SPE/IADC 85326
Novel Drilling, Completion and Workover Fluids for Depleted Zones: Avoiding
Losses, Formation Damage and Stuck Pipe
P. Reid, SPE and H. Santos, SPE, Impact Solutions Group
Copyright 2003, SPE/IADC
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling Technology
Conference & Exhibition held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 20-22 October 2003.
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, as presented, 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, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the SPE, IADC, their
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes 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 where and by whom the paper was
presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A.,
fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
As oil and gas fields become mature, there is an increasing
need to drill, complete and workover wells in depleted zones.
The proximity of normally pressured zones often means that,
in order to maintain wellbore stability, the depleted formations
experience very high overbalance pressures often exceeding
1000psi. As a consequence, problems such as differential
sticking, deep filtrate invasion and severe lost circulation are
common. In the extreme, increased costs and high levels of
formation damage can make continued exploitation of fields
uneconomic.
This paper describes a new fluid additive package designed
to form an effective, low permeability barrier on permeable
formations. The materials have been used in a wide range of
water, oil and synthetic based fluids with excellent results. We
present laboratory evidence and field data to show that fluid
invasion is greatly reduced. This brings several important
benefits:
Differential sticking is greatly reduced
Fracture gradients are increased (increases well over
1000psi have been observed).
Return permeability results, and hence well
productivity indications, have been excellent.
The paper discusses the mechanism by which the additives
provide superior invasion control, and the ease with which the
protective barrier is removed from producing intervals.
The materials have been used onshore and offshore in most
major oil and gas provinces. In addition to providing effective
technical solutions, they have the environmental approvals that
allow their unrestricted use in areas such as the Gulf of
Mexico and the UK North Sea.
Introduction
Depleted zones are becoming more and more common as
many fields become mature. Drilling activity in old fields can
be significant, either in trying to maintain the production level,
or in trying to reach untapped hydrocarbon pools. Workover
activity is also generally high.
The challenge of working in depleted areas increases when
zones with normal or original pressures coexist with the
depleted ones. Several problems can be faced during drilling,
completion or workover that were not present when the fields
were first developed. These changes often require modified
procedures and techniques if the fields are to be developed
economically. In some situations, fields will have to be
abandoned if this economic development cannot be realised.
One of the techniques developed to combat the difficulties
of operating in depleted zones is Under-balanced Drilling
UBD. There are several publications describing this technique
in detail1-3. However, there are technical limitations that mean
that UBD cannot be used in many cases. In these situations, a
more traditional drilling operation must be used.
This paper focuses on those cases where a drilling fluid
with an overbalanced pressure must be used. The paper
initially describes the traditional approaches used in
formulating drilling, completion and workover fluids for
depleted zones, emphasizing the benefits and limitations
associated with each of them. We also discuss recent
technology introductions, focusing on aerated fluids and, more
importantly, on a novel family of ultra-low invasion fluids.
These new fluids are discussed in detail, including their
mechanisms of action and why they are suited to depleted
zone drilling. Laboratory results and field cases are used to
demonstrate the utility of these new fluids in developing
depleted reservoirs economically.
The Traditional Approach: Particle Bridging
For a long time the industry has known that minimizing
invasion of wellbore fluid into the rock is a key part of the
strategy for dealing with depleted formations effectively. An
established approach is to add particles to the fluid to bridge
the pore throats. If the formation pore sizes are known, these
particles can be sized in such a way as to provide effective
cake building properties. Calcium carbonate and salt (sodium
chloride) are the most commonly used particles, because it is
reasoned that acidification or simple dissolution can remove
these solids from inside the rocks pores, should stimulation be
necessary.
2 P. Reid & H. Santos
