Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SPE/lADC 29363
A Dynamic Model for UnderbalancedDrillingWith Coiled Tubing
Rolv Rommetveit, E.H. Vefring, and Zhihua Wang,* RF-Rogaland
and A.M. Faure, Shell Research B.V.
Research,
SPE Members
CcPy~ht
This paper was pfepared for preaentatlon at the 1995 SPE/lADC Drflling Conference fwld in Amsterdam, 28 FebNary-2
March 1995
ABSTRACT
A model for underbafanced drilling with coiled tubing has
been developed which takes into account all important factors
contributing to the process. This model is a unique tool to
plan and execute underbalanced or near balance drilling
operations.
It is a transient, one-dimensional multi-phase
flow model with the following components: Lift gas system
model, multiphase hydraulics model, reservoir-wellbore
interaction model, drilling model, models for multiphase
fluids (lift gas, produced gas, mud, foam, produced gas, oil,
water and cuttings). Various alternative geometries for gas
inje~!ion are modelled as well as all important operations
during underbalanced drilling with coiled tubing.
The model as well as some simulation results from its use are
presented in this paper.
INTRODUCTION
Underbalanced drilling has been utilised increasingly during
the past several years from the perspectives of economics and
practical operations. Among the economic benefits, the most
important aspect of underbafanced drilling is the prevention
of formation damage and hence increasing well productivity.
With respect to practical operations, underbalanced drilling is
an effective technique for preventing severe lost circulation
and differential pipe sticking during drilling.
OCW.J
-.v.
u---------
achieve a smooth
condition.
294
operation
and
the desired
downhole
GOVERNING
processes
will be modclled
in the
EQUATIONS
We assume that all variables depend on only one spatial coordinate, i.e., length along the flow line. The temperature in
the WCI1is assumed to be known. The governing equations
arc those expressing conservation of mass and momentum for
the system of fluid components present in a drilling situation:
Conservation of mass of free produced gas
~(a
lAasP PEP1
&
SPE 29363
a[A
AL
jy%P%
f3g,
]-A~g/
+qg/
&aglpgJ=-a,[
rAag,
vg
l[A(l-a)p,]=-~[A(l-a)v,
at
(3)
p1]+Arn8
~[A(l-a)x,dpl]=
-~[A(l-~)xgdv,p,]+
Arng+Aq,d
(4)
Aqf.
(5)
~[A(l-a)xf.p,]=
-~[A(l-~)xf.v,p,]+
SPE 29363
R. Rommetveit,
:[A(I-a)Xppl]=-:[A(I-a)XfiVIP,]+Aqfi
A. Faure
05)
rn~,= Mgj
(
p, T, X8d,tX,
p81.
VI, V8, S
(17)
)x=p,]= -$[A(l-rx
)XCVC
rngp= ~gp(P*TXg@l
(7)
P,]+4.
PgP>v/!v~,L$
)
(18)
~[A(l-a)p,v,+Awgvg]=
-~[Ap]-Af,
-Af,
+A (la)pl+cxp~
[
1gcose
-~i,4(i-ajp,v~
+Aapgv~]
~,=
(8)
However, we have 20
(9)
Lift gas density
(lo)
(11)
(12)
Cuttings vel~ity
(13)
Q@/(f)
(20)
vc(P,T,
xgd,
vp~
)
Vc
%(P~T1xg&W~v8J
Liquid density
Pgp = qp(PT)
(19)
Js)
(aR+=ti,%,=b.x..
w, Pul P8:,vl.v8.vc.9B:.qp.qcBmw9m,l.
pBff)1. 2
To close the system, we need 12 more equations. These
equations are given by the general functional relationships or
submodels as follows:
Pgl = PJPJ)
v/$vf
Sffilmmms
We have 8 governing equations.
gfi~figwn~:
l(p!T*xgd$a,
(14)
SIMULATION RESULTS
In this section, four simulation results are presented. The
example well geometry is illustrated in Flg 2. The reservoir
data is listed in Table 1 and other necessary data in Table 2.
In the example simulations, two methods for reducing
hydrostatic pressure have been simulated:
(15)
Produced cuttings rate
q.=Q.(~,t)
(16)
295
(i) Gasified fluid where the gas phase is tied in (spiked into)
the drilling fluid at standpipe while it is pumped down the
coiled tubing. In this case, the whole system is full of
gas/mud two phase mixture.
(ii) Annular gas lift where the gas phase is injected into the
annulus through a parasitic string. In this case, only the
annulus above the deepest gas injection point is gasified.
Since the higher gas injection rate does not help, the injcetion
rate is reduced back to 350 sef/min at t = 47.22 min. The
further evidence of this is that the BHPs and/or pressure
profiles within the reservoir section (Fig 5) remain akmt the
same at t = 47.1 min at Qg = 450 sef/min and t = 60.75 min
at Qg = 350 sef/min.
