Underground Flow Well Control:
The Key to Drilling Low·Kick·Tolerance
Wells Safely and Economically
Michael Wessel, SPE, Rohoel-Aufsuchungs Ges., and Brian A. Tarr, SPE, Mobil E&P Services Inc.
Summary. The minimum acceptable kick tolerance can be quantified on the basis of the likelihood and consequences of an underground-
flow well-control incident. Safe and economical casing points can be selected on the basis of the minimum acceptable kick tolerance
required to drill the next hole section. For sections with a known but manageable underground flow potential, necessary unconventional
well-control contingency plans can be developed. This new approach to well control has the potential to reduce drilling costs by signifi-
cantly reducing the likelihood of major drilling-related well-control incidents.
Introduction
The progressive stages of a well-control incident that gets out of
control may be as follows: drill into a permeable gas zone under-
balanced, take a kick, shut in, exceed the maximum allowable shut-
in casing pressure, watch drillpipe pressure drop to zero as an under-
ground flow begins, and watch casing pressure increase until equip-
ment failure leads to a surface blowout. During drilling at a given
depth below the last casing shoe, a measure of the potential for such
a scenario is the remaining kick tolerance. 1 However, a direct
tradeoff exists between kick tolerance and weIl cost: specifying
higher-than-necessary minimum acceptable kick tolerances can in-
crease the weIl cost because additional casing strings will be re-
quired. Specifying smaller-than-necessary minimum acceptable kick
tolerances can lead to costly well-control incidents.
This paper presents a new strategy for determining the adequacy
of a given kick-tolerance value that is based on the well-control
consequences of underground flows from gas zones in the given
hole section. This strategy helps to optimize well costs by manag-
ing the well-control risks better than selecting an arbitrary minimum-
kick-tolerance value.
Well Control In the Well.Planning Phase
The well-control consideration is an important aspect in casing-point
selection during the well-planning procedure. The casing scheme
is developed as a function of pore pressures, fracture gradients,
wellbore stability considerations, and well-control aspects.
The well-control aspect is expressed by the minimum acceptable
kick tolerance required during drilling to the next casing point.
Shut-In Kick Tolerance. It is defined as the kick intensity (for-
mation pressure increment above the mud weight in use, usually
expressed in pounds per gallon) that can be shut in without exceeding
the fracture pressure of the weakest exposed formation after a given
kick volume of a given fluid density has entered the wellbore. 1-4
Dc(PmF-P m ) Z(Pm-Pj)
K=----- - - - - " - . . .................... (1)
D D
By specifying the expected influx density and the influx volume
that can be readily detected and shut in by a given rig drilling a
given hole size, the shut-in kick tolerance can be calculated and
monitored continuously as drilling operations progress. Unless there
is a pore-pressure regression, the next casing string has to be set
when the shut-in kick tolerance has fallen to a specified minimum
acceptable value. A minimum shut-in kick tolerance of 0.5 Ibm/gal
is a common design criterion used as a starting point for selecting
casing points in Mobil wells. 5 For wells linked to the Drilling Data
Center in Dallas, the shut-in kick tolerance is computed and moni-
tored in real time. 6 The default influx volumes used by the Drilling
Data Center are 20 bbl of 2-lbm/gal gas for 12IA-in. and larger
hole sizes and 10 bbl of 2-lbm/gal gas for smaller hole sizes.
The most conservative approach to casing-point selection is to
prevent any possibility of underground flow. Setting casing deeper
Copyright 1991 Society of Petroleum Engineers
250
than the intersection point of a gas gradient line drawn from total
depth (TD) and the fracture gradient line on a depth-vs.-pressure
plot (Fig. 1) will enable a well to be shut in on any size kick without
fracturing the formation. If the well does not fracture in the open
hole after taking a kick, then an underground flow situation cannot
develop. In most cases, this will require the casing to be set only
a short distance above zones that can flow. This conservative prac-
tice is very costly, and there is a risk of reaching the final available
casing point before reaching the well's planned TD. On the other
hand, having zero shut-in kick tolerance is the least conservative
approach to casing-point selection. This will barely allow mud to
be circulated. Any pressure increase from a kick in the wellbore
annulus will cause a fluid loss at the shoe-i.e., underground flow.
There is no safety factor for this scenario.
The greater the shut-in kick tolerance desired at any given depth,
the deeper the last casing must be set. For a given shut-in kick toler-
ance, any combination of a larger kick volume or a higher forma-
tion pressure would result in underground flow. Consequently, in
the well-design process, the shut-in kick tolerance used has to be
acceptable for well-control purposes but also allow the well to be
drilled economically with the required minimum casing size across
the pay zone. For example, Fig. 2 shows a casing point selected
on the basis of a specified shut-in kick tolerance value with a spec-
ified influx volume of gas. (Notice that the resulting casing point
to reach TD is shallower in Fig. 2 than in Fig. 1.)
The criterion for the minimum acceptable shut-in kick tolerance
for a wellbore section must be set according to how well the pore
pressures are known and the risk one is willing to take. The risk
of setting too little casing is that underground flow will result. The
risk of being too conservative is having to set additional strings of
casing to reach TD. Both will increase drilling costs. Hence, there
is an optimum shut-in kick tolerance that minimizes the cost of each
hole section of a well. Fig. 3 illustrates that the optimum shut-in
kick tolerance depends on the underground flow potential of zones
in the hole section being considered.
Circulating Kick Tolerance. It is defined as the kick intensity that
can be circulating out without rupturing the formation or bursting
the casing after a given gas kick volume has been allowed to enter
the wellbore. 3 ,4 Gas expansion is responsible for the increasing
annular pressures required when the kick is circulated out to main-
tain constant bottornhole pressure (BHP). The larger the gas kick
volume, the larger the volume of mud that has to be bled off and
the higher the resulting backpressure that has to be maintained during
circulation of the kick out of the well.
The four factors that control the magnitude of the pressure load
imposed on the wellbore while a gas kick is circulated out are the
influx volume, the wellbore geometry, the kick intensity indicated
by the initial shut-in drillpipe pressure (SIDPP), and the kill proce-
dure used to circulate the kick out. Hence, for a given well design
and kill procedure, downhole loads from circulating out a gas kick
can be limited in magnitude only by limiting the kick intensity and
the kick volume.
SPE Drilling Engineering, December 1991
 PRESSURE PRESSURE

