillbeprovidedbytheoperatingorserviceCompany.

4.4SensitivityAnalysisExampleProblem

In this section, the sequence of iterations implemented by the algorithm when applied to
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 6
5/8
in.
OuterDiameterofHWDP 6
5/8
in.
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

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

Determine:
DoglegSeverity
BuildUpRatefortheBuildSection

DoglegSeverityisgivenby:
DLS=
CL
AC 100
(4.2)
Where:DLS=DoglegSeverity(Deg/100ft)
AC=AngleChange(degrees)
CL=CourseLength(ft)

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

BuildUpRateforBuildSectionisgivenby:
BS= xR
i
360
2
(4.3)
Where:BS=BuildSection(Deg/100ft)
i=AngleChange(degrees)
WellPlanning
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 with the 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

ProceedtoStep3:DrillStringDesign

StopBHADesign
Continueiterations14as
showninFigure4.6untila
BHAdesignthatis
compatiblewiththe
modifiedwellplanis
achieved.
ConditionofSTOPfor
BHADesign

111

DrillStringDesign

Giventhefollowing:

LocalFrictionFactor 0.17
WellFrictionFactor 0.22
MudDensity 13ppg
DepthofInterest(TVD) 1150ft
FormationPorePressure 6692psi
Stress@PointofInterest 7309psi
MatrixStressCoefficient 0.522psi/ft

Thefollowinginformationwillbeprovidedbytheoperator:
RigOperatingLimit
DrillStringMaterialLimits
YieldSafetyFactor
FatigueSafetyFactor
SideForces

UseTorqueandDragModuletoperformFractureGradientCalculations:
1. FractureGradientUsingBenEatonMethodisgivenby:
FG=
D
Ki
D
P
+ (4.26)

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

112

113

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.
















ProceedtoStep4:PrepareWellProposal

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

114

PrepareWellProp ingthetechnically
feasibleand Wellplan,BHA
Design StringDesign
osalShow
recommended
andDrill
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.Eventhoughitwould havebeenniceto
havemorevalidationdata,thefactthatonlyonedatasetwasuseddoesnotsignificantly
affectthefunctionalefficacyofthemodel.

116
ChapterFive
Summary,ConclusionsandRecommendations

A Visual Basic algorithm that shows the interrelationship among the five critical elements
involvedintheplanning,designanddrillingofextendedreachandcomplexwellshasbeen
developed. The development of the model is based upon information gathered from
several sources, many new ideas from technical publications, along with information and
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. Deep kick off point and low buildup rates will reduce the inclination in the larger
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. The recognition of hole cleaning problems in the planning phase and the taking of
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. There is a directcorrelation between ECD and Friction Factor. This is as a result of

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. Determining the best well plan and design is an iterative process. Always consider
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
should be developed in terms of the extent of experience within specific fields and with
specific rigs. Thus, ERD wells should not be treated as just another well. Designs must
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
improvements and the avoidance of NonProductive Time (NPT) and the recording of No
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
flexibility especially at extreme departures. With the potential of Rotary SteerableDrilling
technology, the limits for extended reach wells may now lie with the ability to complete
andmaintainproductionfromawellratherthantodrillit.Asdrillingtechnologycontinues
to improve and as the limiting factors identified in this study are gradually overcome, the
final constraint may well beeconomic rather than technical. Advancesin ERD techniques
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
Di mPi As Doubl e
Pr i vat e Sub CmdAnnul ar Vel oci t
'CALCULATING ANNULAR VELOCITY
y_Cl i ck( )
Di mMFR As Doubl e, I DCH As Doubl e, ODPT As Doubl e, ANV As Doubl e
MFR = Txt MFR. Text
I DCH = Txt I DCH. Text
ODPT = Txt ODPT. Text
ANV = ( 24. 5 * MFR) / ( I DCH ^ 2 - ODPT ^ 2)
Txt ANV. Text = Round( ANV, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdBF_Cl i ck( )
'CALCULATING BUOYANCY FACTOR
Di mMWAs Doubl e, RBF As Doubl e
MW= Txt MW. Text
RBF = ( 65. 5 - MW) / 65. 5
Txt RBF. Text = Round( RBF, 3)
End Sub

