See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/329598671

A review on casing while drilling technology for oil and gas production with well
control model and economical analysis

Article  in  Petroleum · December 2018

DOI: 10.1016/j.petlm.2018.12.003

CITATIONS READS

0 118

5 authors, including:

Dipal Patel Vivek R Thakar

Pandit Deen Dayal Petroleum University Pandit Deen Dayal Petroleum University
2 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS    7 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Sivakumar Pandian Manan Shah

Pandit Deen Dayal Petroleum University Pandit Deen Dayal Petroleum University
75 PUBLICATIONS   463 CITATIONS    32 PUBLICATIONS   88 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Geochemical analysis of water from Bakreshwar and Tantloi hotspring View project

City Gas Distribution : An Indian Perspective View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Anirbid Sircar on 13 December 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Accepted Manuscript

A review on casing while drilling technology for oil and gas production with well
control model and economical analysis

Dipal Patel, Vivek Thakar, Sivakumar Pandian, Manan Shah, Anirbid Sircar

PII: S2405-6561(18)30132-9
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petlm.2018.12.003
Reference: PETLM 243

To appear in: Petroleum

Received Date: 6 August 2018

Revised Date: 27 November 2018
Accepted Date: 11 December 2018

Please cite this article as: D. Patel, V. Thakar, S. Pandian, M. Shah, A. Sircar, A review on casing while
drilling technology for oil and gas production with well control model and economical analysis, Petroleum
(2019), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petlm.2018.12.003.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 1
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
A Review on Casing while Drilling Technology for Oil and Gas Production

with Well Control Model and Economical Analysis

Dipal Patela, Vivek Thakara, Sivakumar Pandiana* Manan Shaha Anirbid Sircara

a
School of Petroleum Technology, Pandit Deendayal Petroleum University, Gandhinagar-

PT
382007, India
*
Corresponding Author E-mail: Sivakumar Pandian (sivakumar.p@spt.pdpu.ac.in)

RI
SC
Abstract

The extraction of petroleum fluids from sub-surface accumulations mandates the drilling of a well into the

U
formation containing the accumulation. The drilling techniques have evolved over time to overcome several
AN
challenges while some of the issues still prevail with the currently used drilling practices like loss circulation,

large tripping time to change bottom hole assembly, stuck pipe problems and low well bore stability, to name a

few. These decrease the drilling efficiency and increase the Non-Productive Time (NPT) of this highly capital-
M

intensive industry encouraging the Petroleum Industry to look for new technology. Casing while Drilling (CwD)
D

is a technique of drilling which has been proven to alleviate many of the problems faced while drilling. In this

method, drilling and casing of a well bore is carried out simultaneously, which improves the drilling efficiency
TE

by reducing the NPT. It has proven to be beneficial in controlling loss circulation and improving wellbore

stability by ‘Plastering’ effect, high quality cement job and increased rig floor safety. It uses smaller rig and less
EP

fuel thereby reducing carbon footprint in the environment. This paper studies comprehensive well control and

casing string design consideration. Economics encourage its application that has been discussed in the paper. A
C

case study on the application of CwD in Malay basin for top hole drilling is presented. Finally, the paper briefly
AC

outlines the technical challenges that need attention to get better results from CwD.

Key Words: Casing While Drilling; Non Productive Time; Plastering Effect; Well Control.

1. Introduction

Mother Earth is a huge storehouse of oil and gas. A hole is drilled in earth to bring hydrocarbons to the

surface. Technology for drilling oil and gas has undergone a great transformation from the ancient spring pole to

percussion cable-tools to rotary drilling that it can drill several miles into the earth [1] and this transformation is
 2
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
continuously going on. Generally, drilling process is accomplished using tubulars called ‘drill pipe’ and drill bit.

However, since a decade ago, drilling companies started experimenting with another type of tubulars called

‘casing’ to drill wells [2]. The reason for this conversion is that the latter provides better drilling efficiency than

the former and has many other advantages that will be discussed later in this paper.

The innovation of this state-of-the-art technology began in 1890 when engineers drilled a well with a

new approach which is rotary drilling process with casing and retrieving hydraulically expandable bit [3].

PT
Russian oil companies reported the use of retractable bits in drilling operation with casing in 1920. Later in the

1930s, USA’s operators made use of production tubing to drill open hole or barefoot completion wherein flat

RI
blade type bit was used for drilling and it remained in the well after the production began [4]. In Brown Oil

SC
Tools, Baker Hughes, first recognized these advantages in the 1960s and they developed an advanced system for

drilling with casing that included retrievable pilot bit that drills pilot hole, under reamers to enlarge pilot hole

size and downhole motors. However, its low penetration compared to conventional drilling limits the further

U
development of this technology [5]. Around 1990, operators began the use of liners to drill potentially
AN
troublesome formations or sections like pressure-depleted intervals, which has a high possibility of loss

circulation [4]. Till date, the experience of using casing drilling shows that the chances for stuck up problem in
M

casing string is less, due to continuous rotation, when compared to conventional casing running operation [6].

The commercial acceptance of CwD technology by the oil and gas industry began in the 1990s after
D

which concrete developments have taken place in this technology [7]. Here, standard casing string is used to
TE

transmit rotary power to bit and to circulate drilling fluid - mud into well bore whereby simultaneous drilling

and casing activities in the well bore are carried out. The casing for drilling can be a liner or a full length casing
EP

string up to the surface. The use of CwD overcomes the drawbacks of conventional drilling practices, like well

bore instability and loss circulation, with the help of plastering effect [8]. It leads to the formation of thin layer
C

of mud cake that is strong enough to prevent fluid loss[9]. Experiments indicates that low radial clearance
AC

(casing to hole diameter ratio less than 0.7) and lower tangential contacts angles can increase plastering benefits

[10]. Same annular space across well bore allows CwD optimization of hydraulics that results in good hole size

and efficient transportation of cuttings [11,12]. The application of CwD with Managed pressure drilling gives a

good control of Bottom Hole Pressure (BHP) thereby allowing drilling between the pore pressure and the

fracture pressure to be carried out without damaging the formation [13]. Reduction in drilling time using CwD

was observed in the tight gas fields of Fahud salt basin wherein about 5 days per well was saved [14]. In the last
 3
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
decade this technology has evolved rapidly and is currently being utilized for drilling both directional and

horizontal wells.

At present CwD is categorized into four types as shown in Figure 1:

1) CwD with retrievable system

CwD with retrievable system is very advanced having the ability of directional trajectory control and

logging with retrievable BHA while keeping the casing string at the bottom. The retrievable system consists of

PT
special downhole locking arrangements to connect the directional BHA having drill bit, under-reamer, Positive

Displacement Motor (PDM) or steerable motor, Measurement while Drilling (MwD)/Logging while Drilling

RI
(LwD) and stabilizer to the bottom most casing joint. To retrieve BHA, either a drill pipe or a wireline operation

SC
can be used while independently continuing the reciprocation of only casing string to avoid the potential

problem of getting stuck. The drill pipe retrieval system is simple but requires static casing string while running

the drill pipe in well bore. The wireline operations are more advanced but need permanent wireline unit adjacent

U
to draw-works [12]. Thus, the selection between drill pipe and wireline operation depends upon the well bore
AN
condition and drilling economics.

