SPE/IADC 37671

New Solutions to Remedy Lost Circulation, Crossflows, and

Underground Blowouts
R.E. Sweatman*'** and C.w. Kessler,*'** Halliburton Energy Services, and J.M. Hillier,** Sonat Exploration CO.
*SPE Members
**IADe Members

COPYright 1997. SPE/IADC Drilling Conference.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1997 SPEIIADC Drilling Conference held in
Amsterdam. The Netherlands. 4--B March 1997.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPEIIADC 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 SPE or IADC. their officers. or members. Papers presented at the SPEIIADC meetings are
subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the SPE and IADC. 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 is
presented. Write Librarian. SPE. P.O. Box 833836. Richardson. TX 75083-3836. U.S.A.. fax
01·972·952·9435.
Abstract
Costly lost circulation, crossflows, and underground blowouts
result in mud losses, wasted rig time, often ineffective remediation
materials and techniques, and sometimes lost holes, sidetracks,
abandoned wells, relief wells, and lost petroleum reserves. In
early 1996, a service company initiated a project to review
conventional remediation materials and methods, search for
more effective remedies, and field-test new solutions. The
project has led to the development of several novellost-circula-
tion material squeeze systems (LCMSS). These LCM squeeze
systems were applied in wells after conventional materials/
methods failed, and they successfully cured lost circulation,
increased the integrity and frac gradient (FMW) of weak zones
(fonnations with low mechanical strength), sealed high-pres-
sure water and gas zones, safely allowed deeper drilling, and
stopped underground blowouts. Data from these field tests show
encouraging trends and prospects not only to save costs associ-
ated with drilling trouble, but also to reduce normal exploration
and production costs for casing, liners, drilling/completion
fluids, rig time, poor primary cementation, remedial cementing,
and water production.
Introduction
API data t in Table 1 indicates that lost circulation occurs in a
significant percentage of wells. In some areas lost circulation
occurs in 40 to 80% of wells. Several operators in such areas
asked for new solutions to reduce or eliminate lost-circulation
trouble, which can cost an additional several hundred thousand
dollars to several million dollars per well. These unplanned costs
were the result of wasted rig time, unsuccessful remedies, and
many thousands of barrels of mud lost to various types of weak
zones. Some operators needed to plug and seal these weak zones
to stop cross flows that had led to underground blowouts (uncon-
trolled subsurface flow of oil, water, or gas). The preferred
solution was to plug and seal the flow's exit point in the well
(weak zone) and then either densify the drilling fluid to overbal-
ance the flow influx point (high-pressure zone) or to plug and
seal the flow influx zone. Other operators requested LCMSS for
the following tasks:
The treatment had to withstand certain EMW (Equivalent
Mud Weight) squeeze pressures to allow an increased mud
weight to overbalance deeper, higher pore-pressure zones
when drilling resumed.
The seal had to last for as much as several weeks of drilling
until the next casing seat depth was reached.
The plugging seal had to withstand both negative (swab)
and positive (surge) pressures applied during drill pipe trips,
casing runs, etc.
The treatment needed to allow higher pump rate mud
displacement and the accompanying higher equivalent cir-
culating densities (ECDs).
The treatment needed to eliminate the waiting periods after
the maximum squeeze pressure was obtained to allow
immediate washout of excess LCMSS in the hole and
pressure testing for the improved formation integrity.
The treatment had to eliminate an unplanned drilling liner.
A review of conventional LCMs, LCM pills, LCM squeeze
systems and drilling procedures indicated that all available
remedies had failed at some level, and that existing LCM
squeeze systems could be improved and better ones might be
developed. During this review, participants also concluded that
new application procedures should be developed to improve the
success rate of new systems. An "engineered solution" featuring
problem identification techniques and analysis, customized
application equipment/procedures and the new LCM squeeze
systems were needed to increase the chance for first-time
success in achieving the project goals and objectives. Field-test
results have benefited accordingly. Sometimes, field-test results
« EMW needed) suffered because of lack of experience with
both traditional' and new LCMSS procedures. Lack of problem

References at the end of the paper.