'CALCULATING THE BUILD SECTION
Di mI NCA As Doubl e, RAD As Doubl e, BSEC As Doubl e
I NCA = Txt I NCA. Text
RAD = Txt RAD. Text
BSEC = ( ( I NCA * 6. 285 / 360) * RAD)
Txt BSEC. Text = Round( BSEC, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub cmdCal cul at eCur r ent TVD_Cl i ck( )
Di mLast TVD As Doubl e, Cur r ent TVD As Doubl e
Di mCour seLengt h As Doubl e, I ncAngl e As Doubl e
Last TVD = Me. t xt _Cur r ent _Last TVD. Text
Cour seLengt h = Me. t xt _Cur r ent _Cour seLenght . Text
I ncAngl e = Me. t xt _Cur r ent _I ncl i nat i onAngl e. Text
Cur r ent TVD = ( Cos( I ncAngl e * Pi / 180) * Cour seLengt h) + Last TVD
Me. t xt _Cur r ent _Cur r ent TVD. Text = Round( Cur r ent TVD, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub cmdCal cul at ePr oj ect edAngl e_Cl i ck( )
Di mTTVD As Doubl e, PTVD As Doubl e
Di mTVS As Doubl e, PVS As Doubl e
Di mUVS As Doubl e
Di mRes1 As Doubl e
Di mRes2 As Doubl e
TTVD = Me. t xt Tar get TVD. Text
PTVD = Me. t xt Pr esent TVD. Text
TVS = Me. t xt Tar get VS. Text

122
PVS = Me. t xt Pr esent VS. Text
UVS = ( TVS - PVS)
Res1 = ( TTVD - PTVD) / UVS
Res2 = At n( Res1) * 180 / Pi
I f Res2 > 90 Then
Res2 = Res2 + 90
El se
Res2 = Res2 - 90
End I f
t xt Pr oj ect edAngl e. Text = Res2
End Sub

'COMBINED MAXIMUM TENSION AND TORSION IN DRILL PIPE
Di mMTYS As Doubl e, I DDP As Doubl e, ODDP As Doubl e, CSAP As Doubl e,
CMATT As Doubl e, MAT As Doubl e
MTYS = Txt MTYS. Text
I DDP = Txt I DDP. Text
ODDP = Txt ODDP. Text
MAT = Txt MAT. Text
CSAP = Txt CSAP. Text
CMATT = ( 0. 096167 * ( 0. 0981875 * ( ODDP ^ 4 - I DDP ^ 4) ) ) * ( MTYS ^
2 - ( MAT ^ 2 / CSAP ^ 2) ) ^ 0. 5 / ( ODDP)
Txt CMATT. Text = Round( CMATT, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdDogl egSever i t y_Cl
'CALCULATION OF DOGLEG SEVERIY'
i ck( )
Di mAC As Doubl e, CL As Doubl e, DLS As Doubl e
AC = Txt AC. Text
CL = Txt CL. Text
DLS = ( AC * 100) / CL
Txt DLS. Text = Round( DLS, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdEqui val ent Ci r cul at i onDensi t y_
'CALCULATING EQUIVALENT CIRCULATION DENSITY
Cl i ck( )
Di mMWT As Doubl e, ANP As Doubl e, TVD1 As Doubl e, ECD As Doubl e
MWT = Txt MWT. Text
ANP = Txt ANP. Text
TVD1 = Txt TVD1. Text
ECD = MWT + ( ANP / ( 0. 052 * TVD1) )
Txt ECD. Text = Round( ECD, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdEqui val ent St at i cDensi t y_Cl i ck( )
'CALCULATING EQUIVALENT STATIC DENSITY
Di mMSP As Doubl e, TVD2 As Doubl e, ADG As Doubl e, ESD As Doubl e
MSP = Txt MSP. Text
TVD2 = Txt TVD2. Text
ADG = Txt ADG. Text
ESD = ( MSP / ( ADG * TVD2) )
Txt ESD. Text = Round( ESD, 2)

