Abstract
The conventional overbalanced drilling of production zones
generally results in a negative effect on overall productivity
and cost, caused primarily by formation damage. As a
result, the oil industry is turning more toward methods such
as underbalanced drilling (UBD) to increase productivity
and reduce overall costs.
UBD, particularly pressure-depleted, mature reservoirs, can
minimise or prevent near-wellbore damage, often avoiding
the need for stimulation.
A clear and fundamental understanding of drilling
technology is required to design and supervise drilling
operations on an underbalanced well.
The benefits of UBD technology, the use of CT (coiled
tubing) in UBD, UBD fluid systems, control of the well
while drilling are presented.
Introduction
Successful underbalanced drilling must increase the
financial returns by creating improvements that either
reduce the cost of drilling the well or increase the overall
productivity of the well once drilled. Benefits of the
underbalanced drilling over the conventional overbalance
techniques are: (1) increased well or field productivity
because of reduced formation damage, (2) reduction in loss
of drilling fluids into the formation, (3) reduction in lossrelated drilling problems, (4) reduced risk of differential
sticking, (5) reduced completion and stimulation
requirements and costs, (6) improved formation evaluation,
(7) increased penetration rates, and (8) extended bit life.
The potential disadvantages of UBD process, particularly if
it is poorly designed and executed are: (1) wellbore stability
and consolidation concerns, (2) safety and well control
concerns in high pressure or sour environments, (3)
increased drilling costs, (4) inability to use conventional
MWD technology for through-string injection techniques,
(5) spontaneous contercurrent inhibition effects, (6)
underbalanced flow conditions, (7) condensate dropout or
2
UNDERBALANCED DRILLING WITH COILED TUBING
SPE 87242
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
4
UNDERBALANCED DRILLING WITH COILED TUBING
SPE 87242
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
NO
IS THE TOTAL FLOW
RATE WITHIN THE
MOTOR SPECS?
YES
NO
IS BOTTOMHOLE
PRESSURE WITHIN
SPECIFICATIONS?
YES
NO
IS CIRCULATING
PRESSURE WITHIN
SPECIFICATIONS?
YES
Fq =
Qg + Q p
Qg + Qw + Q p
(1)
Rs = 1
vs
v an
(2)
Conclusions
Using underbalanced drilling with coiled tubing we can
save two ways: first significantly reducing drilling costs,
and secondly increasing production. The key to selecting
appropriate reservoir candidates for UBD is achieving a
balance of technical, safety and economic factors. Properly
designed and executed underbalanced drilling operations
can eliminate or significantly reduce formation damage,
drill solids and fluid invasion, lost circulation, fluid
entering and trapping effects, and potential adverse reaction
of drilling fluids with the reservoir matrix or in-situ
reservoir fluids.
The use of coiled tubing gives something more, a
continuing process, with excellent pressure control.
Limitations exist if some project is poorly prepared.
Definition of hole size, depth and horizontal reach defines
the possible CT, motor and bit combination. Improved
manufacturing and control during production and
determination of possible CT life have expand the use of
such technology.
Nomenclature
Fq = foam quality, nondimensional
Qg = gas volume in flow for a time unit, m3s-1
Qp = solid particles volume in flow for a time unit,
m3s-1
Qw = water volume in flow for a time unit, m3s-1
Rs = ratio of solid particles carrying off,
nondimensional
vs = solid particles lagging velocity, ms-1
van = flow velocity in annular, ms-1SPE 87242
6
UNDERBALANCED DRILLING WITH COILED TUBING
SPE 87242
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
References
1. Matanovi, Simon,K.,Kritafor, Z. and GaurinaMeimurec,N.: Application of Horizontal Wells for
Increasing Productivity from Partially Depleted
Reservoirs in Croatia, Proceedings of Conference and
Exhibition, Modern Exploration and Improved Oil and
Gas Recovery Methods, Krakow, Poland, Sept. 12-15,
1995, pp. 1-9,
2. Gaurina-Meimurec,N.,Matanovi, D.:Gas
application in drilling, Workover and Completion
Operations, Proceedings, 2nd International Scientific
and Professional Conference Power and Engineering
and Process Plants, Dubrovnik, Croatia, May 22-24,
1996, pp. 559-566,
3. Bennion,D.B.: Reservoir Screening Criteria for
Underbalanced Drilling, Pet. Eng. Intern, February
1997,
4. Melvan,J.: Coiled Tubing Fill Clean Outs, 2nd
International Conference and Exhibition on Coiled
Tubing Technology, Operations, Services, Practices,
Houston, Texas, March 4-7, 1996, pp. 1-6,
5. Eide,E. at all: Further Advances in Coiled Tubing
Drilling, SPE paper 28866, European Petroleum
Conference, London, 25-27 October 1994, pp. 11-19,
6. Graham,R.A.: Planning for Underbalanced Drilling
with Coiled Tubing? The feasibility study and
computer modelling., Paper SPE 46042, presented at
the 1998 SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Roundtable,
Houston, Texas, 15-16 April 1998, pp. 181-190,
7. Walton,I.C., Hongren,G.: Hydraulics Design in Coiled
Tubing Drilling, Paper ICoTA/SPE 96027,
SPE/ICoTA Roundtable, Montgomery, Texas, 26-28
February 1996, pp. 1-10,
8. Mitchel,B.J.: Test Data Fill Theory Gap on Using
Foam as a Drilling Fluid, Oil and Gas J, September 6
1971, pp. 96-100,
9. Gidley,P.C. at all: Recent Advances in Hydraulic
Fracturing, SPE Monography, 1989, pp. 177-222, and
394-396,
10. Haris,P.C.,Reidenbach,V.G.:
High
Temperature
rheological study of foam fracturing fluids, JPT, May
1978, pp. 615-619,
11. Melton,L.L., Malone,W.T.: Fluid Mechanic Research
and Engineering Application in non-Newtonian Fluid
System, Paper SPE 739, 1963,
12. Reidenbach,Z.G.,Harris,P.C.Lee,Y.N. and Lord,D.L:
Rheological Study of Foam Fracturing Fluids Using
Nitrogen and Carbon Dioxide, Paper SPE 12026,
1983,
13. Jeffrey,D.J., Archivos,A.: The Rheological Properties
of Suspensions of Rigid Particles, AIChE Journal,
Vol. 22. No.3, May, 1976, pp. 417-432,
14. Storbridge,T.R.: The Thermodynamic Properties of
Nitrogen Foam From 114 to 540 deg R Between 1.0
and 5000 Psi, National Bureau of Standards Technical
Note No. 129A,