Ub d Workshop Report

7/27/2019 Ub d Workshop Report

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/ub-d-workshop-report 1/25

Underbalance Technology Workshop2005 ETF Essential Technology Forum

8-10 March 2005, Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt

Workshop Report



Energy Egypt Services and Frontier Oilfield Services conducted a workshop on Under-Balance

Technology in Egypt on March 8th

to 10th

2005. The goal of the workshop can be summarized as

1. Increase the awareness of emerging technology in the market

2. Under-Balance technology is globally one of the fastest growing technology

3. Gathering experts from different disciplines of the oil industry in one place to share, discuss

and plan for optimum ways to achieve the best production via implementing technology

4. Provide the young engineers to contact the experts in technology for training and experience

transfer

It was clear that all the above was captured during the workshop. From all the feedback wereceived, the workshop was rated “Successful and Beneficial” for all levels.

We found that following up the workshop with a report on the subjects discussed is a vita step as a

live document in the hands of the attendees. We also encourage you to share it with others to

achieve the goal behind such meeting which is “Experience Transfer”

We hope that you will find the report of value to you and your colleagues. We can also provideyou with extra copies if you would like to send to any of your technical circles.

Thank you very much for your attendance and looking forward to seeing you in the upcoming

event of “Smart Well Completion”



Under-balance Technology: Why and How

Many tight gas reservoirs and fluid sensitive formations are never correctly booked asreserves. The insignificance shows during drilling, logging difficulties like fluid invasionand lack of success with formation testers or drill stem tests, results in hydrocarbonbearing zones being bypassed.

Also, punching a hole in the ground with little regard to the impact of the drilling activityupon the productivity of the well is an every day problem that faces the oil and gasindustry. The modern solution is to achieve good drilling progress coupled withachieving an undamaged well-bore capable of better production potential.

Using an engineering risk-based approach to evaluate the best scenario and the rightmix of technology with the best chance of success is the Fit-For-Purpose approach forsuccess. This allows the right decisions with the most upside potential to be made.Successful implementation of the identified solutions is what assures success. By carefuldetail engineering and planning it is possible to minimize or mitigate downside risks andexploit upside opportunities. This is the basis of Impact’s approach, which is to provide

support from concept to implementation.

By correct use of under-balance approach, and with some basic knowledge, it ispossible to safely explore, reassess interesting horizons and produce non-damagedwell for optimum Productivity and Maximum Reserve.

The primary target when drilling a well is to deliver an undamaged well-bore. This isperfectly possible with the under-balance technology currently available in the oilindustry. The cost of using such advanced technology must be evaluated and comparedto the cost of remedial work. This allows a real decision base to be created based on theoverall economics.

The Under-balanced Drilling is a key to making a substantial advance on productivityachieved by traditional methods. This technology coupled with the right drilling designmake it possible to drill and complete wells with almost no damage.

The Under-balanced Drilling with proper planning, detail engineering, training andexecution of UBD projects provide a vital solution to under-booking reserve.

The above was the reason that the Energy Egypt and Frontier companies designed aworkshop in Sharm El-Shikh to intensively discuss the under-balance technology. Theworkshop actively addressed the Under-balance Drilling from the start of well selectiontill the increase in well deliverability and reserves.

The Workshop discussed the cost of the UDB operations and the impact that theseprojects involve in terms of rig modifications and rig ups. Impact uses risk analysis toshow a projects' expected break even probability and to evaluate the true upsidepotential.

The workshop also showed that under-balance technology requires the necessarytechnical contingency planning that will ensure that the purpose for going Under-balanced (zero primary damage, penetration increase, differential sticking etc) can besupported throughout the whole drilling and completion process.



The workshop also discussed the engineering and project management of a complexCoiled Tubing Drilling project. This project will involve drilling under-balanced withnatural gas being injected through the coiled tubing to achieve the necessary under-balance.

One key issue in under-balance that was also covered in the workshop is the safety

aspect and concerns in any under-balance project. Safety on all under-balance projectshas been of paramount importance. Therefore a large amount of the detail work focusedon safety to ensure the understanding of its importance



Underbalance Technology Workshop

OPENING

KEYNOTEPRESENTAION

“The Growth of Under-balanced Drilling in the Middle East and North Africa Region”

Mr. Patrick Zuber, General Manager of Middle East and North Africa

Mr. Zuber talked about different points which he summarized as

• UBD Technology – Gaining Momentum

• Current UBD Projects – Geographical Representation

• Growing Applications of UBD

• Reasons for the Growth of UBD

• Recent Technological Advances

• Growth Barriers for UBD

• UBD Project Management

• For the momentum of UBD, he said that “Since 2001 – The Number of UBD Packages

within the Region has Increased over 500%”. He also listed some of the countries wherethe UBD is developing “Algeria, Oman, UAE, Jordan, Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Iran

Syria and Tunisia”.

• For the growing applications, he listed them as

• New drills – most UBD projects are new wells drilled horizontally.

• Re-entry wells – reduction in well construction costs.

• Coiled tubing underbalanced drilling – enables through tubing drilling.

