IADC/SPE 102661

Fills Cleanout With Coiled Tubing in the Reverse Circulation Mode

Li J. and B. Luft, BJ Services Co.

Copyright 2006, IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology Conference and Exhibition
transport computer algorithm, which can now be used to
This paper was prepared for presentation at the IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology optimize the hole cleaning process for both the forward and
Conference and Exhibition held in Bangkok, Thailand, 13–15 November 2006.
reverse circulation modes of solids transport.
This paper was selected for presentation by an IADC/SPE Program Committee following
review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the
paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the International Association of Drilling Introduction
Contractors or the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the
author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the Several wellbore cleanout methods have been developed over
International Association of Drilling Contractors, the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its the years. One of the most common operations is running in
officers, or members. Papers presented at IADC/SPE meetings are subject to publication
review by Editorial Committees of the International Association of Drilling Contractors and the with coiled tubing and circulating the solids out with a liquid
Society of Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of
this paper for commercial purposes without the written consent of the International Association or multi-phase fluid through the annulus between the CT and
of Drilling Contractors and the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not
wellbore (i.e. forward circulation, Fig. 1). Solids tend to settle
be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom and form an equilibrium bed on the low side of the wellbore in
the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson,TX 75083-3836,
U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435. highly deviated or horizontal wells. This problem is
exacerbated by the eccentric annular flow path created with
the CT entering deviated wellbores. Fluids with enhanced
Abstract
solids suspension properties tend to have poorer solids re-
Removing sand fills from wellbores is one of the major
entrainment abilities once a stationary solids bed has formed.
applications for coiled tubing (CT). For the fills cleanout
The conventional approaches to removing the solids bed
process, the fluid could be circulated in two different modes:
involve using higher flow rates, or employing exotic and
forward circulation and reverse circulation. In the forward
costly fluids, neither of which ensures complete fill removal in
circulation mode, the carrying fluids are pumped through the
every case.
CT down to bottom and flowed back to surface in the
Based on prior comprehensive research1-6, an effective CT
CT/casing annulus. For reverse circulation, fluids are pumped
sand cleanout methodology utilizing the forward circulation
down the CT/casing annulus and back up the coil. In many
mode has been developed, patented7, and verified during
cases with large completions and low reservoir pressures, the
numerous field operations8-13. This proven sand cleanout
forward circulation mode cannot effectively clean the fills out
process entails a down hole wash tool and a sophisticated
of the annulus with only a limited available flow rate or
computer based methodology for CT deployment in vertical,
without circulating expensive gel fluids, especially for the
deviated and horizontal wells. The preferred down hole tool
heavier particulates in deep and/or highly deviated wells. Due
incorporates fluid nozzles with switchable forward and
to the smaller flow areas and therefore higher velocities, fills
backward facing jets. By selecting the backward facing jets
may be more readily transported inside the CT flow channel.
and controlling the pull-out-of-hole (POOH) speed (at rates
Therefore, reverse circulation may be an option to overcome
determined by the associated particle transport software), the
the above constraints associated with forward circulation.
settled sand bed can be “swept” out of the hole with near
Several major risks for reverse circulation with CT include
100% efficiency.
coil collapse, loss of well control and sand bridging in the coil.
However, in some cases involving large completions in
Controlling the rate of penetration (ROP) of the CT into the
deep and/or highly deviated wells, the forward circulation
