SPE/IADC-194101-MS

Using High-Resolution MWD Survey Data in Mud Removal Simulations for

Effective Cementing Program Design

Leida Cristina Monterrosa, Chuang Hwee Tay, and Jose Martin Salazar, Schlumberger

Copyright 2019, SPE/IADC International Drilling Conference and Exhibition

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/IADC Drilling International Conference and Exhibition held in The Hague, The Netherlands, 5-7 March 2019.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE/IADC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s).
Contents of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors and are subject to correction
by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors,
its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or
the International Association of Drilling Contractors 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 SPE/IADC copyright.

Abstract
The main objective of this study was to understand the impact high-resolution measurement-while-drilling
(MWD) surveys have on casing standoff and mud removal simulations and its impact on final cement
program design and risk analysis.
High-resolution surveys use a combination of static and continuous MWD inclination data to characterize
the well trajectory at 3-m (10-ft) intervals rather than the current industry practices at every stand; i.e., 30
m (100 ft). However, several case studies had demonstrated that surveying the well path at these intervals is
often not sufficient to capture the true characterization of the well in question. This result, in some scenarios,
leads to significant errors in the final reported dogleg severity (DLS) and tortuosity; therefore, resulting in
optimistic well engineering simulations due the hidden additional tortuosity not applied in the models.
Two North Sea wells were analyzed when using conventional trajectories defined at each drillstring stand
as well as using high-resolution trajectories to evaluate the impact on casing centralization and mud removal
simulations.
The latest generation cementing software for placement simulation was used in this study. The simulation
has the capabilities to deal with computing pipe standoff and angle direction in a 3D annulus, including
gravitational forces for accurate mud displacement and removal.
This study confirmed that high-resolution MWD survey data can provide additional precise input for
casing standoff and mud removal simulation, resulting in a more realistic simulation result due to the
appearance of microtortuosity and DLS. Simulation results using high-resolution directional survey data
identified conditions where the original mud removal assessment using a standard survey was overestimated
due to higher standoff. This result allows an appropriate level of risk assessment and cement job design
optimization to improve both the casing standoff and mud removal, which will eventually impact the well
integrity quality.
This study proved that centralization and mud removal simulations can be, in some scenarios, optimistic
if performed using standard trajectories. The results also proved that the risk assessments for the cement
program designs will be evaluated differently because the enhanced simulations provide a more accurate
result, which impacts the final centralization and mud removal to ensure effective zonal isolation.
2 SPE/IADC-194101-MS

Mud Removal Engineering

Previously uncontrolled releases of formation fluid have established and reemphasized the importance of
well integrity in the oil and gas industry. Zonal isolation with a capable well barrier has become a mandatory
requirement for drilling and well operations. A hydraulic seal between the formation and casing to protect
and support the casing is an important factor and ensures a safe and cost-effective well life cycle. Competent
set cement is recognized as one of the most effective well barriers to isolate the formation and potential flow
zone. With well cementing being a long-term zonal isolation solution, the industry has been improving and
optimizing the scientific approach with a goal of improving the quality of well cementing design.
As early as 1985, Sauer and Landrum (1985) created a systematic cementing approach to help engineers
design and execute successful cement jobs. Their work focused on optimizing the cement chemical additives
and casing hardware to obtain a uniform casing sheath around the casing. However, their paper reported that
the cementing design was heavily dependent on the experience acquired from practical drilling operations
with limited simulation aid in the design stage.
Over the last decades, the advancements in drilling technology have allowed well operators to reach
challenging reservoirs with extended-reach and horizontal wells. The technology advances have also
elevated the technical difficulty in designing an effective well cementing design for wells with directional
wellbore trajectories. Compared with the well cementing design for vertical wells, the technical challenges
associated with the directional drilling has pushed the well cementing community to explore and optimize
the quality of the well cementing design from different perspectives. Brandl et al. (2018) reported that the
most important root cause for a poor cementing job, resulting in a lack of zonal isolation and wellbore
integrity is mainly due to the insufficient mud removal prior to performing the cement job. Consequently,
the cement bond integrity between the casing and cement and the cement and formation is compromised.
Essentially, the following design parameters can be optimized to achieve effective mud removal during the
cement job execution.

