You are on page 1of 6

SPE 46008 Weight on Bit in Coiled Tubing Drilling: Collection and Analysis of Field Data

C. G. Blount, ARCO Alaska Inc., D. D. Hearn, ARCO Alaska Inc., M. L. Payne, ARCO Exploration and Production Technology, U. B. Sathuvalli, ARCO Exploration and Production Technology, R. Livesay, Hecate Software have only been validated with surface hook load data1, 2. Experience with conventional drill string torque and drag models has shown that both surface and downhole data are critical to validate models for successful planning and drilling of highly deviated and extended reach wells3.) 3. Obtain improved estimates of input parameters to the TFM (e.g. friction factor, effects of tortuosity, etc.) 4. To improve understanding of the more complex issues concerning the mechanical behavior of CT (e.g., the effects of residual curvature, post buckling wall contact forces, etc.). Not all of these goals were realized in this project because of the time and manpower required to analyze the large amount of downhole and surface data. Also, the behavior of some of the data was complex enough to prevent direct comparison with the results of simulations. The WOB sub recorded tension, torque and temperature near the bit while separate transducers recorded internal and annular pressures. Data from these devices were recorded downhole and transferred to a personal computer during the BHA trips at the surface. A total of 22 megabytes of downhole data were collected during this field test. The sub stopped recording data about 500 ft. before drilling was terminated due to poor transfer of weight to bit. In addition, 3.5 megabytes of surface data on hook load, depth indicator readings, pumping pressures, mud weights, etc. were recorded. This paper presents representative samples of downhole weight and downhole torque, and surface measurements. It discusses selected portions of this data by classifying them into operational intervals such as drill ahead, running in hole (RIH) and pulling out of hole (POOH) and correlating them with events recorded in the drilling reports and surface measurements. To the authors knowledge, this paper represents a first attempt to understand the mechanics of force transmission in CT using both surface and downhole data in the literature. The present analysis focuses on trends rather than actual magnitudes of data. A detailed comparison of the downhole data with simulator predictions and estimation of friction coefficients is ongoing and may be published in the future. The WOB Sub Figure 1 shows a schematic of the WOB sub used to gather the data. The sub consists of a load carrying member (LCM)

Copyright 1998, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc. This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1998 SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Roundtable held in Houston, Texas, 1516 April 1998. This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract This paper analyzes representative samples of downhole and surface measurements collected during a sidetrack operation with a coiled tubing drilling unit. The downhole data are classified into operational windows such as drill ahead, running in hole and pulling out of hole. They are correlated with drilling reports and surface measurements of hook load, pumping pressures, flow rates, and slackoff. Correlations between the surface and downhole data are used to understand force transmission during set-down, pick-up and drilling operations. Introduction The work described in this paper was motivated by a need to calibrate models of force transmission in Coiled Tubing (CT) with field data. The paper describes the collection, analysis and interpretation of data from a downhole weight on bit and torque measurement device (hereafter referred to as the WOB sub). The data were collected during a sidetrack operation on the North Slope of Alaska. The operational plan consisted of setting a cement plug in an existing well, drilling a pilot hole through it and exiting from a milled window to the target at 10,400 ft. The sidetrack was directionally built to horizontal at nearly 22 / 100 ft and drilled to 13,100 ft MD. Drilling was suspended 300 ft. short of total depth (TD) because of difficulty in getting WOB. The data collection project was motivated by the following goals1. To measure the downhole WOB transmitted to the bit while drilling and identify parameters affecting WOB transfer, 2. To determine the accuracy of the tubing force models (TFM) used plan CTD jobs. CT force transmission models