fill is very critical for the reverse circulation sand cleanout
mode cannot effectively clean debris fills out of the annulus
process. There is a lack of knowledge on the effect of as well
with the limited flow rate available or without resorting to
as optimum ROP during reverse circulation. In this paper, the
expensive gel fluids8. Due to the smaller flow areas and higher
maximum ROP for different sand types at different deviated
velocities, fills can be effectively transported by the internal
angles and water flowrates for reverse circulation cleanouts
CT flow channel. Therefore, reverse circulation presents an
are investigated with a full scale flow loop test facility. Based
alternative clean out mode that could overcome the above
on these test results, empirical correlations have been
limitations associated with forward circulation.
developed and incorporated into an existing proprietary solids
2 IADC/SPE 102661
For reverse circulation (Fig. 1), the clean fluid is pumped
down through the annular flow channel outside the CT,
returning back to surface through the CT. Reverse circulation
has been used for cementing, drilling and fills cleaning14-15. As
with forward circulation, reverse circulation is not a perfect
process and candidate well selection discipline must be
exercised. Due to the elimination of the check valve at the end
of CT, well control becomes more critical. Strategic wellbore
hydraulics is not only key to lift the debris from a well but is
also important for preventing coil collapse. On one hand, a
sufficient annulus injection pressure is needed at surface to
maintain circulation and prevent formation fluids from
entering the wellbore. However, since the collapse strength of
a CT string is less than its burst strength, particularly at higher
axial tensile loads, extra precautions are necessary to prevent
tubing collapse. Continuous monitoring of injection and return
flow rates along with annulus injection pressures and use of
pressure relief valves are mandatory for CT reverse circulation
operations. The potential utilization of a partial concentric coil
tubing string could also prevent CT collapse during reverse
circulation.
Critical Reverse Circulation Operating Parameters
The fluid supply rate must be uninterrupted and can be
delivered within a wide range if necessary. As the return fluid
loads with fill, the annulus pressure will rise and the return
flow rate will be reduced. However, a minimum return flow
rate is required to keep the sand concentration inside CT
below a maximum value. A surface manifold system must
therefore be incorporated that can be used to quickly switch
from reverse circulation to forward circulation to remove a
potential sand bridge. The formation of a sand bridge is often
indicated by variation of the pressure and the return flow rate.
Controlling the rate of penetration of the CT into the fills is
very critical for the reverse circulation sand cleanout process.
If the ROP is too fast for a given operation condition, the end
of the coil could penetrate the fills column and cause either CT
buckling, lost returns or high sand concentration inside the
CT. A maximum ROP of 0.5 m/min was recommended for a
horizontal well in Reference 15. A less arbitrary and more
specific engineering correlation is given in Reference 14 as:
Qr
ROP = (1)
Y * Ch
The mixing ratio of fluid volume to solid volume, Y, can
range from 6 to 10. However, Y could be affected by the fluid
and sand type, and wellbore deviation angle. Hence, equation
1 has limited utility and a better understanding and prediction
of the optimum ROP for the CT during reverse circulation is
required.
In this paper, the maximum ROP for different sand types
at different deviated angles in the reverse circulation mode are
determined with a full scale flow loop. The maximum ROP is
defined as the maximum CT penetration rate at which the end
of a coil does not insert itself into the sand column for a given
flow rate at a given deviation angle. The correlations
developed from these tests, have been incorporated into the
solids transport computer software, which can be used to
optimize the hole cleaning process with forward or reverse
circulation.
Experimental Setup and Test Procedure
The flow loop, constructed for a previous project1 and used for
the present study, is shown in Fig. 2. It consists of a 20 ft long
transparent Lexan pipe with a 5 inch inner diameter to
simulate the open hole and a 1.5 inch steel inner pipe to
simulate the coiled tubing. The inner pipe is positioned on the