2) CwD with non-retrievable system

M

Non-retrievable CwD is simple in its operation and application when compared to the others. The

system comprises drillable bit or drill shoe located at the bottom of casing string which is extended till the
D

surface. One of the several limitations of the system is that it can only drill a straight hole with no directional
TE

control. Analysis shows that it is a viable drilling method for industrial implementation in fields where top hole

sections are covered by permafrost [15].

EP

3) Liner drilling with non-retrievable system

Liner drilling has similarities to CwD in which a complete casing string from the surface is replaced by
C

shorter length casing joints extended up to the last casing shoe and the liner string is lowered by a running and
AC

setting tool on a drill pipe. On the completion of the drilling, the non-retrievable system is able to set liner

hanger till the Total Depth (TD) after which cementing is done.

4) Liner drilling with retrievable system

In this, the BHA needs to be retrieved once the liner hanger has been set and then it is cemented. Liner

drilling has been successfully practiced in the Gulf of Mexico to mitigate hole instability problem [16].
 4
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
1(a) Conventional drilling 1(b) Non-retrievable BHA for 1(c) Retrievable BHA for casing and liner
assembly casing and liner

U
Figure 1. Types of CwD system
AN
Till 2002, operators had drilled more than 2000 wellbore sections using casing in which 1020 intervals

were vertical wells drilled with casing and non-retrievable bits, about 620 were drilled with partial liners and
M

more than 400 used retrievable BHA for vertical drilling and about 12 used retrievable BHA for directional
D

drilling [17].

2. CwD components
TE

2.1 CwD rig

Casing Drilling is performed by a specially developed drilling rig or a conventional rig modified for
EP

casing drilling [18]. Rig equipped with a top drive has Casing Drive System (CDS) below it that provides

connection, rotation and circulation of casing string. An automated hydraulic catwalk called ‘V-door’ is
C

provided on drilling rig to move each casing joint from casing rack to rig floor after which it is picked up by a
AC

hydraulically activated single joint elevators attached to CDS as shown in Figure 2.

The extra time related to trip out of drill pipe and running permanent casing inherent to conventional

drilling is successfully eliminated in CwD as the casing is already set after reaching TD. It, thus, reduces NPT

and in addition, less tubulars-handling requirement improves well site safety and allows drillers to use smaller

size rigs. Also, new smaller rig for DwC requires less horsepower and fuel as effective hole cleaning can be

done with less pumping pressure due to lesser annular space. Furthermore, it produces less emission, operates in

small location and can be transported more easily and quickly than larger conventional rig [19].
 5
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
RI
SC
2(a) Casing drive system 2(b) Casing drilling rig

U
Figure 2. CwD system
AN
M

2.2 Casing drive system (CDS)

The CDS, powered by top drive hydraulic control system, holds the full weight of casing string and
D

applies torque for drilling and make up connections. The casing string is attached to the top drive via a casing
TE

drive system without screwing it into the top casing connection [20].The use of CDS and power slips makes

casing connections faster and minimizes rig floor activity while making connections and assuring floor safety
EP

[21].

The CDS are of two types namely, internal for greater casing radius and external for smaller casing

radius as shown in Figure 2. The CDS has an internal spear assembly that provides a leakage seal for drilling
C

fluid when it is connected to the pipe and a slip assembly to grip the interior of casing with larger diameter or
AC

exterior of casing with smaller diameter. A quarter turn to the right engages the spear to hold the casing string

and apply rotational torque and a quarter turn to the left without axial load to release the tool [18]. A mud saver

valve is incorporated to avoid spillage at the time of connections.

2.3 Casing string

In CwD the drill string consists of pipes called ‘casings’. Casings are of similar grade, class and sizes

that are normally used in conventional drilling. They act as hydraulic conduit for drilling fluid and transmitting
 6
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
mechanical energy to bit. In addition, a wireline retrievable BHA consisting of at least a bit and under reamer

that are present at the bottom of casing string to drill a hole of adequate size to allow the casing to pass freely.

In Casing String, BHA is attached to Drill-Lock Assembly (DLA) located above the casing shoe joint

and plays a vital role during insertion and retrieval of tools from the bottom. The DLA locks into casing profile

nipple and allows torque and weight to be applied on casing during drilling [20]. DLA provides two types of

locking mechanism viz. axial lock and torsional lock as shown in Figure 3(a). The force applied from the

PT
surface sets the axial lock, releases the running tool and the rotation engages torsional lock. DLA acts as a seal

between the casing and the BHA thereby allowing the fluid to flow through the casing until it is directed through

RI
BHA [22]. Retrieval of tools is accomplished using pressure to engage DLA, open bypass and release axial

SC
locks. Torsional lock can be released by applying reverse torque to casing string.

The components of BHA are made to pass though the casing string used for drilling having an under

reamer or a hole enlarger and mud motor. This results in less power than the optimum to steer the under reamer

and bit [4].

U
AN
A stabilizer is located opposite to the casing shoe that reduces lateral motion of the assembly inside the

casing. The casing shoe is manufactured from very hard material to ensure that a full-bore hole is drilled ahead
M

of casing string. Excess torque indicates under gauge hole drilled by under reamer. Conventional directional

tools such as bent housing (bent sub), positive displacement motor or Rotary Steerable System (RSS), MwD and
D

LwD tools can be suspended below casing shoe for directional drilling as shown in Figure 3(b). A conventional
TE

core barrel can be run below DLA for coring operation.

C EP
AC

3(a) Drill lock assembly 3(b) CwD retrievable BHA with RSS
 7
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Figure 3. BHA for CwD system

The designing aspects of casing string in CwD are similar to those of conventional casing string except

that special attention is given to buckling, fatigue and hydraulic forces that are experienced by casing during

drilling operation [23].

2.4 CwD accessories

PT
Major CwD accessories used for handling the casing and CwD operations are shown in Figure 4 and

are explained as follows:

RI
1) Pump Down Displacement Plug (PDDP)

SC
PDDP is an accessory used for preventing U-tube effect in cementing operation of CwD. Lesser

chances of improper landing at downhole provide more advantages over normal float equipment used in

U
conventional drilling.

2) Multi-lobe torque ring

AN
Multi-lobe torque ring ring provides positive make up shoulder to increase torque capacity when

installed in standard API - Buttress Threaded Connections (BTC). This increased torque capacity keeps pins and
M

coupling used in API casing and tubing connections from being overstressed in drilling thereby reducing tubular

connection damage.
D

3) Wear resistant couplings

TE

Wear resistant couplings are mainly used to protect casing from excessive abrasion during drilling.

They are installed at well site with a portable hydraulic crimping tool.
EP

4) Centralizers

In CwD, centralizers provide positive centering of casing string for cementing operation in vertical and
C

deviated wells.
AC

5) Warthog

The warthog, a casing running and reaming tool, helps in setting up casing to TD despite the presence

of potential hole problems such as bridges, doglegs, sloughing formations and deviated holes. It uses mechanical

and hydraulic energy to break obstructions. Three spiral helix blades help to condition hole and provide

centralization for cementing.