Casing-to-Formation Annular Geometry

Depending on the formation type and bottomhole assembly used during drilling, the openhole geometry
can vary from well to well Washouts are quite common issues experienced during drilling operations. A
nonuniform wellbore geometry in a directional well causes additional compression and tension forces across
the casing. These forces result in a nonuniform annular geometry, which leads to a fluid fingering effect
during the displacement of fluid train into the casing annulus. A preferential flow path is one with a lesser
amount of resistance where the flow in a wider annular gap will be faster than in the narrower path. With
such annular geometry and flow in an annulus, the displacing fluid will bypass the displaced fluid, and mud
channeling will occur. Without achieving full zonal isolation, a cementing job will be compromised by poor
fluid displacement and mud removal.

Density and Friction Pressure Hierarchy

Nonaqueous drilling fluid is not compatible with cement slurry. Hence, a spacer pill is introduced between
the cement slurry and drilling fluid. This spacer pill normally consists of base fluid, an antifoam additive
to avoid the foaming effect, a viscosifier to suspend solids in the fluid, a mutual solvent to increase the
wettability, a surfactant to reverse emulsion, and a weighting agent to increase the density of the fluid,
which is necessary to achieve the density hierarchy (Nelson and Guillot 2006) As the drilling fluid, spacer,
and cement slurry are displaced into the openhole annulus behind the casing, it is essential to ensure
that the lighter fluid is ahead of the heavier fluid, where the density, ρ, is ρmud < ρspacer < ρcement. With
the appropriate density hierarchy, the buoyancy force of the fluid train will avoid the Kelvin-Helmholtz
instabilities described by Tardy and Bittleston (2015) In a deviated or horizontal well, the gravity effect has
less influence on the mud removal efficiency, and the fluid rheology contributes additionally to the effective
fluid displacement. The rheological hierarchy profile of each fluid is defined by its friction gradient (psi/
SPE/IADC-194101-MS 3

ft). As shown in Fig. 1, a well-designed fluid train with the increasing friction pressure ensures that each of
the fluids maintain their relative position with respect to each other in a dynamic environment.

Figure 1—Friction pressure hierarchy between of cement, spacer, and drilling fluid at different displacement rates.

Casing Standoff
The casing centricity, characterized by the standoff ratio, is defined as a percentage of casing deflection from
the wellbore centerline related to the nominal annular gap (Gorokhova et al. 2014). The design engineer
typically uses the soft-string model calculation methods derived from the American Petroleum Institute
(API) Spec, 10D to predict the casing standoff. However, the soft-string model has shown its limitation
of standoff prediction in the presence of well-path tortuosity and openhole enlargement. A more realistic
physical representation of the casing's mechanical behavior is given by finite element analysis, namely the
stiff-string model. To emphasize the importance of the casing standoff, McLean et al. (1967) reported that
it might be impossible to condition the mud or fluid in the well. In a deviated well, poorly centralized
casing tends to position itself toward the lower side of the annulus and create a larger flow path in the upper
portion of the wellbore. This condition encourages the mud channeling effect as explained previously and
leaves mud pockets in the narrow side of the annulus. In certain circumstances where the well tortuosity
is high, there is a higher risk of mud pockets in the section with high DLS. Different types of centralizers
are available in the market to provide adequate centralization of the casing. Industry recommendation for
casing standoff is above 70% to achieve adequate fluid displacement and mud removal. The difference
between soft-string and stiff-string simulation in a highly deviated well is shown in Fig. 2. Also shown is
the relationship between the casing standoff and the 3D mud removal simulation.
4 SPE/IADC-194101-MS

Figure 2—Computed casing standoff results with the soft-string and stiff-
string model. Also, an example of 3D mud removal simulation results are shown.