The approach requires the particles to penetrate a small
distance into the rock and find a suitable pore size to bridge.
Where and how efficiently this happens depends on the
particle size distribution in the fluid the moment the formation
is exposed. If for any reason the optimum sizes are not
present, effective bridging will not take place and the fluid
(both liquid and solids components) may penetrate deep into
the rock. To demonstrate this, the example shown in Fig. 1 is
of a sand bed exposed to fluids containing different solids
sizes; deep solids invasion can be clearly seen when the
particle size distribution is not appropriate for a specific sand
bed4.
An issue with sized solids muds is that the particle size
distribution is constantly changing as the fluid is circulated.
This is because the sized solids are ground by the action of the
bit and mud pumps, and other solids (e.g. drill solids) are
incorporated into the system (an added complication with salt
crystals is that they also dissolve and recrystallize as they are
warmed and cooled during circulation). Maintenance of a size
distribution that guarantees good sealing against a particular
rock is therefore difficult and the fluids engineer is not always
successful in being able to run a low invasion / low damage
mud.
The use of bridging solids can be very effective in
homogeneous formations where the pore size distribution of
the rock is known prior to drilling. However, most permeable
sections are heterogeneous and the pore size distribution can
vary both vertically and horizontally within a field, making it
difficult, if not impossible, to maintain the optimum particle
size distribution in the fluid. Continuous seepage losses are
one indicator that this sealing is not effective. In this case,
solids invasion might be deep, making it difficult and costly to
remove the resulting formation damage.
Even though bridging with sized solids can be effective
as evidenced by the wide uptake by the industry - in many
situations, a more flexible approach, not relying on knowing
the formation pore sizes accurately, would be more convenient
from the standpoints of design and maintenance. This would
reduce the risk of causing the problems described above when
drilling depleted zones.
We will now discuss these new approaches to fluid design
that embrace this principle of flexibility.
Aerated Fluids for Depleted Zones
Aerated fluids have been used for drilling depleted zones for
some time. In their simplest forms, aerated fluids consist of
mists and foams. These are low density fluids that can be used
to maintain a minimum overbalance while drilling a depleted
zone, however they will be of no use if a normally pressured
zone is also exposed in the same hole section.
Foams have the merit of being a highly structured fluid of
air bubbles contained in a continuous network of liquid films.
The structured nature of the fluid, and the often wide size
distribution of the air bubbles means that foams have the
ability to bridge a wide range of pore sizes, even extending
this ability to small fractures.
There are, however, some disadvantages to foams:
Specialized equipment is required to generate them.
This may be costly and, in offshore locations, limited
deck space may preclude the use of foam
SPE 85326
Foams are compressible and so lose some or all of their
structure (and hence bridging properties) under
downhole conditions. Downhole densities and
rheologies become difficult to predict and control
Recently, a new class of aerated fluids, known as aphrons,
has been applied to a range of drilling conditions, including
depleted zone drilling. These fluids have been extensively
discussed and promoted elsewhere5-7. In brief, they are water-
based fluids containing a viscosifier package, surfactants and
where appropriate densifying agents. The surfactants allow
air to be entrained in the fluid and (with the help of the
viscosifiers) stable, thick walled bubbles are formed; these are
known as aphrons. Several claims are made for aphron fluids,
including the fact that the bubbles are able to form a barrier to
invasion in the near-wellbore formation: hence they can
control formation damage, mud losses and other problems
associated with fluid invasion. Good success is claimed in
specific oil and gas provinces, but concerns have been voiced
that may restrict their widespread use. In particular, the aphron
air bubbles compress as pressure is applied and, above a
critical pressure, collapse and dissolve into the base fluid;
hence any benefit of having bridging bubbles in the fluid is
lost. Additionally, the quite high levels of surfactants raise
concerns about formation damage (particularly relative
permeability effects), and it is possible that formation cleanup
will be difficult if pores are blocked with air bubbles.
Controlling Invasion with Flexible Particles
In the last 2 sections, we have seen how the concept of
bridging pores as a way of limiting invasion and damage has
