SPE/IADC 156904

A Thixotropic Barrier Fluid Used To Prevent the Commingling of Fluids

While Tripping on Managed Pressure Drilling Wells
R. Riker, SPE, J. Turner, SPE, R. Lovorn, SPE, Halliburton; T. Kale, SPE, XTO Energy

Copyright 2012, SPE/IADC Managed Pressure Drilling and Underbalanced Operations Conference and Exhibition

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/IADC Managed Pressure Drilling and Underbalanced Operations Conference and Exhibition held in Milan, Italy, 20–21 March 2012.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE/IADC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been reviewed
by the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the
Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not
be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE/IADC copyright.

Abstract
The use of high density “mud cap” tripping pills to provide adequate hydrostatic pressure downhole for well control is a
common practice on managed pressure and underbalanced drilling operations. However, placing a high density tripping fluid
on top of a lower density drilling fluid is an attempt to defy gravity, and too often the result is large volumes of the two fluids
comingling, ruining the potential reuse of both. Viscosifying the tripping pill itself has been tried with some success, but
problems encountered have included more difficult movement and storage of the tripping fluid, along with the risk of
increasing the well’s bottomhole pressure while pumping the large, viscous pill into place. A better solution to the
comingling issue is to place a physical barrier between the two fluids to prevent their mixing.
A novel fluid with robust thixotropic properties was developed to serve this barrier fluid function. The shear thinning
properties of this fluid allow for ease of placement in the wellbore prior to tripping, and when the high density “mud cap” is
displaced on top of the barrier fluid the comingling of the tripping fluid and the drilling fluid is prevented. After tripping the
drillstring back to the top of the barrier pill, the pill can be washed through and disposed of at surface, leaving a clean drilling
fluid in the wellbore. The development and initial use of this barrier fluid are the subjects of this paper.

Introduction
The Haynesville shale gas play has recently become an important resource in that it has become the largest natural gas field
in the lower 48 states of the United States. It is estimated that production could exceed 50 trillion standard cubic feet of gas.
The Haynesville formation is a Jurassic-aged mudstone comprised of calcium carbonate and argillaceous material which
underlies southern Arkansas, northwest Louisiana, and eastern Texas. The abnormally pressured formation dips to the south
toward the Gulf of Mexico, with typically increasing pressures and temperatures towards the south. Bottomhole temperatures
can range from 260 to 380 degrees F. Due to these high reservoir temperatures and the limited availability of ultra-hot hole
directional tools, the majority of the production and exploration has been limited to the northern regions.
The Haynesville formation presents several challenges to well construction due to its high compressive rock strength,
high pressured fracture networks prone to influxes while drilling, and low rates of penetration while drilling horizontal
wellbores. Recently operators began to utilize managed pressure drilling (MPD) to optimize the process. This led to the
discovery that the reduced mud weights in MPD mode yielded lower circulating temperatures while drilling, and it is
believed that this reduction is the result of lower solids content in mud system.
XTO Energy has properties in the southern regions of the Haynesville and conducted a trial to verify the temperature
reduction result seen in other wells and improvements in the rate of penetration from MPD operations. XTO engineers
believed that if the trial demonstrated that the technology was successful, this would open up other properties to drilling
which are beyond the temperature limits of current hot hole tools.
As with all MPD operations a strategy to secure the well should be developed for tripping. Several questions should be
addressed:
• Should the system be weighted up prior to tripping?
• Is a mechanical device needed for tripping?
• In the lateral section, should the MPD system be used to compensate for surge/swab affect while tripping, followed
by spotting a heaver fluid in the vertical section (also known as a balanced mud cap)?  
2 SPE/IADC 156904

For the XTO trials the third option was chosen. With the balanced mud cap, the challenge is how to prevent the heavier
and lighter fluids from comingling during prolonged periods while tripping. As part of the trial, XTO agreed to use a new
barrier fluid to keep the two fluids separated.