BLOUNT, HEARN, PAYNE, SATHUVALLI AND LIVESAY

SPE 46008

which is subjected to internal and external fluid pressures and WOB. Suitably mounted strain gages measure the load and torque on the LCM. The electronic data acquisition and memory units are protected from the internal and external fluids by protective inner and outer sleeves. These sleeves make sliding contact with the LCM and do not transmit pressure (or other) loads except for the small friction due to the sliding O-ring seals. Force balance on the LCM indicates that the reading on the WOB sub is the resultant of forces due to internal and external pressure and the WOB. Denoting upward forces as negative and downward forces as positive, force balance gives Sub Rdg. = WOB - p o Do 2 + p o D 2 Di 2 + pi Di 2 4 4 o 4 2 = WOB + p i p o D 4 i (1) where and are the annular and internal pressures respectively. This implies that WOB = Sub Rdg. - ( pi p o ) Di 2 (2) 4 It can be verified that the sub reading given by Eq. (1) is independent of configuration of BHA. The WOB as calculated by Eq. (2) is hereafter referred to as the Corrected WOB. The sub records a tensile force on the LCM as a positive number and a compressive value as a negative number. Therefore, a negative value of corrected WOB indicates compression in the sub. Positive values of corrected WOB indicate a force opposite to the direction shown in Fig. 1. For example, while RIH or POOH, the corrected WOB is a positive number. The WOB sub was installed in twelve of the fourteen bottom hole assemblies used to drill the well. The typical BHA arrangement consisted of a mill or bit followed by the equalizing sub, MWD unit, the non magnetic drill collars, flow tube and the flex sub. The WOB sub was installed above the flex sub in most cases. The WOB sub recorded the axial load, bit torque, time and the temperature. Data was recorded at intervals that varied from one second to ten minutes, and it was downloaded each time the BHA was retrieved at surface. Pressure transducers also recorded the internal and annular pressures near the bit. Data from measurements at the surface were recorded several times a minute throughout the operation. The clocks on the WOB sub, the pressure gages and the surface measurement system were not synchronized. Since the four data sets (WOB and torque, internal pressure, external pressure, and surface measurements) could not be synchronized, the raw data was interpolated to accommodate the data sampled at the fastest rate.

Data Analysis Figures 2 and 3 show the wellbore schematic and trajectory respectively. As illustrated in Fig. 3, the wellpath consists of six distinct sections. The well is highly deviated and consists of vertical, inclined, curved (build and drop) and

horizontal sections. The rapid change in the direction is due to the build section of the sidetrack drilled by the CT. When the CT is run into hole, the sub is expected to read the resultant of the weight of BHA section below the sub, the pressure forces and the drag on the BHA. Figure 4 shows the corrected WOB and sub reading plotted (on the left and right hand vertical axes respectively) as functions of the measured depth in the vertical hole section for two similarly constructed BHAs. The measured depths for all the figures in this paper were obtained from the surface depth indicator. The figure illustrates several key points1. The sub reads a consistent steady tensile load (~220 350 lbf) for both BHA configurations. 2. There are large spikes in the sub readings in the first 1000 feet. These spikes are caused by shallow hole testing of the MWD tool. The shallow hole test involves increasing the pump pressure and checking the response of the MWD tool. The drilling reports for this operation confirm the shallow hole tests. Note the relatively smooth (spike-less) curve for corrected WOB which compensates for these hydraulic effects. 3. The sub records repeatable data, i.e. similar readings for similar BHAs and serves as a check for the data. Figure 5 shows the sub reading and inclination in the curved (dropping section) of the hole. The sub and the corrected WOB increase as the inclination decreases due to increase in the axial component of weight and a corresponding decrease in drag. Figure 6 shows similar data for pulling out of hole with BHA # 1. Note that the sub reading increases with decreasing inclination, as expected. Figure 7 shows the corrected WOB during pilot hole drilling and compares it with the hookload at surface. The pilot hole is a dropping hole. The daily drilling report for this period indicates drilling ahead at an ROP of 15 to 20 fph with approximately 1- 2 klbf WOB. The data indicates an average downhole (corrected) WOB of less than 200 lbf. The data in Fig. 7 is re-plotted in Fig. 8 to illustrate the transmission of weight to bit. The data shows the absolute magnitude of downhole corrected WOB as a function of the surface slackoff. Note that all data points do not lie below the maximum weight transfer line. Figure 9 shows the correlation between the slack off and downhole sub measurements for a period of twelve hours. According to the drilling reports, the tubing was run into hole with a new BHA at the beginning of the interval shown in Fig. 9. Drilling commenced at 10,646 ft MD with 4.5 klbf slack off at surface and a rate of penetration of 200 ft/hr. Thirty minutes later, the mud flow rate was reduced to 2.1 bpm to prevent hole enlargement, with a corresponding decrease in the WOB and ROP. Five hours later, the drilling report indicates 10,793 ft. difficult drilling shaleStacking all available weightlittle progress. This section of the drilling interval ends with the comments 10706 ft., little progressprojected inc. at bit 94 deg. POH for bit/motor change. Examination of Fig. 9 shows two clusters of points. The lower cluster of points shows an approximately linear relationship (with a slope approximately equal to 1) indicating

