Contents : Pretest Information : 1.1 Notes for Candidates 1.2 Equation Sheets (Field Units and S.. Units) IWCF Drilling Well Control Certification Syllabus (Compatible with !ADC WellCAP Training Curriculum) IWCF Study Material (Chapters extracted from Distance Learning Package) Extracts from API RP Standards Exercises : 5.1 Exercise 1: Pressure Calculations 5.2 Exercise 2 : Knowledge of Kill Methods 5.3 Exercise 3 : Downhole Equipment and Problems 5.4 Exercise 4: Kick Worksheet 5.5 Exercise 5 : Surface Blowout Prevention Equipment 5.6 Exercise 6 : Subsea Well Control 5.7 Answer Sheets for Exercises 5.1 through 5.6 IWcF_MNLDOCzs0'0 x [YU] GAL [6dq] Aysued pin. SuG + [sd] using Kayes [yl] m8PH GAL 0, h 6 isd] aaais - [sd] gous | 280% 0041 ftsved Pra Comvad [u/siaq]ownjo, senuury [siqq] oz1s ory zso'0 x [4] GAL [isd] sso7] ainssazg seynuury ~ Wysd) pes pints Buna} 2500 X[¥] GAL [6dd] Aysueg piniy Bung feUIBHO + lsd] dais + (ly) UBIeH GAL xnyul x (isd per xny [60d] Aysueg pin} Bug jeusbyo + [8dd ] Ausuoq [3dd } Aysuog prnya [ry x Usd] aaais + Usd] 1d 40 YOS: {y/siaq] eumpo, zejnury [uur siqq) anding dung [wes] pasds dung x ysysiaq] indino dung z50'0 x[y] mdeq jon, ana], isd) amssoug Usd] dads + ’sd) Guns UG UI esnsserg oNBISOIPAH Ww) ude reopen ony x Zg0'0 x [6da] Aysueg pin.g BuniuG zs0'0 (y/1sd] quarpesp aanssosg 2500 x [Odd] Aysueg pints Bun 96/10 (6dd] YOLOWS ALZAVS/NIOUVIN did “St. Gysd] XM14NI 40 LNZIGVYD “yh B/] 310H ONOTW XNT4NISOLHOIH “tL [60d] ALISNAG NOILYINDUID LNATWAINDA “Zt [sd] auNSSaud ONISVONILNHS “Hh [60d] ALISNAG GINTd Tt “OF Usd] 3unssaud ONILWINDUI TWNIS ‘6 Usd] PUNSSAd ONILVINOUI WILINI “8 [ywal] ALIDOT3A BVTIANNY —*L luuyaqlinaino dnd = °8 [60d] ALISNAG GIN T4 ONITHYG LNITWAINDS ‘3 bsd] aunssaud NOUWWNOS — *F Usd] auNSsaud QUVISONGAH “E [6dd) ALisNad GIN14 ONITING twsd] anaiavus auNssaud =F br WwYOs Jeaus SeNUO, SHUN PIa!14 - WNYOA TONLNOSD 113M WNOILWNYALNI[ay /1sd] emssarg u oseasouy - [isd] ainssorg uoneuo, [siqq ] oumjo, 3ory yeuI8iI9 x [sy / 18d] esnssorg uy osvasoUy (y/siqa] ids eiewy x Zs0'0 x [8dd ] Ausuog pinjat Sun (Cy7 5199] ssid ee - [¥/s19q] Medea SuiseD) x [isd] souejeqienQ [y/sigg] Aasedey Bussey Ty7siaa] tdsia rere x Ty] 8221109 [NIG Jo Yau] [y/s19q] Ayoedyg senuury (ry ysiaa] Aedes odig + [3 /s199] dsic rer) x 250 0 x [8dd] Asus pinjy Suu (y/siqq] tdsic ew - [y/s19q] Apedeg Busey Tu/staa] idsia rere x zs0'0 x [8dd ] Ansuaq pinja Buy =A wy td ‘Ad ='A'd Zso0 x [8dd } Aysueg pina Suga [sy /1sd] amssorg odig [LIC Ul eseasou] [8dd ] Aysuoc pinta Int - 8's¢ Oost x [8dd ] Asuoc pinja cl jeusuC - [Bdd ] Aysuaq pms IY WW) GAL 80us x ZS0°0 x (Idd) Aysuaq pints III - [60d] Aysuaq pinis “WG “Molly ‘xeW) zs0'0 x [¥] GAL 204s [sd] yo- yea] aoung (eyeunroxade 70) { ne ae) x [sd] asnssaug queuing, [eda Aysueg pins Bupa sen + bysiqq] dH@ NivLNIVW 04 03378 OL 3W1710A, WW] MOT OL SLUVLS TIM 34034 TINd O4 did Wl suvTI0o Tha Hood Hos dou TART byjsd] adtd LAM ONiddld ‘14 Yad douG 3unssaud WAsd] Adid ANC ONIddIaL “14 Yad dowd auNSsaud im OvSNT Ave-s1A08 bua] ava NOLLWIOOuad baqsqi] ALISN3G GINT ONITWYG 3sivy OL FLAN Usd] 71 uaLav dsvVIW MSN [60d] ALISN3d GINT4 ONITWG FTYMOTTY “XV Usd] dIHSNOILW13¥ SANOULS dWNd/IUNSS3ad aNd 9% 92 ve 4 c24 we ‘6 “8h “a 1 tr weod JOYS seINUUOY SUN PI!4 - WNYOA TONLNOD 114M TVWNOILVNUALNI[ur] 8H GAL xngu zor [ea] dacs - [vax] aors [11/84] suo pinyy Buys [ww] aumjon sejnuuy 921s POY (1) GAL 201 X [ea] 8807] amnsseig sejoNTY L-uy6y] Ausued pint Buy jeUIGUO + Teal dads + {wi] u8iaH GAL xnpul x (luyeay] pess xnyul - [wyeqy] per pinia Buma)} (w] GAL Zot x [ea] dacs [a1 /84_) Ansuog pinjg Sump jeur3uQ [,w/3y ] Gysueq pina 1rd x [eax] Td 40 YOS feet] ddais + [ec] 1d 40 Yos [wy ur] eunjo, aejnury [up ar] nding dung [uds} poeds dung x Pyis/_tu] indino ding [wi] indog jeonse, ony, Zol x [eq] aunssarg fea] ddais + [eer] Gums HC Ul essere oNeISOPAH zor [,w/ 84] Aysuog ping Suyig ZO x [yey] werpel aunssalg zol [73a] Sisveq prog Seq Luy6y) Aysueg pints Suid jeu6uo + [ui] uideg feaen ers x 96/10 [eyed] XN1ANI 40 ANBIGVYD = “Ph [w] 30H SNOT XNT4NI 40 LHOISH “th {:tu/6¥] ALISN30 NOLLWINSUID LNFTVAINDA “ZL [eg] RINSSAUd ONISYD NILAHS ‘bh [euy6y] ALISN3G GIN TID “Ob [egy] SUNSSAYd ONLY INDIO WN *6 [ec] AUNSSAUd ONLLVINUID TWILINE “8 [uuu] ALIOOTAA BVTINNNY “Lk [4uyew) indino dWnd = “8 buy6y] ALISN3d GINT4 ONITWG LNATVAINDA—*S leg] FNSSIYd NOLLVWAOS —*F leg] FUNSSIUd OILVISONGAH —*E kuy6y] ALisNad aini4 ONITIUG (weal LNBIGVND FUNSSaud = “b br waod JO9US SeINWIOJ SHUN “I'S - MNYOI TOMLNOD T14M TWNOILWNYSLNI[ay /eap{] eanssasg ut aseosouy - [egy] aunssasg uorewL0 [.w J oumjo, sory [eurSu x [sy / egy] ounssorg ur esvasouy [wy uw] jdsiq odig x [ ,w/84] Ausuad pinjy Sune Zor x (Cary ws) jdsi persyy - [wr / wr] AnroedeD BuyseD) x [edy] sourjeqieag [ww] Aypeden Susea [ww] idsiq roy x [w J s3¢[105 [TH 50 HBO Zor x (wy wi) Ayoedes rejnuuy (Qu ,w] Anoedeg adig + [wi / ,w1] ydsiq perp) x [wi /84) Asuog pinjg Sum Zol x [wr/ ur) pdsiq ery - [w/w] Anodes Buisea Cur ut] rdsiq pera x [m1 /84) Aysuog ping Say y de ‘A Weg 4 Ax =4 nfds'atd Zor x Lay / eq] aanssaag odi [,ur/84 J Ausued pri IDI = 00zb 00zr * [ur / By ] Aysuag pinjy Tc jeurBU - [wu /8y J AysuEC PINT TEL zo1 7 Cw 84] Ansuag pinoy ier - (41/84) Ausuag pinyg [eq Moy xeRy (w] GAL 204s Buse Zol X [ea] 430 - 49] 2ou}INg [wi] GAL eous x (; Luy6y] Aysueg pints Bumud Ise + (w) dat Luy6y] Aysueq pinis Bua + Wore [ean] use Hapg Lygtl] de NIVINIVW OL 03378 OL SWNTOA [w] Mo14 O4 SLuvis 113M 340439 TInd OL adid (w] suv TI09 Tirud HOOd od dowd 13037 [uyeay] did LAM ONIddiut ‘W Yad douG auNssaud [uyed] ddid AUC ONIddRAL "W Yd douG 3uNssaud IMVT OWSNT Avo-31A08 uu] avy NOLLWIOONad Guy] ALiSNAG CINTA ONITTUG 3sive OL LANE: lec] 74 8aLaV dSVVW MaN buy] ALISNaG GINTS ONITING T1avMOTIV “KYW. [egy] dIHSNOILW13Y SANOULS dWNd/TUNSsaad dWNd Luy6y) YOLoW4 ALAIVSINIOUVIN dL 96/10 92 we “ we ‘6 cr un 1 br wos WSUS Be|NUOY SHUN ‘I'S - NNYOI TONLNOS 114M TWNOILWNYALNIContents Part 1 : Well control : principles and practices 11 12 13 14 15 16 Contents References Resumé Introduction Formation pressures Formation strength Primary well control concepts Secondary well control Tertiary well control Appendix 1: Relationship between bottom hole pressure, formation strength at the casing shoe, drilling fluid density and influx volume Appendix 2: Worked example for killing a well by the “Wait and Weight” method Appendix 3 : Derivation of the equation to caleulate top gas pressures Appendix 4: List of symbols Part 2: Well control equipment 21 2.2 2.3 24 25 2.6 2.7 Contents References Resumé Introduction Well killing system BOP stack equipment Hydraulic BOP operating units Additional well control equipment Testing well control and related equipment Installation requirements for well head and BOP equipment Appendix 1 : Example of accumulator size calculation Appendix 2 : Calculating casing test pressures Page waa a7 59 102 105 110 116 119 125 127 128 129 133 146 167 176 183 188 189 192 Part 3 : Sub-sea well control : equipment and operations Contents 195 References 196 Resumé 197 3.1 Introduction 199 3.2 Components of a sub-sea BOP system 200 3.3 BOP control systems 235 3.4 Miscellaneous subjects 256 3.5 Operations related to subsea BOP systems 263 WCF Training Sn Page i v1.00Part 4: Subsea well control ; principles and practices Contents 281 References 282 Resumé 283 4.1 Introduction 285 4.2 Shallow gas 286 4.3 Well control procedures and calculations 296 Appendix 1: Glossary of abbreviations 317 Appendix 2: Kick calculations with long choke lines 319 Part § : Marine operations Contents 331 Resumé 332 5.4 Intraduction 333 5.2 Rig moves and planning 334 5.2 Rig navigation and positioning 338 5.4 Mooring systems 343 Page* os e Well control: principles and practices e e [ai se v1.00Contents Page References 4 Resumé 8 1.1 Introduction 7 1.2 Formation pressures 8 Origins 8 Pore pressure profiles i e Prediction 16 Shallow gas 23 13 Formation strength aT Introduction. 27 Formation stresses 28 Prediction 33 Measurement 34 Influence on well design and well control 37 MAASP 38 14 Primary well control concepts 39 Concept of averbalance 39 Drilling fluid gradient selection 39 Maintenance of primary control 41 1.5 Secondary well contra! 59 e Principles 59 Planning 61 Regaining control 85 Removal of influx 73 16 Tertiary well control 102 Objectives 12 ‘Methodology 102 Appendix 1: Relationship between bottom hole pressure, formation 105 strength at the casing shoe, drilling fluid density and influx volume Appendix 2: Worked example for killing a well by the “Wait and 110 Weight” method Appendix 3 : Derivation of the equation to calculate top gas pressures 116 Appendix 4 : List of aymbols 119 ICWF Training _ ; _ Page 3 V1.0Iatclisiacy nests Well Engineering DLP, Section 2, Part 6: Casing design Well Engineering DLP, Section 8, Part 4: Rig instrumentation EP 88-1000 Shallow gas procedure guidance manual EP 89-1500 Pressure control manual EP 92-2000 Casing design guide EP 93-1993 The KSEPL rock mechanics manual, Part 1 - Intreduction and basies by C.A.M. Veeken (Report RKMR. 93.052, ). Production Handbook, Volume 2, Chapter 1 Drilling Engineers Notebook, Section F. IFP Drilling Data Handbook, Section K Page 4 ~ _ ~ IWCF Training ¥ 4.00Resumé This Part is one of four that will provide the theoretical knowledge of Well Control Equipment, Principles and Practise required to sit the International Well Control Forum (IWCF) Well Control Exam to Supervisor's Level in either Land or Sub-Sea format. The others are: * Part 2 - Well control equipment * Part 3 - Sub-sea well control equipment * Part 4 -Sub-sea well control principles and practices It explains what pore pressures are and describes the mechanisms by which normal, over- and under-pressures can arise. A very brief aummary of basic rock mechanies is given - sufficient to provide an understanding of the critical importance of the relationship between formation strength, drilling fluid density and surface prossure during well control operations. The concepts of primary, sceondary and textiary well control are presented, with detailed explanations of the practices which allow primary control to be maintained and the secondary control procedures ta be followed if a kick (an inflow) should occur. The latter are illustrated by worked examples. IGWE Training Pages v1.00: e Well control: principles and practices e e JCWE Training Paget Vv 1.00Topic 1.1 Introduction During the majority of operations associated with drilling, completing, | working over and eventually abandoning a well it is necessary to maintain | control over the fluids that occur in the pore-spaces of formations being pene- trated by the well. These fluids can be subject to extreme pressures and temperatures in-situ although these are not pre-requisites for the fluids to cause well control problems! Failure to maintain control over these fluids can result in a spontaneous and sometimes rapid flow of the fluid into the well bore. The rate of flow is deter- mined by the degree of imbalance between the well bore and reservoir pres- sures combined with the permeability of the reservoir. In its initial stages, such a flow is called a kick. When such a flow is not controlled and deterio- rates in an uncontrolled manner it is described as a blow-out. Blow-outs can have a very visible environmental impact and, for that reason alone are very damaging for the Operator. The initial stages of a blow-out can also be very hazardous to personnel and cause major damage to equipment in the vicinity of the well. Control and recovery costs can be in the order of $10- $100 million. However, the blow-out can also cause significant damage to the producing reservoir through depletion and creation of preferential gas and water flow paths. It can also have a secondary impact on overlying forma- tions which may become polluted or abnormally pressurised. These factors impact on operations long after the surface environmental impact has been resolved. It is, therefore. critical