123
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdFr act ur eGr adi ent _Cl i ck( )
'CALCULATING FRACTURE GRADIENT
Di mFPP As Doubl e, SPI As Doubl e, DOI As Doubl e, MSC As Doubl e,
FRAG As Doubl e
FPP = Txt FPP. Text
SPI = Txt SPI . Text
DOI = Txt DOI . Text
MSC = Txt MSC. Text
FRAG = ( FPP / DOI ) + MSC * ( SPI / DOI )
Txt FRAG. Text = Round( FRAG, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdFr act ur ePr essur e
'CALCULATING FRACTURE PRESSURE
_Cl i ck( )
Di mFRAP As Doubl e, FRAG As Doubl e, DOI As Doubl e
FRAG = Txt FRAG. Text
DOI = Txt DOI . Text
FRAP = FRAG * DOI
Txt FRAP. Text = Round( FRAP, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdHor i zont al Depar t ur e_Cl
'CALCULATION OF HORIZONTAL DEPARTURE
i ck( )
Di mI A As Doubl e, KOP As Doubl e, HD As Doubl e
I A = Txt I A. Text
KOP = Txt KOP. Text
HD = Si n( I A * Pi / 180) * KOP
Txt HD. Text = Round( HD, 3)
End Sub

'LENGTH OF BHA NECESSARY FOR REQUIRED WEIGHT ON BIT
' SAFETY FACTOR = 1. 15
Di mWOB As Doubl e, WODC As Doubl e, LBHA As Doubl e, RBF As Doubl e
WOB = Txt WOB. Text
WODC = Txt WODC. Text
RBF = Txt RBF. Text
LBHA = ( WOB * 1. 15) / ( WODC * RBF)
Txt LBHA. Text = Round( LBHA, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdMaxi mumAl l owabl eDLS_Cl i ck( )
'CALCULATING MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DOGLEG SEVERITY FOR AVOIDANCE OF
DRILL PIPE FATIGUE
Di mI DDP As Doubl e, ODDP As Doubl e
Di mL As Doubl e, MPBS As Doubl e
Di mDPMI As Doubl e, T As Doubl e, C As Doubl e
Di mE As Doubl e, Angl eChange As Doubl e
ODDP = Txt ODDP. Text
L = Me. t xt Hal f Di st ance. Text ' Hal f di st ance bt w t ool j oi nt
MPBS = Me. t xt MPBS. Text ' Maxi mumper mi ssi bl e bendi ng st r ess