• Multilateral wells – greater access to reservoirs.

• Batch drilling campaigns – increases UBD package utilization and reduces

drilling costs.

• Offshore – small footprint equipment.

Then he showed the reasons behind the growth and the acceptance of the UBD technology as

• Proven track record of successful UBD projects throughout the entire region.

• Properly engineered UBD solutions.

• Successful operational planning and execution.

• Successful QHSE implementation.

• Enhanced operator understanding of the technology and its application. Shared global

learnings.

• In some instances, UBD can be the last resort for drilling the reservoir.

Mr. Zuber then talked about the new advances in the UBD technology and listed this as

• Equipment – UBD packages are being designed to work in this region’s higher ambient

temperatures.

• Downhole Deployment Valve – eliminates the requirement of a snubbing unit, ensuring

continuous underbalanced conditions throughout the entire drilling operation while

enhancing HSE.

• Survey Tools – introduction of EM-MWD to the region enabling drillpipe injection of

nitrogen.



• Gas Re-compression – eliminate flaring requirements and allows for capturing of

produced hydrocarbons.

• Gas Tight Drillpipe.

• Smaller footprint packages, especially for offshore projects

Then he talked about the barriers that may stand against the “Should Have been” growth as

• Operator understanding of UBD and its benefits.

• Perceived high cost of a UBD Project.

• Unsure how to quantify expected reservoir production increases.

• New and different technology difficult to promote from within operator company.

Session I: Under balanced Drilling & Reservoir Productivity

“The SURE way to UBD, SPE 93346” - Presentation was not submitted to organizers.

Horacio Ferreira, PhD. Weatherford International

Mr. Horacio talked about the “SURE way to under-balance drilling”. In his talk, he talked about

the two phases of under-balance

1. Screening

2. Reservoir Analysis

He mentioned that the under-balance drilling is not a real new technology. It is there from the

1950 via air drilling practices. The technology came back from the beginning of the 1990 where

new technology emerged and better equipment, safety and analysis took place.

Then he started talking about the reasons behind under-balance which he summarized in three points

1. performance drilling2. Improve reservoir characterization

3. Reservoir productivity

Then he moved to explain the SURE system as “an expert system to screen reservoirs for optimum productivity and recovery by controlling damage”.

He then started talking about the steps of SURE

1. Screening

2. In depth analysis

He showed a flow chart on how the process works.

He explained the basis of the SURE process of excluding candidates. These are

1. Borehole stability

2. Wellhead pressure limitations

3. Mobility

4. Minimum pore pressure gradient



Then he explained through equations the role of reservoir which he called “Mother Nature” factor

to that controlled by the engineering design of a well.

Then he moved to damage assessments and he divided them into 11 reasons

1. Mashing2. Glazing

3. Solids Invasion

4. Fines Migration

5. Phase Trap (Invasion)

6. Phase Trap (Imbibition)

7. Clay Sensitivity

8. Wettability Alteration

9. Asphaltene Precipitation10. Scale Precipitation

11. Emulsion Creation

Mr. Horacio then showed case histories. Elkton Harmattan East, He showed productivity index PI

of 43% using under-balance over using overbalance and 33% in recovery over 60 months.

“UBD Remedy for Formation Damage, SPE 88698”

Eng. Hani Qutob – Weatherford International.

Eng. Hani Qutob presented the underbalance technology as a remedy to formation damage, lost

circulations and introduced different ways to overcome the conventional drilling issues. He started

with a discussion on formation damage; definition, causes, indicators and mechanisms. He

defined it as “Any process which would cause a reduction in the productivity and / or injectivity

as a result of Permeability and/or Porosity reduction”. As the reasons for formation damage, he

divided them into four categories;

Damage induced during drilling & completions

Damage induced during hydraulic or acid fracturing

Damage induced during kill or workover treatmentsDamage induced during production operations

He then defined the indicators as

Permeability Impairment

Skin Damage

Decrease in well performance

Then he discussed the causes of the damage and put them in four categories

A - Mechanical

B - Chemical

C - Biological

D - Thermal



For the Mechanical causes, he introduced the reasons as

1. Fines Migrations

2. Phase Trapping

3. Perforation Induced

4. Solids Invasion

For the Chemical, he related this to Rock-Fluid and Fluid-Fluid interactions as

1. Rock - Fluid incompatibilities

• Clay Swelling

• Clay deflocculation

• Formation Dissolution

• Chemical adsorption

2. Fluid - Fluid incompatibilities

• Wax deposition

• Solids Precipitation

• Precipitates, Sludge and Scales• Emulsions ( water-oil & gas-oil )

Then he talked about one factor that is normally overlooked which is the Bacterial effect. He defined

it as “It can be caused by a number of different operative mechanisms caused by the introduction,

growth and propagation of a variety of bacterial agents within the porous medium”

For the thermal effect, Eng. Qutob divided them into three causes

• Mineral transformations

• Rock solubility and dissolution phenomena• Wettability alterations

He then concluded by saying “Formation Damage is not necessarily reversible “

“What gets into porous media does not necessarily come out”. Porter,

1989 called this phenomenon

Therefore,

It is better to AVOID Damaging the delicate infrastructure of the reservoir than try to restore it.