low side of the Lexan pipe for the worst case scenario
operation. Hydraulic rams enable axial movement of the
tubing to simulate RIH or a wiper trip. The loop is supported
by a rigid guide rail that can be inclined at any angle in the
range of 0o-900 from vertical.
Water was pre-mixed with different test sands in a mixing
tank. Initially the test section was filled with a certain amount
of test sand, then the slurry flow is circulated through the inner
“CT” pipe. The initial sand bed area is approximately 80% of
the cross area of the Lexan pipe for the horizontal position,
and 100% for all angles of inclination. Once the initial sand
concentration is attained, the “CT” is run into the test section
at a preset speed while the clean fluid is continuously
circulated through the annulus between “CT” and Lexan pipe.
The circulated fluid entrains the sand and the resulting slurry
is then conveyed out of the test section through the inside of
the “CT”. The entrance of the “CT” consists of a plain square
opening without the use of any special nozzles attachments.
For a given flow rate, the maximum ROP is determined by the
trial and error method.
The water temperature was ambient. The flow pattern was
recorded by a digital video camera. Micro-motion mass flow
meters were stationed at the inlet and outlet of the test section
to determine fluid rate and density.
The data collected from the instrumentation is recorded
using a computer controlled data acquisition system (see Ref.
1 for details). Recorded parameters include flow rate, fluid
density and temperature, and CT run-in-hole speed.
Test Results and Discussion
Particulate material to be removed from a wellbore can
have various sizes. In this study, 0.15 mm Sil #1 sand was
used to simulate formation fines and 0.76 mm (20/40 mesh)
carbolite and bauxite were used as a typical frac proppant.
Washed “GraRock” of 7 mm size was utilized to simulate the
larger particulates. Basic information related to the particle
size and density is listed in Table 1 and the sand/rock images
are shown in Fig. 3.
Flow pattern. Figures 4 to 7 show the flow pattern and sand
front shape for water/carbolite during reverse circulation
cleanout, and Figs. 8 to 10 show the flow pattern and sand
front shape for water/Sil #1 sands during reverse circulation
cleanout at different deviation angles. The arrows in these
figures indicate the general flow directions. From the flow
IADC/SPE 102661
visualization observations, it can be seen that the sands are
drawn into the entrance of the pipe by the water which is
flowing into the CT cleanout string. Once the distance
between the end of the pipe and sand front is larger than a
certain value, which is in the order of the pipe OD, the fluid
suction strength is insufficient to convey the sand into the
pipe. Therefore, maintaining a critical distance between the
opening of the CT and the sand front is very important for
effective reverse circulation sand removal. However, if the
RIH speed of the CT is too high, there is not enough time to
allow the sands to accommodate the required mass flow and
the end of the tubing will insert itself into the sand bed. This
will result in some sands left behind as illustrated by, Figs. 6
and 9.
Comparison of Fig. 5 with Fig. 8, and Fig. 7 with Fig. 10
indicates that the slope of the sand front for carbolite is less
than it is for Sil #1. This is because the spherical shape of
carbolite enables the particulates to slide or roll easily towards
the entrance of the tubing where they are continuously sucked
away. On the other hand, once Sil #1 sands have been
entrained into the water, the solid particles of these sands tend
to agglomerate thereby inhibiting their ability to easily slide
or roll forwards towards the entrance of the suction tubing.
The tendency for Sil#1 sands to agglomerate results in a sand
front with a much steeper slope. More importantly, this will
result a slower ROP for water/Sil #1 compared with
water/carbolite for a given pump rate and a given deviation
angle (see Figs. 14 and 15).
Maximum RIH Speed. Figure 11 displays the maximum RIH
speed for water and 20/40 carbolite at different deviation
angles. It shows that the RIH speed does not change with
angle from vertical to 55o for a given flow rate. Once the
deviation angle is above 55o, the RIH speed decreases with
increasing angle of deviation. The plot also depicts that a
higher flow rate results in a higher RIH speed, which is also
reflected by equation 1 in Ref. 14.
Figure 12 compares the RIH speed with the POOH speed
for carbolite for both vertical and horizontal wells. The plot