that Well Engineering staff know how to manage this hazard through * prevention - using primary control techniques and © control and recovery - if an under-balanced situation does occur; how to control it and regain primary control. ‘The procedures associated with regaining primary control are called secondary control measures. These aim to regain control with minimum impact to the immediate and long term integrity and productivity of the well. Should these measures fail then more drastic tertiary well control measures may be applied. WCF Training Page7 v1.00Topic 1.2 Formation pressures 1.2.1. ORIGINS ‘Two values are significant during the planning and drilling of a well; the pore pressure gradient and the overburden pressure gradient. To understand these gradients and the pressures that they can generate and therefore be encountered whilst drilling it is necessary to appreciate the origins of the pressures. The majority of the formations drilled through in hydrocarbon exploration and production operations is sedimentary. The material has settled out either in air or water and is subsequently covered by more material and buried. The majority of this action occurs in water, Depending on the nature of the material it behaves differently when compressed. Fine clay particles tend to have little inherent strength and so deform and compress tightly together, squeezing out the water around it to form claystones and shales with little or no porosity or permeability. Coarser and stronger, sand parti- cles tend to retain some strength and support each other leaving gaps between, called pores, which will generally be initially filled with water. Over time, minerals in the water that they are deposited in can precipitate and cause the grains to become cemented together. Limestone, originating from calcareous material in the water, tends to lose porosity under pressure and temperature. However, its friable nature often causes it to crack or fracture over time and these then can become filled with water or other fluids. Consequently, under ideal cireumstances, a stratigraphic column of rock formation consists of two phases, a solid and a fluid phase. The solid phase is formed by the rock material, and the fluid phase by water, oil, or gas which fills any pore or fracture space between the grains. The degree to which these pores or fractures are linked such that fluid can flow through the rock is the permeability. The total weight of any volume of porous rock (Wi) equals the sum of the weight of the grains or matrix (Wm) and the weight of the pore contents (Wo). Wi= Wn +Wo Considering a column of unit cross-sectional area from surface to a given depth gives the vertical load per unit area at that depth, ie. the vertical stress or pressure in the formation. W, yields what is known as the over- burden stress denoted by S; Win yields the vertical matrix stress oy and W, Page 8 IWCF Training Vv 1.00yields the fluid pressure or Py S =o, +P, The rates of change of these stresses with depth are called gradients. in units of psi/ft or kPa/m, which are just a different way of expressing the density of the material. Taking the depth as Z, which is conventional practice: ; aw, _as ete the bulk density p= the matrix density Pm = SW = Se, dw, and the pore fluid density p; = S¥ye = Fo os 0 tos ‘Pease ma atm eve ° 2 t : 12.4 tearm (0.86 pouty 3 : 18 2o.8 keaim (0.8 pst) 10 21.4 kPa/m (0.95 psi/tt) 3 “geostatic™ or toverburden* fo 48 22.3 kPa/m (0.99 palit) “under pressures* ‘over-prossures” hydrostatic 12 x 1000 psi Figure 1.1 : Pressure gradient plots A convenient concept is the equivalent gradient which is the total stress (or pressure) divided by the total depth. The convenience comes because the only way in which pressure can be applied in a bore-hole is to fill it with a liquid of a certain density and, if necessary, apply additional pressure at the top of the column. The equivalent gradient at any depth is the gradient of the liquid column which would produce the same stress/pressure as exists in the forma- tion without the application of additional pressure. IWIGF Training Page 9 V 1.00The relationship between pressure and depth can be illustrated using a graph. Custom is such that these graphs are plotted with pressure (P) on the horizontal axis and depth (Z) on the vertical axis, with zero (= datum level) at the top corresponding to the physical system. A constant gradient is plotted as a straight line (see Figure 1.1). For pressure and gradient calculations during day-to-day operations the datum level is usually derrick floor elevation (dfe), since that is the top of the column of drilling fluid (in some areas the top of the kelly bushing is taken as datum but in practice the difference is negligible). Pressure plots are also frequently used to compare data from different wells. For this purpose a common datum plane has to be defined. The datum level is usually mean sea level for offshore wells; for land wells it can be any convenient level such as the average elevation of the area above mean sea level (rounded off to a convenient figure). In the latter case the datum level has usually been defined during the seismic campaign. The overburden gradient or bulk density of formations penetrated can be measured by the bulk density logging tool. When these densities, measured in a well, are plotted, a step-like function of the bulk densities versus depth is obtained. Each step represents a change in lithology. Integrating the bulk density measurements to a given depth gives the overburden stress at that depth, and averaging these in an area will give a general trend like the curved line in Figure 1.2b. If no existing well data exists it is possible to make an estimate of the over- burden gradient. Assuming formation rock has a density of approximately 2650 kg/m’ (26 kPa/m or 1.15 psi/ft): A clay formation near the sediment/water interface has a porosity of say 75%. Therefore the gradient of the bulk clay/water mixture is: 0-25 x 26 kPa/m + 0-75 x 9-81 kPa/m = 13-85 kPa/m or 0-25 x 1-15 psi/ft + 0-75 x 0-433 psi/ft = 0-612 psi/ft A sand formation near the sediment/water interface has a porosity of 35%. The combined bulk gradient of the mixture in this case is: 0-65 x 26 kPa/m + 0-35 x 9-81 kPa/m = 20-33 kPa/m or 0-65 x 1-15 psi/ft + 0-35 x 0-433 psi/ft = 0-899 psi/ft The overburden gradient line (Figure 2.1.2a) is, in actual fact, a curved line as compaction normally causes the density of rock to increase with depth. This behaviour depends on rock composition and porosity. As a rule of thumb the overburden gradient is usually taken to be 22-6 kPa/m (1-0 psi/ft although it can vary between 13-8 kPa/m (0-6 psi/ft) and 24-86 kPa/m (1-1 psi/ft). In areas where active sedimentation takes place like the Gulf Coast, offshore Page 10 IWCF Training V 1.00North West Borneo and Nigeria a value of 20-6 kPa/m (0-9 psi/ft) is more accurate due to the amount of water retained in the rock. Formation pore fluid density can be obtained by using logging tools which measure the pressure at a series of depths within the formation. Measured water gradients are usually between 9-81 kPa/m (0-433 psi/ft) for pure fresh water and 10-52 kPa/m (0-465 psi/ft) but may be as high as 11-31 kPa/m (0-5 psi/ft) for saturated salt water pore fluid. Sea water is assumed to have a gradient of 10-07 kPa/m (0-445 psi/ft). 1.8 1.9 20 21 22Q/c0 10 20 30040 50 GMP overburden depth in 1000 foot 2 w hydrostatic 10.1 kPa/m 0.45 psifft 9} blocked butk 9. density log %y, v4 " 4 0.800 0.900 © 1.0000 = 2.000 4,000 6.000 8.000 10.000 psi density log ‘a. As measured by the bulk b. The overburden stress gradient density tool in g/cc Figure 1.2 : The relationship between bulk density and overburden gradient 1.2.2 PORE PRESSURE PROFILES Formations are conventionally classified as normally pressured, under-pres- sured or over-pressured. Any pore pressure of the liquid or gas phase in the formation, as measured by logging tools, may be plotted on a graph similar to the one shown in Figure 2.1.1, and as indicated on that graph the position in which it is plotted will indicate into which pressure regime it falls. ‘These pressure regimes do not have strictly quantitative definitions, being based on the practical matter of what drilling fluid gradient is required to balance the pore pressure. Because of this the boundaries between them are less well defined than shown in the graph and may vary according to the context and to local custom. IWGF Training Page 17 v1.001.2.2.1 NORMAL PRESSURE REGIME Looking at Figure 1.1 it can be seen that two cases of hydrostatic gradient are shown; these correspond to water with zero salinity and water with a highish (but not extreme) salinity. In general if a plotted pressure falls between these two lines the formation is said to be normally pressured at that depth and a normal unweighted drilling fluid can be used while drilling through it. A normally pressured formation will usually have a hydraulic connection to the water table level although this does not have to be vertical, i.e. the connection could happen some distance away via connections with other formations, non-sealing faults ete. In this case the water table will generally be at approximately the same elevation as the drilling location. In a region known to have unusually high formation water salinities, and thus densities, the formation pressure would still be called “normal” or “hydrostatic” even though the plotted pressure is in the overpressure region of the chart (as long as it is consistent with the known pore fluid densities). 1.2.2.2 SUB-NORMAL PRESSURE REGIME Formations with pore pressures which plot below the hydrostatic region shown in Figure 1.1 (or below the locally accepted normal pressure region) are said to have a Sub-Normal or Sub-Hydrostatie pressure regime. If a formation in the region mentioned above has a pore pressure equivalent to a gradient of 10.2 kPa/m (0.45 psifft) it would probably be referred to as under- pressured, depending on local custom, even though it would be a normal pressure elsewhere. Sub-normal pressures can be caused by the following situations: © Low water table or high drilling location elevation + Reservoir depletion * Tectonic extension after compression 1.2.2.2.1_ Low water table or High Elevation In mountainous or arid areas it is possible for the water table to be deep below the surface at the drilling location. The top hole is then drilled through dry rock, Here the pore pressure is zero and the matrix stress alone defines the overburden down to the water table. Below the water table p, then plays a part. This situation is illustrated in Figure 1.3. For example if the water table is at 1000 m (3,281 ft) bdf and the formation fluid gradient is 10 kPa/m (0-442 psi/ft) then the pressure P at a depth D will be given by: P= 10 kPa/m x (D - 1,000) m P= 0-442 psi/ft x (D - 3,281) ft From surface it is said that the formation pressure is underpressured by 1,000 m x 10 kPa/m = 10,000 kPa or 3,281 ft x 0-442 psi/ft = 1,450 psi. Page 12 - IWF Training Vv 1.00Figure 1.3 : The effect of a low water table or high location elevation 1.2.2.2.2 Depleted Reservoirs It has been stated that a normally pressured reservoir usually has a hydraulic connection to the local water table level. This connection can be tenuous and of low permeability, and can sometimes even have been lost as a result of sealing faults, salt intrusions etc. This situation is often described by saying that a reservoir has little or no natural water drive. Consequently, if such a reservoir is produced the pressure in the reservoir will drop by the process of expansion to less than that calculated from the normal gradient (unless it is artificially maintained by gas or water injection). 