“The Virtual Well Engineer”.

Eng. Randy Davis from Drilling Research Institute, DRI

Product Name of a Suite of Well Engineering Tools for Advanced Well that provides

o Well Planning & Simulation [Detailed Risk assessment],

o Real Time Simulation

Downhole Operation Simulation

o Coupled Reservoir-Wellbore modelling [UBD]

o Virtual Reality Environment

VWE Desktop Simulator



He then talked about Wellbore Pressure Profile Management and defined it as a combination of

¾ Backpressure regulation/Fluid Density/Riser Margin

¾ Mud Cap

¾ Dual Gradient

¾ Fluid Rheology¾ Circulating ECD

¾ Annular Pressure Pump System

¾ Subsea Pump System¾ UBD

He then tried to look at the market and find the status of UBD engineering. He identified several

points

¾ Poor Diagnosis

¾ Need for better integration and appreciation of specialist asset teams¾ Need for better Well & Contingency Planning

o Pre-empt Drilling Problems and Better Well Control

¾ Need for Reduction of NPTo Reduction in Well Construction Cost

¾ Poor understanding of the effects of Key Drilling Process Parameters on Wellbore PressureRegime

He then talked about some Key issues and Gaps where he identified them as flows

¾ Real-Time Downhole Rheology

o Little or no knowledge

¾ Effect of Eccentricity

o Limited Knowledge

¾ Effect of Buckling

o No published Knowledge

¾ Effect of RPM

o Limited Knowledge – Needs further study on effects on cuttiings bed and

multiphase flow profile/pressure gradient

o No knowledge of Orbital RPM

¾ Effects of Cuttings

o Little knowledge of effects of cuttings bed on pressure profile

¾ Effect of Multiphase Flow[UBD and Well Control]

o Limited Knowledge

¾ Need for VR Application to Well Construction Process

o Lack of Real-Time Simulation/VR Monitoring

He then talked about action points to be taken care of. He summarized them as

¾ FOCUS ON SELECT MPD TECHNIQUES¾ Eccentricity

¾ Multiphase Flow

o UBD Environ

¾ RPM

¾ Drillstring Buckling in non-conventional wells

o ERWs

o TTRD

o Coil Tubing Drilling



¾ Downhole Rheology of 4-Phase System

¾ Coupled Wellbore-Reservoir Interaction especially in UBD and well control conditions

¾ Hole Cleaning

Then he started talking in details on each one of these items.

¾ Hole Cleaning in concentric/eccentric annuluso Effect of RPM

o Limited to conventional drilling fluids

¾ Multiphase Flow Analysis

o Experimental Annular Flow Test

o Theoretical Analysis of Inflow effect on Pressure Profile

o UBD Analysis

¾ Effect Of Eccentricity

Effect of RPM on Eccentric Annular Flow

Then he talked about the Multi-phase flow; its pattern and the transient phenomena

¾ Flow Patterns

o Stratified Flow

o Annular Flow

o Slug Flow

o Plug

o Dispersed Bubble

o Mist

¾ Transient Phenomena

o Effect on Velocity Distribution

o Effect on MPD

o Effect on Hole Cleaning

o Effect of Rotary speed

o Effect of Eccentricity/Buckling

Then he moved to Virtual Reality, VR, and the need for it. He said

¾ Live in data rich but information poor environment

¾ Limited information limits development options

¾ Visualisation of Wellbore Operations

o Aids transition to information rich process

He then showed its value. He listed the values as

¾ Real-Time Modelling of Drilling Process¾ Real-Time Shadowing of Downhole Operations

¾ Diagnosis and Optimisation of downhole operation in real time

¾ Reduction of NPT

¾ Reduction of Workforce Constraints¾ Real Time Platform- Office Team Linkage

¾ Highly Visual Training Package

o Better understanding of causes/effects of changes in operational parameters

¾ Provision of Simpler, Faster, more effective way of designing wells



¾ Total Asset & Management Team Involvement in Well Construction Decision Process

¾ Appreciation of Effects of Decisions

o Costs

o Optimisation, etc

¾ Digital/Intelligent ‘’Life Cycle’’ Well Construction System

He then concluded his talk with “Proposal Objectives” and put it as

¾ Proposal Objectives

o To carry out in-depth investigation of the effects of key drilling parameters.

o To Develop a Full-Scale VWE System

o Real -Time Downhole-Reservoir Sensing on VR Platform

Session II: UnderBalance Drilling Operations

Session Chairmen: Ole Gjertsen & Mohamed Bassiouni

“Turbo-drills: optimized designs for Under-balanced Drilling Applications”.