Casing Movement
With the advanced development of surface equipment on drilling rigs, the casing movement during
cementing operations has become more available to the drilling operator. Reciprocation or rotating casing
movements help to shear the drilling fluid in the well. The drag exerted by the moving casing might help
to remove trapped mud and fluidize the gelled fluid (Tardy et al. 2017). Casing rotation during cementing
jobs encourages the azimuthal flow of the fluid in annulus, which improves the mud removal effect as the
spacer train and cement slurry exit the casing shoe into the annulus. A cementing swivel, shown in Fig. 3,
allows for liner rotation during cementing operations.

Figure 3—The cementing swivel allows for liner rotation during cementing operations.

Application of Fibrous Material

Conventionally, only hydrodynamic effect and chemicals were used in the spacer system to aid mud removal
during cementing jobs. Recently, fibrous material (see Fig. 4) is being added into the spacer system to
introduce the mechanical scrubbing effect on the casing and formation wall to remove the mud film prior to
the cement slurry. This method has proved to be effective (Olutimehin et al. 2016) in which 25 wells were
cemented with a fiber engineered spacer system and pressure tested successfully.
SPE/IADC-194101-MS 5

Figure 4—Adding fibrous material into the cement spacer aids mud removal.

High-Resolution Surveying
With today's technology, it is possible to precisely describe the well trajectory while drilling by using
continuous and static MWD data. High-resolution surveys use a combination of static and continuous MWD
inclination data to characterize the well trajectory at 3- m (10-ft) intervals rather than the current industry
practices at every stand; i.e., 30 m (100 ft) or 40 m (120 ft) for those rigs using Range III drillpipe.
To obtain the MWD high-resolution data, the software combines the static measurements taken at every
stand with the single-axis continuous data. The data are statistically filtered to eliminate outliners, and the
resultant inclination and azimuth are compared with the static survey depth stations information for quality
control (Lowdon et al. 2015). In today's drilling operations, this data processing is generally performed only
in those hole sections that require precise true vertical depth (TVD) placement, such as very tight landing
targets or in geosteering sections in which knowing the true shape of the well can significantly impact a
geosteering decision. Another important application is identifying micro-DLS and its impact on torque and
drag simulations for drilling bottomhole assemblies (BHAs), casing running, or completions strings. The
application is also being used to effectively monitor the fatigue life of drilling equipment.
However, the above explanation leads to the fact that although the continuous MWD inclination and
azimuth data are typically available and the industry is becoming more aware of the benefits from their
use, the data are not always used to their full potential. Consequently, there are many cases in which the
added tortuosity does exist, but it is not identified and reported; thus, masking the effect of the hidden DLS
in the engineering simulations of the well construction process. This paper will present this condition for
mud removal simulations.
The study by R. Lowdon et al. (2015) provides an excellent explanation of tortuosity characterization and
how it affects well engineering analysis. Based on the results reported in the Lowdon et al. (2015) study,
Fig. 5 shows the TVD error/1000 m for 18 wells analyzed as a function of the well profile. The largest the
TVD variation indicates that that there were significant variations in the trajectory shape from what it was
previously described with conventional every-stand surveys vs. the new high-resolution trajectory. TVD is a
compound measurement, which means that generally building sections will tend to deliver the largest error.
6 SPE/IADC-194101-MS

Figure 5—TVD error /1000 m sorted by application type (Lowdon et al. 2015)

From this same study, Table 1 summarizes the TVD error down to a standard deviation. The table contains
a comparison of the three primary drive systems used in the industry; i.e., the conventional rotary steerable
system (RSS), the RSS A, which is a rotary steerable system but with advanced DLS capabilities, and mud
motors. As shown in Table 1, there is not a direct correlation in which the drive systems tend to deliver larger
tortuosity. Generally, build and geosteered sections will provide higher degrees of tortuosity, and the level
will vary depending on the how the drive mechanism is being controlled in terms of power and steering
ratios or slide-rotate patterns for motor applications.

