Well Engineering

Guidelines for Hole Cleaning & Tripping

Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................ 3
1.0 Hole Cleaning ............................................................................................................................................ 4
1.1 What is Good Hole Cleaning? ............................................................................................................... 4
1.2 Hole Cleaning Regimes and Mechanisms ............................................................................................. 4
1.4 The Systems Approach to Hole Cleaning .............................................................................................. 6
1.3.1 Flow Rates ........................................................................................................................................ 6
1.3.2 Rotation ............................................................................................................................................. 6
1.3.4 Recommended Medium to High Angle Hole Cleaning Thresholds ................................................... 7
1.3.5 Drilling Fluids..................................................................................................................................... 8
1.3.6 BHA Design....................................................................................................................................... 8
1.3.7 Borehole Instability .......................................................................................................................... 10
1.3.8 Hole Cleaning Tools ........................................................................................................................ 10
1.3.9 How Fast Is Too Fast? .................................................................................................................... 11
2.0 Borehole Monitoring ................................................................................................................................. 12
2.1 Torque and Drag ................................................................................................................................. 12
2.1.1 Torque and Drag Roadmap............................................................................................................. 12
2.1.2 Roles and Responsibilities .............................................................................................................. 12
2.1.3 Limitations of Torque and Drag Modelling ....................................................................................... 12
2.2 Standpipe Pressure ............................................................................................................................. 13
2.3 Pressure Whilst Drilling ....................................................................................................................... 13
2.4 Shakers and Returns ........................................................................................................................... 13
3.0 Drilling & Tripping Practices ..................................................................................................................... 13
3.1 Connection Practices........................................................................................................................... 13
3.2 Clean Up Practices .............................................................................................................................. 13
3.3 Tripping Practices ................................................................................................................................ 13
3.4 Back Reaming / Pumping Out ............................................................................................................. 13
3.5 Remedial Hole Cleaning ...................................................................................................................... 13
3.6 Wiper Trips .......................................................................................................................................... 13
3.7 Sweeps ................................................................................................................................................ 13
Executive Summary

Hole cleaning has been shown to be the cause of most Non-Productive Time in drilling operations, with
increasing well complexity increasing the risk. Overlooking hole cleaning during planning and execution of
a well design will negate the benefits of even the most powerful drilling rig. The application of techniques
and best practices developed for the industry leading extended reach wells has been observed to reduce
the incidence hole cleaning related Non-Productive Time when applied to any deviated well.
By describing the physics of cuttings and techniques that can be applied to successfully monitor of the
condition of the well this guideline provides a basis to minimize the risk of Stuck Pipe and hole cleaning
Non Productive Time.
With the majority of hole cleaning related adverse drilling events occurring during tripping this guideline
1.0 Hole Cleaning
1.1 What is Good Hole Cleaning?
Practically a clean borehole is one that is has a cuttings distribution and build up that allows trouble free
current and subsequent operations. Thus, a borehole does not need to be free of cuttings to be defined as
‘clean’ and is relative to the operation being performed. A clean hole for drilling may not be the same as a
clean hole for tripping, casing, cementing, or running wireline.
All high angle wells will have cuttings beds formation, regardless of how efficient hole cleaning practices
are. The distribution of the cutting’s beds will dictate the measures required to move them and prepare the
hole for trouble free operation.

1.2 Hole Cleaning Regimes and Mechanisms

Mechanical hole cleaning is primarily a challenge against the gravitational effect on cuttings and drill string,
thus the inclination of the borehole creates a boundary condition that limits the distance cuttings can fall
before interacting with the borehole walls and influences the fluid velocity across the borehole as pipe
becomes eccentered. Broadly the inclination can be broken into three ranges where different regimes
influence the cuttings beds and hole cleaning efficiency.

Indicative
Inclination
Description
Range
(degrees)

Cuttings are brought to the surface by maintaining a fluid

0 – 30 viscosity in excess of cuttings slip velocity. Fluid rheology and
cuttings size will influence hole cleaning

Cuttings beds begin to form, when pumps are switched off

cuttings will avalanche down the well. Annular velocities are no
longer uniform across the borehole. Cuttings transport
30 – 65 becomes increasingly dependent on mechanical agitation and
‘high angle’ methodology. This is the highest risk zone for hole
cleaning as avalanching can rapidly cause stuck pipe when
circulation is stopped
Cuttings beds become stable, while the avalanching risk is
removed the stable cuttings beds become more challenging
65 - 90
and time consuming to move. High rotation rates will be
required in most cases.
Table 1: Inclination Dependent Hole Cleaning Regimes
 While traditional discussions on hole cleaning are focused on the mechanical removal of cuttings, the use
of uninhibited drilling fluids in softer clay sections leads to cuttings removal through a dispersion mechanism,
as summarised in table 2.