Mr. Gordon Flint from Smith Nyfor

History of Turbo-drilling and UBD

• Turbo-drill Characteristics• Turbo-drill Design Optimization

• UBD Applications

• Case Histories• Conclusions

For the History for turbo-drill, he said

• First Turbo-drill Patent 1884

• Proliferation in the West starting in the 1950’s

• Early 1980’s Steerable Turbo-drill• Advances in UBD beginning in the 1990’s

• Use of UBD in multi-lateral wells

• Turbo-drills used in UBD from 1996

For the characteristics, he mentioned

• High Power Output

– Reliable utilization of available hydraulic power

– Power generation from non-elastomer materials

• High RPM

• Torque



– ROP

– DOC

– Stall behavior

– Hydraulic

• WOB (Weight On Bit)

– Low weight requirement for high performance

– Many associated benefits – Compatibility with bit selection for UBD

• Resistance to impact damage

• Borehole Quality

– Stabilization

– Bit configuration

– Drilling behavior

• High Temperature

- used up to 500° F

• 2-Phase Operation

- > doubled Hp

- 88% gas used

- reliability = long runs

• Low Vibration• Directional Capabilities

• Toolface control• Effective bend / DLS

• WOB & RPM

• Sliding vs. rotating

From the design point of view, Eng. Flint talked about the advantage and disadvantages of the Turbo-

drill as

• Existing designs have excellent power, but are relatively long

• New, Shorter tools have been developed with improved performance for UBD (& CTD)

– One piece design

– Integral bearing section

– Straight-hole and directional tools

• Different Blade Characteristics

– Longer pressure profile

– More RPM capability

– More power capability

– Nearly 2x as powerful per stage

Then he presented case histories and global statistics as

• Over 110,000 feet drilled

– Drill Pipe injection (Up to 88% Gas)

– Impregnated & PDC drill bits – 6,478’ Longest Interval

– 308 Circulating Hours

– 43% Footage Steered

– MTBF >1,800 hours



Case Histories:

1. UBD Producing Well

• 3-3/8” Steerable Turbodrill on 2” CT

– 519 Ft of new 3-7/8” hole

– 25 Ft/hr

– 330O F – Replaced 9 motors

2. Casing Cleanout

• 2-7/8” Turbodrill on 2” CT

– From inside 4-1/2” liner

– Drilled >2,000’ frac proppant

– 302O F

– Flow Drilling with water

3. Milling HPHT plugs & cmt

• 2-7/8” Turbodrill on 1.75” CT

– 4” carbide mill

– 390O F – Depth in at 15,800 Ft

Drill pipe injection with nitrogen

Mr. Ole Gjertsen from Smith International

“Drill-bit Optimization for Under Balanced Drilling”.

He talked about both Roller Bits and Impregnated Bits. He started with the Roller cone and defined

his presentations as

Roller cone can be successful as “Successful use of Roller Cone in UBD wells with Concentric

Injection” and unsuccessful as “Unsuccessful use (to date) of Roller Cone in UBD with Direct

Injection”. He started with Concentric injections and said

¾ Successful use of XR40YDD2PD bits on UBD wells in North Africa

¾ In UBD conditions:

Roller Cone ROP > Impreg ROP

¾ Geology: Abrasive Cambrian Sandstone

Requires high wear resistance = Diamond

¾ Horizontal Wells steered with PDM

Mr. Gjertsen then made comparison between Roller cones and Impregnated for the UBD applications.

He then talked about the failure mechanisms of bits “failure vs breakage? He then talked about the

dull conditions “Tungsten vs Diamond” then he talked about different products for concentric as

¾ XR40YODPD

¾ XR40YDODPD

¾ XR40YDDPD

¾ XR40YDD2PD



Then he compared between concentric vs direct injection and showed all the failure types of the direct

injections. Then he concluded the roller cone talk by saying

¾ In certain applications the cutting mechanics of roller cone returns the best ROP

o Crushing versus Shearing/Grinding

o Crack propagation & Chip Hold Down

¾ Direct Injection thru’ Motor = Unconstrained vibration = Impact Damage to Cutting Inserts

o Gas’s effect on motor behavior versus Fluid

o Bi-phase = Two alternating motor responses

o SPE 74841: Includes discussion on unconstrained vibration due to two phase fluid

passing through PDM

For the impergs, he talked about the new technology and their applications. He compared betweensynthetic and natural diamond from the thermal stability, wear flatting and strength. He then discussed

new diamond coating process “patent of Smith” which has the below features

¾ Diamond Crystals coated with a Ceramic that Protects from Heat during Sintering &

improves wetting to TC¾ Predominately Tungsten based bond ¾ Sintered with no inert gas at ~ 1050°F¾ Observe post-sintering diamond condition

o No visible diamond degradation

o Crystal edges still sharp and well-defined

Then he talked about “New GHI Manufacturing Process “Grit Hot-Pressed Inserts””. He went

through the advantages of the GHI and applications in Oman and Egypt (Bapetco) where it was

custom made.

Session III: Surface System

Session Chairmen: Omar Mohamed & Shawn Tivadar

Mr. Lee Turnbull, Regional Manager of Gas Services International,

“Gas Compression Services for UBD”.