847
2 NEW SOLUTIONS TO REMEDY LOST CIRCULATION, CROSSFLOWS, AND UNDERGROUND BLOWOUTS
identification data also contributed to the small percentage of
field tests that achieved lower than desired "drill-ahead" EMW
squeeze pressures. Some of this unavailable data included:
a record of mud-loss rate or severity
design information for LCM pills already used
logs showing cross flow fluid type/rate
job procedures for necessary downhole tools
specifications for certain rig equipment, etc.
An internal "best practices" document has been written that
should help increase better understanding of LCMSS applica-
tions.
The new LCMSS formulations are commonly called "reac-
tive pills." However, unlike old formulations, they rapidly form
a rubbery mass when thoroughly mixed at certain shear rates
with either water- or oil-based drilling/completion fluids, for-
mation water/oil/gas, special treated mud, completion fluid,
etc., or a combination of drilling/completion fluid and formation
fluid. Under certain flow conditions, the new LCM squeeze
systems can travel or "finger" through the wellbore fluid for
long distances before reacting in the weak zone or high-pressure
zone. Pressure recordings have shown "peaks" and "valleys" to
support the theory that these new LCM squeeze systems can self-
divert to seal many weak points in a single application. The new
LCM squeeze systems have
reduced LCMSS required volumes
allowed much higher EMW squeeze pressures and can
maintain complete sealing against much higher swab/surge
pressures
eliminated severe water- and oil-based mud losses
plugged weak zones next to pay zones
sealed high-pressure gas to allow a lower mud weight
killed several underground blowouts
saved tens and hundreds of times their own cost
eliminated waiting periods to allow immediate formation
integrity testing
increased weak-zone FMW
eliminated multiple treatments by self-diversion
Of the 15 field tests to date, 14 have been successful,
providing an "economic value created" (EVC).
Old vs. New Methods
Conventional LCMSS formulations to stop lost circulation are
often ineffective because of delayed and inadequate consistency
development. These applications occur in weak zones that are
easily split apart or in fractures that are induced by drilling fluid
pressures because of the poor mechanical strength of the forma-
tion. Some weak zones break down rapidly because of natural
fractures, vugs, or cavernous voids. If the LCMSS does not
develop high consistency quickly enough, the system may only
plug part of the fracture, while the remaining treatment bypasses
the plugged section, where it continues to create a hydraulic or
induced fracture width and/or height. As a result, other fractures
in the open hole cannot be plugged because of the large, often
848
SPE/IADC 37671
unavailable LCMSS volumes required to plug the newly created
fractures. The same bypassing can occur in vugular loss zones.
Crossflows can wash away or dilute conventional LCM squeeze
systems before the systems reach the required consistency to
plug and seal the exit (weak) zone or the influx (high-pressure)
zone. The LCMSS must develop an extremely high fracture
plugging consistency (FPC) within seconds or minutes rather
than the hours required for conventional LCM squeeze systems
(Fig. 1).
The new LCM squeeze systems have been designed and
field-tested in challenging well conditions including the follow-
ina'
c· well temperatures ranging from below 80 to over 325°F
highly vugular or channeled zones
gas, oil, and watercrossflows that dilute or wash away other
systems
weak zones that are easily fractured by water- or oil-based
drilling fluids
underground blowouts (both influx/exit zones) at low to
high flow rates
overpressured or high flow-rate water and gas sands
sealing multiple points or zones causing mud losses
sealing depleted sands and high-pressure, low-volume gas
zones next to pay zones without effect on production
immediate wash-through of the excess left in the well bore
and formation integrity tests to drill ahead without delay
The FPC more effectively blocks the entire lost-circulation
zone by combining different mechanisms working near the
wellbore and in many parts of the hole instead of many tens or
hundreds of feet away from the hole (Fig. 2).
First, the FPC's rubber-like texture "form-fits" into the
fracture or channel by extrusion. Next, more flow resistance is
developed by the FPC friction against the walls of the fracture
or channel. This resistance causes surface pressure to increase
while LCMSS continues to be displaced. Finally, a combination
of extrusion pressure, friction pressure and in some cases
structural strength "bridging" pressure (fiber or coarse particles)
will result in a flexible seal near the wellbore. The LCMSS left
in the wellbore remains pumpable because it is not being
exposed to the mud mixing action, shearing, compacting, fluid
loss, and bridging forces in the smaller flow area fracture or
channel.
Lack of these mechanisms in the well bore cause the LCMSS
to be self-diverting for multiple weak zone plugging with a
single treatment. For a dynamic kill of a crossflow or under-
ground blowout, the LCMSS diverts to seal the influx zone after
plugging all the lower-pressure weak zones. Two stages may
likely be required when exit/influx zones arc far apart, if the
treatment is performed in a small-diameter hole, or if the
treatment is performed in a hole with sloughing or other debris.
Sloughing shales can block the lower section of the wellbore and
prev~nt a~ LCMSS from treating the formations immediately
under the shale blockage.
SPE/IADC 37671 R.E. SWEATMAN, C.w. KESSLER, J.M. HILLIER
New chemical technology is being applied to old fonnula-
tions to create these new LCM squeeze systems. This new
chemistry, when used with controlled pump rates and pressures
will create seals that hold much higher drill-ahead EMWs. The
new systems can be self- diverting, which allows them to seal the
weakest zone first then sequentially proceed to the next weakest
zones in a single treatment across long intervals. The wedging
effect (Fig. 2) of many plugged fractures may artificially increase
fonnation integrity. Field tests have shown that large pressure
increases can be applied without leakage into the weak zones.
Soft, rubbery, and semi-hard versions of the new LCM
squeeze systems are needed when operators must drill ahead to
prevent sidetracking back into the untreated section of weak
zones. A rubbery, semi-hard LCMSS is used when swab/surge
pressures are expected to bypass or dislodge a hard version
containing cement, which would again start losses to the weak
zone. A hard LCMSS containing cement is used when no
drillout is needed and a permanent seal is necessary to meet
regulatory requirements.
Problem Identification
Well Data. To design a successful first-time LCMSS treatment,
engineers must have enough well information to accurately
define the problem and select the most effective treatment type
and procedure. Some of the most critical information is listed as
follows:
the depths for the last pipe's shoe, the weak zone, influx
zone, etc.
the type/density of the wellbore fluids
the mud-loss rate and crossflow rate
casing/drillpipe/hole diameters
previous LCM/LCMSS used
type of weak zone
The fonnation fluid type, flow rate, and influx/exit depths
are especially important when engineers are designing a treat-
ment to kill underground blowouts. This data is best obtained by