Cuttings Removal Mechanism Description

The majority of cuttings are removed mechanically. Discrete particles are

carried out by the mud and removed at the shakers. This requires that the
drilling parameters and mud rheology are maintained above certain
Mechanical
thresholds, below which hole cleaning will not be effective and hole problems
become more likely. The majority of this section is concerned with the
mechanical hole cleaning.

A relatively uninhibited mud system is used which allows the drilled solids to
dissolve, or disperse, into the mud. Large and frequent mud dilutions are
typically required to maintain acceptable rheologies.
Dispersion
More commonly relevant in large diameter top hole sections (>16”) which
include significant soft clay or shale intervals, though have allowed large
diameter high angle wells to be drilled effectively with poor hole cleaning
parameters where lithology has been appropriate.

Table 2: Summary of cuttings removal mechanisms

1.4 The Systems Approach to Hole Cleaning
Good hole cleaning is not just a matter of programming a fluid rheology or applying a high rotary speed, it
requires systems approach where multiple factors must be considered and balanced to achieve the ‘clean
hole’ required for trouble free well delivery.

1.3.1 Flow Rates

The general recommendation is that flow rates should be as high as practical subject to ECD constraints.
Use of larger diameter drill pipe or tapered strings can be used to manage pressure limitations which can
reduce available flow rates.
At any inclination, a minimum threshold for hole cleaning will exist, below this value cuttings will not be
removed from the borehole, above this threshold hole cleaning is possible and it is the rate of hole cleaning
that is of concern. At higher flow rates diminishing returns may be observed in cuttings returns.
In rare situations with lower rheology and low-density fluids high flow rates may result in turbulent and
transitional flow within the annulus, this will increase ECD though has been observed to have positive impact
on the hole cleaning in high angle holes. While concerns exist that turbulent flow causes hole erosion in
high angle wellbores this is often an incorrect assumption due to the eccentricity of the flow velocity profile.
In low angle and vertical wells cuttings slip velocity models commonly used are only valid for laminar flow
regimes.

1.3.2 Rotation
In vertical holes flow rate is the primary factor in hole cleaning as annular velocity distributed concentrically
around the drill pipe. The effect of high-speed drilling string rotation can encourage cuttings tor take a longer
transport path if significant viscous coupling between the rotating drill pipe and drilling fluid occurs. In an
inclined borehole the drill pipe will be on the low side of the borehole causing the flow velocity profile to
become eccentric, as shown in Figure 1. It is common in high angle wells that the flow velocity on the low
side of the well is zero.

Figure 1: Indicative flow velocity profiles in vertical and high angle wells
 To enable the movement of cuttings in the a high angle well high speed drill pipe rotation is critical since
flow rate alone is unlikely to move cuttings unless the drill string is rotated above the threshold required to
initiate cuttings transport. Rotation can aid move cuttings into the highest fluid velocity increasing the rate
of hole cleaning.

Figure 2: The impact of rotation in a high angle borehole (to scale 12-1/4 in. borehole & 5
in. drill pipe)
Equipment including bent housing motors and underreamers may limit maximum rotary speed such that it
is not possible to achieve the rotary threshold required to initiate hole cleaning. However, higher rotary
speeds may be permissible depending on the conditions, for example by collapsing the underreamer cutter
blocks or rotating off bottom. Therefore the following points should be considered with all equipment run
into the well:

• Rotary limitations will vary according to tool, supplier and wellbore geometry.
• The maximum RPM should only be exceeded in agreement with the supplier, with consideration
for the wellbore geometry and drilling conditions.
• Rotary speed should be maximized at all times when circulating off bottom.
• Hole Cleaning is paramount, if a tool cannot clean the well it should not be below the rotary table.

1.3.4 Recommended Medium to High Angle Hole Cleaning Thresholds

While specific minimum parameters may be assessed using effective borehole monitoring during
operations, indicative minimum and recommended flow rate and rotary speeds are provided as guidance.