indicates that the RIH speed for water/carbolite is similar to
the POOH speed for carbolite with 1% gel biopolymer and
with a backward nozzle. However, the optimum RIH speed for
water/carbolite is higher than the POOH speed for the same
water/carbolite slurry. In other words, reverse circulation with
water could clean the sands with the same effectiveness as 1%
gel using backward jetting but more effective than using 1%
gel in the forward circulation mode. In some cases, this means
that there is an economic advantage presented with the option
of circulating a less costly fluid using reverse circulation to
negate the necessity for more expensive fluids with
conventional forward circulating methods.
The above discussion is supported further by the plots
shown in Fig. 13. Shown here are the profiles of the minimum
fluid erosion velocity, that is, the minimum fluid velocity
corresponding to the zero RIH and POOH speeds at different
deviation angles for which 100% of solids can be cleaned out
with a stationary cleaning mode or zero POOH speed. In other
3
words, in order to completely clean the sands out of the hole
when the CT is stationary, i.e. only circulation is occurring,
the minimum superficial water velocity, Vsup, must be above
the erosion velocity. If Vsup is less than the minimum erosion
velocity, there will always be some fills left behind in the hole
regardless of the circulation time.
If the pump rate is lower than the flow rate corresponding
to the minimum liquid velocity for solids’ transport, there will
always be fills left in the hole regardless of how slow the pipe
is pulled out of the hole. Similarly, there is a minimum pump
or flow rate with a corresponding minimum liquid velocity
required for solids’ transport, that is independent of the RIH
speed for the CT clean out string. Figure 13 shows how these
minimum liquid velocities change with deviation angle.
The plots in Fig. 13 indicate that the minimum erosion
velocity for stationary (i.e. zero wiper trip speed) circulation is
higher than the minimum liquid velocity when pulling out of
hole. It is also noticed from this figure that transporting solids
is most difficult at deviation angles of around 55o for both the
stationary circulation and the POOH mode. This is because at
these angles, there is no stable sand bed formed near the
bottom of the wellbore. The fill particles slip and slide back
down near the bottom where they are re-entrained into the
flow stream and transported back up to the top of the flow
channel. The minimum liquid velocity while running into the
hole is much lower than it is for stationary or pulling out of
hole during forward circulation. This means that reverse
circulation could effectively clean the sands out of a hole with
a lower flow rate that would be insufficient with forward
circulation.
Figures 14 and 15 compare the difference of the maximum
RIH speed during reverse circulation for 4 different sand types
in vertical and horizontal wells. In a vertical well, as shown in
Fig. 14, of these four, the fine sand has the lowest RIH speed.
Although the fine sands have the smallest size, their
characteristics are such that these sands have a tendency to
form larger lumps once they have merged with the water. The
lumps of sand thus formed account for the impediment of fine
sands to sliding or rolling forward and towards the intake of
the CT clean out string . The result is a slower RIH speed. Due
to the particulates’ weight, the RIH speed for bauxite and 7
mm rocks would be less than it is for carbolite.
Correlation Development. In previous studies1-6, a
comprehensive experimental program of solids transport with
stationary circulation was conducted. The effect of multi-
phase flow, rate of penetration, deviation angle, circulation
fluid properties, particle density and size, and fluid rheology
on solids transport was investigated. For the stationary
circulation tests, the solids were circulated into the test section
in order to build an equilibrium solids concentration in the
annulus. After reaching equilibrium, the valves are closed
simultaneously at both the inlet and the outlet of the test
section. This allows the solids and fluid volumes in the
annulus of the test section to be measured. The equilibrium
solids concentration is a function of solids injection
concentration and the averaged liquid in-situ velocity. When
4 IADC/SPE 102661
the solids bed has stabilized, the net transport solids
concentration is equal to the injection concentration.
Therefore, based on the stationary circulation test data, a set of