developed over recent years. First, the industry developed
sized solids fluids in an attempt to seal pore throats quickly
and effectively. Air bubbles whether foams or aphrons
have also been applied. These latter fluids benefit from having
particles that have both a broad size distribution and are
deformable. We have discussed the advantages of both
approaches but have also argued that neither provides anything
approaching a perfect solution to the challenge of limiting
invasion and damage in most payzones, let alone depleted
zones where demands are often more severe. With these
limitations in mind, we set out to define the perfect fluid for
controlling invasion and damage in permeable zones. We put
particular emphasis on depleted zone drilling where a
normally pressured zone was exposed in the same hole section
as the depleted formation. We identified the following ideal
set of properties:
The fluid should be able to bridge a wide range of pore
throats without having to change the formulation
The bridging should be rapid and at, or very close to,
the rock surface
Any protective barrier must be easily removed at an
appropriate point in the well completion and production
process
The fluid should be non-damaging
Any barrier formed should continue to function at high
overbalance pressure, should there be a need to raise
fluid density to control high pressure formations in the
section. Ideally, this barrier should be such that
SPE 85326 Novel Drilling, Completion and Workover Fluids for Depleted Zones: Avoiding
Losses, Formation Damage and Stuck Pipe
wellbore pressure is not transmitted to the depleted
formation; this would effectively raise the fracture
gradient
The fluid should function over a wide range of
densities, temperatures and downhole pressures
The same properties should be obtained in oil-,
synthetic- or water-based fluids
Fluids should be easy to mix and maintain
Any additives should be non-toxic and satisfy
environmental and human health requirements
While appreciating that it would be extremely difficult to
satisfy all of the above requirements, we screened a number of
additives and systems before identifying an approach that,
under most conditions, met all of the demands. These Non-
Invasive Fluids (NIF) were extensively tested in the
laboratory before being applied in the field where evidence is
growing that the fluids are, indeed, capable of fulfilling the
above requirements. (Note: we use the term Non-invasive
Fluid to identify the fluid from more conventional systems.
However, we are not aware of any fluid that does not invade to
some degree; the NIF should be considered a fluid that
exhibits ultra-low invasion properties).
The heart of the NIF system is a blend of polymers with a
range of water and oil solubilities (the polymers cover a wide
range of HLB values). The material is described in more detail
elsewhere8 and only a brief summary is therefore given here.
When added to a water-based fluid, the polymers assemble
into deformable aggregates or micelles (micelles are groupings
of molecules that form microscopic spheres, rods and plates in
solution). When driven by the fluid overbalance, the fluid
starts to invade a permeable rock and these micelles rapidly
form a low permeability seal over pore throats, thereby greatly
limiting further fluid invasion. The micelles in the layer are
deformable so, as the pressure is raised, they compress and
reduce the barrier permeability even further. The mechanism
is shown schematically in Fig. 2.
Particle size analysis shows that a solution of the polymer
contains species with a d50 near 60 microns, a d10 of 9 microns
and d90 of 340 microns. Their deformability and wide size
distribution means that they are effective sealing agents over a
much wider range of pore sizes and permeabilities than
specifically sized bridging solids.
The range of oil and water solubilities in the polymer blend
means that the additive works equally well in oil- and
synthetic-based muds as in water-based.
Laboratory Testing
The ability of an NIF fluid to limit invasion can be
demonstrated using the sand bed invasion test shown in Fig. 3.
To perform this test, approximately 350 ml of the chosen
grade of sand is placed in the clear plastic cylinder and gently
tapped to level the surface. The grade of sand is selected to
mimic most closely the permeability and pore sizes of the
formation to be drilled. The mud under test is poured carefully
on top of the sand and the cell filled to within about 1 cm of
the top. The cell is reassembled and pressurized to 100psi. The
depth of invasion, which can be easily seen through the wall of
the cell, is measured as a function of time (alternatively, the
3
sand bed can be saturated with water before the test fluid is
added and the volume of fluid collected at the base of the cell
used as a measure of fluid invasion). The test is typically run
for 30 minutes. The ability of the NIF fluids to greatly reduce
mud invasion is illustrated in Figs. 4a and 4b. Fig. 4a shows a