Table 1—Drive system standard deviation as a function of application (Lowdon et al. 2015)

Drive System Build Tangent Geosteering

RSS 0.74 0.47 1.66

RSS A 3.45 0.47 0.9
Motors 1.52 1.09 6.02

On the other hand, it should be clarified that that large TVD differences between static and high-resolution
data will most likely be attributed to additional deflections in the trajectory not reported with the standard
MWD surveys. This fact does not mean that a well with a lesser TVD variation between the static survey
and high-resolution survey will have less tortuosity. The deflections of the BHA can be either up or down
and in some instances, the TVD error effect can get cancelled out, but the additional tortuosity still exists.

Micro-DLS Generating Factors

It is also important to highlight the collaboration between the drilling engineers and the cementing engineers.
Typically, the default process is to run the engineering simulations with the standard trajectories, which
are defined every 30-m or 40-m (average length for a drillpipe stand). In an enhanced process, the cement
engineer shall collaborate with the directional drilling contractor to know of any expected additional
tortuosity in the well path from what was reported and if significant microtortuosity or micro-DLS are
present.
Furthermore, it is suggested that the cement engineer be familiar with which scenarios are considered as
candidates that can mask hidden micro-DLS due to the surveying frequency being defined at every stand.
The following list is not exhaustive but will serve as a worthy reference:
SPE/IADC-194101-MS 7

• Well trajectories drilled with mud motor BHAs—the slide or rotation patterns are not effectively
reflected in the trajectories defined at every 30-m (100-ft) intervals. Note that with use of Range
III drillpipe, this effect increases if the drillpipe stand is on the order of 40-m (120-ft) in length.
The result of this effect is shown in Fig. 6 taken from the Stockhaussen and Lesson (2003) study.
• Sections with several hard stringers or chert nodules—these tend to rapidly deflect the BHA and
provide added micro-DLS; as a result, causing a loss of the minimum curvature profile between
the survey stations. The micro-DLS are only visible when using the continuous inclination and
azimuth. An example of how a chert nodule can be identified with the density data and images is
shown in Fig. 7a, while Fig. 7b shows a comparison of the static inclination vs. the high-resolution
data, confirming that the BHA will quickly deflect when striking the chert nodules. This condition
results in a well path with a localized micro-DLS, and will tend to reduce mud removal, particularly
in high-angle wells.
Also, Fig. 7b shows that static inclination build rates (orange dotted line) are on the order of 1° /30 m,
while the high-resolution build rate data (light blue dotted line) shows localized effects on the order of 9
to 10° /30 m.

• High-angle wells with active geosteering decisions due the frequent changes in the BHA steering
commands to follow or avoid the mapped formation structure and fulfill the well placement
objectives.
• In wells with several interbedded layers, if the interface between the layers changes from very hard
to soft or vice versa, the layers will tend to deflect the BHA and generate added micro-DLS. The
results of the study by Stockhaussen and Lesson (2003) shown in Fig. 8 provides another excellent
illustration of the deflection in inclination when the BHA hit a hard streak.

Figure 6—Motor slide and rotating pattern (red line) not identified by static surveys (orange line)
8 SPE/IADC-194101-MS

Figure 7a—Chert nodules in a density image log

Figure 7b—Chert nodules effect on the deflection of the BHA in which the high-resolution
inclination (red line) shows more deflection than the static MWD inclination (black line)
SPE/IADC-194101-MS 9

Figure 8—LWD density, directional survey, and geosteered log over 500 ft of a horizontal well in
Angola. The density image shows an unusual double formation fold within 200 ft. The continuous
inclination (red) shows that the wellbore bounced off of a hard streak. (Stockhaussen and Lesson 2003).

There are significant advantages in using this level of high-quality data. To date, a small number of studies
have focused on how a better characterization impacts the final wellbore positioning, reservoir modeling,
and the definition of tortuosity (Monterrosa et al. 2016; Lowdon et al. 2015). However, there is a need to
evaluate the effect from using this type of data in other areas of the well engineering process, specifically the
influence brought about by mud removal simulations and consequently, the assurance of the well integrity.