He divided it into applications as

Wellhead Compression

Gas Gathering

Gas Transmission

Gas Lift

Seismic Exploration

FPSO’s

Gas Re-injection



Offshore Production

Fuel Gas Boosting

Under-balanced Drilling

He then talked about gas compressors packages and talked about

Reciprocating CompressorsRotary Screw Compressors

He then threw the question of “Why to compress gas?”. His answer was

1. To allow drilling underbalanced (gasify liquid column)

2. Environmental considerations – minimal flaring

3. Financial Considerations – natural gas recovery

4. Financial Considerations – condensate recovery

Then he talked about the downstream compression and its challenges

What is it?

1. Recover gases after surface separation.

2. Scrub to remove any entrained liquids.3. Compress using a reciprocating gas compressor – using either gas / diesel or bi-fuel engine

drive.

4. Cool gas following compression

5. Re-inject into flowline for processing and eventual sale6. Provide separated condensate for sale

Requirements

1. Fuel – diesel / gas / bi-fuel2. Flowline for gas export

3. Liquids disposal – water / condensate

4. Gas returns from well

5. Available space / weight capacity? Offshore applications

Challenges

1. Length of contract

2. Gas to be compressed – N2 / Natural Gas / Mix ?

3. Equipment availability

4. Equipment size / weight

5. Available fuel

Then he presented a case history from the Middle East

1. UBD using coiled tubing in Middle East involving the re-entry of mature gas wells drilling

multi-lateral open-hole completions.

a. Four compressors rated at 30 MMSCFD in re-compression service. These

compressors have captured over 2.5 billion SCF of gas. Note the lack of gas being

flared



Eng. Sameh Hussein Marketing Engineer for Baker Oil Tools

“PROPOSED COMPLETION FOR UNDER BALANCE WELLS “.

Eng. Sameh talked about some interesting points

¾ Completion objective and requirements

¾ Proposed Completion hookup

¾ Features and benefits of the completion equipment components used

¾ Completion operations procedures

For the completion objectives, he talked about Completion Objective & Requirement with different

Scenarios

SCENIRO 1

¾ Monobore liner top completion utilizing the liner hanger / completion technology for coiltubing under balance drilling applications with Big bore to accommodate for drilling BHA

¾ Usage of Drill through sub surface safety valve to protect the SSSV during the UBD

SCENIRO 2

¾ Two stage completion phase to enable to isolate the under balance drilled reservoir ¾ Retrieve the down hole isolation valve¾ Upper completion to sting in the lower completion packer and retrieve the isolation plugs

¾ Big bore through completions

From the completion objectives and requirements, Eng. Sameh hit many points

¾ Install a reliable completion hookup with double isolation device to protect the under balance

drilled reservoir section during the pulling of the surface casing tieback with down hole

deployment valve.

¾ The ability to run the upper completion string and re connect to the isolation lower

completion string and retrieve the double isolation devices

¾ Setting completion equipment in an under balance conditions

¾ Gas well / High temp / corrosive chrome completion well

¾ Maintaining Monobore through out the completion string for future interventions through the

well life

Then he talked about different completion products listing all its values and how it helps in

completing and under-balance drilled well. He strated with “Tubing Retrievable Safety Valve” and

its advantages as

¾ Slim line OD

¾ Dampener System

¾ Metal-to-Metal Stop Seals (Open & Closed Position)

¾ Self Equalizing

¾ Non Elastomeric Seal Technology

¾ 5,000 psi Working Pressure

¾ Field Proven Technology



Then he talked about the “Anchor Tubing Seal Nipple” as follows

¾ Is an anchoring and sealing device that connects the retrievable tubing string to the upper bore

of the Premiere® Production Packer Head Assembly

¾ The latch component of the seal assembly provides positive engagement with the packer

head, and the seal unit maintains the pressure integrity of the connection

¾ The anchor seal nipple is available with the following V-RYTE seal type which fits the wellenvironment conditions

Then talked about “Removable Packer Head”. He introduced it as

¾ The Head is the packer-to-tubing connection, either upper seal bore, tubing connection,

and/or thru-tubing cut extension

¾ It is used here to accommodate the KC-22 Anchor Tubing Seal Nipple¾ It has a 4.750” Seal Bore

Then he talked about the Removable Packers properties as

¾ Permanent hydraulic set retrievable packer

¾ Big Bore ID suitable for monobore completion¾ No Body movement during setting¾ Retrieve thru-tubing Chemical cut or by work string mechanical cutting through the mandrel¾ High performance 10 k differential pressure @ 350 deg f

Eng. Sameh then talked about “Baker “AF” Sur-Set Top No-Go Seating Nipple”. He mentioned

that

¾ Designed to accept only the Top No-Go line of Sur-Set equipment

¾ Objective is to land the 1st isolation device type AFH wire line blanking plug¾ 10,000 PSI PRESSURE RATING @ 300 DEG F

Baker “AR” Sur-Set Bottom No-Go Seating Nipple

¾ Designed to accept the bottom No-Go line of Sur-Set equipment .