analysis of various types of electric log data as described in the
following paragraphs.
Flow Detection. To establish a well-control plan for an under-
ground blowout, engineers must know the source of the crossflow,
the location of the thief zone, and the annular flow rate. Various
wireline logging tools can be run through the drillstring for
diagnostics. The most commonly used logging tools for drilling
support are temperature and noise tools. In the last decade,
oxygen-activation/water-flow determination techniques have
been developed that require the use of pulse-neutron logging
tools, or certain carbon-oxygen logging tools.
Noise Logs. The noise logging tool (borehole audio tool) is
a passive listening device (hydrophone) that responds to sounds
in and around the wellbore.' The frequency and amplitude of the
sound level that the downhole flow generates is a function of the
fluid type (gas, liquid) and the choking of the flow through
various downhole restrictions.
849
3
Fig. 3 shows a noise log run in an adjacent well bore on a
platfonn in which an underground blowout is present. Two
shallow sands are being charged by the downhole flow. This
example was recorded through six concentric strings of pipe (30-
in. conductor, 20-in. surface, 13 3/8-in. casing, 9 5/8-in. casing,
7-in. tieback, and 3 Y2-in. tubing). This example demonstrates the
sensitivity of the noise logging tools to monitor downhole flow.
Because the tool is sensitive, it must be kept stationary while
acquiring noise logging data so that "road noise" will not be
recorded. Recordings are made at various depth stations in the
well. A temperature logging tool is generally combined with the
noise logging tool. The temperature tool identifies depth intervals
at which station recordings should be taken.
Temperature Logs. The temperature logging tool monitors
changes in the geothermal gradient of a well. Circulation of
drilling fluids will change the static geothennal gradient be-
cause of the injection of cool mud down the drillstring. Fig. 4
illustrates the effect of circulation on the static geothennal
gradient. The circulation of the mud lowers the temperature in
the lower part of the well, and raises the temperature in the upper
part. When circulation is stopped, horizontal (and some vertical)
heat flow will occur; within a few hours, the nonnal earth
temperature is recorded.
Channeling of fluids, such as in a downhole lost-circula-
tion situation will alter the temperature log response from a
normal circulation gradient to one with several thermal deflec-
tions. From this response, both the source of the downhole
flow and the location of the thief zone can be determined. Figs.
5a and 5b illustrate both the temperature and noise log re-
sponse in a downhole flow situation, and the responses after a
successful kill operation.
The downhole flow rate of the channeled fluid can be
estimated based on (I) nodal analysis and thermal conductivity
of the various downhole materials, (2) hole size, and (3) a flow
path description-tubular summary. Fig. 6 illustrates the model-
ing of heat transfer at different annular flow rates. By matching
this theoretical temperature profile to the actual temperature log
response, engineers can determine the downhole flow rate. By
using this method, engineers determined that an annular flow
rate of 1,000 BWPD should be used to treat an underground
blowout. The exit (weak) zone and the influx (high-pressure gas
and water) zone were plugged and sealed in a single treatment.
Oxygen Activation. Oxygen activation logging tools, such as
pulse-neutron capture (PNC) or pulse-neutron spectroscopy
(PNS) tools can detect downhole water flow. 4 .5 If oxygen is
irradiated with neutrons that have energies greater than about 10
Mev, the following reaction is likely:
I~O + 11 - '~N* + P ......................................................... (J)
The nitrogen is left in an excited state, which beta-decays
back to oxygen with a 7.35-second half-life. The oxygen imme-
diately emits a gamma ray that the logging tool uses for
determining oxygen activation. Therefore, for water to be
4 NEW SOLUTIONS TO REMEDY LOST CIRCULATION, CROSSFLOWS, AND UNDERGROUND BLOWOUTS
detected, its fluid velocity must be great enough that the water
can travel from the neutron generator to the detector within a few
backgrounds. In other words, the fluid velocity must be greater
than the logging tool speed to be detected. The simplest method
for determining annular flow velocity is to log PNC tools at
varying logging speeds until the logging speed is faster than the
annular water flow. When this condition occurs, oxygen activa-
tion is no longer detected.
More advanced methods are available for accurately deter-
mining the velocity of water or any other oxygen-rich fluid, such
as CO 2 , These methods include various generatortiming schemes
and detector spacing. However, making logging passes at differ-
ent cable speeds over a sufficient interval will minimize any
irregular borehole effects, such as washouts or key-seated
drillpipe. These borehole effects could cause an incorrect annu-
lar fluid velocity if a stationary measurement were taken in
either a washed-out or tight section of the hole. The background
measurements in Fig. 7 show water flow. These measurements
were made while the neutron generator was cycling.
LCMSS Treatment Design and Application
Once engineers have enough data to identify the problem and
define the objectives of the LCMSS treatment, they should
obtain samples of the well bore fluid (mud, formation fluid, etc.)
for laboratory tests with the candidate LCMSS slurry. A chemi-
cal analysis is needed if samples are not available. Aftersatisfac-
tory laboratory test results are obtained with the "rig site"
laboratory test procedure, job procedures for the LCMSS treat-
ment can then be prepared and presented to the operator for
review and approval.
Example Job Procedure. The procedure for stopping mud
losses is normally a "dual injection" placement, which requires
two pumps: one to pump the LCMSS slurry down the drillpipe
and the other to pump the activator fluid (mud, etc.) down the
drillpipe/casing annulus. In an underground blowout, the place-
ment procedure is different because the activator fluid is the
formation fluid or a mixture of mud pumped down the annulus
and the formation fluid flowing into the weak zone (exit point).
Variations of the placement procedure are also required when
the service company must place the LCMSS when the well is on
vacuum and a minimal mud column is needed to overbalance a
high-pressure zone.
The end of the drillpipe is typically placed above the weak
zone and inside the casing. To prevent the drillpipe from
sticking, operators should be certain that no part of the drill pipe
is across a zone that may break down under the planned
downhole pressures. The end of the drillpipe should also be
placed to allow most of the LCMSS slurry to clear the drillpipe
before the slurry reaches the weak zone. This practice helps
prevent disposal of any excess LCMSS in the drillpipe after the
maximum squeeze pressure is obtained.
The volume ofLCMSS is determined by the severity of the
mud losses or the uncontrolled formation fluid flow. The
850
SPE/IADC 37671
volume of spacer ahead of the LCMSS is based on the mud type,
the pump rate, and especially for oil-based mud, a mud-film
removal test with a field-laboratory rotational viscometer. Wa-
ter-based muds may only require 100 to 200 linear ft of spacer