Methodology
The high-resolution MWD survey data provide additional benefits to drilling operations. As suggested by
Gaynor et al. (2001), microtortuosity should be routinely considered in torque and drag modeling. Also,
there are potential advantages to be gained by using high-resolution MWD data as input for cementing
design simulations. A careful analysis of the trajectory is one of the main considerations when selecting
the optimum centralization program (Sanchez et al. 2012), which essentially contributes to a successful
cementing job. Static survey data with 30-m (100-ft) intervals are typically used as input in cementing
simulation software to build the well trajectory in the design file; however, microtortuosity is normally not
reflected by the static trajectory in the design. The centralization and mud removal simulation results tend to
be more optimistic in identifying potential hidden risks. With the objectives to determine the effects of using
high-resolution MWD data in well cementing simulation, a collaboration between the drilling discipline and
cementing discipline was formed to evaluate the trajectories of two North Sea wells using static and high-
resolution data. A new generation 3D cementing simulator was used to predict the realistic centralization
and mud removal in highly deviated and horizontal wells.

Simulation Workflow
A comprehensive cementing simulation workflow must be followed to obtain the casing centralization and
mud removal simulation results at the conclusion of the design phase. There are five major modules in the
cementing simulation software. The well information module requires the surface description for the rig,
10 SPE/IADC-194101-MS

tubular information from the well engineer, openhole caliper and directional survey data from the drilling
department, formation information from a geologist, and temperature gradient data that usually comes from
offset well data or the temperature gradient in a known field. In the fluids modules, the cementing engineer
provides the density and rheology of drilling fluid, spacer, and cement slurry based on laboratory testing
results or the fluid report from the drilling rig. The Bingham Plastic model or Herschel-Bulkley model is
normally used to characterize the fluid rheological behavior. The cementing design engineer would then
perform the hydraulic simulation of the cementing job based on the designed volume of spacer and cement
slurry to be pumped and the zonal isolation objectives. At the same time, the temperature simulator is used
to predict the bottomhole circulation temperature at each fluid interface, which s enables the hydraulic
simulator to account for the downhole fluid rheological behavior at different temperatures and pressures.
At this point in the design phase, the 3D wellbore geometry, well construction plan, fluid properties, and
flow rates of the cementing job execution are available. Prior to predicting the mud displacement efficiency
of the cement job, centralization of the casing string to be cemented should be simulated to determine the
annular geometry based on the casing centricity in the wellbore. In this study, a stiff-string model is used
to simulate the casing standoff based on the static survey and high-resolution MWD survey. While running
the casing into an open hole with high tortuosity, there will be additional side forces resulting from bending
the casing. These side forces are typically ignored by the soft-string model. Because buoyancy forces from
the fluid in the casing and annulus create a different lifting effect depending on the position of fluids, this
phenomenon will also influence the casing standoff. The most detrimental condition is when the buoyancy
force is at its minimal; hence, the casing centralization simulation is normally performed when the cement
slurry (heavier fluid) is at the point where it first enters the annulus, the weight of the casing string is at its
maximum, and the gravity effect pushes the casing toward the lower side of the annulus in a deviated or
horizontal section. The centralizer type and placement pattern at each well section can be optimized at this
stage based on the borehole deviation. Excessive centralizer placement will result in a significant increase in
drag force and difficulty in sliding the casing through a tortuous path. As a result, torque and drag simulation
should be run based on the centralizer placement to evaluate the casing running operation.
The fluid displacement in a well is a complex condition. An attempt was made by Martin et al. (1978)
using a numerical computational method to predict the flow in a well during a cementing job. This field of
work has been developed in the last decade from 2D mud displacement simulation to the new-generation 3D
mud displacement simulator. This 3D mud simulator, presented in detail by Tardy et al. (2017), will only be
briefly summarized. The fluid displacement is modeled both inside the casing and in the openhole annulus
based on the casing deviation and azimuth angle. The 3D fluid simulator considers arbitrarily complex
annular geometries and captures accurately azimuthal flows that might arise from the interplay between
buoyancy forces and viscoplastic fluid rheology. With the combination of the stiff-string model and 3D mud
displacement simulator, the casing standoff and mud removal efficiency can be predicted more realistically.
A summary of the five major modules of the 3D cementing simulation software are shown in Fig. 9.
SPE/IADC-194101-MS 11

Figure 9—The five major modules of 3D cementing simulation software.