6) Torque monitoring device

Torque monitoring device located at rig floor is used to monitor connection assembly torques.
 8
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT
4(a) Multi-lobe torque ring 4(b) Wear resistant couplings 4(c) Warthog

RI
U SC
AN
M

4(d) Centralizers 4(e) Pump down displacement plug

D

Figure 4. CwD accessories

TE
EP

3. Cementing and logging operations in CwD

3.1 Cementing operations

C

In CwD, cementing equipment and procedures used are distinct from those used in conventional

drilling operations. In retrievable system, the BHA with the bit is retrieved to the surface using wireline unit
AC

before starting cementing operations whereas in non-retrievable system, drill bit remains at the bottom during

the entire cementing operations. The world´s first convertible casing drill shoe job was performed onshore in

Brunei in September 2003 during a 0.2445 m (9 ⅝”) surface casing job on S-816 well in Seria field [24].

Cementing operations are initiated by lowering Plug Landing Nipple (PLN) before pumping cement

after which cement pumping is done. During pumping operations, casing string is rotated and reciprocated for

providing better displacement of cement between casing and formation. Therefore, Cement bond log for casing

drilling is better than conventional cementing operations. When the required volume of cement is pumped,
 9
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
PDDP is pumped with tail slurry that lands on PLN thereby preventing U-tubing of cement into casing or liner

[25]. With the use of PLN and PDDP, the chances of improper fitting of conventional float equipment are

reduced leading to a reduction in problems associated with cementing. PDDP also wipes out the cement left

behind on the casing or liner string.

After placing the cement behind the casing, sufficient time is provided for the cement to set. In non-

retrievable system, larger size drill bit (drill shoe) is drilled with smaller diameter bit as shown in Figure 5(a).

PT
The drilling operations are then continued with smaller size casing string and BHA.

3.2 Logging operations

RI
Obtaining well logs for formation evaluation is an important factor for assessing the degree of success

SC
of CwD technology. As the casing remains in the hole after drilling up to TD, service providers have to identify

best possible methods for well logging to take the greatest advantage of CwD and its ability to reduce NPT.

Currently there are four options available to log the well drilled using CwD:

1) Open hole wireline logging

U
AN
Here, the casing is pulled up into the previous casing shoe after drilling to TD and then wireline

logging is carried out as shown in Figure 5(b). However, if the borehole collapses, it may not be possible to log
M

across the entire interval.

D
TE
C EP
AC

5(a) Cementing operation in CwD 5 (b) Open hole logging operation in non retrievable
casing drilling
 10
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Figure 5. Cementing and logging in CwD

2) Memory logging tool

Memory logs are obtained by pulling the casing into the previous casing string and then running

memory logging tool are preinstalled in a retrievable BHA by a wireline unit. The logging data recorded by

memory logging tool is downloaded when it is available on the surface which is its main disadvantage.

PT
3) LwD system in retrievable BHA

Casing drilling with retrievable system deploys LwD tools to log the well during drilling operations.

RI
This provides substantial advantage by eliminating the need to pull the casing before logging. However, the

addition of LwD tool increases the length of BHA and thus, vibrational problem may occur as the stiffness of

SC
BHA is reduced [4].

4) Cased hole logging system

U
Cased hole logging system is a cost-effective alternative to open hole, memory or LwD logging
AN
technique allowing it to acquire logs after reaching to TD without pulling or manipulating the casing string.

4. Plastering effect
M

During CwD operation, rotation of casing string and smaller annular space cause drill cutting to be

smeared into the borehole wall as shown in Figure 6 thereby strengthening the well bore. This action is termed
D

the plastering effect that restores the wellbore’s hoop stress by wedging the created fractures and/or by

increasing the fracture propagation pressure [19]. This effect seals pore spaces in the formation to reduce fluid
TE

losses and improves cementing to protect well bore integrity in loose formation or drilling in depleted formation.

Centrifugal forces can primarily be responsible for plastering effect [9]. The plastering effect is the main factor
EP

that helps in overcoming loss circulation in Peruvian fields [26]. This effect results in lesser cuttings being

returned to the surface whereby there is great reduction in solid handling problems.
C
AC

6(a) Plastering effect of 6(b) Repairing of imperfect mud cake by plastering effect
casing string

Figure 6. Plastering effect

 11
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Wells that encounter a low-pressure or weak zone over a potential high-pressure zone while drilling

with drill pipe often find it difficult to balance loss circulation in weak zone with well influxes due to

underbalanced condition. Apart from increasing well integrity, the plastering effect helps in reducing circulation

losses even with higher Equivalent Circulating Density (ECD). Thus, plastering effect has several advantages

that help in overcoming the potential problems normally encountered in conventional drilling. To promote

plastering effect, the ratio of casing diameter to borehole diameter is kept at 0.8. This industry-accepted ratio

PT
provides optimum annular pressure and casing size for plastering effect.

5. Transition from PDM to RSS in casing drilling

RI
CwD technology has drilled more than 2000 well bore sections in a decade establishing it as a well

SC
proven and reliable technology for drilling vertical well with retrievable and non-retrievable systems. However,

in case of drilling of directional and horizontal wells, only few sections were drilled and most of these were

drilled with PDM.

U
In directional drilling using PDM, the bent housing and PDM are located above the under-reamer and
AN
drill bit to rotate both. Though this configuration permits slide drilling without rotating the entire casing string,

the BHA geometry significantly differs from conventional BHA for drill pipe [4]. In addition, casing drilling
M

requires BHA and the PDM to pass through casing due to which the bent housing contact pad often does not

touch the borehole wall and thus, borehole trajectory is affected. The problem is solved by providing a stabilizer
D

below the under-reamer cutters such that it gives directional control. Another problem with smaller motor and
TE

other components is the decrease in stiffness of BHA that makes directional control difficult.

Another challenge occurs when the downhole torque increases, pump circulating pressure increases
EP

causing the drill string to elongate as the bit is at the bottom and the casing cannot move downward. It results in

further worsening of the situation because the Weight on Bit (WoB) and the required rotational motor torque
C

increase [27]. This effect is cyclic and causes the motors to slow down and finally to stall. When the motor
AC

stalls, no torque is transmitted to the bit and drilling is stopped. To recover from the motor stalling problem, the

string is picked up and the pumping pressure is reduced theoretically up to the motor unload pressure. It is

possible to use low-speed motors with high torque output to prevent the motor from stalling making it easier to

operate [22]. However, Rate of Penetration (RoP) decreases in casing drilling is more frequent during slide

drilling.

As the use of downhole motor for directional drilling poses severe problems, RSS is a viable alternative for

direction, high-angle, horizontal and extended reach wells. Directional drilling with RSS technology eliminates
 12
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
slide drilling making it possible to drill large distance such as the extended-reach wells in Wytch farm field, UK,

that are difficult to drill with down hole motors [28].

A RSS is mainly composed of two units namely a bias unit and a control unit. A bias unit, located

directly above the bit, applies side force against the borehole wall while the entire drill string is rotated from the

surface. A control unit, located above the bias unit, contains tools such as gyroscopes, accelerometer and other

directional survey tools that help in keeping drill string along the planned trajectory. A lithium battery pack is

PT
provided to power the control unit sensor. Casing string with RSS assembly is given in Figure 3(b). In vertical

well, the system operates in a neutral mode i.e. no side force is applied by bias unit and if RSS tool senses

RI
deviation from vertical path, it thrusts the bit back to vertical automatically thereby minimizing dogleg severity.