Drivers for Managed Pressure Drilling Barrier Fluid Pill

The drilling mud used for MPD operations is of a lower density than that required for normal overbalanced drilling. This
means that the hydrostatic pressure from the drilling mud is lower than the formation pore pressure; when circulating through
the surface choke equipment back pressure is applied to control the actual bottomhole pressure at the desired level. Because
the drilling mud is “underbalanced” to the formation pore pressures when static, a hydrostatic overbalance is required when
tripping to avoid a kick. This is often accomplished by using a high density mud cap on top of the underbalanced drilling
mud, resulting in the desired total bottomhole hydrostatic pressure. For simplicity and cost, the mud cap is most often a
barite-weighted drilling fluid designed to provide the necessary hydrostatic pressure to control the well. The major
shortcoming of the mud cap design is the risk of comingling of the costly mud cap with the drilling fluid beneath it. Gravity
can force the heavier fluid to fall through the lighter fluid, contaminating both.
This contamination can result in undue and excessive operational delays as both fluids must be circulated and conditioned
back to specifications. The contaminated portion of the lighter drilling fluid may be isolated and captured for disposal. This
also increases the costs related to the use and cleaning of additional trucks and tanks to transport and store the material.
Additionally, there are the associated costs for proper disposal.
Current technology often relies on a casing Fluid Loss Control Valve (FLCV) to isolate the exposed formations from the
upper wellbore. Unfortunately, the FLCV technology has a poor performance history, and a rate of failure as high as 85%
has been reported. Too, the cost for the use of a FLCV can run as high as a $1,000,000 per well.
A barrier fluid can solve both economic and well control problems. A versatile, effective barrier fluid should meet the
following demands:

• Prevent comingling of lighter density drilling mud with heavier density mud cap
• Be compatible with the drilling mud and mud cap fluids
• Be able to be incorporated into drilling mud system with no detrimental effects
• Have a high temperature tolerance
• Have the ability to adjust density
• Have highly thixotropic viscosity (to form a strong gel structure)
• Act as a partial gas barrier below the mud cap in case of migration
• Be easily installed/removed

Design of the Barrier Fluid

The need for an effective barrier fluid for tripping was identified by the authors on MPD wells drilled in Alaska. On these
wells it was not uncommon for the high density mud cap to fall through the drilling fluid, especially on higher angle wells.
Viscosifying the mud cap was not successful in preventing this from happening, and the high viscosity made removal and
storage of the mud cap problematic. It was determined that a barrier fluid to prevent mixing of the mud cap and the drilling
fluid was needed. This fluid should exhibit highly thixotropic properties to simplify spotting the barrier pill and to provide an
efficient barrier. Initial lab testing was performed using a fresh water base fluid viscosified with high concentrations of
oilfield Wyoming bentonite. While the lab testing showed promise, field results were inconsistent. It was determined that
the gel structure formed by the bentonite was not of insufficient strength to provide an adequate barrier to prevent fall-
through of the mud cap.
Further testing with various high-performance biopolymers was not successful in achieving an adequate gel structure to
maintain fluid separation. It was also found that traditional oilfield viscosity measurement devices could not accurately
characterize the highly viscous barrier fluid’s rheology at the very low shear rates expected in the wellbore during trips. An
additional problem encountered was a separation of the highly viscous fluid from the instrument’s sleeve during rotation,
stopping energy transfer from the sleeve to the fluid and rendering any measurements inaccurate. To eliminate this issue, an
Anton Parr 500 rheometer was used. This laboratory instrument allowed fluid measurements at very low shear rates, as low
as 0.01 reciprocal seconds, and proved invaluable in understanding these highly viscous fluids’ behavior. Unfortunately, the
Anton-Parr rheometer is extremely sensitive and is a permanent laboratory-only instrument.
The result of the barrier fluid development was the substitution of a unique synthetic product as the viscosifier in the final
barrier fluid formulation. Exhibiting very high thixotropic characteristics, the resulting barrier fluid was thin enough to be
easily pumped into the wellbore during placement, yet it rapidly developed a gel structure adequate to successfully support
separation of the mud cap and the drilling fluid. The fluid could be weighted with barite or calcium carbonate to any practical
density without losing its gellation properties.
Because field measurements of the barrier fluid rheology are suspect due to the field instrumentation, it was decided that
the formulation of the barrier fluid would be the best field-expedient method to help ensure that the barrier fluid’s rheological
SPE/IADC 156904 3

properties were adequate for the specific well. Thus, the fluid was designed in the laboratory specific for the individual well
application and mixed accordingly on the rig site. While this approach may seem problematic, the ease of mixing along with
the simplicity of the barrier pill formulation minimizes the chances for an out of specification rheology. The barrier fluid is
also checked on the FANN® 35 instrument to help ensure that a minimum viscosity level is reached.

Pre-Well Planning
Mudcap tripping is an attractive method to control bottomhole pressures without circulating the well, but it has drawbacks.
As mentioned, because the weighted mudcap is of considerably higher density than the drilling fluid below, there is a strong
tendency for the mudcap to fall through the drilling fluid even if viscosified. Even if this does not occur, comingling of the
two fluids at their interface causes fluid degradation. The new barrier pill should eliminate this issue.
Located near Nacogdoches, Texas, the XTO Energy Aggies 1H well would use MPD techniques for drilling the lateral
reservoir section in the Carthage field in the Bossier and Haynesville Shale.