field oil-based mud that invades deep into the sand bed. Fig.
4b is the same mud, but with 5ppb of the micelle-forming
polymer added. Further comparisons of the invasion
characteristics of muds with and without the NIF additive are
made in Table 1.
Effective concentrations of the micelle-forming blend vary
from 3 to 8ppb. The optimum within this range depends on the
base fluid properties and the permeability of the formations
being drilled (e.g. higher concentrations would typically be
required to protect very permeable formations and to give
good invasion control in low solids fluids and in high salinity
brines.
As already discussed, it is critical that a fluid used in the
payzone should not cause significant levels of formation
damage. In depleted reservoirs the problem is potentially
worse because the overbalance may be higher (producing
more invasion) and the reservoir pressure lower (giving a
lower drawdown to clean up any damage). It is therefore
encouraging to observe that it is easy to clean up the protective
barrier formed by an NIF. This is because the micelles only
exist above a critical concentration of polymers in the fluid.
Therefore when a wash fluid that is free of micelles contacts
the barrier, or when it is contacted by reservoir fluid (as the
well is brought on production), it simply disperses and is
removed in the wellbore fluid.
Reducing the Risks in Depleted Zone Drilling
Two major problems faced when drilling in depleted zones
are:
Invasion of the rock matrix, leading to formation
damage and/or differentially stuck pipe
Whole mud losses, either into natural or induced
fractures
In order for the drilling, completion, or workover
operations to be economically feasible, these problems must
be reduced to manageable levels or, ideally, eliminated. We
now consider the issues of matrix invasion and whole mud
losses in more detail and discuss how an NIF fluid containing
flexible particles can help reduce or eliminate risk.
Invasion into the Formation Matrix
We have already shown how the micelles contained in an NIF
can greatly reduce invasion in a laboratory sand bed test. The
most direct way of determining this in the field is to use a well
logging technique that is capable of profiling fluid invasion
into downhole formations. Figs. 5a and 5b show logs obtained
from an induction array tool on an offshore well in the Far
East. The logging tool is capable of detecting invasion up to
90 inches into a permeable formation9. Fig. 5a shows the log
obtained from a well drilled with a standard synthetic-based
mud. Over the permeable section indicated in the figure, it can
be clearly seen that the induction tool traces looking 10, 30, 60
4 P. Reid & H. Santos
and 90 inches into the formation are widely spaced; the
interpretation is that the mud filtrate is invading to 90 inches
or greater. Fig. 5b shows the induction log for an offset well
where the same mud was converted to an NIF fluid by adding
5ppb of the micelle-forming polymer blend. The 10, 30, 60
and 90 inch traces now lie virtually on top of each other,
suggesting that the NIF had reduced invasion to 10 inches or
less.
We also discussed earlier the pros and cons of sized solids
muds, stating that the particle size distribution of these solids
change during drilling and the excellent invasion control
offered by the freshly prepared fluid can be lost. Fig. 6
demonstrates this point by showing how the sealing properties
of a sized calcium carbonate fluid change quickly. The fluid,
taken from a North Sea well, had a good sand bed sealing
capability before drilling started but, within 12 hours, invasion
into the sand bed had more than trebled. Interestingly, when
5ppb of the NIF product was added to the degraded fluid, the
sealing capacity was improved beyond that of the original
sized carbonate mud. This is shown in the last test where 4
ppb of the micelle-forming additive was added to sample H.
Preventing Formation Damage
Damage mechanisms have been studied and discussed in
detail over many decades10-14. These are basically mechanisms
that involve the physical blocking / restriction of pore throats
(solids invasion, fines mobilization, polymer invasion, clay
swelling, scale etc) or involve relative permeability changes
(fluid blocks, emulsions, wettability change etc). Whatever the
potential damage mechanism, the first step must be to reduce
mud invasion to as low a level as possible (on the basis that if
mud cannot invade, it cannot damage the formation). The
second step, accepting that some invasion always occurs with
a mud in overbalance, is to ensure that those species that do
invade are selected to cause as little damage as possible.
The NIF concept described here is focused on reducing
invasion to as low a level as is feasible. The fact that the
micelle-forming additive is compatible with all common mud
additives means that the second point can be addressed
without compromising the low invasion characteristics
bestowed by the micelles.