formulae for the sand concentration was developed as 4:
C bed = f ( Fr , C inj ) (2)
Varying forms of Eqn. 2 have been developed for different
combinations of fluid and particle type and deviation angle.
These correlations are empirical formulae based on a wide
range of test results. Using these correlations, the in-situ
concentration of solids inside CT can be predicted during
running in the hole with different flow rates, at different
deviation angles and speeds. These correlations along with the
newly developed correlations for the RIH speeds under
reverse circulation, were incorporated into a solids transport
numerical simulator that provides an efficient on-site analysis
tool for evaluating the solids transport performance under
given downhole conditions. Previous references14-15 suggested
that a safe rule for most clean out operations is to allow about
10% of internal volume of the coil to be filled with solids at
any time. However, with the present software and newly
developed correlations, an engineer can predict the solids in-
situ concentration profile along the inside of the CT at
different wellbore deviation angles and at different flow rates.
This enables an engineer to optimize the job program to
provide more cost effective well clean out operations.
Conclusions
Reverse circulation with CT to clean sand and rock fills is a
field proven process. With a reduced flow rate, the process can
effectively remove the fills out of the hole, especially for
highly deviated wellbores and large completions. Furthermore,
compared to forward circulation, reverse circulation can
maintain clean fluids in the annulus and greatly reduce the
possibility of getting stuck in hole when the fills drop out at
crossovers or at high wellbore deviations.
Reverse circulation can also establish an accurate fill top
by eliminating fall back of particulates. However, there are
also certain risks associated with this process. Once the
candidate selection discipline has been exercised, well control,
coil collapse and proper hydraulic design have to be carefully
considered during both job planning and job execution. Partial
concentric coiled tubing could be used to prevent CT collapse
for the critical cases. Due to the limited ability to break
through hard fill, a surface manifold system has to be setup
that can be used to quickly switch from reverse circulation to
forward circulation to remove a sand bridge.
Based on the experimental results from this study, the
following conclusions can be drawn:
1. Reverse circulation cleaning is more effective than it is
for forward circulation with the same fluid at a given
operation condition.
2. Circulating a less costly fluid like water with reverse
circulation would have the same cleaning effectiveness as
circulating with 1% gel biopolymer using a forward
circulation process; however, reverse circulation presents
a more economic wellbore clean out option.
3. The maximum RIH speed using reverse circulation is
greatly affected by the sand type but not by the deviation
angle.
4. New correlations have been developed from the
experimental data to predict the maximum RIH speed for
a given sand type. Such correlations were incorporated
into a solids transport numerical simulator that allows the
user to predict the time history of solids in-situ
concentrations along the inside of CT and the hole
cleaning time for a given operational case. This enables
an engineer to optimize the job program to provide more
cost effective wellbore clean out operations.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to express their appreciation to BJ
Services Company for the opportunity to present this paper.
Nomenclature
Aannular = annular cross area, m2.
Abed = solids bed cross area, m2
Abed
Cbed = x100% , the bulk volume concentration in the
Aannular
annular test section
Q
Cinj = sand x100% , injection solids volume concentration
Qslurry
De = equivalent hydraulic diameter based on the open flow
area, m
Ch = volumetric capacity of hole/casing, m3/m
De = equivalent hydraulic diameter based on the open flow
area, m
Fr = Froud number, V in2− situ /( gD e )
g = gravitate acceleration constant, 9.81 m/s2
Qr = Return flow rate, m3/min
Qsand = solids true volume flow rate, m3/s
Qslurry = Qwater + Qsand, slurry volume flow rate, m3/s
Qwater = water flow rate, m3/s
ROP = rate of penetration, m/min
Relative in-situ liquid velocity = Vin-situ/Vref in-situ
Relative liquid velocity, Vsup//Vref
Q water
Vin − situ = , in-situ liquid
( Aannular − Abed )(1 − C inj / 100)
velocity, in/s