¾ Objective is to land the 2nd isolation device type ARH wire line blanking plug

¾ 10,000 PSI pressure rating @ 300 deg F

ARH / AFH Sur-Set Two-Trip Bypass Blanking Plug

¾ Baker Models AFH, ARH Two-Trip Bypass Blanking Plugs with Removable Mandrel are

positive blank-off devices designed to seal off pressure from above and below

¾ These plugs are for use in wells where sand or sediment might be encountered

¾ The removable mandrel protrudes from the fishing neck of the lock so that a sand bailer can

expose the top of the mandrel for retrieval

¾ The blanking plugs are two trip: two trips to set the plug and two trips to retrieve the plug¾ The blanking plugs are run in the well without the removable mandrel in place, providing a

large fluid bypass area and allowing fast run-in time

Then Eng. Sameh talked about the operation procedure as follow:

¾ After finishing the under balance drilling operations

¾ A clean out trip of a 7” scrapper and 4-1/2’’ liner tandem tieback to polish the top of the 4-

½’’ liner



¾ RIH with the premier packer and lower completion assembly including the 2 isolation

blanking plugs installed in the AF , AR nipples and liner tieback stem on work string

¾ Once the required packer depth is reached and SISO anchor seal assembly is positioned at the

top of the 4-½’’ liner.

¾ Sting in with the SISO anchor seal assy into the 4-1/2’’ liner tieback sleeve and apply 20 k lbs

to activate the anchor seal assy and apply a pull test to verify the latch of the SISO seal assy

¾ Set the premier packer by applying 4,000 psi in the tubing and monitor the shear indication onthe pressure gauge and hold 15 min

¾ Test packer setting by applying pressure test in the annulus

¾ Release the KC-22 anchor seal assy. from the premier packer head and POOH to surface¾ Retrieve the 7.00’’ casing tieback string with the down hole deployment valve

¾ R/U for running 5.00’’ upper completion string with the redressed KC-22S anchor seal assy

& 4.00’’AF top no go nipple, TSME-5 SSSV

¾ RIH with completion string as per program and test 5.00’’ tubing each 1000 mt.¾ Make up the SCSSSV, connect the control to the safety valve, open the flapper and start RIH

with tubing to surface

¾ Sting into the Premier packer seal head with the KC-22S anchor seal assy, space out the

completion string to land in the tubing hanger ¾ Pooh and install pup joints needed, re-sting in the packer head and latch the KC-22S anchor

seal assy in the head, pull test the anchor seal assy¾ Set tubing hanger in place and connect control line to the control panel.¾ Retrieve the AFH & ARH blanking plugs¾ Well ready for productions

Session IV: Underbalance Applications

Session Chairmen: Horacio Ferreira & Mohamed Bassiououni

Eng. BJ Staal presented an interesting presentation on “Actual Well Planning” for UBD which will

take place in Egypt in 2005 where the expected drilling date is “June 2005”. He started with the

drivers for the project and put it as “Primary and Secondary” drivers. He listed them as

• Primary drivers are to increase gas production and ultimate recovery from

– Tight gas reservoir (new wells)

– Damaged reservoir (infill drilling, side tracks)

– Low quality reservoir (side tracks)

• Secondary drivers

– Improved ROP (reduce well cost)– Improved reservoir knowledge

He made a conclusion that the length of the well is not the objectives but overcoming the damage is

the most important objective. His statement was” Any skin damage makes even >1000 m horizontal

wells uneconomic in < 5md tight gas sands”



He mentioned that the applications in Egypt is for Bapetco in their Obaiyed reservoir in the Lower

Safa formation. He made an overview of the reservoir, performance of non- UBD drilled wells. He

discussed the D-2 and the 4-H wells.

Eng. Staal then talked about Technical Evaluation of the UBD in Bapetco and the growth of thinking

there. He started with the comparison between Jointed pipes and coiled tubing drilling that took place

in 2002. He said

Jointed Pipe

• Can deliver 1000 m lateral

• Requires additional equipment:

– New drill string (gas tight connections)

– Top Drive

– Snubbing Unit

– Rig modifications

– Concentric string for N2

• BHP fluctuations (OB risk) during the operation

• Higher risk of OB (HSE driven)

• Rig personnel experience

• IADC level 5

Coiled Tubing

• Can deliver 1000 m ( 2 x 500 m laterals)

• Thru tubing operation enables N2 injection & ideal CTD environment

• Low risk of overbalanced conditions (no connections)

• Higher surface pressure capability

• UBD experienced personnel

• Lower HS&E risk due to integrated equipment

• IADC level 4

Then he talked about the reasons for choosing the Jointed pipes now as the option. He said

• Coiled tubing UBD tender was issued in 2003

• Tender failed due to high cost of bid

• Peer review in May 2004 confirmed the business case for UBD was strong

• JP UBD technology had progressed

– Downhole deployment valve

– Gas tight drill pipe

– Experience level of JP UBD providers

– E.D.C. Have UBD experience (Syria

He then we through the design of the D2 and 4H wells and process flow. Then he talked about the

equipment.

Eng. Staal then touched on the Saftey aspects of the project as follows

• HSE is a key part of the contract, deliverables are listed.

• HAZID, HAZOP and SIMOPS studies completed.

• Environmental Impact Assessment Completed for UBD.

• Use of Pre Start Up Independent Audit Team.