GAS GRADIENT

/ CASING SETTING DEPTH

FOR SPECIFIED SHUT-IN
KICK TOLERANCE

~
w
o
~w
o /

Fig. 1-Casing-point selection for no flow at the shoe. Fig. 2-Casing-point selection using shut-in kick tolerance.

If the formation pressure is much larger than the mud hydrostatic
pressure (indicated by a high SIDPP), this high differential pres-
sure will produce a high initial shut-in casing pressure so that only
a small gas-kick volume can be circulated out. On the other hand,
if the mud weight is adequate for the formation pressure, the re-
sulting very low shut-in casing pressure (with zero SIDPP) will per-
mit circulation of a large swabbed gas-kick volume out of the well.
Because the combination of only intensity and volume dictates the
effective loads on the wellbore, a spreadsheet calculation can de-
termine the maximum allowable kick volume that can safely be cir-
culated out as a function of the kick intensity (and vice versa) for
a predetermined maximum load on a known weak point in the well-
bore. 7 A series of maximum kick-volume/intensity combinations
can be determined as functions of the changing hydraulic pressures
in the annulus during circulating out a kick such that, when ex-
ceeded, the wellbore will break down at the specified weak-point
depth (generally the last casing shoe).
As illustrated in Fig. 4, the higher the initial shut-in pressure,
the lower the tolerable gas-kick volume before the circulating-kick-
tolerance boundary is reached. The critical weak point of the well-
bore may be in a formation with a low fracture strength, in the casing
(e.g., at a depleted zone), or at the surface. If the combination of
the initial kick volume and the kick intensity (initial SIDPP) lies
to the right of the boundary curve and an attempt is made to circu-
late out the kick, formation or casing rupture and underground flow
could result. An underground kill procedure would then be nec-
essary.
The evaluation of the circulating-kick-tolerance curve, as part
of the normal well-design process, determines whether the allowa-
ble kick tolerances are within a reasonable range or whether an al-
ternate well design must be considered. Additionally, an up-to-date
well-depth-dependent circulating-kick-tolerance curve, similar to
Fig. 4, would be very useful for a rig supervisor. It could be used
immediately after taking a gas kick to determine whether to pro-
ceed immediately with a conventional kill procedure or whether
preparations should be made to implement an underground-flow
kill procedure.
Underground Flow Potential Evaluation
Some situations require drilling with a very low kick tolerance, thus
increasing the chance of taking a kick that will break down the casing
shoe. The determination of "adequate" kick tolerance is a difficult