SPE 46008

WEIGHT ON BIT IN COILED TUBING DRILLING: COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS OF FIELD DATA

that all the slack off at the surface is transmitted downhole. As the slackoff increases further, the slope of the line decreases since a portion of the slackoff is used to overcome drag. The drag may be caused by the weight of the string in inclined hole and wall contact forces in hole sections where buckling has occurred. The upper cluster of points tends asymptotically to 8 klbf and the downhole weight is no longer responsive to slackoff. This is possibly due to helical buckling and the accompanying increase in drag. Recall that at any point in the CT string, drag is roughly proportional to the axial force before buckling and is proportional to the square of the axial force after helical buckling. In general, the effect of slackoff on the downhole WOB is characterized by two distinct trends In the absence of buckling, downhole WOB is a linear function of the surface slack off. Since drag increases rapidly with the onset of helical buckling, the efficiency of weight transmission to the bit for a given slackoff decreases and WOB tends asymptotically to the lockup load. The exact relationship between downhole WOB and the surface slackoff can be examined by using the methods outlined in Reference 4. It is conjectured that the asymptotic region of the WOB versus slackoff may be described by the equation WOB = (1 e SO ) where SO is the slackoff, and and are constants that depend on the wellbore and string geometry, coefficient of friction, and string stiffness. This functional dependence of WOB on slackoff and the data in Fig. 9 suggest that is the maximum WOB that can be obtained for a given slackoff. Furthermore, by using dimensional analysis, it can be shown that the constant is of the order of (rcso)/EI where is the coefficient of friction, rc is the radial clearance between the CT and wellbore, and EI is the bending stiffness of the string. Interestingly the factor (rcso)/EI is dimensionally similar to the reciprocal of the Euler buckling load for an unconstrained column. This functional behavior of the downhole WOB and its limiting value is currently being investigated. Figure 10 shows torque as measured by the sub versus downhole pressure drop determined from the difference between the internal and annular pressures near the bit. The drilling reports indicate that the data shown in this figure represents drilling ahead at 10,689 ft. MD, with 3 klbf WOB and a mud flow rate of 2.1 bpm. The ROP at this point is recorded as 90 ft/hr. The performance curves of motors similar to downhole motor are also shown in this figure. Comparison of the downhole data trend and motor performance indicates that the bit is drilling ahead with a torque of 150 300 ft-lbf. Finally, Fig. 11 represents the downhole data for drilling a portion of the horizontal section. The drilling report does not indicate the magnitude of weight stacked at the surface. However, the reports confirm drilling in the horizontal section at an ROP of 100 150 ft/hr. It is clear that the downhole sub responds to the slackoff at surface. The figures appear to indicate a correspondence between the slackoff weight and the downhole data, as confirmed by the drilling reports. Unfortunately, the large amount of scatter in the data for the