124
DPMI = Me. t xt DPMI . Text ' Dr i l l pi pe moment of i ner t i a
T = Me. t xt Bouyant Wei ght . Text ' Bouyant Wei ght
E = Me. t xt YoungModul us. Text ' Young Modul us of El ast i ci t y
Angl eChange = Me. t xt Angl eChange. Text ' Angl e Change
C = ( 432000 / Pi ) * MPBS / ( E * ODDP) * Angl eChange
Me. t xt MPDLS = Round( C, 2) ' Maxi mumPer mi ssi bl e Dog Leg
Sever i t y
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdMaxMudDensi t y_Cl i ck( )
'CALCULATING MAXIMUM MUD DENSITY
Di mMMD As Doubl e, FRAG As Doubl e
FRAG = Txt FRAG. Text
MMD = FRAG / 0. 052
Txt MMD. Text = Round( MMD, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdMeasur edDept h_Cl i ck( )
'CALCULATING PROJECTED MEASURED DEPTH
Di mTAGI As Doubl e, PRESI As Doubl e, DLS2 As Doubl e, PMD As Doubl e
TAGI = Txt TAGI . Text
PRESI = Txt PRESI . Text
DLS2 = Txt DLS2. Text
PMD = ( TAGI - PRESI ) / DLS2
Txt PMD. Text = Round( PMD, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub cmdNRTVD_Cl i ck( )
Di mDA As Doubl e, CA As Doubl e
Di mTTVD As Doubl e, CTVD As Doubl e
Di mRes1 As Doubl e, Res2 As Doubl e
DA = Me. Txt DA. Text
CA = Me. Txt CA. Text
TTVD = Me. Txt TTVD. Text
CTVD = Me. Txt CTVD. Text
Res1 = Si n( DA * Pi / 180) - Si n( CA * Pi / 180)
Res2 = Res1 / ( TTVD - CTVD)
Me. Txt NRTVD. Text = Round( Res2, 4)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub cmdOpt i mi ze_Cl i ck( )
Di mECD As Doubl e, PPG As Doubl e
Di mFPG As Doubl e, FBG As Doubl e
ECD = Me. Txt ECD. Text
PPG = Me. t xt PPG. Text
FPG = Me. t xt FPG. Text
FBG = Me. t xt FBG. Text
I f ECD > FPG Then
Me. t xt Opt i mi zeECD. Text = " ECD i s gr eat er t han Fr act ur e
Gr adi ent . Check Mud Wei ght or Annul us Pr essur e"
El se
Me. t xt Opt i mi zeECD. Text = " ECD i s good enough t o cl ean t he hol e"

125
End I f
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub cmdPr edi ct CC_Cl i ck( )
Di mA As I nt eger
A = Me. t xt Hol eAngl e. Text
Sel ect Case A
Case 0 To 34
Me. t xt Di spl ayCC. Text = " Cut t i ngs do not f or m. Tr anspor t
vel oci t y i s gr eat er t han sl i p vel oci t y; t he cut t i ngs ar e
ef f ect i vel y car r i ed i n suspensi on"
Case 35 To 45
Me. t xt Di spl ayCC. Text = " Cut t i ngs bed st ar t s t o f or m. Ther e
i s unst abl e, movi ng cut t i ngs bed and t r anspor t i s vi a l i f t i ng
mechani sm. "
Case 46 To 65
Me. t xt Di spl ayCC. Text = " Aval anchi ng st ar t s. Most pr obl ems
associ at ed wi t h hol e cl eani ng wi l l occur i n t hi s sect i on. "
Case 66 To 90
Me. t xt Di spl ayCC. Text = " ASt abl e beds. St at i onar y cut t i ngs
bed f or mi nst ant aneousl y and t r anspor t i s vi a a r ol l i ng mechani sm. "
Case El se
Me. t xt Di spl ayCC. Text = " "
MsgBox " Angl e out of r ange, Pl ease ent er hol e angl e bet ween
0 and 90 degr ees" , vbExcl amat i on

End Sel ect
End Sub
Pr i vat e Sub cmdPr edi ct Fl owRat e_Cl i ck( )
Di mI As I nt eger
I = Me. cboHol eSi ze. Li st I ndex
Sel ect Case I
Case 0
t xt DFR = " DESI RABLE FLOWRATE: "
t xt DFRV = " 900 - 1200 gpm"
l bl MWFR = " MI NI MUM WORKABLE FLOWRATE: "
l bl MWFRV1 = " 800 gpm, wi t h ROP @"
l bl MWFRV2 = " 20 m/ hr ( 65' / hr ) "
Case 1
t xt DFR = " DESI RABLE FLOWRATE: "
t xt DFRV = " 800 - 1100 gpm"
l bl MWFR = " MI NI MUM WORKABLE FLOWRATE: "
l bl MWFRV1 = " 650 - 700 gpm, wi t h"
l bl MWFRV2 = " ROP @10- 15 m/ hr ( 30- 50' / hr ) "
Case 2
t xt DFR = " DESI RABLE FLOWRATE: "
t xt DFRV = " 700 - 900 gpm"
l bl MWFR = " MI NI MUM WORKABLE FLOWRATE: "
l bl MWFRV1 = " 500 gpm, wi t h ROP"
l bl MWFRV2 = " @10- 20 m/ hr ( 33- 65' / hr ) "
Case 3
t xt DFR = " DESI RABLE FLOWRATE: "