ahead of the treatment compared to some "sticky" oil-based
muds that may need 1,000 to 2,000 linear ft of spacer ahead of
the treatment. The type of spacer may be a simple, single-recipe
fluid or a complex recipe consisting of mUltiple fluids, depend-
ing on the type of mud and the pump rate. The spacer volume
behind the LCMSS may be minimal to prevent displacement
fluid fingering, etc. The LCMSS should be surface-tested with
a rig-site laboratory test before it is pumped to ensure optimum
FPC (fracture plugging consistency) within the desired period.
The procedure inTable 2 is an example for spotting an oil-based
LCMSS slurry inside and near the bottom of the drillpipe based
on the dual injection placement technique.
A typical downhole application is shown in Fig. 8. The job
procedure should include the following rig-site test procedure as
a quality-control test and the squeeze pressure schedule.
Rig Site Laboratory Test. Lab mixes of the new LCMSS
slurries and activator fluid (mud, formation fluid, etc.) are tested
for FPC time with a rig-site test to prejob design LCMSS
formulations. This test also determines the FPC time to qualify
the rig site LCMSS slurry before it is pumped into the well. FPC
time starts when a LCMSS slurry is mixed with an activator fluid
and ends when a FPC is observed. A sample of the LCMSS
slurry from the mixing tank is mixed with the designed ratio of
activator fluid, and the time to reach a rubbery mass is recorded.
To determine a dual-injection pump-rate range, personnel start
testing with a I: I mix of LCMSS and activator. Depending on
the planned placement procedure, personnel will test various
ratios of LCMSS and activator fluid mixtures to establish a
range of FPC times. The sample volumes of LCMSS and
activator fluid can be as small as a typical coffee cup or as great
as 0.5 gal of each substance. The LCMSS and activator are
stirred together by hand with a metal spoon or other strong
stirring instrument. If possible, the rig crew should be present
during testing to observe the plugging effect. They should be
cautioned against pumping the LCMSS in the drillpipe and hole
or pipe annulus.
The yield of the LCMSS and activator mixture determines
the appearance of the FPC and texture of the reacted mass
(degree of cohesive, adhesive, elastic, etc., properties). To seal
the weak zone effectively, the texture of the FPC should be stiff
and flexible.
Squeeze Pressure Schedule Design. Applied pressure is
required to force the FPC of the new LCM squeeze systems into
the lost-circulation or influx flowing zone. This pressure must
be great enough to overbalance all the forces resisting the flow
of the FPC (formation pore pressure, friction pressure, extrusion
pressure, pressure from bridging, etc.).
A positive pressure differential (L'1P) is used to overcome all
FPC flow-resisting forces. However, when most of the LCMSS
has entered the formation, operators must carefully apply this
SPE/IADC 37671 R.E. SWEATMAN, CW. KESSLER, J.M. HILLIER
positive L'lP. Sufficient LCMSS volume is needed to fill the
spaces in the formations opened by the positive pressures.
The LCMSS plugging treatment pump operator and all
relevant job site personnel should have a copy of the schedule
(Table 3) for the varying maximum pump pressures that could
be applied while the slurry is placed in the well. Obviously, most
jobs will require operators to pump fluids with different densi-
ties (LCMSS slurry, mud, spacer, etc.) in the pipe.
As the column height for each fluid changes during the job,
the hydrostatic head (HH) will also vary accordingly. To deter-
mine the HH pressure change, operators must calculate the HH
for each barrel of displacement fluid pumped and enter the
results in the respective schedule column. An easy way to
calculate the change is to express it as psi/bbl differential in the
HH of one fluid density compared to a different fluid density.
Forexample, 40 psi/bbl of displacement pumped may be the HH
of I bbl of plug slurry inside the drillpipe subtracted from the HH
of I bbl of displacement mud inside the drillpipe. As each barrel
of lighter-weight mud is pumped into the top of the drillpipe, a
barrel of the heavier LCMSS slurry enters the formation, which
allows the pump pressure to increase 40 psi for each barrel of
mud.
Certain pumping and well conditions may not require this
schedule, such as wells on vacuum, wells in which the back side
is not staying full of mud, etc. However, many jobs require that
the actual bottomhole squeeze pressure (BHSP) never exceed
the maximum bottomhole pressure (BHP).
Wells with combination drillpipe strings and various wellbore
sizes below the drillpipe (casing and hole), require more com-
plex calculations for the squeeze-pressure schedule. These
conditions can be calculated by existing computer software
designed for low-pressure cement squeeze procedures. The job
pump rates should also be listed in a column on the squeeze
pressure schedule to indicate the following:
changing pump rates because of circulation to spot the
LCMSS near the end of the drillpipe
rates to match the drillpipe pump rate to the drillpipe/casing
annulus pump rate (dual injection)
drillpipe pump rate when LCMSS cannot be spotted (well
on vacuum)
lower rates for long-distance travel by LCMSS (many hun-
dreds of feet between end of drillpipe and weak zone), etc.
Rig Practices. Rig personnel should be included early in the
design process to advise on the following best practices for the
rIg:
Determine how to dispose of excess LCMSS slurry left in
the batch mixer/lines and possibly in the drillpipe after the
maximum squeeze pressure and slow bleedoff are obtained.
Use "mud buckets" to drain off mud when pulling excess
LCMSS slurry remaining in bottom of the drillpipe. This
practice keeps the rig floor clean.
Get an agreement from the operator's representative and rig
toolpusher to remove possible excess LCMSS from the
drillpipe by using one of the following methods:
851
5
I. Place the bottom of the drillpipe far enough above the
weak zone to clear LCMSS out of the drillpipe before
the system enters the weak zone. If conditions do not
allow this method to be used, operators can choose
from one of the three remaining procedures.
2. Reverse the slurry out to a pit or disposal container. If
pressure increases, shut the pump down when it equals
the maximum squeeze pressure and pull all the drillpipe
out of the hole. If backside swabbing starts, use Step 3.
3. Immediately pull enough drillpipe out of the hole to
allow excess LCMSS slurry to fall out into the hole or
to perform a second squeeze with drill pipe above any
thief zone. If the excess slurry U-Tubes and forms a
FPC in the drillpipe/hole or pipe annulus, the fluid in
the annulus may start swabbing as drillpipe is pulled
out of the hole. To remedy this swabbing, close the
hydril and pump mud equal to one pipe-stand capacity
down the annulus to push the FPC out of the annulus
while pulling the drillpipe out of the hole. While
pulling drillpipe out of the hole, continuously monitor
the annulus to stop pulling as soon as swabbing occurs.
After the drill pipe is clear ofLCMSS, wash the excess
LCMSS while running the bottomhole assembly (BHA)
to drill ahead.
4. Determine if the excess volume of LCMSS is small
enough to pump into an induced fracture that operators
could create by applying a higher squeeze pressure. If
the LCMSS volume is too small to fill the induced
fractures, a second LCMSS treatment may be required