SC
Testing with RSS technology in casing drilling improves operational efficiency by eliminating the

unexpected difficulties normally encountered in conventional RSS drilling. Though it improves the efficiency of

directional drilling, some minor problems like bit vibration, casing centralization, etc. are encountered and they

must be addressed immediately to increase the RoP.

U
AN
6. Well control for CwD

The oil and gas industry is expanding rapidly and oil wells are drilled in challenging environments
M

using new and innovative drilling technologies. However, every drilling technology requires a robust well

control design to tackle the kick of hydrocarbon fluids from the formation in well bore during drilling. Though
D

the reasons for kicks are numerous, the most important ones are insufficient hydrostatic column, lost circulation,
TE

swabbing, loss of riser drilling fluid in offshore rigs, etc. Early kick detection is necessary to prevent the well

from flowing in uncontrollable manner. The objective of well control methods is to remove the influx from the
EP

wellbore by circulation and reestablishing primary well control.

Though the objective of well control remains the same at all times, the design for well control changes
C

according to different drilling methods like the pipe rams being changed to casing rams in Blow Out Preventer
AC

(BOP). Low annular clearance and different pipe geometries that are different from drilling with drill pipe

requires modification in previous well control methods to enable its use in CwD. Tripping in/out of hole causes

70% of kick incidents which is a well-known fact. CwD minimizes these well control incidents as the bottom of

the string is always at the bottom of hole [22]. Casing Circulation Tool (CCT) is used to isolate the annulus

inner string casing to prevent the influx from entering into annulus between casing and drill pipe [29]. In the

event of kick while retrieving BHA, the inner string is suspended in the false rotary and the circulating tool with
 13
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Full-Opening Safety Valve (FOSV) is installed to lower the drill string into the casing after which the FOSV is

closed [30].

Two of the most widely used constant bottom hole circulating well control methods are the driller’s

method and the wait and weight method. The advantages of the driller’s method are the simple calculation and

minimum information required while high annular pressure and longest on-choke time are the disadvantages.

Lowest wellbore and surface pressures, obtaining well control within one circulation and minimum ‘on-choke’

PT
time are the advantages of wait and weight method whereas, the longer waiting time prior to circulation,

complexity of calculation and the immediate requirement of sufficient weighing materials are some of its

RI
disadvantages. Both the methods are applicable in CwD well control but the wait and weight method is

SC
preferred to driller’s method as it allows well killing without fracturing casing shoe.

Shallow gas kick and gas influx are the major complications in CwD because of the smaller annular

capacity. The maximum expansion of gas influx results in a sudden increase of surface choke pressure which is

U
higher than in conventional drilling. Shallow gas kick can be prevented by controlling ECD. Due to non-linear
AN
behavior of ECD, this problem occurs more frequently in directional and horizontal well drilling. Semi premium

shouldered connection has been the preferred solution when there is no risk of shallow gas kick. Proper gas seal
M

ability is achieved by using premium shoulder connection with metal to metal seal which is important if there is

high risk of shallow gas kick [31].

D

6.1 Pressure step-down calculations for vertical and horizontal wells

TE

By variable choke, pump pressure is adjusted from Initial Circulating Pressure (ICP) to Final

Circulating Pressure (FCP) corresponding to strokes-to-bit value and strokes-per-minute of pump. Pump
EP

pressure has two components: static-head pressure and dynamic-frictional loss. The static head pressure

indicates the additional hydrostatic back pressure exerted by the kill mud weight to pump. This static head
C

component changes with depth but does not depend on the capacity of tubular and annulus. The dynamic
AC

frictional pressure linearly increases with the depth and due to less annular capacity as the high density of kill

mud creates higher friction. Vertical wells have negligible slow pump rate APL and linear friction loss

(including bit losses) distributed within the drill string as shown as in Figure 7. In horizontal well, due to the

increase in ECD friction, loss is not linearly distributed. It is linear up to Kick Off Point after which the behavior

changes.
 14
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
The approximate step-down speed is maintained to keep the BHP constant while the kill mud displaces

the normal mud in the entire drill string. The Eq. (1) is used to determine the step-down speed values in psi per

100 strokes;

 


=  Eq. (1)
 
 
 


1000

PT
Vertical Wells
900 Horizontal Wells
Pump Pressure (psi)

RI
800

SC
700

600

500
U
AN
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (min)
M

Figure 7: Pump pressure step-down approaches for vertical and horizontal wells
D

6.2 Wait and weight method

TE

After shutting the well, stabilized shut in drill casing pressure is used to design kill mud. The mud of

the required weight is prepared in the mud pits. When the kill mud is ready, it is pumped down the drill casing.
EP

At the initial condition, surface to bit annular casing (outer) pressure is kept constant by bleeding pressure from

the annular and adjusting choke. After the kill mud reaches to the bit by keeping the drill casing pressure
C

constant, kick is circulated out as shown in Figure 8.

AC

The pressure response in the circulation of the kill mud is explained as follows:

1) SIDCSP (Shut-in Drill Casing String Pressure) linearly decreases from the starting point of the pumping of

the kill mud till it reaches the bit (A-D).

2) SIDCSP is constant while the kill mud is circulated from the bit to the surface (D-F).

3) SICP (Shut-in Casing Pressure) gradually increases till the kick reaches the surface (A-C).

4) SICP is maximum when the kick reaches the surface (C).

 15
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
5) SICP decreases when the kick is circulated out from the well(C-D) and as the kill mud enters in to the

annulus, SICP will decrease further though now the decreasing trend is linear (D-F).

PT
RI
U SC
AN
8(a) Shut-in Drill Casing string pressure 8(b) Shut-in Casing pressure profile

Figure 8. Wait and weight method in casing drilling well control

M

In CwD, the ECD increases exponentially at higher flow rates due to tight annulus. Thus, it is essential
D

to circulate out the kick at low pump rate in order to prevent loss circulation. Statistics said that in CwD, same
TE

annular velocity could be achieved only at 50% of conventional flow rate in drilling with pipe [32].

The impact of circulation rate, influx size and influx intensity on casing surface pressure should be
EP

considered for making a proper well control procedure. As the pumping rate increases, high frictional forces are

experienced in wellbore and surface as shown in Figure 9(a). BHP and casing shoe pressure increase at higher
C

pumping rate. As the size of influx increases, vertical height of influx in wellbore also increases and this
AC

increase is very large in case of drilling with casing due to the tight annulus. The size of influx increases casing

shoe and surface choke pressure as shown in Figure 9(b). Thus, the size of influx should be determined to

prevent casing shoe fracturing (weakest point in wellbore). Higher influx intensity increases the surface

pressure: ICP, SICP and SIDPP as shown in Figure 9 (c). The value of the FCP remains same for any influx

intensity as influx is removed prior to reaching FCP. Choke pressure tends to increase after influx is removed

due to under-balance condition.