A key feature and benefit of NIF fluids is that the low
permeability barrier of micelles forms quickly and at (or very
close to) the exposed rock surface. This means that solids and
most polymers are kept from entering the pores, and only the
liquid filtrate invades a short way into the rock matrix. The
near-surface barrier can be seen in the sand bed experiment
shown in Fig. 4b.
Because the barrier is located at the rock surface, it is not
surprising that low flow initiation pressures are recorded in a
formation cleanup experiment; this, combined with the fact
that the micelles break up when exposed to the produced
formation fluid means that excellent return permeabilities are
generally obtained in laboratory tests. The location of the
barrier at the wellbore wall also makes it accessible to wash
fluids should this cleanup option be chosen in place of back
production.
Laboratory-derived return permeability data are shown in
Figs. 7 and 8. It is important to add sufficient of the micelle-
forming polymer to establish a fully effective protective
SPE 85326
barrier. In a low-solids fluid, this concentration may be as high
as 7 or 8ppb, while in a solids-laden mud (where the solids
will contribute to barrier formation in synergy with the
micelles) this can be expected to reduce to 3 to 5ppb. The
optimum concentration should always be determined on a
mud-by-mud basis using the sand bed test cell.
Differentially Stuck Pipe
Once the drill string contacts a permeable formation the
mud overbalance pressure acts on the string, forcing it against
the wellbore wall. It this pressure is sufficient, and the filter
cake forms a seal around a portion of the string, the pipe will
become stuck. This phenomenon, known as differential
pressure sticking, is illustrated in Fig. 9. An important factor
in differential sticking is the properties of the mud filter cake:
if the cake is thick, sticking is more likely to occur than if it is
thin because the area of contact between the cake and pipe is
increased15. An NIF fluid helps prevent differentially stuck
pipe in 2 ways16. First, the very low permeability barrier is
formed rapidly, reducing the effect of the wellbore pressure on
the formation. Second, by having a very low permeability
barrier, the filter cake thickness does not increase as rapidly as
with most conventional muds. Therefore, the risk of stuck pipe
is significantly reduced when using the NIF. While not a
guarantee in future wells, we can state that, at the time of
writing this paper, not a single stuck pipe incident has been
reported in any application of an NIF fluid.
Mud losses
For simplicity of discussion, but moving away from industry
convention, we choose to divide mud losses into just two
categories: seepage losses and severe losses. The first includes
all losses of up to 50-75 bbl/hr, mainly into the matrix or
microfractures. The second is considered here to be any loss
above 50-75 bbl/hr, typically into fractures, large openings,
vugs or caverns. We have chosen to divide the losses into
these categories because the actions taken to cure the problem
are different in each case.
Seepage Losses.
The micelles formed by the polymer blend are present in a
broad size distribution and hence work over a wider range of
rock pore sizes, up to and including microfractures8. This
enables the same fluid composition to seal a wide range of
formations effectively. Laboratory tests with sand beds have
shown that the fluid is capable of controlling invasion into
formations with permeabilities well in excess of 20 Darcies.
With coarse solids added to an NIF, preliminary laboratory
results indicate that even higher permeabilities could also be
drilled without significant losses.
Preventing Initiation of Severe Losses.
When a weak formation is drilled at moderate overbalance,
or a depleted formation at high overbalance, there is a real risk
of inducing fractures and initiating severe mud losses. The
NIF fluid will reduce the risk and in several field applications
there have been strong indications that the fracture gradient
has been increased relative to that measured with a
conventional fluid. There are 2 rock mechanics arguments that
SPE 85326 Novel Drilling, Completion and Workover Fluids for Depleted Zones: Avoiding
Losses, Formation Damage and Stuck Pipe
can explain how the formation of the low permeability NIF
barrier can result in an increase in fracture gradient:
A very low permeability barrier on or near the wellbore
wall will isolate the pore fluid from the wellbore fluid.
Because the fluid hardly penetrates into the formation,
the pore pressure will not be raised as much as with a
conventional fluid, the effective stress will not be
reduced and the wellbore will be less prone to
fracturing
Should a fracture initiate in a weak formation, the
micelles in an NIF will form a barrier in the fracture
and a form of tip screen out can occur. Therefore, if a
fracture is initiated, its propagation should be slowed or