• Use of HSE Safety Case (in conjunction with EDC).

• Experienced contractor with strong UBD HSE philosophy.

• HSE Crew Bonus incentives are included in the contract.



Then he talked about the challenges of the project and listed them as

• Through tubing drilling – slim hole pipe

• Surface handling of condensate

• Maintaining UB conditions is critical

• Drilling and producing simultaneously• Training rig crews

• Hard rock drilling (UCS>25kpsi)

• New BHA components (slim hole PWD)

• Signal acquisition in a two phase environment

• Underbalance completions

Then he talked about the future of the UBD in Bapetco beyond the Obaiyed field as follows

• Phase II – UBD

– Obaiyed

• Vertical wells to be prepared

• New wells drilled with UB philosophy

– Bed• Target Bahariya formation

– Neag

• Well extension(s) for reservoir knowledge

Then he concluded with “Future in Egypt” by saying “Reduce, Coordinate, Train and Focus”

• Reduce cost; use EGPC leverage for contracts to make UBD accessible to the “smaller” oilcompanies by lowering OPEX

• Coordinate drilling schedules between Operators and Contractors to optimise utilisation of

UBD package

• Train the national engineers in UBD engineering (reservoir, drilling)

Focus to reduce turnaround time for a project (feasibility-implementation/contracting-execution/spud)from 12 months to 3 months

Mr. Patrick Zuber talked about “Case Histories of UBD in the Middle East and North Africa”. He

said that this relates to applications in the regions and divided that into types

Three Primary Types:

1. Underbalanced Reservoir Drilling (UBD)

2. Performance Drilling (PD)3. Managed Pressure Drilling (MPD)

For the reservoir drilling, he explained the reasons

• Drilling with bottom hole annulus pressures intentionally designed and maintained below

adjacent wellbore reservoir pressures to invite a hydrocarbon influx.

• The primary objective is to reduce formation damage, increase production and characterizethe reservoir.



For the Performance Drilling, he said

• Drilling with air, mist or foam drilling fluid systems in order to drill with sub-hydrostatic

wellbore pressures.

• Primary objective is increasing the rate of penetration with secondary benefits of avoiding the

traditional overbalanced drilling problems (stuck pipe, lost circulation, etc

For the Managed Pressure Drilling he said

• Drilling while utilizing a closed, pressurizable fluid system that allows greater and more

precise control of the wellbore pressure profile than only making mud weight adjustments.

• Primary objective is to enhance conventional drilling processes by decreasing non-productive

time and mitigating drilling hazards

For the case histories, he divided projects into two categories

1. Long term Projects

2. Short Term Projects

For the Long Term Projects, Mr. Zuber listed them as follows

• Long term campaigns with one operator:

¾ Oman

¾ Algeria¾ Jordan¾ United Arab Emirates : Coiled Tubing drilling since 2003.

¾ Iran : Since 2004.

¾ Saudi Arabia : Since 2004.

While on the Short Term Projects he listed the following

• Short Term / Pilot Projects

¾ Egypt : Two operators had projects in 2001. A third operator will drill two wells in

2005.

¾ Libya : Two operators started projects in 2004. At least two other operators will

start UBD projects in 2005.

¾ United Arab Emirates : An additional operator started a 2 well project in 2004.

¾ Syria : Drilled one well in 2003.

Mr. Zuber then listed the projects by country. He divided the project into Objectives and Results as

follows as per applications. For the Reservoir Drilling, he said

OmanObjecives

¾ Increase production by minimizing formation damage.¾ Establish a long term reservoir UBD campaign in Oman.¾ Accelerate the adoption of UBD in Oman as the standard drilling practice.

¾ Improve reservoir understanding by characterizing the inflow profile of underbalanced wells.

¾ Prove the performance and reliability of the DDV (Downhole Deployment Valve) for this

international Oil Company.

Results

¾ Over 50+ wells drilled underbalanced between 2002 and 2004.

¾ Increased production rates were observed consistently throughout the reservoir campaign.



¾ Well delivery times have steadily decreased over the course of the campaign.

¾ Effective reservoir characterization techniques have been implemented with the aid of UBD

production data.

¾ DDV technology has been successfully implemented and proven within Oman and globally .

AlgeriaObjectives

¾ Increase ROP compared to conventional overbalanced drilling.¾ Increase oil production by minimizing formation damage.¾ Eliminate NPT associated with conventional drilling problems

Results

¾ To date more than 10 wells have been drilled using UBD technology.¾ Encouraging production rates were observed while drilling and conducting production flow

tests.

¾ Significant increase in ROP compared to offset conventionally drilled wells.

¾ Successfully spread the UBD technology in the North Africa region.

For Performance Drilling he said,

Objectives

¾ Air Drill the top hole sections of wells in order to:

¾ Prevent Losses.

¾ Increase ROP.

¾ Reduce Rig Time.

Results

¾ Air drilling has proved to be a very useful tool for the top hole sections.

¾ Over 500 wells drilled in MENA between 2000 and 2004.