to seal the zone. Sufficient reserve mud may also be
needed to keep the hole full while the second LCMSS
is mixed. The company representative should deter-
mine the increases in maximum squeeze pressure and
understand the risk involved.
Test the hydril before the job and make sure it can hold
pressure equal to the maximum squeeze pressure (with no
packer to isolate the back side). Test the hydril again while
the drillpipe is rotated and reciprocated.
Rotate and/or reciprocate drillpipe while pumping LCMSS,
especially when the drillpipe is inside the open hole. Rotation
and reciprocation will help prevent the pipe from sticking if
the LCMSS flows into the annulus and forms an FPC.
If rig pumps can be accurate down to 0.5 bbl/min, operators
can use them to pump down the annulus. Service pumps are
preferred, however, because pump rates are more accurate,
pressure and rate recording can be made, and errors result-
ing from poor communication is less likely.
The rig toolpusher, company representative, rig crew, and
service company crew should be briefed/trained before the
job, and all parties should agree upon a fully understood
communications and contingency plan.
Field Test Results
Between March and November 1996, over 15 field tests of the
new LCM squeeze systems were performed. This paper presents
6 NEW SOLUTIONS TO REMEDY LOST CIRCULATION, CROSS FLOWS, AND UNDERGROUND BLOWOUTS
details of two field tests. Data from all IS field tests are
summarized in Tables 4 and 5.
Field Test 1. On May 7, 1996, a well in Webb County, Texas
was treated with a new LCMSS in a single squeeze that effec-
tively diverted to seal many points in a I ,200-ft section of open
hole across the Queen City formation. The well conditions are
listed in Table 6. The job procedure is listed in Table 7. The
final squeeze pressure achieved the drill-ahead EMW of 10.0 lb/
gal, and all mud losses were stopped, compared to 8.8Ib/gal mud
losses of 60 bbllhr before the job. However, the bottom 200 ft of
drillpipe became temporarily stuck because diverted LCMSS
sealed weak points between 2,800 and 4,000 f1. The LCMSS
moved into the drillpipe/hole annulus and stuck the drill pipe
because of an unknown weak zone breaking down above the end
of the drillpipe at 3,000 f1. This condition resulted in even longer
distances between the end of the drillpipe and the predicted top
of the weak zone being used for subsequent field tests. Instead
of the 400-ft distance used for this squeeze, the drillpipe is now
set up to 2,000 ft away from the top of the weak zone when the
drillpipe is in open hole. The 2,000-ft distance also applies (in
either open or cased hole) when operators want to clear excess
LCMSS out of the drillpipe after the final squeeze. Future field
tests may extend this distance even more when the desired
squeeze pressure EMW is close to the FMW just below the shoe
of the last string and the weak zone is at the bottom of the open
hole several thousand feet deeper.
This treatment was judged an overall success because it
allowed drilling to continue from 4,880 ft to 6, 122 ft, where the
next string was set without any further mud losses. Approxi-
mately $150,000 had been spent before the LCMSS job for rig
time, conventional LCMs, and cement plugs that failed to seal
the Queen City weak zone and allowed mud losses to continue.
Field Test 2. On May 17, 1996, in the next, deeper hole section
of the same well, II.O-lb/gal mud losses of 20 bbllhr continued
after large volumes ofLCM pills failed to seal the Wilcox sand
weak zone. This led to the second use of the new LCMSS, which
successfully achieved a l3.5Ib/gal drill-ahead EMW. The well
conditions are listed in Table 8. The job procedure is listed in
Table 9. The rig inadvertently pumped down the drill pipe after
some of the excess LCMSS U-tubed out the drillpipe as it was
pulled out of the hole. As a result, all 8 bbl of excess LCMSS
was placed in the annulus. This material formed a temporary
pressure seal, and subsequently, the formation seal failed when
pump pressure was applied in an attempt to establish circulation.
This field test was the only one that did not provide an EVC
for the well operator. A "best practices" document has been
written to instruct personnel how to avoid the reoccurrence of
the problem. When planning future jobs, operators will pump
the excess LCMSS out of the drillpipe during the squeeze by
either (I) increasing the planned maximum pressure, (2) raising
the drillpipe to clear LCMSS out before reaching the zone, or
if swabbing occurs, by (3) following Messenger's" traditional
852
SPE/IADC 37671
procedure of pulling the drill pipe out of the hole and pumping
down the annulus if swabbing occurs.
Table 4 shows that the field te·sts covered a wide range of
well conditions. Most of the new LCMSS treatments followed
unsuccessful conventional LCM pills and old LCM squeeze
systems that did not have a self-diverting function or the
capability of (I) forming an FPC, (2) substantially increasing
the FMW of a weak zone, and (3) overcoming the diluting effect
of crossflows.
Field-test results demonstrate that casing design and mud
program economics can be improved. If the high EMW squeeze
pressure continues in the future field tests, contingency pipe
strings and associated oversized pipe diameters may be deleted
from casing programs. Later, even traditionally planned inter-
mediate casing and drilling liriers may be unnecessary. If high-
pressure, nonpay zones continue to be sealed to allow lower mud
weights, and weak zones are sealed to allow higher circulation
rates, the drilling mud may be a lower, safe weight and the hole
may be better cleaned, which would increase drilling speed and
improve primary cementing. Use of synthetic oil muds may
increase as the new LCM squeeze systems ensure minimal oil-
mud losses. Table 10 provides information regarding self-
diversion and the progress in achieving long-distance travel of
the new LCM squeeze systems in the hole below the drillpipe.
The economic value created by applying the new LCMSS
treatments is shown in Table 11.
Conclusions
The new solutions to remedy lost circulation, crossflows, and
underground blowouts have been successfully tested in the field.
More field tests are planned to confirm the initial results and
fully explore other potential applications, untried LCMSS for-
mulations, and enhanced placement procedures. For example,
four LCMSS treatments to stop oil-mud losses were placed in
several weak zones and one high-pressure, low-volume gas zone
next to good pay zones. Based on production results, none of the
four LCMSS treatments damaged the pay zone productivity. A
planned in-field drilling program will likely provide more
opportunities to confirm that the new LCM squeeze systems can
be safely used in pay zone applications.
The conclusions based on project results are listed as
follows:
Problem identification is critical to the success of the new
LCMSS treatments.
Severe water-based and oil-based mud losses can be elimi-
nated when conventional materials/methods fail.
High-rate, uncontrolled crossflows (underground blow-
outs) can be quickly killed without a relief well or other
expensive remedy.
The integrity (frac gradient) of various types of formations
can be strengthened to high values.
High-pressure gas or water zones can be sealed to isolate the
pore pressure from the wellbore and allow lower mud
weights.
SPEIIADC 37671 R.E. SWEATMAN, C.w. KESSLER, J.M. HILLIER 7