stopped and severe mud losses prevented or reduced.
Laboratory experiments are planned to investigate both points
further.
Managing Severe Losses
There will be situations where naturally occurring features
(e.g. fractures, faults, rubble zones, vugs) give rise to severe
mud losses, whether the well is drilled with an NIF or a
conventional mud. There may also be situations where an NIF
fluid does not prevent fracture formation (e.g. at extreme
overbalance pressures or when insufficient of the micelle-
forming additive is present). Once these severe losses have
started, the use of a micelle-forming additive will bring no
benefit because, although able to protect a wide range of pore
openings, there is a maximum size above which the micelles
cannot bridge.
In this situation, a lost circulation pill treatment will
generally be required. There are many pill treatments
available, including cements, gunk squeezes, cross-linked gels
and graded particulates (micas, coarse mineral grains, fibres,
nut hulls etc). Our preference in these situations is for a high
solids dilatant fluid pill that offers several technical and
operational advantages. The product is a blend of flakes, fibres
and granules, ground to finer than 5 mesh.
Most treatments either include large particles that, it is
hoped, will bridge across the loss zone, or use fluids that can
chemically set (e.g. flash-set cements or cross-linked gels). In
both cases, a detailed knowledge of the type of loss zone, and
perhaps temperature and pressure, is required for the treatment
to be successful.
The dilatant pill works by a different mechanism and its
success depends less on a full understanding of the type of loss
zone. Dilatancy is the property of a fluid to thicken as the
shear rate is increased; this contrasts with most drilling fluids
where shear-thinning properties are desirable.
The dilatant property of the fluid helps hold the pill
together during placement. It will also cause the viscosity to
increase further when the pill experiences the increased flow
rates on entering the loss zone. By thickening in the loss zone,
the pill is held in place until a small volume of fluid leaks out
(into the formation or into the loss zone). The result is a solid
plug that, if properly placed, can hold in excess of 1000psi
differential pressure.
The amount of additive required to produce a dilatant pill
varies with fluid type, mud weight, low gravity solids content,
5
etc., but is of the order of 50ppb in water-based muds and
70ppb in oil- and synthetic-based fluids. The pill can be built
into a volume of the active mud and does not need to be mixed
in a special base fluid.
An important benefit is that the product is fine enough to
be pumped through downhole equipment such as mud motors,
MWD and bit nozzles without plugging the flow paths. There
is therefore no need to trip and run in hole with open-ended
pipe before being able to treat the mud losses. The pill
treatment has proved to be successful in several cases of
severe losses into natural and induced fractures:
Field Case 1. In a series of wells drilled in a development field
in the Far East, losses averaged 0.91 and 0.41 barrels / foot
drilled in 2 different hole sections over a 2 year period.
Several conventional lost circulation treatments were tried but
with little success. The dilatant pill treatment was introduced
late in 2001 and average losses reduced to 0.06 and 0.21
barrels / foot respectively. Cost savings associated with lost
drilling fluids and with non-productive time have been
substantial.
Field Case 2. Total losses were experienced during workover
operations in a Far East well in late 2002. Losses were into the
fractured basement reservoir rock. A 40 bbl dilatant pill
comprising 67 lbs/bbl of the additive was placed and allowed
to soak for 1 hour. Losses stopped and, 3 hours after spotting
the pill, the well successfully held a 1000psi pressure test
without losses.
Field Case 3. An onshore USA operator has routinely used
dilatant pills over the past 5 years to cure massive losses in
naturally fractured carbonate reservoirs and in weak sands.
The wells with fractured carbonate targets are typically drilled
with oil-based muds and use 40 60 bbl pills containing 50
75 lbs/bbl of the additive once losses are encountered. Severe
to total losses are generally reduced to 80-90% returns with
one pill. On occasions, a second, smaller pill is used to obtain
full returns.
Conclusions
Drilling, completing or working over depleted zones
presents special challenges, particularly when a
normally pressured formation is exposed in the same
hole section. To avoid instability in the normally
pressured zone, the depleted formation is subjected to
a high overbalance pressure and this increases fluid
invasion and the associated risk of formation damage
and differential pressure sticking. The high
overbalance may also fracture the formation, causing
whole mud losses.
Recent fluid designs aimed at reducing the above