 16
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
16
14
Surface Choke Pressure (psi)

Surface choke pressure (psi)

14 20 bbls
12 30 bbls
10 SPM 12
10 20 SPM 40 bbls
10
8 30 SPM 8

6 6

4 4

2
2
0
0 0 1 2 3 4 5
Elapsed pump strokes

PT
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Elapsed pump strokes

9(a) Effect of circulation rate 9(b) Influx size

RI
16
0.3
Surface choke pressure (psi)

14

SC
0.5
12
0.7
10

U
4

2
AN
0
0 1 2 3 4 5

Elapsed pump strokes

M

9(c) Influx intensity

Figure 9. Effect of different parameters on casing surface choke pressure (wait and weight method)
D
TE

6.3 Ballooning effect in CwD

Ballooning effect (wellbore breathing) is the term given to a loss/gain situation that occurs during
EP

connections when flow back is observed. This situation occurs when the ECD is high enough, happening often

in CwD, to exceed the local fracture pressure gradient. When the pumps are off during drilling, there is a drop in
C

ECD which is more than in conventional drilling operation. Thus, fluids (mud and hydrocarbon) are flushed into
AC

the wellbore from the formation that gives false indication of kick. Tight annulus in casing drilling gives large

changes the annular pressure reading greatly making the false indication of the kick stronger. A flow check must

be done to differentiate kick and ballooning as ballooning effect provides only temporary flow back. Thus,

ballooning effect is an important well control phenomenon, which must be considered in CwD before operating

the second barrier of well control i.e. BOP.

7. Casing string design consideration for CwD

7.1 Casing string buckling

 17
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Tubular string buckling is a very prominent issue faced by drilling industry. This buckling of tubular

string plays a very important role in designing CwD. Casing string buckling is mainly caused by hole geometry

and excessive compressive stress acting on casing because the bottom of the casing string accommodates a

limited amount of compressive load before buckling. It causes the initial straight casing string to convert into

curved shape thereby it increases the bending stress on string and the contact between the string and borehole

results in increased torque at the surface. Excessive deformation due to buckling reduces the ability to resist the

PT
failure of casing string [33]. The increased contact between the string and borehole causes excessive wear on

casing which sometimes results in lock-up of casing string. Buckling in straight hole is caused by compressive

RI
load which is due to gravitational force (inclination and weight of pipe), pipe stiffness and clearance between

SC
borehole and casing string. On the other hand, in directional well, drill string stability increases with angle of

inclination.

Buckling is characterized by critical load, a minimum load that causes buckling in casing string. The

critical buckling force is given in Eq. (2) [23].

U
AN

   .  ! '
 =   & Eq. (2)
"# "$%
M

Where, Fc - critical buckling force, lb; I - moment of inertia of casing, in4; Wstring - weight of casing string in air,

lb ft-1; Mw - mud density, ppg; ( - hole angle, degree; DH - hole diameter, in; DTJ - diameter of tool joint, in.
D

7.2 Casing string fatigue failure

TE

Fatigue failure in casing string weakens the casing material by cyclic stresses. Cyclic stresses are

formed due to dynamic loads like vibration and bending loads in curved section of hole through rotation. It starts
EP

with micro-cracks in material which propagates through the casing body due to cyclic stresses until the

remaining cross sectional area is incapable of supporting static load. The number of stress cycles required to
C

rupture the material may vary from few to infinity and it is also dependent on local conditions. Casing material,

corroded by the presence of O2, CO2, and H2S, fails within a less number of cyclic stress. It occurs due to the
AC

oscillatory bending loads usually appearing as washout before the final rupture. It is always located at the

bottom of the casing string because the tensile stress is the greatest at the top. The use of casing drilling drill

collars improves the fatigue resistance of casing string [20].

7.3 Torque and drag

Torque is defined as the rotational force required to rotate the entire drill string and drill bit at the

bottom of the hole. This rotational force is used to overcome the rotational friction against the wellbore and the

viscous force between the pipe string and drilling fluid [34]. The value of torque and drag depends mainly upon
 18
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
two factors: coefficient of friction and the magnitude of contact force [35]. In CwD, torque is provided from the

surface through CDS to rotate the casing string. However, when the casing and borehole wall come in contact,

frictional forces are generated, thus, providing the drag to rotation of the string and necessitating high torque to

rotate the string. In contrast to conventional drilling, torque and drag for casing drilling are always more due to

the less clearance between the casing and borehole. This is a critical parameter in operation which ensures that

additional torque will not exceed the torque limit of casing or the makeup torque of connection. In directional

PT
drilling, toque and drag become the most important parameters in determining the suitability of a well for casing

drilling.

RI
The equations used to calculate torque are Eqs. (3-5) [23]:

SC
For straight section of hole,

)"  *  +  !
$= Eq. (3)
',

U
For build-up curve section,

(i) For -./ < 0.3 3 -4 3 5, torque value is given by,

AN
)"  *  7
$6 = Eq. (4)
8'

(ii) For -./ > 0.3 3 -4 3 5, torque value is given by,

M

)"  *  7 )"  );

$6 = + ); − . ==* 7 Eq. (5)
,, ,
D
TE

where, T - torque, lb ft; µ - coefficient of friction; WoB - weight on bit, lb; OD - outer diameter of tool joint, in;

Wm - average pipe buoyant weight, lb ft-1; L - length of hole or pipe section, ft; R - build up radius, ft
EP

7.4 Vibration problems

Drill string vibration occurs when the frequency of the applied forces matches with the natural
C

vibration frequency of drill string. Rotation of drill string at natural resonant frequency produces vibration with
AC

high shock loads resulting in severe downhole tool damage, fatigue failure as washout, tool joint failure, etc.

There are three types of vibration namely, axial, torsional and transverse. Vibration of all three types may occur

during drilling. However, the most severe type is transverse vibration which is violent in vertical or low angle

wells where drill string may move freely than in vertical wells. Transverse vibration changes with lithology

variation due to the change in rock’s coefficient of friction. The cost of drilling a well can increase approx. 2-

10% because of vibration related problems such as lost time while pulling out of hole, fishing, poor quality of

hole and many more. Vibration modelling in combination with field observations was useful to redesign the

CwD BHA for centralizer placement and component functionality to improve RoP [36].
 19
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
A downhole accelerometer is mounted eccentrically so that it measures both the transverse and

torsional vibrations in the MwD electronics housing. It is programmed to count downhole shocks and sending

the information in real time to the surface [37–39]. After detecting vibration, the next step is to prevent

vibration. Driller’s has three ways to prevent or minimize vibration: modification of drilling parameters (RoP,

WoB) until shock measurement shows that harmful vibration has ceased, pull the BHA out of the hole and run a

new one less likely to vibrate or employ a special system such as torque feedback to reduce stick-slip.

PT
Critical rotary speed (RPM), where severe drill string vibration occurs, must be calculated for each

casing string by following the below given in Eq. (6) [23].

RI

,,8,  "' ?@' '
7
 = Eq. (6)
'

SC
where, RPM-critical speeds, revolution min-1; I - Length of one joint, in; D = outside diameter, in; d - casing

inside diameter, in.

U
8. Case study on CwD application in malay basin
AN
The application of CwD in Malay Basin operation pushed the boundary of 20” casing to 1002 m

Measured Depth (MD), the deepest in the world (Figure 10). The drilling of Well X with CwD was done in
M

2015. The key objectives behind the use of CwD for this project are improving drilling efficiency by minimizing

NPT which is the result of wellbore stability and loss circulation. Malay basin is a tertiary transtensional
D

extensional with two-petroleum systems: the Oligocene-Miocene Lacustrine total petroleum system and
TE

Miocene-coaly Strata total petroleum system. Source rocks began generating hydrocarbons in the middle

Miocene at approximately 1,000 to 3,500 m burial depth and hydrocarbons are trapped in the middle to the late

Miocene transpressional folds, drap anticlines and some stratigraphic traps [40]. The lithology arrangement for
EP

well X are mainly shale-siltstone and sandy. However, the shallow sedimentary arrangement is very soft with

washout tendency. Offset well data suggests that out of 12 wells, 7 wells experienced a partial or total loss with
C

the loss rate varying from 60 barrels per hour to roughly 500 barrels per hour. This challenge provided a strong
AC

motivation for CwD application in drilling of top hole section.