1.2.2.2.3 Tectonic extension after compression If a reservoir rock with permesbility and porosity becomes sealed after depo- sition, and is then extended or expanded due to tectonic stresses acting on it, the effect can be to expand the fluid in the pore spaces and so reduce the pressure. The effect will be to reduce the pore pressure to less than that generated by the local hydrostatic pressure gradient. 1.2.2.3 OVER-PRESSURED PRESSURE REGIME Formations with pore pressures which plot above the hydrostatic region shown in Figure 1.1 (or above the locally accepted normal pressure region) are said to have an Abnormal or Over-Pressured pressure regime. Over-pressures may be the result of: © High water table or low elevation * Hydrocarbon bearing formations * Abnormal sedimentary burial circumstances * Osmotic action Whilst sub-normal or sub-hydrostatic formations can cause drilling problems such as losses or stuck pipe due to the pressure difference between the well bore and the formation pores (assuming that the well is kept full with water as a minimum!), over-pressures can cause more significant problems such as borehole instability, kicks and blow-outs, Consequently it is important to understand how over-pressures can occur and how they can be predicted and identified at an early stage. IWCF Training Page 13 V 1.001.2.2.3.1 High Water Table / Low Elevation This is the opposite situation to a low water table/high elevation described above. When the well is drilled from a location below the water table or into a permeable formation linked to an aquifer at a higher level, the formation pressure will be greater than that generated by a hydrostatic gradient from the rig floor. This situation can lead to artesian flow from shallow aquifers (as used in London and Paris for drinking water production). Typically, problems can occur when entering the first porous, permeable formation after drilling through surface clays, claystones or shales. 1.2.2.3.2. Hydrocarbon Bearing Formations The permeability of shale to hydrocarbons is extremely low and can be consid- ered to be zero. Once hydrocarbons are trapped below a sealing shale the system is closed at the top. Figure 1.4 shows the basic principle. As the aquifer is open to the base, the water bearing part of the reservoir will be hydrostatically pressurised. Although a normal hydrostatic pressure may exist at the hydrocarbon-water contact, the column of low density oil, condensate or gas on top will result in pore pressures above hydrostatic. The difference between the pore pressure and the hydrostatic pressure increases with distance from the Oil-Water Contact (OWC) or Gas-Water Contact (GWC) with the highest over- pressure at the top of the reservoir (see Figure 1.4). This abnormal pressure resulting from displacement of water by less dense fluids or gas is called genetic pressure. Often there is a small pressure difference at the OWC as oil is pushed down through the pore throats replacing the formation water. This pressure difference can be substantial if pore throats are very small (eg. in chalk). The pressure is a result of the gradient required to produce flow and of working against the capillary effect. Figure 1.4 : “Gas effect” over-pressures 1.2.2.3.3 Abnormal Burial Conditions The conditions under which the sedimentary material is deposited and subse- quently buried can give rise to abnormally pressurised formation. A number of these mechanisms are reviewed below. Page 14 IWCF Training V 1.00Undercompaction Abnormal pressures arising from rapid burial of water saturated sediments are referred to as geopressures (sometimes referred to as depopressures or undercompaction pressures). This phenomenon is the mechanism that has caused the majority of overpressured formations in existence. Depo-, geo- or undereompaction pressures are created by the resistance of low permeability rock to the escape of trapped fluid. The permeability of clean sandstones, limestones and dolomites is generally too high to develop overpressures from undercompaction. However, the permeability of clay or shale decreases with compaction to extremely low values. ‘As the process of burial proceeds a specific increment of overburden load normally causes a rock matrix to compact by a specific corresponding amount, provided that there is enough time available for the pore fluid to escape from the reducing pore space. Under such conditions the pore pressure in the rock remains in hydrostatic equilibrium with that in the overlying formations and remains normal. If, however, the burial process proceeds too quickly the pore fluid will not be able to flow out of the formation at a rate which allows the same matrix compression rate to be achieved. The fluid will then have to support part of the overburden load and will therefore become overpressured. The formation is said to be undercompacted. An alternative way of looking at the situation is that as the rock is put under compressive stress by the increasing overburden the pore fluid always supports part of this increasing load. The increasing pore pressure thus creates a differential which causes the pore fluid to flow out of the formation. If the ratio of permeability to rate of increase of load is high enough the system will stabilise with a low elevation of the pore pressure. If the converse is the case equilibrium will be reached with a high pore pressure. Significant factors in creating an overpressure under these conditions are: * the permeability of the clay or shale which decreases with compaction. * the thickness of the shale through which the water must escape. * the potential compaction that could occur in the shale at the applied load. * the rate of burial. As mentioned above continuous beds of sandstones, limestones and dolomites do not become undercompacted because their permeability is high. If, however, a lens of a high permeability material is completely enclosed in a compacting clay (later to become shale) the pore fluid can no more escape from that than from the clay itself. The pore fluid will thus remain in pressure equilibrium with the fluid in the clay immediately surrounding it and the lens will become undercompacted and overpressured Due to the minimal permeability of shales, drilling into an undereompacted and therefore overpressured shale will normally only lead to borehole IWGF Training Page 15 v1.00stability problems. Drilling into an overpressured porous lens can lead to a kick. However, if the lens is only water filled even a very small expansion of the sealed system will result in a substantial drop in fluid pressure, given the low compressibility of the pore water (4-35 x 10-7 kPa! or 3x 10% psi). If, for example, the pore space is allowed to expand by as little as 0-1 of a per cent, the pressure of the pore water will decrease by 0-001/4-35 x 10-7 kPa! = 2,299 kPa (0-001/8 x 10 psi! = 833 psi). If, on the other hand, the formation has become partially gas filled due to degradation of material in the surrounding shale, the potential exists for a high pressure, high volume gas kick. Diagenesis Phase changes in the matrix material of the rock can cause overpressures. Some types of rock under the influence of pressure and temperature alters their structure and composition, resulting in a reduction in pore volume and/or an increase in the amount of formation fluid. Such a change could cause a pore pressure increase in a sealed system. For example in sand/shale sequences montmorillonite or smectite clays change to illite at about 220°F. This alteration frees water with a volume in excess of the reduction in volume of montmorillonite or smectite altered. If expulsion is inhibited, these liquids will, with continued burial, absorb increasing load. The effective stress will increase more slowly and abnormal pore pressures will result. Tectonic pressures Tectonic phenomena such as sliding, piercements (volcanic), shearing, diaperic movements (salt, clay), uplifts (mountain building), thrust, ete. can add energy to the pressure system in a geological area resulting in abnormal pore pressures in formations from which fluids cannot escape. Osmosis Two reservoirs separated by an impermeable membrane may develop a pressure differential across the membrane as a function of a difference in the salinity of the formation liquid. As clay may act as such a membrane and because salinity changes occur in the subsurface, osmosis could have some potential to create abnormal pressures. Tests have proved that a pressure differential of 21 to 28 kPa (or 3 to 4 psi) could be generated by osmosis across a clay membrane. 1.2.3. PREDICTION Due to the drilling problems that both abnormally and sub-normally pres- sured formations can cause it is important to be able to predict them. Depending on the nature of the drilling operation this may be during the planning stages of a well or whilst actually drilling the well. Page 16 - IGF Training V 1.001.2.3.1 PREDICTION WHILST PLANNING 1.2.3.1.1 Offset Well Information When planning a development or appraisal well, information from offset wells can provide indicators of over-pressure. Key information is: © Pore Pressure measurements (e.g. RFT logs) * Drill-speed logs - drillability should reduce with depth in shales (see later section on “a” exponent) * Formation bulk density logs (compaction and thus bulk density should generally increase with depth in shales) * Formation Fluid contact levels (OWC, GOC, GWC) - these tend to remain almost constant across a field (assuming the absence of sealing faults) and thus their depths, combined with formation depth estimates, can provide sufficient information to estimate formation pressure gradi- ents along the proposed well path. Given that depth prognoses tend to have margins of error associated with them, it is normal to make pore pressure prediction estimates based on the worst reasonable case scenario (but not on the worst theoretically possible case). This is generally a combination of a reasonable estimate of the maximum reservoir height combined with a reasonable estimate of the maximum hydrostatic pressure. This data can be used to make a good estimate of the pore pressures that may be encountered in the new well and so the casing scheme and drilling fluid program can be designed accordingly. However, pressure data has to be checked carefully to ensure that field production operations have not caused changes in the reservoir characteristics since the source well was Grilled. These issues will be discussed further later in the Part 1.2.3.1.2 Regional Geology Because the majority of causes of overpressures are related to the deposi- tional environment or history of the sedimentary rock, the prediction of over- pressures during well planning, in the absence of any offset well information (eg. when drilling a wildcat or first well in an area), relies on either looking for indications of sedimentary activity that has the potential to generate over- pressures or, alternatively, extrapolating symptoms of overpressure that are visible at or near the surface to underlying formations. In common with hydrocarbons, often the only way to determine if overpressures actually exist is to drill! Complex studies of stratigraphic and hydrodynamic features have been conducted in some areas of the world. These can be useful to identify shallow overpressures caused by artesian flow conditions etc. but are less likely to yield information about overpressures in hydrocarbon bearing formations. Studies into the depositional environment of an area may indicate the type of rapid burial that can lead to over-pressures. Mathematical modelling is being applied to the action of sedimentation and burial with the objective of IWCF Training Page 17 V 1.00simulating the process of compaction and so identify areas where overpres- sures may exist. 