Limitations & Assymptlons·

For waterbased muds only
Major Underground Bubble rises at cirCulating speed
Flow Potential 3500

3000

i 2500
W
II:
Minor Underground :::>
~ 2000
Flow Potential UI
g:
~ 1500
~
,:
~ 1000
Z

No Underground 5 500
Flow Potential : No flow Kick Tolerance ill
!/
Kick Tolerance
50 100 150
KICK SIZE, bbl
200 250

Fig. 3-Risk evaluation for casing-point selection. Fig. 4-Example circulating-kick-tolerance boundary.

SPE Drilling Engineering, December 1991 251

 FLOW STARTS FLOW STABILIZES KILL PROCEDURE

killmud

after a successful
OH section is
kill, the open hole
lull of influx
seciion is full of kill
medium mud

The well is flowing underground

Fig. 5-Underground flow situation.

matter. The adequacy of the kick tolerance in any situation is meas-

ured by whether a kick that might be taken can be handled with INFLUX FLOWRATE
the available rig equipment or whether special well-control proce-
dures, such as drilling a relief well, and additional equipment are
necessary. Kick tolerance is inadequate if the result of a kick is
a high-rate underground flow to the weakest formation in the open
hole, usually at the previous casing shoe, and a relief well or major
well control effort is needed.
Once underground flow has occurred, typical well-control proce-
dures call for pumping down the drillpipe while closed in on the
casing, thus displacing the influx medium out of the drill-
pipe/openhole annulus (see Fig. 5). If the influx rate is sufficiently
low, this will stop the flow, because kill mud will establish a BHP
that exceeds the pore pressure. If the influx rate is high, then the
kill mud will be cut with the influx flow and may not increase the
BHP sufficiently to stop the flow. In some high-flow-rate cases, Equipment
Performance
a relief well may be necessary to achieve a sufficient pump rate Relationship (EPR)
of kill fluid to stop the underground flow. for successful kill
Determining whether drilling ahead with a low kick tolerance has higher BHP than
the IPR al all influx
is acceptable in a given hole interval depends primarily on the in- flowrales
flow behavior of the expected permeable formations to be drilled.
If there is little flow potential in the openhole zones, breaking down
the shoe will be classified as "loss of circulation. " Normal types
of remedial actions (such as bridging agents or cementing to repair
the casing shoe or thief zone) usually will solve the problem.
Under the same circumstances, if there is a high flow potential, Fig. 6-IPR and EPR for an effective kill operation.
an uncontrolled underground blowout may result from breakdown
of the openhole interval. Cases are documented where rig crews,
when faced with underground flow, have pulled up into the casing ture has to exceed the flowing pressure at the flowing zone. That
and set a cement plug, leaving the well flowing underground. This is, the annulus equipment performance relationship (EPR) has to
is obviously unacceptable, and a relief well is needed if commercial cause a higher wellbore pressure than the flowing pressure given
reserves are involved. Thus, the consequences of an underground by the zone's inflow performance relationship (IPR) for any given
flow vary from a modest inconvenience to a major well-control influx flow rate 8 (Fig. 6).
effort. The inflow behavior of a permeable zone is a function not only
The influx rate from a permeable zone is a function of the differ- of the pressure differential but also of the reservoir permeability,
ence between the formation pore pressure and the wellbore pres- thickness, radius of drainage, and fluid properties. Craft and
sure. If the wellbore hydrostatic pressure equals or exceeds the Hawkins 9 gave the common form of the gas-flow-rate equation for
formation pore pressure, then there is no flow into the well. If a strong waterdrive gas reservoirs as
kick of sufficient volume and intensity to fracture the formation
is taken, usually at the last casing shoe, the well will begin to flow 703kh(pJs-paj)
underground into the fracture. Because the influx flow rate is dif- qsc= ............................. (2)
ferential pressure dependent, it will increase as drilling mud in the p.Tz In(re/r w)
annulus is replaced by the lower-density flowing formation fluid. The downhole gas-flow rate q, in gallons per minute, is
To kill the flow, the wellbore pressure exerted by the kill
mud/influx-fluid mixture flowing up the annulus and into the frac- q=qsJz/6812pwf . ................................ (3)