Case Study 1
A deviated well in Norway with a maximum deviation of 35° was selected for this case study. The objective
of the study was to evaluate the difference in cementing simulation based on static and high-resolution
MWD data from the 17.5-in. section. The 17.5-in. section had a measured depth (MD) of 7,640-ft MD and
6,972.9-ft TVD. The 3D well geometry and trajectory of the well is shown in Fig. 10. The cement plan called
for the top of the cement to be at 4,816ft MD, and achieved by using 500 bbl. with 150 bbl. of viscosified
spacer ahead of the cement slurry.

Figure 10—Case study 1 well geometry

After hydraulic simulation was run based on the designed volume and pumping rate of the cementing job,
the casing centralization was computed using the stiff-string model with the static and high-resolution MWD
12 SPE/IADC-194101-MS

data for the same well trajectory. The same centralizer placement pattern was used in both simulations;
i.e., two centralizers per joint for the casing shoe and one centralizer per joint to the top of cement. Casing
standoff with the static MWD well trajectory survey is between 50% and 70%. However, a fluctuation in
casing standoff between the centralizers was observed with the high-resolution MWD well trajectory survey
between 5,800-ft to 6,800-ft MD as shown in Fig. 11. Microtortuosity and high DLS were observed in the
high-resolution MWD data but hidden from the static MWD data as indicated in Fig. 12.

Figure 11—Casing standoff computed by the stiff-string model in

the (a) static and (b) high-resolution MWD well trajectory survey.

Figure 12—High-resolution vs. static DLS in the 17.5-in. section.

SPE/IADC-194101-MS 13

The 3D color map shown in Fig. 13 is a comparison of the casing position or the gap between the casing
and the borehole size. The color difference shows the normalized gap, which varies axially and azimuthally.
The red identifies where the casing is in contact with the wellbore, the white is where the casing string is
centralized, and the blue indicates the widest gap in the annulus.

Figure 13—3D color map showing the 13 3/8-in. casing shape in the 17.5-in. open
hole described by the (a) static and (b) high-resolution MWD well trajectory survey.

The comparison between the color maps shows that there are several casing contact points with the
wellbore geometry described by the high-resolution MWD well trajectory survey. These contact points
are not presented in the (a) color map where the wellbore geometry is described by the static MWD well
trajectory survey. The stiff-string model used in the casing centralization simulation previously considers the
bending moments transmitted from one element to the next along the string; hence, due to the existence of
casing contact points with the formation, the forces transmitted through the casing are affected in the casing
centralization computation. The contact point of the casing with the wellbore means the annulus between
the casing and formation, indicated in red, is narrower. This result leads to the creation of preferential flow
paths across the wider annulus (blue), which might occur azimuthally across the wellbore. Consequently,
the risk of bypassing the fluid on the narrower path (red) and leaving a mud pocket increase in that section.
With the casing centralization computed, the 3D fluid displacement simulator was used to predict the
efficiency of mud removal during the cementing job. This simulator predicts the risk of mud on the wall by
taking into account the casing centralization result, fluid train rheology, speed of fluid flow in the annulus,
and the fluid friction pressure. With the casing-wellbore contact points and lower casing centralization
identified in the well geometry described by the high-resolution MWD data, the risk of mud on the wall for
the same well is increased significantly in this case study (see Fig. 14). Well integrity objectives might be
compromised with the risk of poor mud removal not being identified during the design stage.
14 SPE/IADC-194101-MS

Figure 14—Mud removal simulation of the same wellbore using

the (a) static and (b) high-resolution MWD well trajectory survey.