risks include sized solids muds and aerated systems
(foams and aphrons). While these approaches offer
advantages over standard fluids, they still have
limitations.
We propose the use of fluids containing flexible
particles that rapidly form an ultra-low permeability
barrier to fluid invasion. This is an effective method
of greatly limiting invasion at high overbalance
6 P. Reid & H. Santos
pressure and, hence, reducing (and sometimes
eliminating) the problems of drilling depleted zones.
The argument for using flexible particles is supported
by laboratory data and field case histories.
In situations where the flexible particles do not prevent
induced fracturing and mud losses or where natural
fractures or vugs exist the benefits of using a dilatant
pill as a lost circulation treatment are presented.
References
1. Bennion, D.B., Thomas, F.B., Bietz, R.F. and Bennion,
D.W.: Underbalanced Drilling, Praises and Perils,
SPEDC (December 1998), pp. 214-222, SPE 52889.
2. Stone, R.: The History and Development of
Underbalanced Drilling in the USA, paper presented at the
1995 International Underbalanced Drilling Conference &
Exhibition, The Hague, The Netherlands, 2-4 October.
3. Santos, H. and Queiroz, J.: How Effective is
Underbalanced Drilling in Preventing Formation Damage,
Paper SPE 58738, 2000 International Conference on
Formation Damage, Lafayette, 23-24 February 2000.
4. Soares, C. Influence of solids on the invasion of permeable
formation in drilling operations, M.Sc. Thesis, State
University of the North Fluminense, 2001 (in Portuguese).
5. Brookey, T. Micro-Bubbles": New Aphron Drill-In Fluid
Technique Reduces Formation Damage in Horizontal
Wells, Paper SPE 39589, presented at the 1998 SPE
International Symposium on Formation Damage Control
held in Lafayette, Louisiana, 18-19 February 1998.
6. Ivan, C., Quintana, J. and Blake, L.: Aphron-Base Drilling
Fluid: Evolving Technologies for Lost Circulation
Control, Paper SPE 71377, presented at the 2001 SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in New
Orleans, Louisiana, 30 September-3 October 2001.
7. Ivan, C., Growcock, F. and Friedheim, J.: Chemical and
Physical Characterization of Aphron-Based Drilling
Fluids, Paper SPE 77445, presented at the SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition held in San Antonio,
Texas, 29 September-2 October 2002.
Table 1 Sand bed invasion results of various drilling fluids, tested with and without the micelle additive.
Mud Type Sand Bed Invasion Sand Bed Invasion
(Base Mud) (With Micelles )
Oil Mud 1 Total 1 cm
Oil Mud 2 Total 0.5 cm
KCl Polymer Total 4.5 cm
KCl Polymer2 Total 1.5 cm
NaCl Total 3.7 cm
Polymer / Starch Total 1.7 cm
Cesium Formate Total 6 cm
Notes: Sand bed was 20/40 sand. Test pressure 100psi. Test time 30 minutes
SPE 85326
8. Reid, P., Labenski, F. and Santos, H.: Drilling Fluids
Approaches for Control of Wellbore Instability in Fractured
Formations, Paper SPE/IADC 85304, presented at the
SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling Technology Conference &
Exhibition held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 20-22 October 2003.
9. Semmelbeck, M. E. and Dewan, J. T.: Invasion-Based
Method For Estimating Permeability From Logs, Paper
SPE 30581, presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference & Exhibition held in Dallas, TX, U.S.A., 22-25
October, 1995.
10. Bennion. D.B, Thomas, F.B, and Bennion. D.W: Effective
laboratory coreflood tests to evaluate and minimize
formation damage in horizontal wells: Third International
Conference on Horizontal Well Technology, November 12-
14, 1991, Houston, Texas.
11. Abrams. A: Mud design to minimize rock impairment due
to particle invasion: Journal of Petroleum Technology,
May 1977, 586-592.
12. Glenn. E.E and Slusser. M.L: Factors affecting well
productivity II - drilling fluid particle invasion into porous
media: Trans Soc. Pet. Eng. 1954, Vol. 210, 126-131.
13. Krueger. R.F: An overview of formation damage and well
productivity in oilfield operations: Journal of Petroleum
Technology, Feb. 1986, 131-152.
14. Porter. K.E: An overview of formation damage: Journal
of Petroleum Technology, Aug. 1989, 780-786.
15. Reid, P., Meeten, G., Way, P., Clark, P., Chambers, B.,
Gilmour, A., and Sanders,M.: Differential-Sticking
Mechanisms and a Simple Wellsite Test for Monitoring and
Optimizing Drilling Mud Properties, Paper SPE 64114,
SPE Drilling & Completion Journal, June 2000.
16. Santos, H.: Differentially Stuck Pipe: Early Diagnostic
and Solution,, Paper SPE 59127, presented at the 2000
IADC/SPE Drilling Conference held in New Orleans,
Louisiana, 2325 February 2000.
Conc. Of Micelle Additive
(ppb)
8
10
6
8
5.25
5
5
Figure 1 A sand bed exposed to different calcium carbonate
sizes. From left to right: fine, medium and coarse. If the solids
particle size is not appropriate, deep invasion of the solids occurs
(left). This can causing severe formation damage and may not
effectively prevent mud losses or stuck pipe1.