252 SPE Drilling Engineering, December 1991

 .~
Infinite Volume of Mud Required
KILL MUD WEIGHT
Fig. 7-Mud·weightlpump·rate requirements to kill an under·
ground flow.
Substituting Eq. 2 into Eq. 3 and dividing by the drawdown gives
the downhole PI, J, in gal/(min-psi):
kh(pws +Pwf)
J -----'---"---. . ........................... (4)
9.69/1ln(re/r w)pwf
The fluid properties and the radius of drainage for a given gas
reservoir are less important factors and can be estimated without
introducing significant errors into the downhole productivity cal-
culation. On the other hand, the factors of reservoir permeability,
k (in darcies) and reservoir thickness, h (in feet) are significant vari-
ables. The product kh (also called flow capacity) varies significantly
from one reservoir to another. By substituting re/rw=2,OOO ft and
/1=0.027 cp (values typical for gas reservoirs 9 ) into Eq. 4 and con-
sidering only small drawdowns (i.e., Pws+Pwf"",2Pwf), a simpli-
fied PI equation as a function of only kh is obtained:
J"", 1.006kh. . ..................................... (5)
Hence, the PI of a gas zone flowing underground is approximately
proportional to the product of the formation's permeability and thick-
ness, kh. If this product is low, there is a good probability of stop-
ping the flow with the available rig equipment. The chances diminish
if the number is high. By estimating the kh value for a potential
gas zone to be drilled, you can determine whether an underground
gas flow from the zone could be controlled (i.e., killed) with the
available rig equipment or whether additional pumping units or a
relief well would be required. The adequacy of a given kick toler-
ance can be evaluated on the basis of these results.
By neglecting any two-phase-flow liquid-holdup effect and any
friction in the openhole annulus while an underground flow is killed
(these are small pressure-drop effects compared with the hydro-
static pressure of the kill-fluid/influx mixture), it can be shown that
the kill-mud density/rate combination required to kill underground
flows is dependent on the volume of kill mud available. To calcu-
late the volume needed for a given kill-mud density/rate combina-
tion requires a timestep numerical integration procedure to track
the changing influx flow rate that results from the changing density
of the fluid mixture in the annulus. 10 However, explicit equations
can be derived for two extremes of mud volume available. 10 To
stop the flow with an infinite volume of kill mud, the required pump
rate, qmf¥)' is given by Eq. 6. To stop the flow when the first kill
SPE Drilling Engineering, December 1991
pumping capacity
with additional hp
pumps
KILL MUD WEIGHT
Fig. 8-Pump·rate requirements and equipment limits.
mud pumped out of the drillpipe reaches the fractured formation,
the required pump rate, qmOH, is given by Eq. 7.
C
_2J(Pmk +PF-PWS)(Pmk
Pf Pf
C
-c) ] ........... (6)
J(C+PF-Pws)2
and qmOH= -(-Pm-k-- - - - ) - ' .................... (7)
C
2 --+PF-Pws
Pf
where C=(VanPfcos Q> )/A.
Note that to evaluate the "killability" of underground flows in-
vol ving gas reservoirs, substituting J = 1.006 kh from Eq. 5 and
Pf =2.0 Ibm/gal (gas density at downhole conditions 9 ) into Eqs.
6 and 7 will produce reasonable first approximations for the range
of kill mud flow rates required.
Fig. 7 shows example plots of pumping rate required vs. kill mud
weight. The flow-rate/mud-weight combinations on the lower,
"infinite-volume" curve, developed from Eq. 6, may be relatively
easy to achieve on location. However, an infinite or very large
volume of kill mud would be needed. The Eq. 7 combinations (de-
fined by the upper "1 OH annulus" curve in Fig. 7) will kill the
underground flow as soon as the first kill mud reaches the frac-
tured formation-usually at the previous casing shoe. These high-
flow-rate requirements, however, may not be achievable because
of rig equipment limitations. Any flow-rate/mud-weight combina-
tion within the shaded area between the two curves would fulfill
the requirements to kill the flow; larger volumes of kill mud are
required as the selected point becomes closer to the lower, infinite-
volume curve.
If the pump rate required for an effective kill with a given kill
weight mud can be provided by the available rig equipment, then
the result of an underground flow would not be too serious. Fig.
S shows an example case where the flow capacity of the rig equip-
253