Recommended Minimum
Hole Size Drill String Drill String
Flow Rate Flow Rate
(inches) Rotation Rotation
gpm (lpm) gpm (lpm)
rpm rpm
17-1/2 1200 (4550) >150 900 (3400) 120
12-1/4 1000 (3800) >150 800 (3030) 120
8-1/2 * 500 (1900) >100 350 (1330) 80
6* 250 (950) >100 175 (665) 80
* In holes sizes <8-1/2 in. the effect of rotation on ECD must be considered.

Table 3: Indicative recommended and minimum hole cleaning thresholds for common
hole sizes..
 If either parameter drops below the minimum value hole cleaning will be compromised. Any time that
parameters drop below the minimum hole cleaning threshold should not be counted towards hole cleaning
time.

1.3.5 Drilling Fluids

Where a drilling fluid is inappropriate it will exacerbate existing hole problems and create new ones, as well
sections become more complex or higher angle these impacts will become greater. While fluid selection is
based on many technical, commercial and logistical factors it is generally observed that a high quality mud
system will prove more cost effective than a cheaper mud system in a complex or high angle well (at least
in the more complex sections).
When considering hole cleaning capability, the primary driver in low angle holes is that fluid the fluid can lift
cuttings when pumping and suspend them when not pumping. In medium to high angle holes the following
considerations should be made for hole cleaning capability:

• Large diameter surface holes that are drilling soft dispersive formations will benefit from the use
of non-inhibited WBM to allow the hole to be cleaned with dispersion rather than mechanical
removal of the cuttings.
• When drilling nondispersive formations, OBM will generally improve results relative to WBM,
resulting from improved inhibition and gauge hole. The higher the hole angle the higher OWR will
be likely be required to improve available flow rates, manage ECD and improve annular cleaning.
• Mud that is being carried over from previous wells may be more difficult to keep within specification
due to the buildup of low gravity and colloidal solids. This will impact hydraulics and hole cleaning
efficiency.
• Shear thinning fluids with good low-end rheology (3 and 6 rpm readings) are required to support
cuttings in the low shear environment of the annulus. The 6 rpm reading should target 1.1 – 1.5 x
hole size (in inches).
• Rheology should be optimised to allow maximum flow rates to be used.
• Down-hole rheology should be confirmed using Fann 70 measurements to cover the well design.
• The barite sag qualities of should be sufficient to allow constant mud weight in the hole (ECD and
wellbore stability).
• A well specified, properly maintained and operated solids control system from shakers through to
centrifuges is critical in ensuring drilling fluids are maintained as clean as possible.
• If fluid rheology is not controlled and allowed to increase then fluid channeling shown in figure 1 &
Figure 2 will become more pronounced and reduce the hole cleaning effectiveness (also
increasing pump pressure and ECD)
• If fluid rheology is excessively reduced it will reduce hole cleaning effectiveness by reducing the
viscous coupling between fluid and drill string and allowing cuttings to settle quickly

1.3.6 BHA Design

BHA’s should be designed not to inhibit hole cleaning practices when drilling or to increase risks when
pulling out of hole. To this end the following design considerations should be made:

• Does the BHA equipment selected limit available flow rate or rotational speed?
• Will slide drilling above 30 deg inclination be required? Little, if any, cuttings will be removed from
the hole while sliding, although they may be removed on returning to rotary drilling hole cleaning
will become increasingly difficult to maintain as the hole has been loaded up with cuttings.
• What hole size is required? Larger hole sizes are more difficult to clean, slide drilling and reduced
parameters are more easily tolerated in smaller hole sizes.
 • Is a dispersive mud system going to be used with dispersive clays present? Dispersive systems
do not require as stringent hole cleaning practices, hole cleaning may not be an issue as rock
predominately dissolves into the mud.
• Has the BHA been tendency screened? Is the assembly design work with the directional tools to
meet planned trajectory, a significant number of unplanned trips for directional control has been
due to poor BHA tendency design (this will also increase tortuosity and impact drilling
performance).
• Has the Bit & BHA been vibration screened? Effective vibration screening will minimise the risk of
vibration related failure and unplanned tripping. BHA equipment requirements may limit the ability
to make stabilization changes due to tool stabilisers.
o A BHA with vibration characteristics may also drill a rugose and larger than gauge hole
which will create more cuttings and have cause reduced hole cleaning effectiveness.
• Is the BHA trippable?
o Are the stabilisers able to be tripped out of hole? (Stabiliser selection criteria are provided
in Table 4).
o Could stabiliser placement cause a BHA lock if tripping in dirty hole?
o Will BHA equipment allow minimum hole cleaning parameters to be applied if remedial
hole cleaning or backreaming is required?