The gas oil ratio of the reservoir has also been varied to
For illustrative
illustrate the well-resemoir interaction.
purposes, the four simulations are designated by:
(1) Case 1A: annular gas lift in low GOR reservoir
Gas Liff
rewmmir
.-.
. . ..
.infllw
. .....
ic
.
nntir.d
..s ..
ac
..
chmwn
...,
.. . .
~~
[~~
SPE 29363
rnm~ss
296
I%rino
-w
. . ..~
.ths
..
mmifitwi
~.......
flIIid
..
.
rlrillino
. . . . . . . ..~.
th~
. ..
mm
&.u
nhac~
~.....-
{c
. infrnrlllm=d
. .. . . ..w-
SPE 29363
297
OPERATIONAL IMPLICATIONS
In this section, we intended to discuss briefly about the
operational considerations based upon the above simulation
results. We shall concentrate only on two issues here, i.e. (1)
knowledge of reservoir properties and (2) pump start up
procedure.
It is obvious from the simulations and operational side that
reservoir fluid properties, especially gas-oil ratio, will have
considerable effects on the underbalanced drilling operations.
Indeed, the gas production rate from the reservoir will affect
the lift gas volume and rate requirements as demonstrated by
the example simulations. The exact extent of the effect will
depend
upon many parameters,
reservoir
properties
(permeability, GOR, water saturation, etc.), wellbore length
exposed to the reservoir, pressure undcrbalance and wellbore
trajectory, for example.
During underbalanced drilling operations, it is important that
the well is maintained at the desired underbalanced
conditions at all times. This is particularly important during
the pump (both liquid and gas pumps) start-up stage. In both
of the systems simulated, the BHP increases when the gas
injection is started, especially in the case of gasified fluid
drilling (Fig 3, Fig 7, Fig 12, Fig 16). As a result, in the case
of gasified fluid drilling, the pumps will be required to start
circulation when the bit is high up in the vertical/inclined
section depending upon the liquid level in the well.
Another consideration is the flow rate out of the well. Fig 20
compares the liquid flow rates out of the well for high GOR
reservoirs between the gasified fluid drilling (Case 2B) and
the annular gas injection (Case 1B). In both cases, the liquid
pump rate is maintained at 350 l/rein before gas injection
commcnccs and the choke position remains unchanged. it is
seen clearly that in the case of annular gas injection, the
liquid flow rate out of the WCI1increases rapidly before the
gas reaches lhe surface and decreases sharply when the gas
breaks out at the surface. This may overload the surface
processing equipment temporarily.
mix
CONCLUSIONS
%~
An advanced simulation modei has been ~~~~i~-~d
The model
simulating underbalanced drilling operations.
accounts for transient multi-phase hydraulics, reservoir-well
various
interactions associated with underbalanced drilling,
diiiiifig cperatiwts.
gas iift SySteinS,
d
NOMENCLATURE
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
Ercsman,
D.: Underbalanced
drilling guidelines
improve safety, efficiency, Oil & Gas J. (Feb. 28, 1994)
39.
s.
6.
Missclbrook,
J., Wilde, G. and Falk K.: The
Development and Use of a Coiled-Tubing Simulation for
Horizontal Applications, paper SPE 22822 presented at
the 66th Annular Technical Conf and Ex. of the SPE,
Dallas, TX, (Oct. 6-!9, i99 i j
7.
8.
9.
f,
fz
rng
qgl
qfgp
pressure
distance
time
temperature
velocity
mass fraction
Symbol
a
fnm-tinn
.. .,....
density
hole inclination
~gi
+~
liP
Subscripts
c
cuttings
fo
formation oil
fw
formation water
gas
gd
dissolved gas
gl
lift gas
8P
produced gas
liquid
mixture
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
SPE 29383
298
SPE 29363
.. .
Table 1. Reservoir
Properties
Depth (MD)
800-950
Permeability
1500 md
Porosity
20%
Pressure
65 bar
Temperature
50 c
897 kg/m3
1050 ktim3
II
0.68 kg/m3
*SC:standard conditions
18. Beggs, H.D. and Brill, J.P.: J. Pet. Tech. (May 1973) pp
607-6i7
Plastic viscosity
11.5cp
Yield point
Gas
Nitrogen
350 l/rein
. .-,. ,.-
I r/lw It
Tempcralure gradient
I 1100kg/m3
I Mud density
.Llauld
Q,
Qf
@SSifkd
Fluld
.Foam
9
i
. ......
.Gas(lnpctad
&
!=!
I
I
donw
.lWlllrIm
Ulll
+
ad
IIIk
Produowd}
. . ... .. .. .Fluids
-----
. Disaolvad
tiS
.Form800n
011
.Formation
Walar
.Cunings
-l&,
FormalIon
Influx
VM
A
4
lQhl
SPE 29363
Wellbore
ID
S In
4 3/8In
OD
Gas fnjecton
@5SOm
3 1/4 In
Drill collar
CT
I.a@h
ID
100 m
1 4/5 In
2 2/S In
850 m
2 In
Mm
Reservoirtop
52Oeg
R.servdr bottom
TD@%Om
~w
TVD.