Oman (Air Hammer) Objectives

¾ Improved ROP versus conventional drilling.¾ Prove that the conglomerate rock is competent enough to withstand the differential pressure

drop of the hydrostatics of an air filled hole.

¾ Monitor production of formations fluids under UB conditions.

Results

¾ Increased ROP up to 10 times when using dry air and air hammers.

¾ The conglomerate is capable of withstanding the pressure drop of an air filled hole.

¾ No production of hydrocarbons or significant water inflows.

For the Managed Pressure Drilling, he said

Example: Syria

Objectives

¾ Reduce typical drilling non- productive time (NPT) by depleting a high pressure, low volumegas zone while drilling.

¾ Eliminate an intermediate casing string from the drilling programme.¾ Develop UBD technology, practices and procedures for future Syrian activity.

Results

¾ Average drilling rig time of 45 days, was reduced to an average of 21 days.

¾ Intermediate casing string was eliminated.¾ ROP improvements and excellent bit performance were experienced as compared to

conventional drilling.



¾ All wells were delivered safely with zero LTI’s.

¾ UBD technology is successfully being spread in Syria. A reservoir UBD application was

conducted in the 4th quarter of 2003.

Session V: QHSE in UBD

Session Chairmen: Horacio Ferreira & Mohamed Bassiououni

Eng. Ibrahim Sharaf, Middle East and North Africa HSE coordinator for weatherford, talked about

“Health Safety and Environment” which is a critical subject in oil drilling and more critical in

under-balance drilling.

Eng. Sharaf started with “A Comprehensive UBD HSE System”. He listed all items included in

HSE procedure

o Equipment design

o Formalized Safety Review Process

HAZOP, HAZID, SIMOPS

o Operational Procedures

o Emergency Procedures & Contingencies

o Specialized Training

o Effective Site Specific HSE Plan

o Bridging Documento Audits, Inspections

o Reviews

For the equipment design, he said

¾ A properly designed and implemented UBD HSE system is safer than conventional drillingsystem

¾ A properly designed UBD system does not have to depend on personnel properly

interpreting and responding to well control incident¾ The system is designed to properly handle & process flow from the well

Then he talked about the systems from being semi closed and closed and said

¾ Semi Closed System

o Liquids and Solids are returned to open tanks after gas has been separated

¾ Closed System

o All separation is done within the separator. The liquid for injecting (water or oil) isrecycled directly from the separator

Then he talked about the Barrier Policy as



¾ UBD requires fundamental change to the Well Control Policy

¾ Conventional Primary Well Control is removed

¾ UBD depends on dynamic well control

¾ Flow diversions of well returns while operating (Drilling, connections & tripping) is

accomplished with the use of a Rotating Control Head.

¾ In Addition to string floats, 5000psi UB choke manifold, Emergency Shutdown system

for safe well control and wellbore production handling.

Then he talked about the Emergency Shut Down as

¾ ESD protect all closed vessels from over pressure

¾ ESD include

o automatic shutdown devices

o & manual switches in critical areas around the rig

¾ ESD valves are closed any time

o the pressure limit of a vessel is exceeded or if the volume in a vessel exceeds

o or drops below the design limit

For the “HAZOP, HAZID, SIMOPS”, Eng. Sharaf defined the HAZOP as” is designed to

review process systems and operating procedures to confirm whether they will operate and

be operable as intended, without having introduced any avoidable hazards”.

He the talked about the team members responsible for HAZOP control as

¾ Core Team

Session Leader (Process Engineer with Drilling background)

Session Recorder

Design Process Engineer

Project Operations Representative

QHSE Engineer

¾ Additional Members

Instrument Engineer

Project Engineer

Mechanical Engineer

Independent Experts (unless covered by the Leader)

He then talked about the HAZOP guidewords and deviations then talked about some examples of

HAZOP.

He then moved to the HAZID process and defined it as

¾ It is a technique for early identification of potential hazards and threats.

¾ The major benefit of HAZID is that early identification and assessment of the critical

HSE hazards provides essential input to project development decisions.

¾ This will lead to safer and more cost-effective design options being adopted with aminimum cost of change penalty.

Then he gave some examples on types of HAZARD

¾ Usage Hydrocarbon as Drilling Fluid

¾ Compressed gas in the drill string and surface pipe work

¾ Intentional Loss of Primary Well Control Barriers (i.e. mud column)

¾ H2S



¾ CO2

Mr. Sharaf then talked about operational procedures in HSE as follows

¾ Procedures on all Critical operations are reviewed and documented

¾ No deviation to Procedures is tolerated in UBD

¾ Management of Change process is frequently used to facilitate any proposed changes toprocedures or systems at site

¾ Management of Change Form to be used for permanent changes

Then he talked about training and its importance in UBD as part of the implementing HSE

¾ All personnel from the Package Supervisor or Engineer down to Assistant Operators

are fully trained in the operation of all items of UBS equipment deployed for the

projects.

¾ Where training or advance courses are required, our own staff as well as the operators

can benefit from participation.

Then he talked about audits and inspections and gave several examples.

Ub d Workshop Report

Documents

Transcript of Ub d Workshop Report