126
t xt DFRV = " 450 - 600 gpm"
l bl MWFR = " MI NI MUM WORKABLE FLOWRATE: "
l bl MWFRV1 = " 350- 400 gpm, wi t h"
l bl MWFRV2 = " ROP @10- 20 m/ hr ( 33- 65' / hr ) "
End Sel ect
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub cmdPr edi ct Rot ar ySpeed_Cl i ck( )
Di mI As I nt eger
I = Me. cboHol eSi ze2. Li st I ndex
Sel ect Case I
Case 0
t xt DFR1 = " DESI RABLE RPM: "
t xt DFRV1 = " 120 - 180 r pm"
t xt MWFR1 = " MI NUMUM FOR EFFECTI VE HOLE CLEANI NG: "
t xt MWFRV1 = " 120 r pm"

Case 1
t xt DFR1 = " DESI RABLE RPM: "
t xt DFRV1 = " 150 - 180 r pm"
t xt MWFR1 = " MI NUMUM FOR EFFECTI VE HOLE CLEANI NG: "
t xt MWFRV1 = " 120 r pm"

Case 2
t xt DFR1 = " DESI RABLE RPM: "
t xt DFRV1 = " 120 - 150 r pm"
t xt MWFR1 = " MI NUMUM FOR EFFECTI VE HOLE CLEANI NG: "
t xt MWFRV1 = " 100 r pm"

Case 3
t xt DFR1 = " DESI RABLE RPM: "
t xt DFRV1 = " 70 - 100 r pm"
t xt MWFR1 = " MI NUMUM FOR EFFECTI VE HOLE CLEANI NG: "
t xt MWFRV1 = " 60 r pm"

End Sel ect
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdPr essur eLoss1_Cl i ck( )
' PRESSURE LOSS AT BI T. . 1
Di mMW1 As Doubl e, FLR As Doubl e, BNZA As Doubl e, BNPL As Doubl e
MW1 = Txt MW1. Text
FLR = Txt FLR. Text
BNZA = Txt BNZA. Text

BNPL = ( FLR ^ 2 * MW1) / ( 10858 * BNZA ^ 2)
Txt BNPL. Text = Round( BNPL, 1)

End Sub

'This sub calculates the length of the tangent section.
' i ncl i nat i on shoul d be i n degr ees.

127
Pr i vat e Sub cmdTangent Sect i on_Cl i ck( )
Di mR As Doubl e, I ncAngl e As Doubl e

R = Me. t xt TanTVD. Text ' t hi s i s t he r adi us but used as TVD
because of compact i bi l i t y
' wi t h ear l i er nami ng convent i on.
I ncAngl e = Me. t xt TanI ncAngl e. Text

Di mR_I ncAngl e As Doubl e ' I ncl i nat i on angl e conver t ed t o r adi ans
R_I ncAngl e = I ncAngl e * Pi / 180
Me. t xt Tangent Sect i onResul t s. Text = Round( R * Si n( R_I ncAngl e) /
Cos( R_I ncAngl e) , 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub cmdTar get Azi mut h_Cl i ck( )
' t hi s sub cal cul at es t he Tangent Azi mut h.
' Assumpt i on i s t hat t he Sur f aceCoor di nat e and Tar get Coor di nat e ar e
i n degr ees
Di mSur f aceCoor di nat e As Doubl e, Tar get Coor di nat e As Doubl e
Di mPi As Doubl e, X As Doubl e, Get Tangent Azi mut h As Doubl e
Pi = 3. 14159265358979
Sur f aceCoor di nat e = Me. t xt Tar get Sur f aceCoor di nat e. Text
Tar get Coor di nat e = Me. t xt Tar get coor di nat e. Text
X = At n( Sur f aceCoor di nat e / Tar get Coor di nat e) * 180 / Pi
Get Tangent Azi mut h = X + 180
Me. t xt Tar get Azi mut h. Text = Get Tangent Azi mut h
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdTensi onI nDr i l l Pi pe_Cl i ck( )
'MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TENSION IN DRILL PIPE
Di mMTYS As Doubl e, CSAP As Doubl e, MAT As Doubl e
MTYS = Txt MTYS. Text
CSAP = Txt CSAP. Text
MAT = ( MTYS * CSAP) * 0. 85
Txt MAT. Text = Round( MAT, 2)
End Sub