I
10,02
707 m
0.00
I
I
40,00
20.W
Preeeure (bara)
I
20.00
Fig 5 Wollbom
&
!lj
Pressure
I
W.00
I
W.w
1
#
.ZuxO+
4omo
i
&
40.00
0.00
II
(Ces@ 1A)
I
Oco
1
?O,m
+
p-J
t.
t.
t.
t.
t.
1.,5.26-
l.m.om
-coo.oo
0.00
20.00
40W
7ime (mm)
eaoo
Fig 3 Preeeur.
Rosponeos
to Oporaflorml
Ev.nts
-Iooc.m
4000
1.47,90.A
-,-
1.
O,w
0.10
M,75..
(Cass 1 A)
m.co
I
I
I
0,40
0,20
O.za
Free Ges Void Fmaion
Oow.mu
ClmR. -.
-A-
Plmo
I
0,%
I
O.w
pmun
pu,u
t.tsti,ohdnsotmw%
mmienlnlAOn
8t2WccfMn
t.7.slral, ctldm88tms4%
l.lwnJn,
hcmmD@cmwhOm
a0e10220psmmm7mmaae 104s8c2mAl
t.mOtlin,
t.47.0*,
docmo88e-mmti hm4.50m22e M
t.660tin,
Umka9mm3S%
t.2.0nh
1
E
a,w
-1
OOO.CO
O.w
I
0.cQ
w
Fig 4 Mau
I
I
0.04
Fmaion of F&%fion
Fracfions of Formation
I
0,C4
,,wL-J
I
010
Oil
Oil t Sekcted
Ow
I
2000
300
Roepmees
I
40.00
Time (rein)
to Op.ratbnei
I
moo
I
moo
SPE 29363
f~
-mom
t,
.moam
O.m
at B.I.etad
I
033
I
I
I
040
0,20
0,20
Free Gee Void Fracrion
I
0.10
(Case 1 B)
..-!)
&
+com
016
0,12
Mass Fmctkm of Form~icm Oil
Fmctiorre of Form~ion
40.m
II
CM*
-&-
Pump
LJ
p.
Wnw
o.m
0.20
Rosponees
?m.m
ao.m
40,m
m w
Time (rein)
mm
Fig 12 Premuro
to Opamtiond
Events
(Case 26)
!~
6
1
.... EEl
\\
o.m
0.0s
0.04
Fig 9-
rzvmt -qWnm
,W
Bj
-T15cT15c
t
0,00
!!
~{k:
---------%
L.
-4C.3.CO
Componmsts
lm.m
--Y
of VmknM
I
0.20
I
O.*5
I
0.10
Mess Freclions
0.0s
0s0
nom
o.m
lo.m
Flg 10 Wollboro
I
zo.m
40.m
30.m
P1eSeure (bsm)
Pressure
Pmfilss
I
so.m
st Selected
I
Woo
0.0
10.0
70.m
Fig 13 Wellbore
Tlmos
(Csee
1 B)
301
2Q.O
30.0
Pressure
Pr.eeure
40.0
(bara)
Profllos
So.o
st Setectod
m.o
So.o
Tlm88
(Csee
2B)
L
k
&
~m
*
El
T.2a26m
T.
,.7225-
S4.2 m.
T.101-
-lOOOW
0,40
O.za
OCQ
Vod Frac4ion
Fig 14 Froo Gas Void Fraztions
2B)
~m,o
0.0 10.0 2s)0
200
Pressure
Flg 17 Wollbcw
Prsssur6
(bra)
Profiles
at Solaetsd
Timss
(Ca9s
2A)
Om
om
mm
040
030
0.20
Mass Fraction
0.10
of Formation
0S2
0.60
010
000
0.50
C&mVcid Fra%n
011 at Sebowd
llms
(CEC4 2A)
60.m
8
k
~
;
il
40.m
o.
Event
sequonms
2000
o.oo~
O.m
2000
40.m
Fig 16 Pressuro
Rosponsss
Woo
80 m
-1O@ .m
I moo
?
o.m
&
I
0.10
0.s0
030
0.40
Mm..
,., -..
Time (mifij
to Opsratiorml
Events
(Caso 2A)
FW 19 Mess Fraction
Profiles
Cra,-limne
!.., ,-.
of Formation
SPE 29363
14000
920C0
1lm.o
a-w
A181LW0.
Ilum
emw
W.SlOfl
22
(c.
!0)
(C.
SoOo
In
~
,0
400.0
\ ,
200.0
00
100
200
300
400
Soo
Time (mm)
Fig 20 Liquid Flow-out
Rates During
Early Stag.
of Operation
11