Leveraging the benefits available from the high-definition MWD trajectory survey, the cementing
engineer will be able to resimulate the cementing job design with a more realistic wellbore geometry that
will allow for identifying the additional cementing design risks. These risks can be mitigated in several
ways by optimizing the cementing design. To improve the casing standoff across the section with hidden
microtortuosity, the centralizer placement pattern can be increased across the section. Also, the displacement
rate can be increased to improve the flow regime in the annulus. A higher flow rate in the annulus helps
to achieve the recommended friction pressure hierarchy during the displacement. If the wellbore stability
allows for an increment in equivalent circulating density during cementing, the spacer density can be easily
adjusted prior to the cement job by adding weighting material. This increase in spacer density triggers higher
buoyancy-driven azimuthal flow for the spacer in the annulus and improves its well-cleaning function.

Case Study 2
A North Sea well in the UK block was chosen for the second case study to provide additional support for
using the high-resolution MWD data. This is a highly deviated well with 78° deviation at the target depth as
shown in Fig. 15. The DLS indicated in the static MWD data is less than 5° /100 ft, but the high-resolution
MWD data show the presence of microtortuosity with DLS above 5° /100 ft. The 17.5-in. section was drilled
to 6,454.9-ft MD with a TVD of 4,111.3 ft. The top of the cement was designed to be at 3,300-ft MD by
using 502 bbl. with 120 bbl. of spacer ahead of the surfactant.
SPE/IADC-194101-MS 15

Figure 15—Case study 2 well geometry

The simulation results are shown in Fig. 16 and show the same trend as in Case Study 1. The hydraulic
simulation was run using the static and high-resolution MWD data well paths. Two centralizers per joint
were installed from the casing shoe to the top of the impermeable formation at 5,804-ft MD and one
centralizer per joint was installed to the top of cement. The standoff between the centralizers (red line) was
reduced to below 10% at certain depth with a hidden microtortuosity in the well path.

Figure 16—Comparison of casing standoff computed by the stiff-string

model in (a) static and (b) high- resolution MWD well trajectory survey.

A comparison of high-resolution vs. static inclination and DLS for this case study is shown in Fig. 17.
16 SPE/IADC-194101-MS

Figure 17—High-resolution vs. static DLS in the 17.5-in. section.

Because the casing is not completely centralized as shown in Fig. 16, the 3D color illustrations in Fig.
18 show that the annulus path is narrower at the bottom of the casing. However, the 3D color map from
high-resolution data shows multiple casing contract points with the formation in the high DLS section.
These casing contact points change the flow regime and increase the risk of mud on the wall in the bottom
section of the casing from majority medium to high risk as shown in Fig. 19. Again, cementing design
optimization as was presented in Case Study 1 has to be implemented at this stage to improve the quality
of the cementing job.

Figure 18—3D color map showing the 13 3/8-in. casing shape in the 17.5-in. open
hole described by the (a) static and (b) high-resolution MWD well trajectory survey.
SPE/IADC-194101-MS 17

Figure 19—Mud removal simulation of the same wellbore using

the (a) static and (b) high-resolution MWD well trajectory survey.

Conclusions and Recommendations

The drilling and well technology advances in different disciplines enable the industry to produce improved
well construction designs. The application of high-resolution MWD data and 3D cementing simulators help
to generate more effective cementing programs. Understanding the effects of hidden microtortuosity and
increased DLS have on the efficiency of zonal isolation should be acknowledged during the planning and
execution stage of drilling, especially in highly deviated or horizontal wells. The novel approach, based
on very limited literature available in the industry, provided the cementing design used in two case studies
with static and high-resolution MWD data. This technique also represents a step forward in the cementing
design workflow, providing a more robust well cementing solution to achieve the zonal isolation objective
and eventually a long-term well integrity barrier.
This method presented in this paper also has the goal to encourage synergy between the different drilling
disciplines and improve well construction design. It is essential that the directional drilling company and
well cementing personnel comprehend the more realistic and precise well trajectory during the drilling
operation. Depending on the region, formation type, and drilling BHA, the static survey, which is widely
used currently, might underestimate the true tortuosity of a well and overlook the increased risks that might
exist.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the management of Schlumberger for the permission to publish this paper.