Stabiliser Design Feature Acceptance Criteria

Taper ≤30°, smooth with no shoulders
Wrap Angle • Stabilisers should be non-straight blade (except
motors)
• 270° ≤ Wrap Angle < 360°
• Sum of all blade coverage as per API
Specification 7-1
• Right hand wrap
Bypass Area • ≥35% of hole area for 10-5/8” and above,
• ≥25% hole area for below 10-5/8”
Stabiliser Pad Diameter • No full diameter gauge pads
• Near Bit Stabiliser:
o 1/8” to 1/16” less than bit diameter
• All other stabilisers:
o Bit Diameter ≤ 8-1/2” – 1/8” undergauge
o Bit Diameter ≥ 8-1/2” – 1/4" to 1/8”
undergauge
Stabiliser Pad Pressure • ≤300 psi based on expected sideloads
• Pad lengths 8 - 16”
• Avoid pad lengths ≥18”
• Pad width should meet pad pressure and bypass
area constraints
Transition Radii • Radius outer end of taper ¼ of blade depth
• Radius inner ender of tapers 1/8 of blade depth
• 1/4”-1/2” radius or chamfer leading/trailing edges
Cutters and Cutting Structure • No active cutting structure on outer diameter
• Review all up-drill or down-drill cutting structure
Table 4: Recommended stabiliser acceptance criteria (based on IADC/SPE-189649-MS)
1.3.7 Borehole Instability
Borehole instability can be a function of the in-situ stresses, the strength of the rock and the reactivity of the
formation or a combination of all three. While the mud system can be used to control the majority of stability
issues through fluid density, inhibition, water phase salinity, etc, there are situations where instability will
continue to occur including areas of weak lithology, time dependent formations and as a cyclic pressure
fatigue. Whether or not the stability is controlled effectively once cavings have entered the borehole they
become a hole cleaning issue as they have introduced more solids into the borehole and increased the hole
diameter.

Figure 3: Mechanical stability relative to mudweight

In situations where borehole instability is present more time will be required to clean the hole effectively for
trouble free operations. In generally complex situations where the designed hole cleaning system has little
tolerance for problems borehole instability material may not be able to be cleaned out effectively

1.3.8 Hole Cleaning Tools

A number of vendors provide patented tools that claim to improve high angle hole cleaning these range
from joints of drill pipe such as the Vallorec Hydroclean Enhanced Drill pipe to subs such as the Franks
International Cuttings Bed Impellers. Broadly these tools introduce a bladed stirrer into the assembly to
cause mechanical agitation of cuttings beds, lifting the cuttings into the high flow channel above the drill
string. They are spaced every 2-3 stands to maintain cuttings in the high flow velocity area of the borehole
for as much time as possible, thus increase the hole cleaning efficiency.
 Figure 4: Examples of hole cleaning enhancement tools

While evidence suggests that these types of tools are effective in improving hole cleaning efficiency, if wells
are planned and drilled with parameters in excess of recommended hole cleaning thresholds for the hole
size then the justification for running these tools can be difficult. The downsides of running these types of
tools include extra makeup / breakout time, cumulative pressure drop increases impacting pump pressure
and ECD, and rental and redress costs. It should be noted the highest stepout wells drilled globally did not
use such equipment.
The times when hole cleaning tools may be considered useful include:

• Larger high inclination holes drilled with motors.

• Where drilling parameters are limited and don’t meet the recommended hole cleaning thresholds
• When backreaming is planned the may assist in moving cuttings ahead of the BHA and minimise
the risks of the BHA catching up with the cuttings front.

1.3.9 How Fast Is Too Fast?

There are two different schools of thought on drilling ROPs:.

• Drill at maximum instantaneous ROP’s and then perform remedial hole cleaning operations as
required.
• Drill at a safe ROP at which the hole can be kept clean as it is drilled.
High instantaneous ROP’s and remedial hole cleaning may result in periods when the well unloads cuttings
at a rate that cannot be handled by the containment system. This alone may suggest that limiting the
instantaneous ROP and drilling at a steady rate which can be handled by the cuttings containment system
may be the prudent choice.
There are numerous scenarios that should be considered as part of the risk assessment process. For
example, if a problem occurred that prevented hole cleaning from being performed prior to a trip (such as
a wash-out or top drive failure), could the resulting risks be managed adequately?
2.0 Borehole Monitoring

2.1 Torque and Drag

2.1.1 Torque and Drag Roadmap
Torque & drag is the primary method for monitoring hole cleaning performance while drilling, and for
reducing risk during tripping and casing running operations.