1.2.3.1.3 Geophysics It is rare that exploration or appraisal drilling is initiated prior to the comple- tion of seismic profiling of the area. With modern processing techniques it is possible to identify characteristics in the survey that suggest the existence of over-pressured formations. Primarily they identify undercompacted material due to poor response or slow transit times. These techniques become more reliable when combined with log data from wells in the same province. Actual sonic transit times in these wells can be compared to seismic data to identify where undercompaction appears to have occurred. Seismic surveys can show the presence of geological features known to cause overpressures such as salt domes (causing formation distortions), growth faults (in areas of rapid burial) ete. In addition, the presence of gas can increasingly be suggested by seismic data; bright spots indicating high ampli- tude reflections from gas filled (and so relatively low bulk density) formations being identified on the seismic maps. 1.2.3.2. WARNING SIGNS WHILST DRILLING It is normally possible to identify that the well is entering an area of over- pressure before the latter manifests itself by a kick from a porous and perme- able formation. To exist, an overpressured formation must be sealed, at least from above, by an impermeable layer. Consequently a pressure gradient will exist across the impermeable layer and the effects of this gradient provide the warning signs. The nature of the impermeable layer is important; a very thin but extremely impermeable layer (such as salt and limestone) will not provide as many clues as one where the pressure gradient permeates the formation (e.g. shale). The formation where pressure moves from normally pressured is called the transition zone. 1.2.3.2.1 Drilling Parameters In general, the onset of abnormally pressured formations is associated with an increase in the drillability of the formation. This is a deviation from a general trend of reduced drillability with depth due to compaction, increased stresses etc. Basically this increase can manifest itself in two ways. In shale, where this shale is a pressure transition zone, the increase will be gradual, while, when entering the overpressured reservoir itself the increase will be more sudden. The latter is normally called a drilling break. It should be noted that not all increases in the drilling rate are a result of an increase in formation pressure. It could simply have been the result of a change in lithology. However, any unexplained increase in drilling rate should always be investigated. A number of attempts have been made to link the drilling parameters to generate a measure of drillability . The best known was by Jorden and Page18 IWCF Training Vv 1.00Shirley * who demonstrated empirically that in homogeneous shale forma- tions, and with all other factors being equal, penetration rate is proportional to the rotation rate of the bit. R=k,N where: Ris the rate of penetration Nis the rotation rate ky is a constant of proportionality (that is only valid for one set of circumstances) Jorden and Shirley also showed empirically that the penetration rate depends on the weight on bit and hole size according to an exponential rela- tionship : Ww do Rokx(¥] where: W is the weight on bit D is the hole diameter ky is a constant of proportionality (that is, like k, , only valid for one set of circumstances) dis an exponent which, relating penetration rate to weight on bit per unit hole diameter, gives a measure of the "drillability" of the forma- tion It was shown, still empirically, that combining the two above equations into wy = R=KxNx — one: xnxi gives a good approximation to the behaviour of a real system in practice. Given that the utility of such a relationship is to compare the drillability of similar formations in similar circumstances, rather than to establish the absolute value of a well defined parameter, the equation is simplified by dropping the constant. The relative drillabilities of similar formations in which only the penetration rate, weight on bit, rotation rate and hole diameter vary is then given by the value of “d” in the equation wy R=N { - ) in which case “d” is known as “the d exponent” and * Jorden, JR. and Shirley, O.J., “Application of drilling performance data to overpressure detection,” Journal of Petroleum Technology, November 1966 IWF Training Page 19 V 1.00Given again that the objective is to make comparisons rather than establish absolute values, the units in which penetration rate, weight on bit, rotation rate and hole diameter are expressed do not affect the final result. When working in oilfield units, in which penetration rate is measured in ft/hour, weight on bit in Ibs, rotation rate in rpm and hole diameter in inches, the convention has grown to insert factors to convert diameter to feet, to make the time units consistent and to convert the weight on bit units into Ibs x108. Conventionally thus It has been found that the “d exponent” can additionally be adjusted for drilling fluid density variations. This gives the compensated d exponent, “d,” . a. — However, it is very likely that a sealing cap rock is a shale so it does have relevance. Additionally, the equation was specifically developed for Gulf Coast condi- tions where drilling shale is the norm; it should therefore be used with caution in other areas. Figure 1.5 illustrates the indication of change given by the “d exponent” Other algorithms have been developed that require significant processing of raw data such as Geoservice’s Sigmalog, Baroid’s Log Normalised Drilling Rate (LNDR) and Anaéril’s Instantaneous Drilling Evaluation Log (IDEL) or A-exponent. These and others may be provided as a standard or additional Mud- Logging service. <— Depth Figure 1.5 1.2.3.2.2 Drilling fluid parameters A number of indications can be observed in the drilling fluid returns. These, again, have to be assessed in conjunction with the drilling parameters and the drilling environment. Relevant parameters include: Drilling fluid gas levels The gas content of the drilling fluid can be measured crudely using stand- Page 20 IWCE Training v1.00@ alone methane (CH,) meters or more sophisticated gas chromatographs (usually in Mud Logging units). The following parameters may be useful: Background gas levels (very small quantities of gas contained in clay- stone/shale ) generally increase from ambient values when drilling into undercompacted shales. Gas shows (from the pores of gas-containing reservoir rock being drilled) will be apparent when a hydrocarbon reservoir is entered. The degree of the shows is dependant on the pore pressure of the rock. Excessive gas shows suggests a minimal overbalance on bottom. Trip | Connection gas may be observed due to slight reductions in bottom hole pressure due to a loss of the back pressure due to fluid friction in the annulus when the pumps are stopped plus a swabbing effect whilst picking up to make a connection or when tripping. Again, high readings tend to suggest that there is minimal overbalance on bottom. Gas composition from a gas chromatograph - a service offered by Mud Logging Units - can also provide indications of overpressures. The ratio of methane to ethane generally reduces as levels of ethane inerease in transition zones or overpressured formations. 2S levels - The presence of increasing levels of HgS in the drilling fluid whilst drilling evaporites can also be an indication of the onset of overpressures Drilling fluid density Reductions in drilling fluid density may be caused by increased gas content (see earlier) or increasing water content. In low permeability formations this may be observed in place of a higher volume kick. Drilling fluid temperature Temperature gradients (dT/dZ) in undercompacted formations tend to be greater than in normally compacted formations. Normally, the flow line temperature of the drilling fluid, under conditions of uniform cooling ete. should increase regularly with depth. If the increase deviates from the established pattern it can indicate the onset of over-pressures. This effect is, however, generally masked by changes in circulation rate, drilling fluid characteristics, tripping as well as riser cooling effects, particularly in deep water operations. Drilling fluid resistivity Associated with increased formation water content in the drilling fluid, this parameter can back up others such as density provided there is suffi- cient contrast in the salinity of the drilling fluid and formation water. Increased levels of sulphur salts in the drilling fluid whilst drilling evapor- ites can indicate over-pressures (see HyS). IWGF Training Page 21 V 1.001.2.3.2.3. Cuttings analysis Careful analysis of cuttings samples can provide warning signs of impending overpressures: Shale density Shale density can be measured relatively easily at the well site by Mud- Loggers. In areas of undercompaction the density will not increase with depth as fast as in normally pressured formations and may even decrease. Plotted against depth this is a useful tool in areas of long shale sections. Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC) Shale is composed of four different clay minerals, kaolinite, illite, montmo- rillonite and smectite. The ratios of these minerals change with depth due to the transformation of smectite into illite with increased pressure and temperature. A simple test can be performed to estimate the amount of smectite in a sample of cuttings and this value, when plotted against depth should show a negative gradient. Deviation from this trend in a shale formation is indicative of entering a transition or overpressured zone. Cuttings shape, size and abundance In general, as a transition or over-pressured zone is penetrated, increased borehole instability caused by a reduced drilling fluid pressure overbalance can lead to increased volumes of larger, more angular cuttings. This may be associated with other indications of borehole instability such as over- pulls etc. It is important to realise, however, that such features are not. indicative in isolation as they can be caused by other factors such as tectonic stress etc, 1.2.3.2.4 Wireline logs & formation pressure evaluation Many logging tools used for petrophysical analysis can give indications of overpressured formations or transition zones, predominantly through identi- fying shale undercompaction. Density Under normal compaction conditions, shale density increases with depth. Consequently, a change in the density gradient can suggest a transition zone or overpressures. Resistivity Shale density and therefore resistivity tends to increase with compaction and depth. Reductions in resistivity can indicate overpressures. Sonic Sonic transit times reduce as density increases. Thus, an increase in the transit time can indicate overpressures. Page 22 : IWGF Training v1.00Formation pressure Ultimately, a series of formation pressure measurements will provide quantitative evidence of the existence of over-pressures. However, these require porous, permeable formations and cannot give warning of the exis- tence of a transition zone. 1.2.3.2.5 Well seismic evaluation Seismic check shots or a Vertical Seismic Profile can be conducted in the well and the time/depth data used to correct the original seismic interpreta- tions which may have been based on assumed velocities in various rock formations. These corrections can assist in more accurately predicting the depth of deeper sites of undercompaction and thus possible overpressures. 