After a detailed risk analysis, it was decided to use 20” CwD i.e. 20” conductor casing for top hole

drilling while removing the original 30” from the well construction plan. The conductor casing was planned to

be set between a minimum of 750 m and a maximum of 1000 m to prevent potential loss circulation observed in

two offset wells. The maximum depth for setting casing was limited to 1100 m due to the medium risk of

shallow gas. The conductor casing utilized was 20” SL-BOSS 133ppf X-56 which came up with a maximum

torque value of 35.9 kft lbs, an optimum torque value of 33.2 kft lbs and a minimum value of 30.5 kft lb. In
 20
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
torque calculation, the safety factor for maximum applicable drilling torque on a given conductor casing was set

as 80% of the maximum make-up torque for the casing. Engineering analysis at 1000 m MD shows that the

maximum calculated drilling torque is 27,696 ft lbs with a friction factor of 0 in cased hole and 0.4 in open hole

that are below the specified 80% limit.

PT
RI
U SC
AN
M
D
TE

Figure 10. Malay Basin

EP

In hydraulic design, pumping of 8.6 ppg seawater was planned at a rate of 1000 gpm minimum. Plastic
C

Viscosity (PV) and Yield Point (YP) for this mud design are 10 cP and 20 lbf per 100 ft2. This will produce a
AC

total system pressure loss of 77 % and generate ECD varying from 9.1 to 9.6 ppg. Annular velocity was

maintained above 160 ft min-1. The 23”x 20” CwD was run in hole to 111 m MD (Seabed) and drilled to 1002 m

MD with seawater. 30 barrels of hi-vis fluid was pumped after every stand drilled and it was pumped at TD to

clean the hole thoroughly. Total interval of 891 m was drilled in 32 h at the bottom and the average drilling

parameters were 30 m hr-1 RoP, 900 gpm pumping rate, 4 klbs WoB and 80 rpm rotating speed. The value RoP

was restricted to prevent vibrational problem that took place in other wells. At the bottom, a hole was circulated

clean and 10 ppg mud was displaced before starting the cementing operation. The torque value seen on the
 21
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
surface varies from 4 to 18 kft lbs which is much lower than the expected value. The total casing string rotation

is less than the rotation at which casing string may fail.

In conjunction with the elimination of loss circulation during casing drilling operation, there was no

accident observed during the 32 h of drilling time for well X [41]. During the drilling to 1002 m MD, non-

existent of tight spot and stall problem were experienced which was an indication of good hole cleaning.

9. Cost analysis of CwD

PT
The main goal of drilling a well for hydrocarbon reservoir is to drill a well with minimal cost subject to

quality and safety concerns. To fulfill this goal, oil industry continuously innovates new drilling technologies or

RI
practices. In reality, every decision regarding the acceptance of new drilling technology is taken on the basis of

SC
profitability i.e. the benefit provided by the new technology in terms of economics and efficiency over the

existing technology with better improved quality and safety standards.

The day work rate for a land rig is approx. $18,500-20,000[42]. So, it is very important that every

U
moment of the rig is used in drilling rather than wasting time in tubular handling or doing secondary activity
AN
such as recovering from pipe stuck up, well control, tripping in or out for logging purpose. As mentioned earlier,

casing drilling is carried out with drill string made up of casing only which eliminates the requirement for drill
M

pipe. Thus, the capital cost of drill pipe and cost related to transportation and maintenance of drill pipe is

removed. Lesser tubular handling at the rig site further reduces the NPT of rig. In addition, as standard casing
D

joint length is 40 ft, drillers make about 25% fewer connections compared to standard drill pipe joint of approx.
TE

30 ft length. In casing drilling, after drilling to TD, casings are already in place and thus, the time related to

tripping out of drill string and running in permanent casing is abolished. Therefore, if we consider the above
EP

scenarios, casing drilling results in 45% NPT reduction. [4]. Casing drilling also reduces interruption during

drilling operation resulting from unforeseen occurrences such as pipe stuck up and loss of well control during
C

tripping in and out of string since casing string remains at the bottom during most of time. The key cost
AC

comparison between conventional drilling and CwD is given in Table 1.

The cost comparison is taken for vertical well whose True Vertical Depth (TVD) is 13140 ft. Here, the

cost of CwD is not exact as the technology is new and varies considerably from operator to operator across

globe. Although the above table indicates that the cost for CwD is slightly lower ($254,200-135,385) than

conventional drilling, the overall time for drilling is reduced to 18-20 days compared to 25 days for

conventional drilling. This factor becomes important when considering drilling offshore wells where dayrate
 22
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
cost for drilling rig goes above $300,000. Thus, the reduction in drilling time encourages deep and ultra-deep

offshore drilling.

Table 1. Drilling cost comparison between conventional drilling and CwD for vertical well

Cost Parameter Conventional drilling cost1 CwD cost1

Rig mobilization $180,000 $95,000

PT
Rig dayrate $462,500 $400,000-450,000

Fuel $112,500 $70,000-80000

Intangible

RI
Solid control equipment $34,375 $20,000-25,000

Drilling mud $210,000 $190,000-$200,000

SC
Cementation $204,000 $170,000-175,000

Bit cost

U $40,000 $45,000-50,000
AN
Drill Pipe cost $116,000 $0

Conductor casing $3,200 $3,600-4,000

M

Tangible
Surface casing $59,850 $69,825-74,100
D

Intermediate casing $212,000 $240,000-256,000

Production Casing $236,000 $262,800-275,940

TE

Total Cost $1,870,425 $1,566,225-1,685,040

1
EP

per day cost of drilling is taken from [42] and total drilling cost is obtain from drilling time of conventional

drilling and CwD system

C

If the operator company owns the drilling rig, the major equipments required to convert conventional
AC

drilling rig into CwD rig are Hydraulic Catwalk, CDS with top drive (+cement swivel) and DLA. The capital

cost of this equipment is given in Table 2.

Table 2. Capital equipment cost required to convert conventional drilling rig into CwD rig [43]

Additional Equipment Cost

Hydraulic Catwalk $450,000

Top drive + cement swivel $4,000,000-5,000,000

 23
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
+ casing drive

Casing drilling wireline winch1 $500,000

Wireline BOPs1 $50,000

Total $5,000,000-6,000,000

Currently, casing drilling has reached up to development stage in many parts of the world but still it is

PT
in its infancy in countries like India. ONGC in Geleky area of Upper Assam Asset where wells of depth more

than 4000m are taking a long time for completion due to borehole instability tried this technology in 2-3 wells to

RI
test its ability to reduce the cycle time and the cost of drilling. Although the cost is slightly on the higher side, it

helped in completing 8 ½” section in 45 days for all wells [18]. Thus, CwD has huge potential in these

SC
countries.