The economic value (reduced drilling costs) of the new References

LCMSS treatments has been demonstrated and can be
assured in the future.
Acknowledgments
We thank the management of SONAT ExplorationCompany and
Halliburton Energy Services for their support and permission to
publish this paper. We also recognize Ron Crook, John Jameson,
Archie Felio, Mike Sutton, Ed Flemma, Larry Mitschke, Jim
Cottom, James Heathman, Audis Byrd, David Poole, Terry Wilie,
John Landis, Charles Moore, Dan Bour, and John Macomber for
their encouragement, useful suggestions, and contributions to the
success of this project. Special thanks goes to Paul Scott and
Randy Ray for the use of their laboratory at M-J Drilling Fluids.
I. Worldwide Cementing Practices, first edition, API (Jan. 1991).
2. Messenger, J.U. et al: "Lost Circulation," PennWell Publishing
Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma (1981).
3. Britt, E.L.: "Theory and Applications of the Borehole Audio
Tracer Survey," SPWLA 17th Annual Logging Symposium,
June 1976.
4. Arnold, D.M., and Papp, H.J.: "Quantitative Monitoring of Water
Flow Behind and in Well bore Casing," JPT Vol. 31, January
1979.
5. Jacobson, L.A., Ethridge, R., Wyatt, D.F. Jr.: "A New Thermal
Multigate Decay Lithology Tool," SPWLA paper M, June 1994.

Table 1-1991 API Survey

United North Global
States America
Producing Fields in Survey 204 218 339
Wells needing Intermediate Casing 31% 33% 45%
and/or Drilling Liner
Lost Circulation Encountered
Surface Casing 24% 24% 21%
Intermediate Casing 24% 25% 23%
Production Casing 24% 24% 24%
Liners 18% 26% 19%

853
8 NEW SOLUTIONS TO REMEDY LOST CIRCULATION, CROSSFLOWS, AND UNDERGROUND BLOWOUTS SPE/IADC 37671

Table 2-Example Job Procedure

Step Procedure
1 Pump the following materials down the drill pipe at 5 bbl/min:
a) 200 ft diesel spacer
b) LCMSS (oil-based) slurry at specified volume and formulation
c) 200 ft diesel spacer
d) Displace with mud to the calculated volume noted below
2 Slow pump rate to 1 bbl/min when LCMSS is 200 ft from the bottom of the drill pipe.

3 Shut down and close annulus when LCMSS is 100 ft from the bottom of drillpipe.

4 Continue displacement down drillpipe at 1 bbl/min and start mud down drillpipe/casing
annulus at 1 bbl/min. Do not exceed maximum pump pressure (see schedule).

5 When LCMSS slurry reaches the formation, pump at required rate until the specified
squeeze pressure is obtained (see schedule). Squeeze pressure is determined by the
surface pressure required to equal the drill-ahead
equivalent mud weight (EMW) or other required pressure. If half of the LCMSS slurry
enters the formation and the squeeze pressure is not obtained, shut
down and wait 10 minutes. The remaining slurry will be pumped in increments to
be determined until squeeze pressure is obtained.
6 After squeeze pressure is obtained, shut down and record bleedoff rate. If the bleedoff
rate is greater than 100 psi/min, continue pumping increments to be decided until
bleedoff rate is less than 100 psi/min or no LCMSS slurry is left in the well bore.

7 If the squeeze pressure or bleedoff rate is not achieved, consider repeating Steps 1
through 5.
8 If the squeeze pressure and bleedoff rate are achieved, pull the workstring out of hole
and resume drilling operations. If the bottom hole assembly (BHA) is already on the
drillpipe, resume drilling without delay. The excess FPC mass in the wellbore
can be washed out without damage to the seal in the weak zone or high-pressure zone,
up to the limits of the applied squeeze pressure.

Note: If there are no returns in Step 1, slow pumping to 1 bbl/min. If mud returns, do not
start; proceed to Step 3.

Table 3-Squeeze Pressure Schedule

Slurry out Displacement Hydrostatic Max. Pump Bottomhole Pump
End of Pumped Head Pressure Pressure Rate
Tubing (bbl) (bbl) (psi) (psi) (psi) (bbl/min)
0 3.3 2,989 213 3,289 1
1 4.3 2,889 313 3,289 1
2 5.3 2,789 413 3,289 1
3 6.3 2,689 513 3,289 1
4 7.3 2,589 613 3,289 1
5 8.3 2,489 713 3,289 1
6 9.3 2,389 813 3,289 1
7 10.3 2,289 913 3,289 1
8 11.3 2,189 1,013 3,289 1
9 12.3 2,089 1,113 3,289 1
10 13.3 1,989 1,213 3,289 1
Note: Because of low pump rates, friction pressure in workstring and perforations is very low and
is allowed for in the 300 psi safety factor.