1.2.4 SHALLOW GAS 1.2.4.1. INTRODUCTION Shallow gas deposits account for 41% of all recorded blowouts in the Gulf of ‘Mexico and the North Sea since 1980. Over 50% of these blowouts resulted in major damage to the drilling unit and many have resulted in serious injury and death to personnel. Characteristics of shallow gas blowouts are very little warning, very high flow-rates, large volumes of abrasive sand, rapid equipment failure, gas leaks, ignition and fires, all in conjunction with exces- sive noise. If one commences it is virtually impossible to recover control until the gas flow stops naturally, either due to exhaustion of the reservoir or collapse of the bore hole. 1.2.4.2 DEFINITION Various definitions for shallow gas deposits exist: EP 88-1000 SIPM Shallow Gas Procedure Guidance Manual: “gas that is encountered in the well which cannot be closed in, because well shut-in pressures combined with the hydrostatic head of the fluid in the well bore will probably result in formation breakdown and subsequently cratering of the well. If BOP protection and normal well killing proce- dures can be applied the gas is not considered to be shallow gas”. Shell Expro: Well Engineering Information System (1995) : Shallow gas shall be taken to mean: i. Hydrocarbon Gas accumulations encountered before setting surface casing (first casing on which a BOP is installed) ii, Hydrocarbon gas accumulations encountered after setting the surface casing but where the well cannot be closed in. IWGF Training Page 23 v1.001.2.4.3 ORIGINS OF SHALLOW GAS Shallow gas can derive from two sources: Biogenic Gas Biogenic gas is formed at shallow depth from the decomposition of organic material (i.e. ‘swamp gas”). It is primarily methane and tends to be found in-situ in the decomposing material or in a very close reservoir. This type of shallow gas is particularly prevalent in swampy areas as well as in areas of rapid sedimentary deposition where there is a significant amount of organic material being deposited. Petrogenic Gas Potrogenie gas is generated at depth from the degradation of hydrocarbon source material at elevated temperature and pressure and has subse- quently migrated into a shallow reservoir rock overlain by a seal. Migration can have occurred naturally over geological time or may have occurred recently due to poorly cemented casing strings, internal blow-outs ete. Alternatively, in rare circumstances, a deeply buried gas reservoir can become uplifted or exposed near surface by erosion of the original over- burden. Petrogenic gas is predominantly composed of Methane, Ethane and Propane. Gas of either origin will only form a reservoir if it exists or subsequently migrates into a permeable and porous formation overlain by a sealing forma- tion. The gas is commonly found in highly porous and permeable unconsoli- dated sands overlain by clay or claystone. Due to the depth of burial it is unusual for the reservoir to be overpressured however, the “gas effect” can cause the top of the reservoir to be abnormally pressured with respect to the local hydrostatic gradient. Shallow gas pockets can also form in cold environments without the presence of an impermeable formation. Migrating gas cools to form hydrates (solid mixtures of water and gas molecules) which, being impermeable, trap addi- tional gas. This environment is becoming increasingly significant in deep water drilling operations where sea bed temperatures can approach 0° C. 1.2.4.4 OPERATIONAL CONSTRAINTS Given the shallow depth of burial and the very low formation strength of overlying formations it is not normally possibie to drill with sufficient drilling fluid gradient to control shallow gas formations that are overpressured due to the “gas effect”. In addition it is generally not possible to close in a well in the early stages of a shallow gas blowout without the risk of breaking down the formation at the previous casing shoe (if any) and cratering the formation around the well. Consequently the only well control method available is to divert the flow away from the rig whilst attempting to regain control of the well or evacuating the location. The entrained sand and other material Page 24 IWCF Training Vv 4.00causes significant damage to the diverting equipment and its subsequent failure has been the primary cause of major shallow gas incidents, many trag- ically with fatal consequences. The plume of a flow of shallow gas has been postulated to cause stability problems for floating drilling vessels, particularly drill-ships. The flow of gas can also ignite at surface forming a hazard to the rig itself as well as to evac- uating personnel. Other characteristics of a shallow gas kick/blowout are: © difficulty in identifying initial well flow - particularly when drilling from floating units and there is no return of drilling fluid to surface. * arapid increase in flow - as the well starts to flow additional gas rapidly reduces the hydrostatic head in the well and so increases the flow rate. Total unloading of the well to gas can happen in less than a minute leaving very little time for analysis and reaction and making controlled reaction to a shallow gas kick extremely difficult. If returns are to surface the noise levels are exceedingly high, adding to the diffi- culty of carrying out emergency procedures. * whilst control may be held whilst drilling, rapid flow can start when circulation ceases or when the hole is circulated clean of drilled cuttings. Swabbing whilst tripping can initiate a shallow gas kick and is difficult to identify when there are no returns to surface. For this reason the standard procedure is to pump out of the hole if there is any possibility of shallow gas. 1.2.4.5 PREDICTION The primary defence against shallow gas is its identification and avoidance at the well planning stage. As mentioned earlier, certain depositional environ- ments are more prone to shallow gas, particularly of the Diagenic origin. However, Petrogenic shallow gas has the potential to exist wherever a shallow sealing formation exists. In addition, deep water hydrate formations can exist even in the absence of a seal. The principle method of identification is through the use of Seismic Surveys. These can be either analogue or digital Shallow seismic surveys. Analogue surveys, combined with bathymetric measurements and a sea bed sonar survey, provide a very limited penetration into the sea bed, being primarily of use for selecting a suitable drilling location. Digital surveys can be processed and analysed to identify bright-spots in formations down to around 3,000 ft (1,000 m) and with thicknesses in excess of 15 ft (5 m)which are indicative of the presence of shallow deposits of gas. (refer to EP 88-1000 for additional data on shallow seismic surveys). Shallow seismic can be augmented by small diameter soil boring surveys (usually limited to 50 m penetration) and pilot hole drilling from a conven- tional drilling rig. Pilot holes can be logged using conventional petrophysical IWCF Training Page 25 v1.00tools (Induction / SP / Sonic / Gamma Ray / Caliper) to identify the presence of shallow gas deposits and evaluate its characteristics. Additional information on the operational precautions to be taken if shallow gas is present can be found in Topic 1.4.3.3. Page 26 IWCF Training v1.00Topic 1.3 Formation strength 1.3.1. INTRODUCTION In Topic 1.2 the origins and potential for abnormally-pressured formations was explained. The basic principle of controlling these pressures , as discussed in Topic 1.4, is to balance or exceed these pore pressures with the hydrostatic head of the drilling fluid. This principle defines the minimum drilling fluid gradient that can be permitted (i. so that the formation pore pressure is just equalled or exceeded. However, another limitation exists on selection of the drilling fluid gradient; the maximum drilling fluid gradient that the formation can with- stand before fractures occur and develop in the rock surrounding the well bore, the formation breakdown gradient. These fractures have a tendency to propagate at a slightly lower pressure, the fracture propagation pressure, than that required to initiate them. The propagation opens up an increasingly large volume of space causing losses of the drilling fluid into the formation. It is also assumed that once a fracture has occurred in a formation then the formation strength is reduced to a value approaching the fracture propagation pressure. The relationship between these pressures is discussed in this Topic. The formation being drilled may dictate an even lower maximum drilling fluid gradient. * In some cases underpressured formations can be encountered such that a significant differential pressure exists between the drilling fluid column and pore pressure. * In some cases fractures and cavities are encountered which cannot be sealed off by a filter cake built up by the drilling fluid, even with the addition of very coarse lost circulation material (LOM), and the drilling fluid itself is then lost to the formation unless its gradient can be reduced to the formation gradient. Even if this can be done so that no losses occur in the static situation there will still be losses while drilling and/or circu- lating because of the increased fluid pressure on bottom due to friction losses in the annulus and the cuttings load in the annulus. * In some areas both of these situations occur simultaneously. In that case even a column of water cannot be supported and drilling blind (without fluid returns) until an impermeable zone has been reached may be neces- sary. Once the loss zone has been passed and an impermeable zone has been reached a casing string has to be set to improve the bore hole strength before it is safe to drill deeper. The procedure of drilling blind requires a good knowledge of the forma- tions to be penetrated, and is not advisable in exploration wells. IGF Training Page 27 v1.00Information about the anticipated formation strengths are required for the preliminary casing design during the planning process. Where this data is based on empirical estimates or extrapolation of data from offset wells it is sometimes necessary to conduct a Formation Strength Test (see later) to check the validity of the information and so the integrity of the casing design. More information on the subject of formation strength and its measurement is to be found in the following EP Reports: ¢ EP 93-1993 The KSEPL Rock Mechanics Manual, Part 1 - Introduction and Basics by C.A.M. Veeken (Report RKMR. 93.052, ). ° EP 92-2000 Casing Design Guide 1.3.2 FORMATION STRESSES One of the principle influences on the strength of a particular formation is the stress field existing in the rock prior to drilling through it. It is important to understand this phenomena and the effects of drilling operations on it. Any element within a confined solid body can be assumed to have forces acting on it which can be resolved into three components, at right angles to each other. In any particular case fs Se the values of the components will depend on Z the direction in which it is chosen to resolve the 4 forces. If the directions in which the forces are resolved are such that one component reaches a maximum and one reaches a minimum the stresses within the body are known as the prin- cipal stresses, normally known as 01, 62 and 3. 9, is the maximum principal stress and o3 Figure 1.6 : Principal stresses is the minimum principal stress. o; 6; 1.3.2.1 STRESS DISTRIBUTION IN THE FORMATION In the case of a geological formation one of the forces acting on any element within the rock is the weight of the rock (plus pore contents) above it - known as the overburden. This gives the vertical stress o, . There are also hori- zontal confining forces Gy, and Oy. In the majority of sedimentary formations the greatest stress is that caused by the overburden, and o, is 0}. It follows that oj; is Gy and ony is 05. The two horizontal components, 6, and Gyp, combine to form a hoop shaped stress distribution in the horizontal plane. The shape of this field is depen- dant, on the ratio between the maximum and minimum horizontal confining stresses. In ideal cireumstances these stresses will be equal (ie. a uniform horizontal stress) and the stress field will be circular. In rocks which have been subjected to folding and/or faulting and/or other tectonic stresses (which applies to the majority of hydrocarbon reservoirs, Page 26 : _ WEF Training V 1.00otherwise they would not have formed traps) the horizontal stresses may not be equal, and in extreme cases one of the maximum horizontal stresses may be greater than the vertical stress. (In which case dy; would be 0,.). However such cases are rare, and extreme cases are very rare, because rock formations are plastic in a geological time frame and after tectonic events any abnormally high horizontal stresses will relax and a close approximation to the usual stress situation will re-establish itself. 