7” Casing shoe 13,200 feet MD

6” Open hole - lateral 19,052 feet MD
TD 13,876 feet TVD

The well had a long horizontal interval of 5,852 feet, but the wellbore location for the barrier fluid was to be near vertical,
which increased the chances for success on the initial barrier fluid trial well. A separation between the mud cap and drilling
mud of 250 feet was determined to be ample for initial trials, allowing some minor contamination of the barrier fluid during
placement without compromising the bulk of the pill. This separation required 9 barrels of barrier fluid to be placed between
the mud cap and the drilling mud during trips.
The drilling mud for the lateral would be an oil-based fluid with a nominal density of 14.5 lb/gal. The mud cap would be
an oil based fluid with a density of 16.1 lb/gal. The barrier pill would be formulated with a density slightly lower than the
drilling fluid to simplify placement. The trial well objective was to successfully mix and place the barrier fluid in the
wellbore, keeping the mud cap fluid on top of the drilling fluid during trips. Monitoring the density of the fluid returns while
circulating out the mud cap and the drilling fluid would confirm if the barrier pill was successful in maintaining separation of
the two fluids during the trip.
The barrier fluid is engineered to be fully compatible with the drilling fluid, thus on the trip into the hole it can be easily
incorporated into the drilling fluid. After displacing out the mud cap, the barrier pill can be washed through with the drilling
fluid.
Due to the small volume of barrier fluid required for a trip, it was not practical to mix the fluid in the rig pit system.
Instead, a skid-mounted mixing tank package was supplied for mixing and short term storage. This compact self-contained
tank unit had a capacity of 50 barrels, ample for the mixing of the barrier pill. It also provided a centrifugal mixing pump and
a paddle mixer to shear the barrier fluid after static periods. Unit power was supplied by a small diesel engine.

Jobsite Execution
The mixing unit package was spotted on location within ten feet of the rig centrifugal pump suctions to reduce the length of
lines (Figs. 1-2).
4 SPE/IADC 156904

Fig. 1—Third party 50 bbl skid mounted mixing tank adjacent to rig.

Fig. 2—Transfer of barrier fluid pill from mixing tank to rig slug pit via hose.

Prior to the first trip the barrier fluid was mixed to specification in the skid mixing unit. While a 9 barrel pill was
necessary to satisfy the linear wellbore coverage specification, additional volume was built to account for potential dead
volumes within the blending unit and rig slugging pit. Therefore, a total of 14.5 bbl was prepared so that there was sufficient
pill available to spot in the wellbore. At the time of the trip the drilling mud density was 15.2 lb/gal; therefore, the barrier
pill was mixed to 14.8 lb/gal – just slightly less than that of the drilling fluid. The pill’s rheological properties taken on the
rigsite with a FANN 35 rheometer are recorded below (Table 1).
SPE/IADC 156904 5

TABLE 1—FANN 35 RHEOMETER BARRIER FLUID PILL READINGS.

Density
14.8

Yield Point
131

Plastic Viscosity
4

600 RPM
139
300 RPM
135

200 RPM
145

100 RPM
165
6 RPM
197

3 RPM
194

Gel Strength 10
Seconds 121

Once the build section of the wellbore had been drilled and the horizontal section initiated, the XTO Energy drilling
program specified a trip out of the hole. The barrier fluid pill was transferred from the mixing unit directly into the rig slug
pit via a 4–in. discharge hose. In preparation of receiving the barrier pill, the rig slug pit had been drained of all residual
drilling mud with the use of a diaphragm pump. This process eliminated most of the normally required rig surface equipment
cleaning when moving different fluids throughout the rig circulating system, simplifying the process.
Approximately 11.5 bbl of the pill was transferred to the rig slug pit. At this point the rig pumps circulated the pill from
the rig slug pit down the workstring followed by the 15.2 lb/gal drilling mud. The 7” casing shoe was @ 13,190 ft MD. The
pill was spotted in the open hole below the casing shoe in the near vertical section of the 6-in. open hole from 13,589 ft MD
(bottom) to 13,339 ft MD (top).
Once the barrier pill was spotted, three stands of the workstring were pulled. The pill was allowed to set undisturbed for
25 minutes to maximize the formation of gel strength, during which time preparations were made to spot the 16.1 lb/gal mud
cap. A 94-bbl volume of mud cap was required to fill the upper wellbore to surface. Once the mud cap was in place the
workstring was tripped the rest of the way out of the hole. Flow and pressure monitoring indicated that the barrier pill was
holding the two other wellbore fluids in place. The monitoring also indicated that the barrier pill had inhibited the normally
seen gas migration to surface.
After tripping back into the hole with the workstring to the bottom of the mud cap, the latter was displaced out of the well
with the 15.2 lb/gal drilling mud and into storage. During this phase of circulation the mud cap density was constant, an
indication that the barrier pill had held the heavy mud cap in place. After pumping the bottoms-up volume, returns were
checked for density, again confirming that the pill had remained intact preventing comingling of the two different muds.
However, at this point in the trip a test of the downhole logging tools indicated a malfunction, so the mud cap was again
spotted on top of the same barrier pill and the tripping operations were repeated.
The mud cap was once again displaced out of the well with the same positive results. The replacement logging tools were
tested and at this time were found operational, and the process of washing through the barrier pill commenced. The 250-ft
section of barrier fluid pill was washed through at an average flow rate of 5 bpm over a period of 30 minutes. This was done
to allow the barrier fluid pill to be easily incorporated into the circulating drilling mud system with no detrimental effects
(i.e., no change to density, electrical stability, oil-water ratio, etc.). The absence of adverse effects was confirmed through
continuous monitoring of the shale shaker returns, drilling mud property checks, and Coriolis density meter readouts.
With the barrier pill gone, the workstring was tripped to the wellbore bottom and drilling commenced. The drilling mud
returns were again carefully monitored while circulating bottoms up, with constant fluid densities recorded. This
reconfirmed that the barrier pill prevented the mud cap and drilling mud fluids from comingling during a trip which took over
24 hours to complete.