w
a:
~w
If
a.
::e
::;)
a.
Fig. 9-Pump pressure behavior for an underground flow sit-
uation.
ment and drill string provides a range of acceptable flow-rate/mud-
weight combinations for an effective kill of the example underground
flow. On the other hand, if the flow rate requirements to kill the
underground flow were found to be beyond the capability of the
rig equipment, then the flow could not be stopped and the results
would be very serious. In such a case, the minimum design kick
tolerance must be increased to reduce the underground flow potential
(Le., casing would have to be set closer to the anticipated high-kh
gas zone).
If these calculations are considered in the well-planning phase,
then the minimum required kick tolerances for each hole section
can be better defined through an awareness of the potential for,
and consequences of, underground flow.
Contingency Planning for Underground Flows
For critical hole sections of wells-where there is a possibility of
underground flow-a well-control contingency plan can be devel-
oped in advance. This plan should be available at the rig site so
that the staff understands how to control such an underground flow
should it occur. The contingency plan should prepare the rig-site
personnel to recognize an underground flow, to calculate the kill
mud flow-rate/mud-weight combination required to kill an under-
ground flow, to determine whether a kill with the rig equipment
is feasible or whether additional high-pressure pumps will be re-
quired, to calculate the volume of kill mud required for the kill
operation, and to recognize whether the well kill pumping opera-
tion is proceeding successfully.
Information on the local availability of the required kill mud
volume should be part of every well-control contingency plan. When
the rig equipment is known to be inadequate for the underground
flow potential of a certain hole section, the contingency plan should
specify the additional pump units required at the well location, on
standby, and how they are to be rigged.
The major computational work in developing the contingency plan
would be done in the planning phase and then updated as each casing
string is set and actual leakoff data are obtained. With a spread-
sheet and a computer, the circulating kick tolerance can be moni-
tored as drilling progresses.
Recognizing an Underground Flow Situation. When a kick is
taken and the combination of SIDPP and kick volume exceeds the
fracture pressure at the weakest point in the open hole, the SIDPP
pressure will drop to zero and the drillpipe will be partially evacu-
ated as long as the well is flowing underground. There are cases
where the SIDPP peaks so rapidly that the maximum pressure peak
is not seen before the SIDPP drops to zero. After shutting in the
well, if the field personnel are not sure whether they have swabbed
in a kick or the well is flowing underground, the driIlpipe pressure
response from a slow circulation test with different choke settings
will clarify the situation.
254
Pumpr&te 250gpm
8000
7800
7600
BHP reqUIred to kill well
B 7400
H
P
7200
p
s Mud enters tracture
i 7000
Kill mud: 19 Ibm/gal
6800
Minimum kill mud
volume required =
6600 (250 gal/min x 265 min)/
42 gal/bbl =1577 bbl
6400 +---+--t--+---+--+...!--I---+----j
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Kill time, min
Fig. 10-BHP during the killing of an underground flow.
If the choke is opened, the casing pressure can be held constant
while the rig pumps are brought up to the slow circulation rate,
and the drillpipe pressure rises to the expected prerecorded value,
the well is not flowing underground and the kick is a noncritical
swabbed-in kick. However, if the drillpipe pressure remains at zero
while the pumps are brought up to speed and the drillpipe pressure
is much lower than expected at the slow circulation rate (Fig. 9),
then an underground flow is probably occurring. If choke adjust-
ments that increase or decrease the casing pressure do not produce