1.3.2.2 STRESS DISTORTION CAUSED BY THE BOREHOLE The removal of formation to make a well bore distorts the pre-existing stress field in the rock. An approximate calculation of this distortion may be made by assuming that the rock is elastic, the bore hole smooth and cylindrical, and both the bore hole axis and the regional principal stress 6, are vertical. In general, none of these assumptions are precisely correct, but they will provide a close approximation to the actual stresses. The stresses will therefore all be viewed as the effective stresses carried by the rock in addition to a hydro- static fluid pressure “P,”, which exists, and is assumed equal, within the well bore as well as in the rock. A calculation of the stress distribution around such a vertical bore hole could be made from the solution in elastic theory for the stresses in an infinite plate containing a circular hole, with its axis perpendicular to the plate, which was first obtained by Kirsch, and is also given by Timoshenko, and by Miles and Topping. Such tangential stress is known as a “hoop stress field” (Figure 1.7). It can be seen (see Figure 1.9a) that in every case the stress concentrations are local and that the stresses rapidly approach the undisturbed regional stresses within a few hole diameters. For the case in which Gy/0 is 1.0, the stress field has radial symmetry and the tangential stress at the walls of the hole is +2 63, Figure 1.7: The hoop stress around a vertical borehole(o; is vertical) ‘The vertical component of the stress is also distorted in the vicinity of the bore hole. The initial vertical stress is equal to the effective pressure of the overburden. However, the magnitude of this distortion is small in comparison IWGEF Training Page 29 v1.00with the concentrations of the horizontal stresses. In addition it rapidly disappears, with distance, away from the well bore. 1.3.2.3 THE EFFECT OF PRESSURE APPLIED TO THE BOREHOLE ‘The application within the bore hole of a non-pene- trating fluid pressure, in excess of the original fluid pressure, produces additional stresses. The tangential stresses due to an additional pressure AP in the well bore are shown in Figure 1.8. The stresses given are those caused by AP alone, and to obtain the complete stress field it is necessary to superimpose these stresses upon those caused by the pre-existing regional stresses. This is illustrated in Figures 1.9b and 1.9¢ in which a pressure equal to 1.6 03 is applied to the well bore for the case in which 67/63 = 1.4. That pressure is just suffi- cient to reduce 3 to zero. Figure 1.8 : Stresses cause by AP within the well bore In all cases when the 6,/o3 ratio is greater than 1, the vertical plane across which the stress first becomes zero as the well bore pressure is increased is the plane perpendicular to os, the least principal stress. 1.8.2.3.1 Rupture Pressures (formation Breakdown Pressures) In sections of a well bore through consolidated rock with any significant length it is probable that quite a few rock layers have been intersected. As (») © a | i SEES = ap L160.) 7 1, | a 0+ 0% oP 0 +02 +P (82/03 = 1.4) Figure 1.9: Superimposing fluid pressure stresses on the in-situ stresses round a well bore Page 30 a IWCF Training Vv 1.00cementing between layers will be weak if non-existent. the tensile strength between the layers can be negligible. Each layer, however will have its own unique tensile strength depending upon its structure, compaction and cemen- tation. This tensile strength will exist both vertically and horizontally but may differ in value. Consequently, the tensile strength of the formation can vary considerably in an interbedded environment. The hydraulic pressure required to produce a vertical separation (horizontal fracture) in horizontal formations is that pressure required to equal or slightly exceed the sum of the vertical compressive stress and the weakest of any inter-bed tensile strength; to initiate a vertical fracture it is necessary to exceed the sum of the minimum horizontal stress and the least of the forma- tion's tensile strengths. As tectonic effects determine which of these stresses is the greatest they will also influence whether a fracture will occur horizon- tally, vertically or even inclined in the well. As the pressure is increased, the plane along which a fracture will commence will be that across which the compressive stress is first reduced below zero G.e. it becomes a tensile stress) to such an extent that it overcomes the tensile strength in that plane. In the case of a smooth cylindrical well bore in an isotropic formation, this will be a plane perpendicular to the least principal stress. In cases where the largest principal stress , is vertical, the down-the- hole pressure required to start a vertical fracture may vary from the least principal (= horizontal) stress to a value of twice that value, depending upon the oz/og ratio. A feature of vertical and inclined fractures is that they have to overcome a significant tensile strength in the formation before they initiate. However, once a fracture has occurred, the tensile strength will have been reduced and subsequent loading of the well bore will open this pre-existing fracture at a lower pressure. For the same reason, the formation breakdown pressure of a formation in a naturally fractured environment will be lower than that in an unfractured environment. 1.3.2.3.2. Injection pressures Once a fracture has been started the fluid penetrates it and pressure is applied to the walls of the fracture. This reduces the stress concentration that previously existed in the vicinity of the well bore. The pressure AP required to hold the fracture open in ease of a non-penetrating fluid is then equal to the component of the undistorted stress field normal to the plane of the fracture. A pressure only slightly greater than this will extend the fracture indefinitely provided it can be transmitted to the leading edge. This can be seen from an ideally elastic solid, as shown in Figure 1.10. The normal stresses across the plane of a fracture near its leading edge are shown for the case in which the applied pressure AP is slightly greater than the original undistorted stress field og. The tensile stress, as a result of AP in the bore hole, near the edge of the IWGF Training Page 31 V 1.00fracture approaches an infinite magni- tude for a perfectly elastic material. For actual materials this stress will still be so large that a pressure AP, only slightly greater than 03, will extend the fracture indefinitely. The minimum down-the-hole injection pressure, required to hold open and extend a fracture, is therefore slightly in excess of the original undistorted. regional stress normal to the plane of the fracture. The actual injection pressure will in general be higher than this minimum because of friction losses along the fracture. Figure 1.10 : 1.3.2.3.3. Pressure behaviour during ee injection tests ‘Stresses in the vicinity of a crack in a stressed elastic material when the pressure acting on A comparison of the breakdown and _the walls of the crack is slightly greater than lnjdetibn feqhinéd, tsi the stress within the material non-penetrating fluids and for various values of the 62/03 ratio, shows that there are in general two possible types of down-the-hole pressure behaviour during fracturing. These are illustrated in Figure 1.11. During a fracture test the pressure AP is increased and in one case (case ‘a’) the breakdown pressure may be substantially higher than the injection pressure. This would probably correspond to a horizontal fracture from a relatively smooth well bore or to a vertical fracture under conditions in which o2 and o3 were nearly equal, again assuming that 0; is vertical. In the second case (case ‘b’) there is no distinct pressure breakdown during the treat- ment, indicating that the pressure required to start the fracture is less than or equal to the injection pressure. This would correspond to a horizontal or vertical fracture starting from a pre-existing opening, or to a vertical fracture in a situation where o/og was greater than 2.0. Fluid pressure diiforonce between Fluid pressure difference between the formation and the well bore the formation and the well bore Fluid pressure in the well bore Fluid pressure in the formation | Fluid pressure in the wall bore / Fluid pressure in the formation Fluid pressure ——» i as Fluid pressure Time —~ Time —~ fa) (o) Figure 1.11 ; Idealised diagrams of pressure behaviour when creating a fracture Page 32 WEF Training V 1.001.3.3 PREDICTION Whilst it is difficult to estimate the effect of additional tectonic stresses it is possible to make a rough approximation of the field around a well bore in “jdeal" circumstances. This approximation will provide an order of magnitude estimate. In-situ stress measurement (i.e. Mini-frac tests) are required to determine the local stress distribution and orientation with any accuracy. However, values from one well may be extrapolated with some reliability over substantial distances, particularly the horizontal stress values. The undisturbed effective vertical stress o, is equal to the total pressure of the overburden, S, less the original fluid pressure, P,, existing within the rocks prior to disturbances such as fluid withdrawals. In algebraic form: 6, =S-P, Under conditions of incipient normal faulting, the least principal stress og will be horizontal and will have a value of approximately one-third the effective vertical stress, oy or 6}. Therefore og (S - P,)/3. Since the additional fluid pressure differential AP required to hold open and extend a fracture should be slightly larger than the least principal stress, then: AP = (S - P,y3. However, the total injection pressure P is given by: P = AP + Py. Therefore: P = (S +2 P,W/3 Dividing by the depth, Z, then gives: P/Z = (S/Z + 2 P/Z)/3, which is the approximate expression for the minimum injection pressure required per unit of depth in an area of incipient normal faulting. The value of §/Z is approximately equal to 22-6 kPa/m (1.0 psi/ft) for normal sedimentary rocks in most areas. Under normal hydrostatic fluid pressure conditions, P,/Z is about 10-4 kPa/m (0-46 psi/ft). Substituting these values gives P/Z = 14-5 kPa/m (0-641 psi/ft), as the approximate minimum value that should be expected in areas with incipient normal faulting. In different areas the op/03 ratio may have different values and so maximum drilling fluid density or minimum injection pressures could differ. In compressional tectonics oy may be three times the effective vertical stress , and 80 op= (S - Ps) x 8. The additional fluid pressure AP required to hold open a fracture should equal the least principal stress, which now is the effective vertical stress: AP = oy. As P=AP +P, P/Z=(o, +P,V/Z=S/Z= 22-6 kPa/m (1-0 psi/ft). which is just another way of saying that to hold a horizontal fracture open the pressure has to support the whole of the overburden. Formation breakdown gradients play an overriding role in maximum drilling fluid densities, in casing design, in drilling operations and in injection of liquids in the formation. IGF Training Page 33 v1.001.3.4 MEASUREMENT 1.3.4.1. PROCEDURE For the purposes of drilling operations it is sufficient to know the maximum pressure that may be applied to exposed formations without causing damage and thus risk the generation of fractures and associated losses etc. It is not normally relevant in which direction such a fracture