References
Brandl, A., Doan, A.A., and Alegria, A.E. 2018. Overcoming the Challenges During Cementing Spacer
Design for Deep Deviated HPHT Wells Containing Heavy Oil Based Muds. Presented at the IADC/SPE
Asia Pacific Drilling Technology Conference. Bangkok, Thailand, 27–29 August. SPE-191084-MS. http://
dx.doi.org/2802/10.2118/191084-MS.
Gaynor, T., Chen, D., Stuart, D., and Comeaux, B. 2001. Tortuosity Versus Micro-Tortuosity – Why Little Things Mean
A Lot. Presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference. Amsterdam, The Netherland. 27 February – 1 March 2001.
SPE-67818. https://eureka.slb.com:2802/10.2118/67818-MS
Gorokhova, L., Parry, A.J., and Flamant, N.C. 2014. Comparing Soft-String and Stiff-String Mothods Used to Compute
Casing Centralization. SPE Drill & Compl 29(month): 106–114. SPE-163424-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/163424-
PA.
18 SPE/IADC-194101-MS

Lowdon, R., Brands, S., and Alexander, G. 2015. Analysis of the Impact of Wellbore Tortuosity on Well
Construction Using Scaled Tortuosity Index and High-Resolution Continuous Surveys. Presented at the SPE/
IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition, London, United Kingdom, 17–19 March. SPE-173110-MS. http://
dx.doi.org/10.2118/173110-MS.
Martin, M., Latil, M., and Vetter, P. 1978. Mud Displacement by Slurry During Primary Cementing Jobs – Predicting
Optium Conditions. Presented at the SPE Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, 1–3
October. SPE-7590-MS. http://dx.Doi.org/10.2118/7590-MS.
McLean, R.H., Mary, C.W., and Whitaker, W.W. 1967. Displacement Mechanics in Primary Cementing. J Petrol Technol
19 (month?):251–260.
Monterrosa, L., Ferreira, M., Zegarra, E. et al. 2016. Statistical Analysis Between Different Surveying Instruments to
Understand the Reliability of MWD/RSS High Resolution Surveys and its Effect in Well Trajectory Characterization.
Presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference and Exhibition, Fort Worth, Texas, USA, 1–3 March. SPE-178830-
MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/178830-MS.
Nelson, E.B. and Guillot, D. 2006. Well Cementing, second edition. Schlumberger: Sugar Land, Texas.
Olutimehin, K., Taoutaou, S., Pasteris, M. et al. 2016. Implementation of an Engineered, Fiber-Based Spacer Solution
for Improved Mud Removal – Thailand Case History. Presented at IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology
Conference, Singapore, 22–24 August. SPE-180624-MS. http://dx.doi.org/ 2802/10.2118/180624-MS.
Sanchez, A., Brown, C., and Adams W. 2012. Casing Centralization in Horizontal and Extended Reach Wells. Presented
at the SPE/EAGE European Unconventional Resources Conference and Exihibition, 20-22 March 2012. SPE 150317.
http://dx.doi.org/2802/10.2118/150317-MS
Sauer, C.W. and Landrum, W.R. 1985. Cementing – A Systematic Approach. Presented at the SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Francisco, California, USA, 5–8 October. SPE-11981-PA. http://
dx.doi.org/2802/10.2118/11981-PA.
Stockhausen, E. J. and Lesso, W. G. 2003. Continuous Direction and Inclination Measurements Lead to an Improvement in
Wellbore Positioning. Presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands,
19–21 February. SPE-79917-MS. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2118/79917-MS.
Tardy, P.M. and Bittleston, S.H. 2015. A Model for Annular Displacements of Wellbore Completion Fluids Involving
Casing Movement. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 126 (month?): page numbers?
Tardy, P.M., Flamant, N.C., Lac, E. et al. 2017. New Generation 3D Simulator Predicts Mud Displacement in Highly
Deviated and Horizontal Wells. Presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition, The Hague, The
Netherlands, 14–16 March. SPE-184677-MS. http://dx. Doi.org/2802/10.2118/184677-MS.