horizontal section beyond this point prevented further analysis. Finally, a complete understanding of the data presented here requires careful comparison with the predicted values from a TFM. This additional analysis is ongoing and is expected to be the subject of a future paper. Conclusions Analysis of selected portions of downhole and surface data collected in this study indicates the following1. The downhole data follows expected trends for operations such as RIH, POOH and drill ahead operations. 2. The dependence of downhole WOB on the surface slackoff illustrates the onset of buckling and the tendency for eventual lockup. 3. The scatter in the downhole data is considerable. The magnitude of the scatter is of the order of resolution of the downhole weight measurement device. 4. The WOB sub is essentially a strain gage based load cell capable of measuring loads from 25,000 lbf in tension to 10,000 lbf in compression. Since the downhole weights are of the order of a few klbf, a cell with a smaller range and greater resolution may have to be used. This may require significant re-design of the tool. Further, well defined calibration procedures to benchmark tool measurements and identify effects of downhole temperature must be developed prior to a field test. 5. Commercial TFMs used to plan CTD operations need to be verified with the downhole and surface data. This data analysis reveals the lack of an important feature in CT simulators, i.e., the calculation of the downhole WOB for a given slackoff at surface. Currently, this calculation has to be iteratively performed to generate a curve similar to Fig. 9. 6. Future analysis should include the effects of hydraulics on bit behavior. Nomenclature BHA = Bottom Hole Assembly CT = Coiled Tubing Di= Inside diameter of WOB sub, in Do= Outside diameter of WOB sub, in E = Youngs modulus, psi I = Moment of inertia, in4 LCM = Load Carrying Member = coefficent of friction MD = Measured Depth, ft MWD = Measurement while Drilling POOH = Pulling out of hole pi= Pressure in the CT, psi po= Pressure in the CT-hole annulus, psi rc = Radial clearance between CT and wellbore, in RIH = Running in Hole ROP = Rate of Penetration, ft /hr Sub Rdg.= Reading recorded by the WOB sub, lbf TFM = Tubing Force Model WOB = Weight on Bit, lbf

BLOUNT, HEARN, PAYNE, SATHUVALLI AND LIVESAY

SPE 46008

Acknowledgments We are grateful to Lamar Gantt, Erin Oba and the management of ARCO Alaska Inc. and ARCO E & P Technology for sponsoring this study and the writing of this paper. We also thank Mr. Barry Dean and Mr. Loren Hauglund of Dowell Schlumberger for their help with the CT force simulator and preliminary data analysis. We also thank Mr. Fred Pomeroy of Petredat, Inc. for his assistance in reducing the large amounts of raw data into files of manageable size. References 1. Van Adrichem, W and Newman, K. R., Validation of Coiled Tubing Predictions in Horizontal Wells, JPT (Feb. 1993) 155. 2. Bhalla, K., Coiled Tubing Extended Reach Technology, paper SPE 30404 presented at the 1995 SPE offshore Europe Conference, Aberdeen, Sep. 5-8. 3. Payne, M. L. and Abbassian, F., Advanced Torque and Drag Considerations in Extended-Reach Wells, paper SPE 35102 presented at the 1996 IADC/SPE Conference, New Orleans, Mar. 12-15. 4. Suryanarayana, P. V. R., Maximum Set Down Weight and Overpull in Coiled Tubing Simulations,, paper SPE 36348 presented at the 1996 1st North American Round Coiled Tubing Roundtable, Montgomery, TX, February 25-26. SI Metric Conversion Factors ft x 3.048 E-01 = m in2 x 6.4516 E-04 = m2 ft /hr x 1.13864 E-2 = m / hr psi x 6.89476 E+00 = kPa lbf x 4.448222 E+00 = N ft-lbf x 1.355818 E+00 = N-m

Fig. 2 Wellbore and Sidetrack Schematic

Fig. 3 Wellbore inclination and azimuth

Fig. 1 Schematic of the WOB sub Fig. 4 Running in Hole- Vertical Section

SPE 46008

WEIGHT ON BIT IN COILED TUBING DRILLING: COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS OF FIELD DATA

Fig. 5 - Running in Hole- Dropping Hole Section

Fig. 8 - Weight Transmission- Pilot Hole Drilling

Fig. 6 - Pulling out of Hole

Fig. 9 Weight Transmission- Sidetrack Entrance

Fig. 7 Hook load and WOB- Pilot Hole Drilling

Fig. 10 Downhole Torque and Pressure Drop

BLOUNT, HEARN, PAYNE, SATHUVALLI AND LIVESAY

SPE 46008

Fig. 11 Drilling the Horizontal Section