would run and whether it is a vertical, horizontal or inclined fracture. The standard operational procedure to ascertain the maximum pressure it is a Formation Strength Test. Whilst this may take a number of forms the general procedure remains the same. The test is normally conducted after drilling out the shoe track of a recently cemented casing string. The cement filled pocket is drilled out along with a minimum of about 20 ft (6m) of new formation. The test is conducted using a low volume high pressure pump (i.e. the cementing pump) and calibrated pressure gauges over a variety of ranges. The drilling fluid system pumps and gauges are not sufficiently accurate enough to perform the operation. The proce- dure is: * Circulate and condition the drilling fluid to a consistent density * Pull back the bit into the casing shoe + Ensure the well is full. Close in the well using the BOP pipe rams around the drill pipe * Open the annuli between the current and previous casing strings and monitor for flow * Slowly pump down the drill string until surface pressure approaches ca. 100 psi (700 kPa). * Carefully measure tank levels ete. * Pump uniform increments of volume - 0-1 to 0-25 bbl (0-016 to 0-4 m®) then stop and wait 2 minutes for pressures to stabilise. For each inere- ment the following are noted: - cumulative volume pumped, - pressure immediately after pumping ceases (final pumping pressure) - static pressure after 2 minutes (final static pressure) * Plot the cumulative volume pumped against both the dynamic and static pressures on a graph. * Continue to pump incremental volumes until one of the following occurs: - a pre-determined limit pressure has been reached - the static pressure line deviates from a straight line (i.e. a linear relationship between pressure and volume pumped) * Bleed off pressure at surface via the annulus (to prevent bit plugging!) Page 34 /CF Training Vv 1.00and monitor the returns. Determine how much fluid has been lost to the formation. It should be noted that the objective of a Formation Strength Test is not to break down the formation and generate/propagate a fracture. The point at which the pressure/volume plot deviates from a linear relationship is called the leak off point. It should be taken as the last measured point on the straight line; no extrapolation should normally be performed that would yield an increased formation strength. The leak off point is sometimes also called the formation intake point. A formation strength test that is terminated when a leak off point is identi- fied is called a Leak Off Test. This type of test is commonly performed on Exploration and Appraisal wells below any casing shoe that will form part of a pressure vessel (i.e. have BOPs attached at surface). It may also be performed to gain information to aid in the design of future wells. A formation strength test that is terminated when a pre-determined pressure is reached is called a Limit Test. Usually performed on development wells, these also test the integrity of the cement bond around the casing shoe. They are sometimes omitted in the absence of mobile hydrocarbons or over-pres- sured formations in the interval to be drilled. On rare occasions the decision is taken to perform a Formation Breakdown. ‘Test. The pressure is deliberately increased to the point where a fracture occurs, the Formation Breakdown Pressure (FBP). This is usually marked by a sudden drop in surface pressure. Continued pumping now Breakdown will be possible at a lower pressure - the Fracture Fracture propagation Propagation Pressure (FPP). Ifpumpingis 8 stopped the surface = pressure will drop rapidly and then stabilise. This final pressure equates to the Fracture Closure Pressure (FCP). The ae relationship of these Figure 1.12 : Typical formation breakdown test result pressures under ideal circumstances is illustrated in Figure 1.12. Fracture closure (sip) x Cumutative volume pumped —_| Shut-in period 1.3.4.2 INTERPRETATION The majority of competent formations will display a linear relationship between pressure and volume (essentially reflecting an elastic deformation of the rock). Permeable formations may show some separation between the final pumping and final static pressures as slight fluid loss occurs to the formation. The fluid loss control characteristics normally take effect rapidly however, causing the two lines to be almost superimposed. WCF Training Page 35 v1.00Shallow, unconsolidated formations can, however, display plastic deformation almost from the start of the-test with continued fluid losses to the formation. This can make interpretation difficult (although the formation actually does have very little strength!) and an estimation can be made by identifying where the static pressure trend deviates from that of the final pumping pressure trend. The actual Formation Strength Gradient (FSG) is calculated as follows: FSG= Maximum pressure at shoe Land: ———— Shoe depth(tvd-bdf) - Derrick floor elevation Maximum pressure at shoe - Head of seawater column Offshore: FSG Maximum pressure at shoe - Head of seawater column _ - | Shoe depth(tvd- bdf) - Sea bed depth (bdf) For well control calculation purposes the FSG is normally expressed as an Equivalent Maximum Mud Gradient (EMMG): Maximum pressure at shoe EMMG = —20mUm pressure at shoe Shoe depth(tvd- bdf) 1.3.4.3 LIMITATIONS Information obtained from leak-off tests in straight holes is not applicable to deviated holes in the same field (and vice versa). Only measurements in the deviated hole themselves should be used. It is not necessarily true that deeper horizons always have a higher strength than shallower ones. If less competent formations have been drilled through, another test can be made immediately upon penetrating a transition zone or a cap rock which could overlay higher pressured zones. However, the practice of repeating limit or leak-off tests needs to be applied with much caution. In general during kick control the breakdown pressure at the shoe will remain the critical pressure, unless much weaker zones, close to the shoe, are pene- trated. Also, if known depleted or low pressure zones are penetrated, the breakdown pressure may be estimated on the basis of RFT results. If the zone is expected to be critical during kick control, it may still be preferable not to subject this ‘weak spot’ to breakdown loads during tests. Data obtained from leak-off tests should be treated with some caution. It is considered acceptable to use the values obtained to calculate the maximum pressure to which the formation can be temporarily subjected, such as while circulating out a kick, The capability of the formation to support pressure continuously may, however, be adversely affected by changes in the hole profile or local damage to the borehole wall. Therefore, it should not be presumed that a drilling fluid gradient can be increased up to that of the formation strength, as indicated by a leak-off test. If available, information on the fracture propagation pressure should be used to determine the maximum allowable drilling fluid gradient in the hole. Page 36 IWCF Training V 1.00All leak-off tests should be carried out with the lowest drilling fluid density necessary to overbalance the expected reservoir pressure at the shoe. Weighting up drilling fluid to combat anticipated higher pressure gradients further down the hole should be done after the leak-off test. ‘When good zonal isolation behind the casing is imperative, the leak-off/limit test should be carried out with a retrievable packer to avoid pressurising the casing which may cause possible permanent damage to the cement bond by the creation of micro-annuli in the cement. 1.3.5 INFLUENCE ON WELL DESIGN AND WELL CONTROL The value of formation strength is a principle input into the preliminary easing design process. The formation strength values can be expressed as a Formation Breakdown Pressure (FBP) and plotted against depth for the well being designed. This line forms one of the limiting values for the drilling fluid pressure gradient at any depth, the other being the pore pressure gradient, Exceeding the FBP risks fracturing the formation and initiating losses. Dropping below the Pore Pressure line gives rise to the likelihood of an influx if sufficient porosity and permeability exists in the formation. The gap between these lines varies. Closure of the lines is largely dependant on the existence of abnormal pore pressures whilst separation of the lines generally reflects the existence of additional tectonic stresses. During preliminary casing design certain assumptions are made about pore pressures and realistic influx sizes. As will be discussed in the secondary pressure control section, the maximum pressure experienced at the shoe whilst circulating out a gas influx is usually when the top of the (theoretical) gas bubble reaches the casing shoe. This is a common design factor in selecting the maximum depth that may be drilled to below a particular casing shoe given an assumed formation strength. Conversely it can be used to determine the minimum formation strength at the shoe required to safely drill into a formation with a known or worst-case potential pressure gradient, again using assumptions about the volume of kick that might be taken. The relationships between bottom hole pressure, drilling fluid density, influx volume and the pressure at the casing shoe is contained in Appendix 1. Although these calculations are normally now automated in well engineering design software, it is essential that the student is familiar with the manual calculation method so that the implications of unexpectedly low FST result or a higher drilling fluid gradient are understood. These two parameters are used to determine the casing points in a well. Subsequent FSTs may confirm or disprove the assumptions and can, under certain circumstances, require the well plan to be altered following a low strength result. IWCF Training Page 37 v1.001.3.6 MAASP Given a known drilling fluid gradient it is possible to express the Formation Strength as a Maximum Allowable Annular Surface Pressure (MAASP) that may be applied in addition to the fluid column before the formation strength pressure is exceeded. This can be calculated as: MAASP = Dghe X (EMMG ~ payia) Given that this value depends on the fluid gradient, payja, from surface to the casing shoe the recorded MAASP value must be amended whenever the drilling fluid density is changed. In addition, when an influx - particularly gas - passes the shoe and enters the casing the hydrostatic pressure associ- ated with the fluid column to surface alters dramatically and so negates the previously calculated MAASP value. Limitations of the application of the MAASP are discussed at length in EP 89-1500 Section 2.3.3.5. This should be reviewed as part of this Part. Page 38 IWCF Training Vv 1.00Topic 1.4 Primary well control concepts 1.4.1. CONCEPT OF OVERBALANCE Primary Well Control relies on the use of hydrostatic pressure to control the pore pressure in exposed formations. The hydrostatic pressure exerted by a column of fluid at any depth is dependant on * the density (p) of the fluid - expressed as a unit weight * (kg/m! or Ibs/bbl etc.) or pressure “A gradient (kPa/m, psi/ft etc.). © The true vertical height of the column of fluid. By adjusting the specific gravity or %, density of the drilling fluid the hydro- o. static pressure at a specific depth can be % adjusted accordingly. As mentioned in the following para- graph it is customary to maintain a hydrostatic column with a pressure slightly exceeding the pore pressure of the exposed formation. This overbal- ance, safety margin, or trip margin, Py, varies depending on circumstances MY but is generally of the order of 1,500 kPa (200 psi) for conventional operations. The required density to control a forma- tion at a depth, D, with a pressure, P, , is thus given by : True vertical depth