Pr i vat e Sub Cmd
'TORQUE AT BIT
Tor queAt Bi t _Cl i ck( )
Di mWOB2 As Doubl e, BD As Doubl e, BAG As Doubl e, TQB As Doubl e
WOB2 = Txt WOB2. Text
BD = Txt BD. Text
BAG = Txt BAG. Text
TQB = WOB2 * BD * BAG
Txt TQB. Text = Round( TQB, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdTor si onI nDr i l l Pi pe_Cl i ck( )
'MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE TORSION IN DRILL PIPE
Di mMTYS As Doubl e, I DDP As Doubl e, ODDP As Doubl e, MTOYS As Doubl e
MTYS = Txt MTYS. Text

128
ODDP = Txt ODDP. Text
I DDP = Txt I DDP. Text
MTOYS = ( ( 0. 096167 * ( 0. 0981875 * ( ODDP ^ 4 - I DDP ^ 4) * MTYS) ) /
ODDP) * 0. 85
Txt MTOYS. Text = Round( MTOYS, 2)
End Sub


Pr i vat e Sub CmdTot al Dr agFor ces_
'CALCULATING TOTAL DRAG FORCES
Cl i ck( )
Di mSTEN As Doubl e, PUWAs Doubl e, SOWAs Doubl e, OBT As Doubl e,
FRT As Doubl e, FRWAs Doubl e, TDF As Doubl e
STEN = Txt STEN. Text
PUW= Txt PUW. Text
SOW= Txt SOW. Text
OBT = Txt OBT. Text
FRT = Txt FRT. Text
FRW= Txt FRW. Text
TDF = STEN + PUW+ SOW+ OBT + FRT + FRW
Txt TDF. Text = Round( TDF, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdTot al Sur f aceTor que_Cl i ck( )
'TOTAL SURFACE TORQUE
Di mTQB As Doubl e, STRT As Doubl e, MET As Doubl e, DYT As Doubl e,
TSTQ As Doubl e
TQB = Txt TQB. Text
STRT = Txt STRT. Text
MET = Txt MET. Text
DYT = Txt DYT. Text
TSTQ = TQB + STRT + MET + DYT
Txt TSTQ. Text = Round( TSTQ, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub cmdTr ansf er _Cl i ck( )
Me. t xt MPDLS2. Text = Me. t xt MPDLS. Text
Me. t xt Bouyant Wei ght 2. Text = Me. t xt Bouyant Wei ght . Text
Me. t xt Hal f Di st ance2. Text = Me. t xt Hal f Di st ance. Text
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdWei ght OnBi t _Cl i ck( )
Di mI A As Doubl e, TWOC As Doubl e
Di mRes As Doubl e
I A = Me. t xt I ncl i nat i onAngl e. Text
TWOC = Me. t xt TWOC. Text
Res = TWOC * Cos( I A * Pi / 180)
Me. t xt Avai l abl eWOB. Text = Round( Res, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub CmdYSC_Cl i ck( )
' CALCULATI NG YI ELD STRENGTH COLLAPSE
Di mMYS As Doubl e, NWT As Doubl e, ODC As Doubl e, YSC As Doubl e