854
SP.E/IADC 37671 R.E. SWEATMAN, CW. KESSLER, J.M. HILLIER 9

Table 4-Field-Test We" Conditions

Treatment HP Zone
BHT Loss RatelType Mud WeightIType Influx RatelType
Depth Pore Press Eq.
(OF) (Max. bbllhr) (Ib/gal) (bbllhr)
(ft) (Ib/gal)
4000 190 1200/salt water 11.01WBM 14 1200/S. Water
5500 197 1200/salt water 11.01WBM 14 1200/SWater
9200 210 42/salt water and ?/gasa 13.71WBM est. 15.0 42/S. Water and ?/Gas
4000 145 60/water-based mud 8.81WBM - -
7248 210 20IWBM 11.01WBM - -
1200 80 est. 30IWater 8.4lWater - est. 5IWater Behind Pipe
9700 200 150/0BM 12.0/0BM - -
9800 200 370/0BM 12.6/0BM - -
6600 est. 170 100IWBM 10.81WBM - -
8700 est. 210 ?/Gas 12.01WBM 16 ?/Gas
7000 est. 185 ?/Gas 12.61WBM est. 16.0 ?/Gas
14000 325 348/0BM 18.0/0BM 17.9 Gas (1600 units)
14000 325 60/0BM 18.0/0BM 17.9 Gas (900 units)
14200 325 ?/OBM 17.9/0BM 17.9 Gas (2400 units)
14300 325 83/0BM 17.9/0BM 17.9 No Gas
a No gas-logging or measuring equipment available.

Table 5-Field-Test Results Table 6-We" Conditions

Before LCMSS After LCMSS Total Depth 4,880 ft
UG blowout 50% surface pressure reduced Hole Size 83/4 in.
Mud Weight 8.8Ib/gal
UG blowout Dynamic seal 20 bbl/min SW exit zone
Mud Type Native (9.2 pH) water-based mud
UG blowout Sealed 1,000 BSWD + gas exit and influx zones
Last Casing Depth 537 ft
WBM losses Sealed weak zone 1.2 EMW > Mud WT Last Casing Size 95/8 in.
WBM losses Sealed weak zone 11.6 EMW > Mud WT Last Casing Weight 36lb/ft
Dri"pipe Size/Depth 4 1/2 in. at 3,000 ft
Water crossflow Sealed to 13.5 EMW > Water
Drillpipe Weight 16.60Ib/ft
OBM losses Sealed weak zone 2.0 EMW > Mud WT
BHST 158°F
OBM losses Sealed weak zone 1.9 EMW > Mud WT Next Casing Point 6,122 ft
WBM losses Circulated after 10 days complete loss Weak Zone Queen City
Predicted Interval 3,400 to 4,000 ft
UG blowout Sealed gas exit and influx zones
Actual Interval 2,800 to 4,000 ft
UG blowout Sealed gas exit and influx zones
Mud Loss Rate 60 bbl/hr (8.8 Ib/gal Mud) before LCMSS
OBM losses + gas Squeeze EMW only 0.4 EMW > Mud WT Drill-Ahead EMW 10.0 Ib/gal after LCMSS
OBM losses + gas Sealed weak zone 1.3 EMW > Mud WT Frac Mud Weight 10.4 Ib/gal at 3,500 ft after LCMSS
Sealed weak zone + gas zone 2.1 EMW > Mud LCMSS Design Slurried in oil to pump downhole; rapidly
OBM losses + gas
WT reacted with water-based mud to form FPC
OBM losses Sealed weak zone 4.8 EMW > Mud WT in the weak zone.

855
10 NEW SOLUTIONS TO REMEDY LOST CIRCULATION, CROSSFLOWS, AND UNDERGROUND BLOWOUTS SPE/IADC 37671

Table 7-Planned Job Procedure Table 8-Well Conditions

Total Depth 7248 ft
Step Procedure
Hole Size 6 1/2 in.
1 Run open-ended drillpipe in hole and circulate mud to wash
down to 4,000 ft. Mud Weight 10.5lb/gal
2 Pull up end of drillpipe to 3,000 ft. Mud Type Water-based polymer
Last Casing Depth 6,122 ft
3 Pump 3 bbl of diesel spacer while circulating down drillpipe.
Last Casing Size 7 in.
4 Pump 25 bbl of LCMSS down drillpipe at 1 bbl/min. Last Casing Weight 231b/ft

Pump 3 bbl diesel spacer down drill pipe at 1 bbl/min. Drillpipe Size/Depth 3 1/2 in. at 6,019 ft
5
Drillpipe Weight 13.301b/ft
6 Pump 11 bbl of 8.8-lb/gal mud down drillpipe at 1 bbl/min.
BHST 210°F
7 Start pumping 8.8-lb/gal mud down drillpipe/casing annulus
Mud Loss Rate 20 bbl/hr (11 Ib/gal)
at 1 bbl/min with top of annulus closed.
Drill-Ahead EMW 13.5 Ib/gal after LCMSS
8 Continue pumping 8.8-lb/gal mud down drillpipe at 1 bbl/min
Weak Zone Wilcox Sand
with service company pump and pump down backside at 1
bbl/min with rig pump. Do not exceed maximum squeeze LCMSS Design Slurried in oil to pump downhole; rapidly
pressures. reacted with water-based mud to form FPC
in the weak zone.
9 With 24 bbl of mud down drill pipe and no squeeze pressure,
shut down 10 minutes, then start hesitation squeeze to
obtain drill-ahead EMW. (See Squeeze Pressure Schedule
for maximum squeeze pressure.)

10 If maximum squeeze pressure is obtained, record bleedoff

rate. If the rate is > 100 psi/min, continue pumping hesitation
until < 100 psi/min bleedoff rate is reached.

11 If all of LCMSS is pumped into the weak zones without

completing Step 10, repeat Steps 3 through 10.
12 If Step 10 is completed, continue drilling operations without
delay.

856
'SFlE/IADC 37671 R.E. SWEATMAN, C.w. KESSLER, J.M. HILLIER 11

Table 9-RecC)rded Job Procedure

Step Procedure
1 Run in hole with open-ended drillpipe to 6,019 ft.
2 Pump 3 bbl of diesel spacer while circulating down drillpipe.
3 Pump 19 bbl of LCMSS down drillpipe at 1 bbl/min.
4 Pump 3 bbl of diesel spacer while circulating down drillpipe.
5 Pump 22 bbl of mud down drillpipe at 1 bbl/min.
6 Close Hydril.
7 Pump 10.5 Ib/gal of mud down drillpipe and casing annulus at 1 bbl/min.
8 Pump down drillpipe and annulus at 1 bbl/min. Do not exceed the maximum squeeze
pressure of 13.5Ib/gal EMW. (See squeeze pressure schedule.)
9 Maximum pressure reached at 33 bbl mud down drillpipe. Shutdown and monitor leakoff.