Figure 3 Diagram of the sand bed invasion test cell. The

invasion test is carried out at 100psi for 30 minutes at room
temperature.

Invasion
< 1cm

Deep
invasion
Figure 2 A schematic representation of the modified polymers
(1) forming micelles (2) in solution. The micelles form the low > 14 cm
permeability, deformable barrier (3) on the rock surface in the
very early stages of mud filtration.

Figures 4a and 4b The left hand figure (a) shows deep invasion
of a field oil-based mud on a 20/40 grade sand bed. The right hand
figure (b) shows the same mud with 5ppb of the micelle-forming
additive present. The barrier at the sand surface can be seen just
below the top arrow.
 8 P. Reid & H. Santos SPE 85326

220

200
Initial perm. 2050
Return perm. 1950
180

160

140
400 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Injected Volume
Figure 7 Return permeability to brine. Arrow denotes point of
injection of NIF fluid. Vertical scale is milliDarcies. Fluid is a
bentonite water based mud containing 8ppb micelle-forming
additive. Core is a natural sample from a South American well.
Return permeability = 93%

Figures 5a and 5b The left hand figure shows an array induction

log of a permeable formation (shaded) drilled with a standard 50
synthetic-based mud. The spaced lines on the left hand side 0
indicate deep filtrate invasion (> 90 inches). The right hand figure
(5b) shows an offset well using the same mud but with 5ppb of 40
the micelle-forming additive presence. The overlying lines 0
indicate much less invasion (< 10 inches).
30
0 Initial perm. 385 Return perm. 361
20 mD mD
14 0
10
12 0

10 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 Injected Volume
(ml)
6
Figure 8 Return permeability to brine. Arrow denotes point of
4 injection of NIF fluid. Vertical scale is milliDarcies. Fluid is a
solids-free water based brine fluid containing 6ppb micelle-
forming additive. Core is a synthetic aluminosilicate core. Return
2 permeability = 95%.

0
A B C D E F G H
Fluid

Figure 6 Sand bed invasion results for a field mud containing

sized calcium carbonate. Samples A-C were taken from the
system before drilling commenced. Samples D-H were taken after
12 hours drilling & show an approximate 3-fold increase in
invasion. The last test was done with sample H plus 4 ppb of the
micelle-forming NIF additive. Vertical scale is sand bed invasion
volume x 10 (mL).
SPE 85326 Novel Drilling, Completion and Workover Fluids for Depleted Zones: Avoiding
Losses, Formation Damage and Stuck Pipe 9

Cake
Mud pressure

Mud

BHA/string/tool

Formation fluid pressure

Figure 9 A schematic diagram of the differential sticking

process. Once the drillstring touches the wellbore wall, the mud
pressure, which is higher than the formation fluid pressure, holds
the string in place. As mud cake builds around the string, a
pressure seal is formed and sticking occurs.