Plug and Abandonment - Presentation

Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 8

STABILITY OF WELLBORE. RESTRICTIONS.

POOR HOLE CLEANING

Prevention and Elimination of Problems and Accidents in the Wells Construction


CUTTING BEHAVIOR
Downhole restrictions: Hole cleaning
1. Washout problem

2. Differential pressure pipe sticking


3. Creeping wellbore
4. Swelling wellbore
 Mechanical pipe sticking

Incl Ann Ann  Slow rate of penetration

Cutt For
Cut
 Excessive torque and drag

ular ular m
 Difficulties to run casing to the planned landing

inat
depth

ings Pac
ting
 Difficulties while cementing the well

spac velo  Formation fracturing 


beds
ion acc k
FACTORS EFFECTING HOLE CLEANING
1. Flow rate
Increasing the flow rate leads to better cuttings removal
Limiting factors: allowed ECD; Rig hydraulic power availability; the resistance of the open hole to the hydraulic erosion
2. Flow rate regime
Turbulent flow is more efficient in removing the cuttings than laminar flow, because turbulent flow lifts the cuttings into the effective flow
path.
3. Drill string rotation
Dynamic behavior improves hole cleaning
Limiting factors: pipe failures, wear due to cyclic stresses
4. Pipe eccentricity
Narrow clearance leads to difficulties
5. Rate of penetration
Reduction of ROP leads to better cleaning
Limiting factors: cost
6. Mud properties
Higher viscosity improves hole cleaning
TORQUE AND DRAG MONITORING
 Technique to monitor Torque and Survey
Drag in real time: Drillstring data
 The drillstring consist of short data Sensor Data:
Bit depth
OD, ID,
segments, joined by connections HL
Weight Surface torque
that transmit tension, compression, Downhole WOB,
torsion, and bending moment. TOB
RPM
 Comparing of real time T&D with Borehole
precalculated values (conventional ID
HL, surface torque) Rig Data
Indicators of poor hole cleaning: Mud
Weights Tensile
 Increased pick-up weight
strength
 Decreased slack off weight Yield strength
 Increased torque in horizontal wells Fatigue limit
COMPARING ECD TO FRICTION FACTOR TRENDS

 The real time Torque and Drag


software used the measured surface
torque during off bottom rotation to
determine a friction factor.
 Measured down hole pressure was
converted into ECD at the surface.
Bad removing
of cuttings bed

Small decrease of ECD – beginning of cutting bed


Increase of ECD - Pack off
Increase of Friction Factor – Cutting bed is built
Opposite effect
HOLE CLEANING RISK REDUCTION SERVICE
Multiple sensors and digital signals Real-time data dashboard Mud-effect correction
 cuttings flowmeter (CFM) and  comprehensive, real-time  correction on coating of mud on
weighting tray, located at the cuttings flow information cuttings
end of each shale shaker  integration with drilling  correction factor - equivalent
 cuttings accumulate on the tray parameters, cuttings geology, dry cuttings ratio (EDCR)
and are weighed with strain drilling fluid properties, and  wet cuttings weight is
gauges MLWD data converted into equivalent
 digital outputs are sent to the  visualisation of results through volume of dry cuttings
acquisition system dashboard  comparison of dry cuttings
 accessibility online whenever volume with theoretical volume
and wherever it’s needed of formation drilled at any time
REFERENCES

 1. Fred Robert Mkuyi, Dissertation “Evidences of Poor Hole-cleaning or of Wellbore Instability through Hook load Response”,
NTNU: Norwegian University of Science and Technology, July 2016
 2. Erik Jorge Silva Ferreire, Dissertation “Hole Cleaning Performance Monitoring During The Drilling Of Directional Wells”
University of Lisboa, September 2012
 3. Thor Ole Gulsrud, Statistical Method for detection of poor hole cleaning and stuck pipe, SPE, 2009. ID SPE-123374-MS.
 4. Mohammed Alawami, Real-Time Indicator for the Evaluation of Hole Cleaning Efficiency, SPE 2019. ID SPE-196448-MS.
 5. Adari, R., Miska, S., Kuru, E., Bern, P., Saasen, A. 2000. Selecting Drilling Fluid Properties and Flow rates For Effective
Hole Cleaningin High Angle and Horizontal Wells – SPE.
 6. Bart E. Vos, SPE, and Frank Reiber, Baker Hughes INTEQ 2000. The Benefits of Monitoring Torque & Drag in Real Time –
SPE
 7. Schlumberger. Hole cleaning and wellbore risk reduction service [slb.com/CLEAR]
THANK YOU FOR ATTENTION

PERFORMED BY KSENIIA ZHUKOVA


MOSCOW
2020

You might also like