corresponding time-lapsed driIIpipe pressure changes, while the well
is circulated on the choke, then the wellbore is no longer intact and
conventional constant BHP well-control methods must be
abandoned.
Kill-Mud Volume Required. Once a pump rate and mud weight
are selected, the total kill-mud volume required is determined so
that the kill procedure can be executed without interruption. If you
ran out of kill mud just before the completion of the kill process,
the mud in the annulus would be produced out into the fractured
formation and the well would resume flowing. Consequently, a well-
control contingency plan (see next section) should include the mini-
mum volume of kill mud required to kill an underground flow to
be on location before the pumping operation starts. If needed, ad-
ditional mud should be ordered or mixed.
The total kill-mud volume required is a function of the variables
in Eqs. 6 and 7, but a computer is required to solve the timestep
numerical integration procedure. The results from such a computer
program 7 can be presented graphically by plotting the wellbore
pressure at the flowing zone vs. pumping time (Fig. 10). The total
kill-mud volume required is determined from the time taken to reach
the final stable pump pressure multiplied by the pump rate used
(see Fig. 10).
If you run out of mud before the formation pore pressure is ex-
ceeded (plus at least one additional annular volume to displace the
remaining influx mixture out of the annulus), the total kill proce-
dure wiIl result in nothing more than wasting the mud pumped.
Pump Pressure Schedule for Underground Kill Procedure. The
on-site supervisor needs to monitor progress and to recognize
whether an underground-flow well-kill pumping operation is
SPE Drilling Engineering, December 1991
 Design Kill Rate: 250 gal/min
. ...
65001r==========~-----~7··~
-.- Initial .(). Min final·. Final •• ~•••••
6000 . , . ,,,
! 5500
W
~ 5000
!!l
~ 4500
II.
::;;
::l 4000 Expected pump
II. ~ w'
pressure response 8S
3500 Pumps are brought up
to speed for kill and as
kill progresses
3000
100 150 200 250
PUMP RATE. gal/min
Fig. 11-Pump pressure curves for an underground flow kill
operation.
proceeding successfully. Thus, the pumping plan should contain
a pump-pressure-vs.-volume-pumped schedule. Rig supervisors,
using a hand-held calculator, are familiar with developing and plot-
ting the pump-pressure-vs.-volume schedule needed to monitor and
control a conventional "wait and weight" kill; a computer
program 7 is required to do the same for an underground kill.
When the first kill fluid is displaced down the drillstring and kill
mud fills the drillpipe, the initial pump pressure (IPP) can be cal-
culated as
pp;=ilp+Pwf-Pmk' ............................... (8)
A substantial pump rate may be required before the partially
evacuated workstring is filled and any pump pressure is seen. When
pumping starts, the kill mud hydrostatic pressure, Pmk, will sub-
stantially exceed the bottornhole flowing pressure, Pwf' Some
pump rate will be required to develop a friction pressure drop in
the drillstring, ilp, before any drillpipe pressure will be registered.
From then on, the pump pressure should follow or be close to the
IPP curve shown in Fig. 11 while the pump rate is increased to
the rate required to kill the underground flow. Major deviations
from the expected IPP curve require investigation before proceed-
ing with the kill operation. If the pump pressure does not closely
follow the IPP curve as the pumps are brought up to speed, the
kill is unlikely to be successful. A deviation from the IPP curve
could indicate a previously undetected leak in the drillpipe caused
by turbulence and abrasive particle washing, for example. Early
detection of such problems allows the pumping operation to be
stopped before a large volume of kill mud has been wasted on a
plan that cannot succeed.
The well should stop flowing when the wellbore backpressure