10. Challenges in CwD

Major challenges associated with CwD are as follows:

U
AN
1) High torque and drag: As casing is larger in diameter and heavier when compared to drill pipe, the torque

required to rotate the casing string to TD is often high.

M

2) Hydraulics: As the annular clearance in CwD is very small compared to conventional drilling practices, it

requires a redesigning of hydraulic. As higher ECDs are hard to manage at greater depth, it is difficult to
D

plan the hydraulics for CwD in deeper intervals even with optimal mud rheology and reduced flow.
TE

3) Tripping Casing: Saving tripping time is prolific advantage, Bit for CwD needs to be designed in a way that

it completes drilling up to a minimum casing depth in one run. Otherwise, the whole casing string must be
EP

pulled out to change the bit. Thus, proper bit selection is a prerequisite to reduce tripping time.

4) Gas influx (well control): Due to less annular clearance in CwD, gas influx will expand more in terms of
C

height of hydrostatic column. Thus, it will cause sudden decrease in BHP and this situation invites more

influx from formation.

AC

5) Managing stick out: In retrievable BHA, the benefits of CwD are not seen until the bottom most casing

reaches the formations concerned. Thus, if the directional/logging BHA extends 90 ft past the casing shoe

and the RoP is 30 ft hr-1, three hours of drilling is required before any benefit of plastering effect (reduction

in losses) is seen.

6) Fatigue failure: It is most likely to occur in casing string with high doglegs that cause high levels of

reversing stresses on casing connections. To prevent fatigue failure, a safe number of total revolutions must

be calculated in pre-job analysis.

 24
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
7) Cost: Though CwD showed reduction in daily drilling cost in almost every area, capital investment for

CwD rig is still higher. Thus, it requires cost efficient manufacturing of major CwD rig equipment like CDS

and hydraulic catwalk.

The above challenges must be addressed for getting an outstanding result from CwD.

11. Conclusion

The oil and gas industry has a long history of innovating and developing best practices for drilling in

PT
which CwD is one-step in that direction. CwD provides numerous benefits right from its commencement to oil

and gas industry. The main benefits of CwD technology are the reduction of non-productive times and enhanced

RI
well control for complicated areas. This is used in several types of projects like shale oil, tight gas and mature

SC
field. The case study of CwD application in Malay basin showed that CwD can be used in drilling top and

intermediate sections with trouble giving formation. When CwD becomes a wide spread practice all over the

world, the present cost will lower down considerably allowing drilling to be carried out at lower prices in the

U
future. However, improvements like, use of lighter and more durable bit, proper casing centralization and
AN
minimizing mechanical tool failure in the present system should be made to improve the performance of CwD.

Declaration
M

Availability of data and material

All relevant data and material are presented in the main paper.
D

Competing interests
TE

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding
EP

Not Applicable

Acknowledgments
C

The authors are grateful to School of Petroleum Technology, Pandit Deendayal Petroleum University for the
AC

permission to publish this research.

References

[1] А.. Epikhin, History of oil drilling, (2015). Available from:

http://portal.tpu.ru:7777/SHARED/s/SHAMAIM/academic/Tab1/2.ppt

[2] N. Velmurugan, P. Mathur, V. Babu, Particle Size Distribution in Casing While Drilling: A Quantitative
Analysis, Abu Dhabi Int. Pet. Exhib. Conf. (2015). doi:10.2118/177679-MS.

[3] R.M.B. Tessari, G. Madell, Casing Drilling - A Revolutionary Approach to Reducing Well Costs,
SPE/IADC Drill. Conf. (1999). doi:10.2118/52789-MS.
 25
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
[4] K.R. Fontenot, B. Lesso, R.D.B. Strickler, T.M. Warren, Using Casing to Drill Directional Wells, Oilf.
Rev. (2005) 44–61.
http://www.slb.com/~/media/Files/resources/oilfield_review/ors05/sum05/04_casing_drilling.pdf.

[5] D. Hahn, W. Van Gestel, N. Fröhlich, G. Stewart, Simultaneous Drill and Case Technology - Case
Histories, Status and Options for Further Development, IADC/SPE Drill. Conf. (2000).
doi:10.2118/59126-MS.

[6] A.M. Radwan, M. Karimi, Feasibility Study of Casing Drilling Application in HPHT Environments; a

PT
Review of Challenges, Benefits, and Limitations, SPE/IADC Middle East Drill. Technol. Conf. Exhib.
(2011). doi:10.2118/148433-MS.

RI
[7] B. Pavkovic, R. Bizjak, B. Petrovic, Review of casing while drilling technology, 2016.
doi:10.5937/podrad1629011P.

SC
[8] I. Abubakar, M., Okeke, C.J., Abolle-Okoyeagu, Current Trends and Future Development in Casing
Drilling, Int. J. Sci. Technol. 2 (2012) 567–582.

U
[9] V. Naveen, V. Babu, Experimental Study of Plastering Effect During Casing While Drilling, Abu Dhabi
Int. Pet. Exhib. Conf. (2014). doi:10.2118/171997-MS.
AN
[10] O.G. Meza, T. Yaqoob, O. Bello, F. Boulakhrif, J. Holzmann, J. Oppelt, Combined Investigation of
Effects of Contact Stresses, Pore Size and Rotary Dynamics on Mud Plastering in Prevention of Lost
Circulation in Weak Zones during Casing Drilling, Abu Dhabi Int. Pet. Exhib. Conf. (2017).
M

doi:10.2118/188182-MS.

[11] A. Fisher, D. Reid, M.Z. Tan, G. Galloway, Extending the Boundries of Casing Drilling, IADC/SPE
D

Asia Pacific Drill. Technol. Conf. Exhib. (2004). doi:10.2118/87998-MS.

TE

[12] J. Chima, S. Zhou, A. Al-Hajji, M. Okot, Q.J. Sharif, D. Clark, D. Oveson, E. Moellendick, C. Holt, D.
Neidhardt, Casing Drilling Technology Application: Case Histories from Saudi Arabia, SPE Saudi
Arab. Sect. Tech. Symp. Exhib. (2012). doi:10.2118/160857-MS.
EP

[13] J.A. Balanza, L.C. Justiniano, I. Poletzky, Implementation of Managed Pressure Casing Drilling and
Managed Pressure Cementing Techniques in Unconventional Reservoirs, SPE/IADC Drill. Conf. Exhib.
C

(2015). doi:10.2118/173080-MS.
AC

[14] A. Briner, Y. Busaidi, A. Adawi, R. Hilditch, F. Sanchez, M. Sanderson, A. Refai, E. Adly, S.

Nadezhdin, CwD Technology Improves Economics in Tight Gas Exploration Project in the Sultanate of
Oman, Abu Dhabi Int. Pet. Exhib. Conf. (2015). doi:10.2118/177762-MS.

[15] K.A. Aleksandrov, E. V Kiselev, S.N. Ovchinnikov, M. Tan, M.Y. Gelfgat, S.S. Kulikov, P.S. Shilkin,
D.A. Priymachenko, D.A. Fedoseev, V.N. Gnibidin, Drilling-with-Casing Technology Pilot Testing
Results, SPE Russ. Pet. Technol. Conf. (2015). doi:10.2118/176506-MS.