129
MYS = CboMYS. Text
NWT = Txt NWT. Text
ODC = Txt ODC. Text
YSC = ( 2 * MYS) / ( ( ODC / ( NWT - 1) ) / ( ODC / NWT) ^ 2)
Txt YSC. Text = Round( YSC, 2)
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub Cbo1_Change( )
Cal l Di spl ay_Dat a_Fr om_Combo_t o_Text Box2
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub cmdCr eat eRepor t _Cl i ck( )

' Repor t dog l eg sever i t y
Sheet s( " Repor t s" ) . Range( " B11" ) = Me. Txt DLS
' Repor t Bui l d up r at e
Sheet s( " Repor t s" ) . Range( " B13" ) = Me. Txt BSEC. Text
' Repor t t angent sect i on
Sheet s( " Repor t s" ) . Range( " B14" ) =
Me. t xt Tangent Sect i onResul t s. Text

MsgBox " Repor t s Cr eat ed Successf ul l y"
End Sub


'This function calculates the length of the tangent section.
' i ncl i nat i on shoul d be i n degr ees.
Funct i on Get Tangent Sect i on( ByVal TVD As Doubl e, ByVal I ncAngl e As
Doubl e) As Doubl e
Di mPi As Doubl e
Pi = 3. 14159265358979
Di mR_I ncAngl e As Doubl e ' I ncl i nat i on angl e conver t ed t o r adi ans
R_I ncAngl e = I ncAngl e * Pi / 180
Get Tangent Sect i on = TVD / Cos( R_I ncAngl e)
End Funct i on

Sub Di spl ay_Dat a_Fr om_Combo_t o_Text Box1( )
Di mI As I nt eger
I = Me. Cbo1. Li st I ndex
Sel ect Case I
Case 0
Me. Txt 1. Text = " Thi s"
Case 1
Me. Txt 1. Text = " That "
End Sel ect
End Sub
Sub Di spl ay_Dat a_Fr om_Combo_t o_Text Box2( )
Di mI As I nt eger
I = Me. Cbo1. Li st I ndex
Me. Txt 1. Text = Cel l s( 65520 + I , 2)
End Sub

130
Pr i vat e Sub User For m_Act i vat e( )
Pi = 3. 14159265358979
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub User For m_I ni t i al i ze( )
Pi = 3. 14159265358979
End Sub

Pr i vat e Sub User For m_MouseMove( ByVal But t on As I nt eger , ByVal Shi f t
As I nt eger , ByVal X As Si ngl e, ByVal Y As Si ngl e)


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
OpposedBore Dual Horizontal Well in the Austin Chalk Formation of South Texas,
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,
paper presented at the IADC/SPE Middle East Drilling Technology Conference held
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
Envelope Extending the Limits of Current Drilling Technology, paper SPE 64696
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. and McGhee, G.: Techniques for Solving Torque and Drag
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
2000 IADC/SPE DrillingConferenceheld in New Orleans, Louisiana, 2325 February
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., and Raitt, F.: Advances in Extended Reach Drilling An Eye
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. and Holt, C.A.: Uses and Limitations of Drillstring Tension
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
Hole Cleaning During Directional Well Drilling, paper SPE 37626 presented at the
1997SPEDrillingConferenceheldinAmsterdam,TheNetherlands,Mar.46.

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

36. Blikra, H., Drevdal, K.E., and Aarrestad., Extended Reach, Horizontal and Complex
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 with an 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., and Dore Fernandes, P.: Planning Extended
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.: Hydraulic Fracture Stress Testing APCRC Unrestricted Report No. 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
Reach Drilling: New World Record from Platform Statfjord C, Well C2, SPE 26350,
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.: Maersk Sets Horizontal World Records in Qatar, Drilling Contractor,
July1994,pg19.

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

142

143
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, and J. R.: Innovative Additives
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
Drilling To Increase Total Recovery and Production Rates, Paper IADC/SPE 27461,
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,2002,2
nd
Edition.
74. Bourgoyne, A.T., Chenevert, M.E., Millhem, K.K., Young Jr., F.S.: Applied Drilling
Engineering,SPETextbookSeries,Vol.2