Vref = reference liquid superficial velocity, m/min
Vref in-situ = reference in-situ liquid velocity, in/s
Vsup = liquid superficial velocity, m/min ( Q water / Aannular )
Y = mixing ratio of fluid volume to solid volume
IADC/SPE 102661
CT – coiled tubing
OD – outside diameter
POOH or POH – pull out of hole
RIH – run in hole
SI Metric Conversion Factors
bbl x159 E +00 = liter
ft x 0.3048 E +00 = m
inch x 25.4 E –03 = m
psi x 6.895 E +03 = Pa
References
1. Li, J. and S. Walker: “Sensitivity Analysis of Hole
Cleaning Parameters in Directional Wells”, SPE Journal,
pp356-363, December, 2001.
2. Walker, S. and J. Li: “Effects of Particle Size, Fluid
Rheology, and Pipe Eccentricity on Cuttings Transport”,
paper SPE 60755 presented at the 2000 SPE/ICoTA
Coiled Tubing Roundtable held in Houston, Texas, 5 - 6
April 2000.
3. Walker, S. and J. Li: ”Coiled-Tubing Wiper Trip Hole
Cleaning in Highly Deviated Wellbores”, paper SPE
68435 presented at the 2001 SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing
Roundtable held in Houston, Texas, 7 - 8 March 2001.
October 6-9, 1991.
4. Li, J., S. Walker and B. Aitken: “How to Efficiently
Remove Sand From Deviated Wellbores With a Solids
Transport Simulator and a Coiled Tubing Cleanout Tool”,
paper SPE 77527 presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition held in San Antonio, Texas,
29 September–2 October 2002.
5. Li, J., G. Wilde and A. Crabtree: “Do Complex Super-Gel
Liquids Perform Better Than Simple Linear Liquids In
Hole Cleaning With Coiled Tubing?”, paper SPE 94185
presented at the 2005 SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing
Conference and Exhibition held in Woodlands, Texas,
U.S.A., 12 – 13 April 2005.
6. Li, J. and G. Wilde: “Affect of Particle Density and Size
on Solids Transport and Hole Cleaning with Coiled
Tubing”, paper SPE 94187 presented at the 2005
SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Conference and Exhibition
held in Woodlands, Texas, U.S.A., 12 – 13 April 2005.
7. US patent 6,982,008 B2, “Coiled Tubing Wellbore
Cleanout”, January 3, 2006.
8. Engel, S. P. and P. Rae: “New Methods for Sand Cleanout
in Deviated Wellbores Using Small Diameter Coiled
Tubing”, paper IADC/SPE 77207 presented at the
IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology held in
Jakarta, Indonesia, 9–11 September 2002.
9. Ovesen, M., M. Sach, L. Laun, G. E. Gill and H. Juel:
“Efficient Sand Cleanouts in Larger Wellbores Using
Coiled Tubing: A New Approach Making an Old Problem
Simple”, paper SPE 81727 presented at the SPE/ICoTA
Coiled Tubing Conference held in Houston, Texas,
U.S.A., 8-9 April 2003.
10. Hobbs, Douglas and C. Liles: “Technique, nozzle enhance
coiled-tubing wiper-trip efficiency”, Oil & Gas Journal,
IADC/SPE 102661 IAD
April 1, 2002, pp52-56.
11. Gilmore, T., R. Leonard and S. Steinback: ‘Software,
Fluids and Down Hole Tools for Successful Sand Clean
Outs in Any Wellbore Geometry Using Small Coiled
Tubing”, paper SPE 97080 presented at the 2005 SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in
Dallas, Texas, U.S.A., 9 – 12 October 2005.
12. Li, J., I. Bayfield and G. Paton: “Effective Heavy Post-
Fracturing Proppant Cleanout with Coiled Tubing:
Experimental Study and Field Casing History”, paper SPE
101235 presented at the 2006 SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition held in Dallas, Texas, U.S.A.,
9 – 12 October 2006.
13. Eldien, H. N., M. A. Al-Anazi, R. Proctor, J. B. Chesson,
R. M. Saleh: “Challenging Wellbore Cleanouts with
Coiled Tubing Made Easy with Computer Modeling
Technology”, paper SPE 100129 presented at the 2006
SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Roundtable held in
Woodlands, TX, U.S.A., 4–5 April 2006.
14. Michel, C., R. Stephens, D. Smith, W. Crow and G. King:
“Reverse Circulation with Coiled Tubing – Results of
1600+ Jobs”, paper SPE 89505 presented at the 2004
SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Roundtable held in Houston,
Texas, 23 - 24 March 2004.
15. Kumar, P.S., B. AI-Amri, P. Kouli, S. Van Gisbergen, S.
Shidi, E. ferdiansyah and P. Mowat: “Coiled Tubing
reverse Circulation – An Efficient Method of Cleaning
Horizontal Wells in a Mature, Pressure-Depleted Field”,
paper SPE 92804 presented at the 2005 Asia Pacific Oil
and gas Conference and Exhibition held in Jarta,
Indonesia, 5-7 April 2005.
Table 1 Particle size and density for the tested solids
Solids type Size True density Bulk Density
mm kg/m3 kg/m3
Sil #1 0.15 2672 1462
20/40 Carbolite 0.76 2710 1620
20/40 Bauxite 0.76 3560 2000
Washed GraRock 7 2714 1342
6 IADC/SPE 102661