at the flowing zone equals the static pore pressure of the flowing
zone. (The well would be dynamically dead at this time but would
resume flowing if pumping were stopped.) The pump pressure now
is the minimum final pump pressure (MFPP) and is calculated by
(Pp)min=ilP+Pws-Pmk' ............................ (9)
At least one additional openhole annular volume of kill mud has
to be pumped to displace any remaining influx into the fracture be-
fore the pumps may be shut off. Then, the annulus between the
end of the drill string and the fracture will be filled with kill mud
and the final pump pressure (FPP) can be calculated as
Pp =ilp+ilPan +PP-(Pmk)P' ....................... (10)
At the predetermined kill pump-rate/mud-weight combination,
the underground flow will stop if the actual pump pressure crosses
the MFPP curve and finally stabilizes within a reasonable range
of the expected FPP curve, as shown in Fig. 11.
SPE Drilling Engineering, December 1991
6000 Final Pump Pressure
5800
5600
Minimum Final Pump Pressure
5400
.~
~ 5200
Cf)
Cf)
w
a: Pump rate: 250 gal/min
II.
II. 5000
::;;
=>
Il.
300
4800
4600 Initial Pump Pressure
4400
500 1000 1500 2000 2500
KILL MUD VOLUME, bbl
Fig. 12-Pump pressure during the killing of an underground
flow.
At no time can the pressure be allowed to exceed the pump's oper-
ating pressure limit. There may be cases where the required flow
rate is so high that the pump operating pressure limit would be ex-
ceeded before reaching the FPP value. However, the flow rate can
be reduced from the kill pump rate only after the MFPP has been
exceeded. Because the well is dynamically dead, the influx in the
openhole annulu~ can be displaced with a lower pump rate as long
as the pump pressure remains above the MFPP curve. Should the
pump pressure stabilize below the MFPP, the kill procedure will
not be successful and should be terminated to avoid wasting kill mud.
With the pump rate held constant at the predetermined design
kill rate, Fig. 12 shows the computer-generated plot of expected
drillpipe pressure vs. kill-mud volume pumped that would be used
to monitor the progress of the pumping operation. Note that Fig.
12 is very similar to Fig. 10. On the vertical axis, the drillpipe pres-
sure of Fig. 12 is simply the BHP of Fig. 10 minus the kill-mud
hydrostatic pressure in the drill string plus the kill-mud frictional
pressure drop in the drill string at the design kill rate. The kill-mud-
volume axis of Fig. 12 is simply the kill time of Fig. 10 multiplied
by the design kill rate.
Conclusions
1. In the planning phase of drilling a well, the well-control risks
can be taken into account in the casing-point selection strategy. The
acceptable minimum shut-in kick tolerance for each casing point
can be evaluated on the basis of the resulting circulating kick toler-
ance and the selected rig's capacity to handle the consequences of
an underground flow from any gas zone in the next interval.
2. For hole sections where an underground flow is possible, a
well-control contingency plan can be developed in advance that will
enable the on-site personnel to be prepared for any well-control
situation and to implement an appropriate kill procedure.
3. Adequate preparation to evaluate the underground-flow
implications at the well-design stage and to develop suitable well-
control contingency plans requires use of computers by drilling
personnel. However, the drilling cost savings should provide an
adequate incentive to use this new approach to managing well-
control risk.
255
 Nomenclature
Authors
A = average area of openhole annulus, in. 2
Michael Wessel D = true vertical depth of hole, ft
is a drilling superin- Dc = true vertical depth of casing shoe, ft
tendent with RohoeI- h = permeable zone thickness, ft
Aufsuchungs Ges.
J = PI, downhole, gal/(min-psi)
in Austria. He has
been involved in k = formation permeability, darcies
drilling engineering K = shut-in kick tolerance, Ibm/gal
and operations PF = formation fracture pressure, psi