[16] A. Torsvoll, J. Abdollahi, M. Eidem, T. Weltzin, A. Hjelle, S.A. Rasmussen, S. Krueger, S. Schwarze,
C. Freyer, T. Huynh, T. Sorheim, Successful Development and Field Qualification of a 9]5/8 in and 7 in
Rotary Steerable Drilling Liner System that Enables Simultaneous Directional Drilling and Lining of the
 26
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Wellbore, IADC/SPE Drill. Conf. Exhib. (2010). doi:10.2118/128685-MS.

[17] S.F. Shepard, R.H. Reiley, T.M. Warren, Casing Drilling: An Emerging Technology, SPE Drill.
Complet. 17 (2002) 4–14. doi:10.2118/76640-PA.

[18] ONGC, ONGC drilling operational manual, 2007.

[19] IADC, IADC drilling manual, 2015.

[20] V. Domala, V. Kumar Gupta, R. Sharma, Computer aided design model for integrated casing while

PT
drilling system for deepwater applications, 2015. doi:10.1504/IJOGCT.2015.070837.

[21] T. Warren, R. Tessari, B. Houtchens, Casing Drilling with Retrievable Drilling Assemblies, Offshore

RI
Technol. Conf. (2004) 1–11.

[22] E. Beaumont, L. De Crevoisier, F. Baquero, J. Sanguino, D.C. Herrera Gomez, E. Cordero, First

SC
Retrievable Directional Casing-While-Drilling (DCWD) Application in Peruvian Fields Generates Time
Reduction and Improves Drilling Performance Preventing Potential Nonplanned Downtime, SPE Lat.
Am. Caribb. Pet. Eng. Conf. (2010). doi:10.2118/139339-MS.

U
[23] E. Marbun, T., Widiyanto, Adinugratama, Y., Kurnianto, Feasibility Study of Casing While Drilling
AN
Application on Geothermal Drilling Operation., in: Stamphord Geotherm. Work., 2014.

[24] N. Gaurina-međimurec, Casing Drilling Technology, Rud. Zb. 17 (2005) 19–26.

M

[25] V. Radhakrishnan, H.G. Gonzalo, D.B. Borge, D.I. Pickup, F.D. Anggraini, C. Kongoun, Integrated and
Longest Directional Casing While Drilling Mitigates Hole Problems and Improves Drilling Performance
While Saving Drilling Time, SPE/IADC Drill. Conf. Exhib. (2017). doi:10.2118/184624-MS.
D

[26] H. Gallardo Falero, J.P. Cassanelli, S. Barrett, P.D. Romero, A. Mufarech Rey, Casing-Drilling
TE

Technology (CwD) Mitigates Fluid Losses In Peruvian Jungle, SPE Lat. Am. Caribb. Pet. Eng. Conf.
(2010). doi:10.2118/139065-MS.

[27] T.M. Warren, P. Angman, B. Houtchens, Casing Drilling Application Design Considerations,
EP

IADC/SPE Drill. Conf. (2000). doi:10.2118/59179-MS.

[28] T. Meader, F. Allen, G. Riley, To the Limit and Beyond - The Secret of World-Class Extended-Reach
C

Drilling Performance at Wytch Farm, IADC/SPE Drill. Conf. (2000). doi:10.2118/59204-MS.

AC

[29] G. Muñoz, B. Dhafeeri, H. Saggaf, H. Shaaban, D.C. Herrera, A. Osman, L. Otaremwa, Directional
Casing While Drilling (CwD) Reestablished as Viable Technology in Saudi Arabia, SPE/IADC Middle
East Drill. Technol. Conf. Exhib. (2016). doi:10.2118/178193-MS.

[30] K.S. Graves, D.C. Herrera, Casing During Drilling With Rotary-Steerable Technology in the Stag Field-
-Offshore Australia, (2013). doi:10.2118/166166-PA.

[31] C. Espinosa, D. Codega, A. Caglieri, S. Grill, H. Guttner, C. Roldan, Five Years of Drilling with Casing
in Argentina and Bolivia. Lessons Learned from the Field, SPE Lat. Am. Caribb. Pet. Eng. Conf.
(2017). doi:10.2118/185506-MS.

[32] T. Elshehabi, I. Bilgesu, What are the Well Control Complications While Drilling with Casing or
 27
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
Liner?, AADE Fluids Tech. Conf. Exhib. (2016). doi:AADE-16-FTCE-79.

[33] M. He, M. Xu, J. Li, G. Liu, A new two-phase model to simulate sour gas kicks in MPD operations with
Water Based Mud, J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 159 (2017) 331–343.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2017.09.024.

[34] M. Alsharif, M. Al Khudiri, B. Albassam, K. Ahmad Khan, An Innovative Approach Towards Real-
Time Torque and Drag Model and its Analysis - A Case Study, SPE Kingdom Saudi Arab. Annu. Tech.
Symp. Exhib. (2017). doi:10.2118/188014-MS.

PT
[35] M. S. Aston, P. J. Hearn, G. McGhee, Techniques for Solving Torque and Drag Problems in Today’s
Drilling Environment, 1998. doi:10.2118/48939-MS.

RI
[36] A. Vos, I. Kamyani, R.A. Hilditch, F.J. Sanchez, A Brownfield Well Re-Design with Casing While
Drilling, SPE/IADC Middle East Drill. Technol. Conf. Exhib. (2013). doi:10.2118/166678-MS.

SC
[37] S.D. Alley, G.B. Sutherland, The Use of Real-Time Downhole Shock Measurements To Improve BHA
Component Reliability, SPE Annu. Tech. Conf. Exhib. (1991). doi:10.2118/22537-MS.

U
[38] S.C. Rewcastle, T.M. Burgess, Real-Time Downhole Shock Measurements Increase Drilling Efficiency
and Improve MWD Reliability, SPE/IADC Drill. Conf. (1992). doi:10.2118/23890-MS.
AN
[39] R.L. Cook, J.W. Nicholson, M.C. Sheppard, W. Westlake, First Real Time Measurements of Downhole
Vibrations, Forces, and Pressures Used To Monitor Directional Drilling Operations, SPE/IADC Drill.
M

Conf. (1989). doi:10.2118/18651-MS.

[40] M.G. Bishop, Petroleum system of the Malay Basin Province, Malaysia,
D

Https://Pubs.Usgs.Gov/of/1999/Ofr-99-0050/OF99-50T/. (2002).

[41] M. Makri, M. Hafiz, I.M. Mukhriz, M. Shah, M. Syafiq, J. Sherene, Pushing The Limit, New World
TE

Record Deepest 20? Level 2 Casing While Drilling - A Case Study for a Malay Basin Well, Offshore
Technol. Conf. Asia. (2016). doi:10.4043/26722-MS.
EP

[42] Petroleum Service Association of Canada, Well Cost Study, 2015. https://www.psac.ca/wp-
content/uploads/wcs_sample.pdf.
C

[43] A.K. Gupta, Drilling With Casing: Prospects and Limitations, SPE West. Reg. Pacific Sect. Cordilleran
Sect. Jt. Meet. (2006). doi:10.2118/99536-MS.
AC
ED
M
AN
D
M
A
ED
M
AN
ED
M
AN
ED
M
AN
M
A
ED
M
AN
ED
M
AN
PT
ED
M
AN
US
 AN
M
D
TE

View publication stats