CASING CASING

TUBING TUBING

COILED TUBING COILED TUBING

PACKER PACKER
NIPPLE NIPPLE

PERFS PERFS
FILL FILL

Forward Circulation Reverse Circulation

Figure 1 Circulation modes for fills cleanout

Figure 3 Tested sand type

Figure 4 Reverse cleanout for water/carbolite at 5o

Figure 2 Photo of solids transport flow loop

IADC/SPE 102661 7

Figure 5 Reverse cleanout for water/carbolite at 45o Figure 8 Reverse cleanout for water/ Sil #1 at 45o

Figure 6 Reverse cleanout for water/carbolite at 45o Figure 9 Reverse cleanout for water/ Sil #1 at 45o
RIH is too fast RIH is too fast

Figure 7 Reverse cleanout for water/carbolite at 90o Figure 10 Reverse cleanout for water/ Sil #1 at 90o
8 IADC/SPE 102661

12

20
Water/Carbolite, 5 degree
10
18 5 degree
Water/Bauxite, 5 degree
16 45 degree

Optimum RIH speed, m/min

8 Water/7mm Rocks, 5 degree
14 55 degree
Optimum RIH speed, m/min

Water/Fine sand, 5 degree

12 65 degree
6

90 degree
10

4
8

6
2
4

2 0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
0
Relative liquid superficial velocity in CT
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Relative liquid superficial velocity in CT
Figure 14 Comparison RIH speed for sands
Figure 11 Optimum RIH speed for water/carbolite reverse in the vertical 5"X1.5" wellbore
circulation at different angles in 5"X1.5" wellbore
12

25
Water/Carbolite, 90 degree
Water/Carbolite, RIH at 5 degree 10

Water/Carbolite, RIH at 90 degree Water/Bauxite, 90 degree

Optimum RIH speed, m/min

20 Water/Carbolite, POOH at 5 degree 8 Water/7mm Rocks, 90 degree
Maximum RIH or POOH speed, m/min

Water/Carbolite, POOH at 90 degree

Water/Fine sand, 90 degree
1% gel/Carbolite, POOH at 5 degree
6
15
1% gel/Carbolite, POOH at 90 degree

10

5
0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Relative liquid superficial velocity in CT
0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Figure 15 Comparison RIH speed for sands
Relative liquid superficial velocity in annulus
in the horizontal 5"X1.5" wellbore
Figure 12 Comparison between RIH and POOH speed for
carbolite at different angles in 5"X1.5" wellbore

Minimum erosion velocity with stationary circulation mode

0.9
Minimum velocity with forward jets, POOH
0.8
Minimum velocity with backward jets, POOH

0.7
Minimum relative liquid velocity

Minimum liquid velocity for RIH

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Deviation angle, o

Figure 13 Minimum liquid velocities that corresponds to the

zero trip speed at different angles (water/carbolite)