• This very effective technique requires only information that is readily available and easily
interpreted on the rig floor.
• Rotating string weight, pick-up and slack-off weights, and torque is recorded every connection.
• These values are plotted over modelled curves which are prepared in advance. This is the “Torque
& Drag Roadmap” and is specific to the interval or operation.
• Theoretical modelled values can be updated and calibrated for changes in well execution from
plan.
• Any divergence in trends may indicate hole cleaning issues (drilling), or the presence of cuttings
beds (tripping or casing running).
• Techniques are provided for establishing whether cuttings beds are indeed the issue (default
position), or whether alternative factors may be of more significance (e.g. wellbore geometry).
• All assumptions should be included on the Torque and Drag roadmap to provide quality assurance
of the model.

2.1.2 Roles and Responsibilities

The process for preparing, issuing, and updating the charts must be understood.

• Responsibilities should be agreed, assigned, and documented in the Drilling Programme.

• The T&D roadmap must be prepared ahead of operations and completed on the rig.
• Readings must be taken accurately and consistently to be useful and to allow reliable
interpretation. A dedicated resource on the rig is recommended to allow the Torque and Drag
Roadmap to be completed for drilling, tripping and casing operations without distraction of other
duties. This is especially important for real-time trip monitoring on the rig floor.
• This ensures that developing trends are always available to the driller, to allow immediate action
when required.
• It is recommended that the recorded data is input directly into the spreadsheet or T&D software
to provide a permanent record of the run or trip, as soon as possible after recording. This can be
done immediately by the wellsite drilling engineer, or can be sent to the office team each day,
dependent upon the resources available.

2.1.3 Limitations of Torque and Drag Modelling

It is important to trust the torque and drag modelling, but it is just as important that its limitations are
understood.

• Torque and drag modelling has proven to be an excellent tool for monitoring cuttings bed build up,
but there are many actions that may be occurring that will not necessarily show up or may be
misinterpreted.
• Differential sticking, key-seating and wellbore instability effects should not be misinterpreted as
cuttings build up. The symptoms of these problems are different, and their identification underlines
the importance of collecting and interpreting the torque and drag data on an ongoing basis.
• The theoretical predictions must be of good quality. Not only is the software model important but
the input data must be good quality and continually calibrated against the actual measured values.
• Friction factors derived from offset wells will form the basis of the planning.
 • Different software models will calculate compatible friction factors.
• Deadline measured hookload will be subject to sheave friction effects, at low angle or low drag this
will result in a reversal of weights. While measuring travelling block weight whilst moving may
provide an indication of affect, the quantified effect is proportional to total weight at time of
measurement.

2.2 Standpipe Pressure

2.3 Pressure Whilst Drilling

Most directional drilling companies offer Pressure While Drilling (PWD) tools that can measure down hole
pressures. Some tools offer only annular pressure, while others monitor both annular and internal
pressures.
These tools are often claimed to be effective indicators of hole cleanliness. It is recommended though that
they are NOT used as primary indicators of hole cleaning in inclined wells but used to supplement surface
torque and drag monitoring. The reason for this is that the measurements are limited due to:

• Cuttings must be suspended in the fluid column to contribute to hydrostatic pressure, cuttings beds
therefore do not contribute to the back-pressure in the annulus.
• Annular pressures are sensitive to small variations in mud weight and rheology.
• The transmitted pressure data is often not of sufficiently frequent to be of use for detailed analysis
and can be difficult to interpret in real time. Recorded data can reveal significant events which
have been missed by the real-time data but is only available after the event.
• The most significant limitation of PWD information is that it is plays no role when tripping in or out
when the risk of stuck pipe is greatest.
Despite these disadvantages, the information from these tools can be very useful. The PWD tool is an
excellent way to monitor down hole pressures in narrow mud weight window environments and can be used
to monitor changes in the drilling fluid that may impact the well. Similarly to torque and drag ECD roadmaps
can be built to monitor real-time data against modelled values for a range of expected flowrates.

2.4 Shakers and Returns

3.0 Drilling & Tripping Practices

3.1 Connection Practices
3.2 Clean Up Practices
3.3 Tripping Practices
3.4 Back Reaming / Pumping Out
3.5 Remedial Hole Cleaning
3.6 Wiper Trips
3.7 Sweeps