Results
The initial trial of the barrier fluid proved successful as the chief project goals were achieved. The chief goal was to provide
positive separation between the drilling mud and the mud cap during tripping operations. This was accomplished. No
incompatibility issues with either the mud cap or the drilling mud were observed. The pill was easily placed and easily
removed. During the trip no gas migration was noted at surface, indicating that the pill had acted as a barrier to minor gas
6 SPE/IADC 156904

migration. An additional challenge was the extended trip time and the multiple spotting and removal of the mud cap; the
barrier pill was not affected by these challenges and performed as expected.
XTO Energy personnel agreed that the use of the barrier fluid pill was successful and authorized additional field trials
with a greater density differential to further confirm the success of the technology. The result will be a further streamlining
of the barrier pill use, with the following critical points:

• Barrier pill will be pre-mixed and delivered in sealed containers with agitator.
• Cleanliness of rig pill pit and pump lines is critical to success.
• Spotting the pill with a “pump and pull” technique is recommended.
• Further testing is required to optimize the length of the barrier pill in the wellbore.

Summary
In an effort to engage the high temperature gas reservoirs in the southern regions of the Haynesville and the limited
availability of ultra-hot hole directional tools, MPD operational techniques have been employed. The use of reduced mud
weight drilling fluid in MPD mode yields lower circulating temperatures while drilling, and this reduction is the result of
lower solids content in mud system. This result, plus improvements in the rate of penetration from MPD operations will
allow other, more challenging XTO Energy reservoirs to to be drilled. These reservoirs have been considered beyond the
temperature limits of current downhole drilling tools, but now may be drillable with current technologies.
The use of a mud cap tripping technique increased the efficiency of MPD operations for the XPO Energy well, and the
new barrier fluid improved the success of this technique. The properly designed and engineered barrier fluid placed between
the mud cap and drilling mud solved both economic and potential well control problems.
The new barrier fluid formulation demonstrated a highly thixotropic nature and was thin enough to be easily pumped into
the wellbore during placement, and at the same time rapidly developed a robust gel structure to facilitate separation of the
mud cap and the drilling mud. The barrier fluid was weighted up with barite (calcium carbonate could be used) to any
practical density without losing its gelation properties. Since field measurements of the barrier fluid rheology are suspect due
to the limited field instrumentation, it was decided that the formulation of the barrier fluid would be the best field-expedient
method to ensure that the barrier fluid’s rheological properties met the design parameters. Flow and pressure monitoring
indicated that the barrier pill was holding the two other wellbore fluids in place. Once the trip was completed, drilling mud
returns showed constant fluid densities, reconfirming that the barrier pill had prevented the mud cap and drilling mud fluids
from comingling.

Conclusions
The initial trial of the barrier fluid proved successful as the chief project goals were achieved including: providing positive
separation between the drilling mud and the mud cap during tripping operations, minimizing incompatibility issues with
either the mud cap or the drilling mud, allowing for ease of placement and removal, and inhibiting gas migration. XTO
Energy agreed that the use of the barrier fluid pill was successful and authorized additional field trials with a greater density
differential to further confirm the success of the technology. Future field trials will focus on further streamlining of the
barrier pill preparation, deployment, and overall properties.

Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank XTO Energy for the opportunity to field trial the barrier fluid pill on their well and Halliburton for
providing the work environment which supports the development of new technologies.