You might also like

• The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  

  From Everand

  The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  Mark Manson

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (5835)
• The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are

  

  From Everand

  The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are

  Brene Brown

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1093)
• Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It

  

  From Everand

  Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It

  Chris Voss

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (852)
• • Magazines
  • Podcasts
  • Sheet music
• Principles: Life and Work

  

  From Everand

  Principles: Life and Work

  Ray Dalio

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (612)
• The Glass Castle: A Memoir

  

  From Everand

  The Glass Castle: A Memoir

  Jeannette Walls

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (1720)
• Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance

  

  From Everand

  Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance

  Angela Duckworth

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (590)
• Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel

  Jesmyn Ward

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1194)
• Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race

  

  From Everand

  Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race

  Margot Lee Shetterly

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (903)
• Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike

  

  From Everand

  Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike

  Phil Knight

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (541)
• The Perks of Being a Wallflower

  

  From Everand

  The Perks of Being a Wallflower

  Stephen Chbosky

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (2107)
• The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers

  

  From Everand

  The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers

  Ben Horowitz

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (350)
• Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future

  

  From Everand

  Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future

  Ashlee Vance

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (474)
• Bad Feminist: Essays

  

  From Everand

  Bad Feminist: Essays

  Roxane Gay

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1029)
• The Outsider: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Outsider: A Novel

  Stephen King

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1872)
• Her Body and Other Parties: Stories

  

  From Everand

  Her Body and Other Parties: Stories

  Carmen Maria Machado

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (824)
• The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)

  

  From Everand

  The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)

  Viet Thanh Nguyen

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (122)
• The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

  

  From Everand

  The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

  Siddhartha Mukherjee

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (271)
• Angela's Ashes: A Memoir

  

  From Everand

  Angela's Ashes: A Memoir

  Frank McCourt

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (443)
• Brooklyn: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Brooklyn: A Novel

  Colm Tóibín

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (1948)
• The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living

  

  From Everand

  The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living

  Meik Wiking

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (405)
• A Man Called Ove: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  A Man Called Ove: A Novel

  Fredrik Backman

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (4772)
• The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century

  

  From Everand

  The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century

  Thomas L. Friedman

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (2259)
• Steve Jobs

  

  From Everand

  Steve Jobs

  Walter Isaacson

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (809)
• The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel

  Garth Stein

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (4214)
• The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)

  

  From Everand

  The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)

  Sarah M. Broom

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (98)
• Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America

  

  From Everand

  Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America

  Gilbert King

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (266)
• A Tree Grows in Brooklyn

  

  From Everand

  A Tree Grows in Brooklyn

  Betty Smith

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (1930)
• A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story

  

  From Everand

  A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story

  Dave Eggers

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (231)
• Yes Please

  

  From Everand

  Yes Please

  Amy Poehler

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1905)
• Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln

  

  From Everand

  Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln

  Doris Kearns Goodwin

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (234)
• The Woman in Cabin 10

  

  From Everand

  The Woman in Cabin 10

  Ruth Ware

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (2526)
• Wolf Hall: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Wolf Hall: A Novel

  Hilary Mantel

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (3973)
• Fear: Trump in the White House

  

  From Everand

  Fear: Trump in the White House

  Bob Woodward

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (738)
• John Adams

  

  From Everand

  John Adams

  David McCullough

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (2410)
• On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal

  

  From Everand

  On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal

  Naomi Klein

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (74)
• The Light Between Oceans: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Light Between Oceans: A Novel

  M.L. Stedman

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (789)
• Manhattan Beach: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Manhattan Beach: A Novel

  Jennifer Egan

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (880)
• The Constant Gardener: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Constant Gardener: A Novel

  John le Carré

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (104)
• The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America

  

  From Everand

  The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America

  George Packer

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (45)
• Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore

  

  From Everand

  Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore

  Jay Sekulow

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (137)
• Little Women

  

  From Everand

  Little Women

  Louisa May Alcott

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (105)
• Oct Iwfc Course

  

  Document1 page

  Oct Iwfc Course

  Franklin

  No ratings yet
• Oct Iwfc Course

  

  Document1 page

  Oct Iwfc Course

  Franklin

  No ratings yet
• Dokumen - Tips Equipment Iwcf Course

  

  Document42 pages

  Dokumen - Tips Equipment Iwcf Course

  Franklin

  No ratings yet
• Distance Learning Drilling Calculations Part 2

  

  Document203 pages

  Distance Learning Drilling Calculations Part 2

  Franklin

  No ratings yet
• Dokumen - Tips - Iwcf Well Control Level 5 Celle Drilling Spec 6aiso 104232009 July 2015

  

  Document35 pages

  Dokumen - Tips - Iwcf Well Control Level 5 Celle Drilling Spec 6aiso 104232009 July 2015

  Franklin

  No ratings yet
• Dokumen - Tips New Iwcf Chapter

  

  Document23 pages

  Dokumen - Tips New Iwcf Chapter

  Franklin

  No ratings yet
• New AWC IWCF WC Level 3 4 Course Outline

  

  Document1 page

  New AWC IWCF WC Level 3 4 Course Outline

  Franklin

  No ratings yet
• POWER2014-32305: Go With The Flow: The Evolvement of Geothermal Wellhead Maintenance at The Hellisheidi Power Plant

  

  Document7 pages

  POWER2014-32305: Go With The Flow: The Evolvement of Geothermal Wellhead Maintenance at The Hellisheidi Power Plant

  Franklin

  No ratings yet
• Complete Report PDF

  

  Document66 pages

  Complete Report PDF

  Franklin

  No ratings yet