10 Leakoff was> 100 psi in 1 minute. Pump down drillpipe and annulus at 1/2 bbl/min.
11 Shutdown and monitor leakoff. Maximum pressure reached.
12 Leakoff was> 100 psi in 1 minute. Resume pumping down drillpipe and annulus at 1/2
bbl/min.
13 Maximum pressure reached. Leakoff was < 100 psi/min.
14 Open Hydril and pull out of hole.
15 Pulled one stand of dry pipe
16 Drillpipe was pulling wet. After about 4 stands, rig wanted to pump down drillpipe to allow
LCMSS to fallout.
17 Pumped 1 1/2 bbl to unplug drillpipe.
18 Resume pulling out of hole, with pipe pulling wet and hole swabbing.
19 Rigged up Kelly and pumped ca. 8 bbl of LCMSS out of the drillpipe and into the
drillpipe/casing annulus. The LCMSS and mud reacted to temporarily stick the drillpipe
and block the flow in the annulus. More drill pipe pressure
was applied until the LCMSS seal in the weak zone broke down and hole began taking
mud at 3,700 psi surface pressure. The LCMSS seal held EMW of 22.1 Ib/gal (3,700 psi
surface) before leaking and restaring mud losses.
20 Pulled out of hole slowly with high drag and hole swabbing.

857
12 NEW SOLUTIONS TO REMEDY LOST CIRCULATION, CROSSFLOWS, AND UNDERGROUND BLOWOUTS SPE/IADC 37671

Table 10-LCMSS Fingering and Self-Diversion Table 11-Economic Value Created (EVC)
LCMSS Travel Gross Interval EVC For Various LCMSS
(Drill pipe to Longest Point) Sealed by LCMSS Diversion Well Operators Job Cost
(tt) (tt) ($,000) ($,000)

100 60 500 145

400 300 6,000 120
1,832 48
625 700
1,150 18
1,000 1,200
0 22
1,229 1,128
100 20
Through perfs + 100 ? behind pipe
550 75
100 60 263 86
1,050 40 180 30
580 520 270 10
est. 100 thorugh perf in drillpipe est. 100 behind pipe 90 10
est. 100 through perf in drill pipe est. 100 behind pipe See Total Below 30
1,200 34 See Total Below 25

1,200 34 See Total Below 62

est. Total 50,000 62
1,333 est. 300
approx. 1,800 est. 600

. Open Hole

-
10 sec.1 • Rubbery Mass

...---
I
I
I
, /'
Consistency of Putty
, ",," Fractured
Weak

. / Zone

/
/ -- New LCMSS ~

~
,/ -- Old LCMSS
I---
11/
V Convenbonal
lC Matenals
o Time (mins.) 60

Fig.1-Thickening of old VS. new LCMSS. Fig. 2-Downhole mechanism.

858
'SPE/IADC 37671 R.E. SWEATMAN, C.w. KESSLER, J.M. HILLIER 13

Gamma Ray Fluid Density Temperature Noise Log

0 150 0 1.2 00 120 .1 100

.1 100

.1 100

.1 JQO.

\
'I\...
~ ~\ ""'" "'}0"1;\
J
~ r\,\ I(
I II

,,
lY 51. V

,•
( ;f (
• ~
-,
.

'l'
14
I~

I--
.. \
,
\ l
1\ \ ' ~
I-- \ ) /
I-- \ I 1.;& /

-
~ ~
" I
''' (

I l
~
J ~
\
~ ~ II
Fig. 3-Noise log showing underground blowout.

859
1< NEW SOLUTIONS TO REMEDY LOST CIRCULATION, CROSSFLOWS, AND UNDERGROUND BLOWOUTS SPE/IADC 37671

Temperature Increases Noise Comparison

\ \
• 4,500
Noise level units
100
Lime Immediately after circulation
18·0ct Noise
Shale A few hours after circulation 4,600 19·0ct Noise (04:40)
19·0ct Noise (23:15)
12 hours after circulation
Dolomite 21·0ct Noise
4,700
- - - - 23·0ct Noise
Gypsum
4,800
Anhydrite , -----7
4,900
",
. "-
Sand I
5,000 \,
Fig. 4-Effect of circulation on static geothermal gradient. )
5,100
''\

5,200 ",

5,300

Fig. Sa-Noise log response to downhole flow.

Water channeled from below bottomhole flowing 80 90 100 110 120

pressure in production zone above bubble point. 0.0
Production Well
0.459 water grad (psi/ft)
Temperature Increases tOO%water
1,000
• Annular 4.750·0.000·
Annular 3.500 - 0.000 -
Annular 3.500 - 9.625 -
6,000
5,177
5,073
2,000 Annular 4.500 - 9.625 - 3,687

Flow correlation = H/B

Rate (bbl/d) - left to right

3,000
100.0
500.0
1,000.0
4,000 1,500.0
2,000.0
2,500.0
Producing Zone 3,000.0
1.----' 5,000 3,500.0
4,000.0
4,500.0
5,000.0
Channeled Zone 6,000
Temperature of

Fig. Sb-Temperature log response to downhole flow. Fig. 6-Heat transfer modeled at different annular flow rates.

860
SHE/IADC ~7671 R.E. SWEATMAN, C.w. KESSLER, J.M. HILLIER 15

rO;....._-.....,;F0~i<>i~"',"''''''''''''''"''''''122m 60K AXWH o

.9 G4ER -.1 o NSBK 1000 5K RBHlFM o
260 ~BH 60 o
o GR 200 60 ~ss o

Packer Leak

GR

Fig. 7-TMD example of channeling.

861
16 NEW SOLUTIONS TO REMEDY LOST CIRCULATION, CROSSFLOWS, AND UNDERGROUND BLOWOUTS SPE/IADC 37671

Pump Down
Drillpipe Pump down Start
drillpipe and drilling
annulus
Apply pressure
and squeeze
;;....--+- Spacer

~--t- LCMSS

Pump Down
Annulus

~-"""'I- Spacer

Fig, a-Downhole application.

862