with Mobil in Ger· Pmk = kill-mud hydrostatic in drillstring, psi
many and the Gulf (Pmk)F = kill-mud hydrostatic at fracture depth, psi
of Mexico. During
Wessel Tarr an assignment at Pp = final pump pressure, psi
Mobil E&P Services Ppi = initial pump pressure, psi
Inc. (MEPSI) Drilling Technology in Dallas, he developed and (Pp)min = minimum final pump pressure, psi
taught an advanced well control school. He holds an MEng. Pwj = flowing BHP, psi
degree in petroleum engineering from Clausthal·Zelierfeld U., Pws = static pore pressure of permeable zone, psi
Germany. Brian A. Tarr leads the drilling engineering group Ap = friction pressure drop in drillstring, psi
of the Dept. of Drilling Technology at MEPSI in Dallas. His
special interests include wild well control, directional drill· ilPan = friction pressure drop in openhole annulus, psi
ing and surveying, and horizontal drilling. He holds a BS q = gas inflow rate, gal/min
degree in aeronautical engineering from Manc!lester U. and qmOH = kill rate for openhole annulus mud volume,
an MEng degree in petroleum engineering from Heriot Watt gal/min
U., Edinburgh. qmoo = kill rate for infinite mud volume, gal/min
qsc = gas inflow rate, scf/D
4. Nance, G.: "Handy Method Helps Define Kick Tolerances," Pet. Eng. re = effective drainage radius, ft
Inti. (Feb. 1990) 26-31. rw = wellbore radius, ft
5. Rudiono, F.: "Computer Program To Determine Casing Setting Depth T = absolute temperature, OR
From Seismic Intervai Velocity," paper IPA 90-179 presented at the
Van = annulus volume flowing zone to fracture, gal
1990 IPA Annual Convention, Jakarta, Oct.
6. Booth, J.E.: " Support of Drilling Operations Using a Central Com- z = gas deviation factor
puter and Communications," paper SPE 19127 presented at the 1989 Z = vertical height of influx in annulus, ft
SPE Petroleum Computer Conference, San Antonio, June 26-28. Pj = density of influx fluid, Ibm/gal
7. Wessel, M.: Mobil Advanced Well Control Course Computer Programs, Pm = mud weight in use, Ibm/gal
Mobil E&P Services Inc., Dallas (1990). PmF = fracture pressure at casing shoe, Ibm/gal equiv.
8.·Blount, E.M. and Soeiinah, E.: "Dynamic Kili: Controlling Wild Wells
Pmk = kill-mud weight, Ibm/gal
a New Way," World Oil (Oct. 1981) 109-26.
9. Craft, B.C. and Hawkins, M.F.: Applied Petroleum Reservoir Engi- /L = gas viscosity, cp
neering, Chemical Engineering Series, Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood rf> = average hole deviation of open hole, degrees
Cliffs, NJ (1959).
10. Wessel, M. and Tarr, B.A.: "Supplement to SPE 22217, Underground Acknowledgments
Flow Well Control: The Key to Drilling Low-Kick-Tolerance Wells
We acknowledge the contributions made by Mobil personnel who
Safely and Economically," paper SPE 23764 available from SPE,
Richardson, TX. developed key parts of the material summarized in this paper, es-
pecially E.M. Blount, D.L. Garrett, R.S . Franklin, and R. Quitzau.
SI Metric Conversion Factors We also thank Mobil E&P Services Inc. and Rohoel-Aufsuchungs
bbl x 1.589873 E-Ol m3 Ges. management for permission to publish this paper.
cp x 1.0* E-03 Pa's
ft x 3.048* E-Ol m References
gal X 3.785412 E-03 m3 1. Pilkington, P.E. and Niehaus, H.A.: " Exploding the Myths About Kick
in. X 2.54* E+OO cm Tolerance," World Oil (June 1975) 59-62 .
Ibm x 4.535924 E-Ol kg 2. Wilkie, D.1. and Bernard, W.F.: "Abnonnal Pressure Detection and
Control in Beaufort Sea Wells," paper presented at the 1981 IADC
psi x 6.894757 E+OO kPa
Drilling Technology Conference, March.
'Converslon factor is exact. SPEDE 3. Redman, K.P. Jr. : "Understanding Kick Tolerance and Its Significance
Original SPE manuscript received for review Jan. 2, 1991. Paper (SPE 22217) accepted in Drilling Planning and Execution," paper SPE 19991 presented at
for publication Sept. 3, 1991. Revised manuscript received Aug. 1, 1991 . the 1990 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Houston, Feb. 27-March 2.

256 SPE Drilling Engineering, December 1991