SPE/IADC 92195

Casing Directional Drilling Using a Rotary Steerable System

Robert Strickler and Todd Mushovic, ConocoPhillips; Tommy Warren, Tesco; and Bill Lesso, Schlumberger

Copyright 2005, SPE/IADC Drilling Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference held in
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 23-25 February 2005.
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
The hardware used in casing while drilling operations over the
past 5 years has proved to be robust and reliable. Several
directional wells have been drilled successfully with casing
using positive displacement motors (PDMs), but the drilling
efficiency was significantly degraded in most of them. This
paper documents the drilling of the first two wells to utilize a
rotary steerable system (RSS) to improve drilling efficiency
when drilling with casing.
Combining an RSS with casing while drilling operations
seemed to be a natural way to eliminate the major weaknesses
in motor bottomhole assembly (BHA) designs. Rotary
steerable systems had not previously been used with casing
while drilling because both are new technologies focused on
different environments. Casing while drilling developed on
land operations while rotary steerables have been popular for
offshore projects.
ConocoPhillips has drilled more than 94 wells in the Lobo
trend of South Texas since 2001 using the new technique. As
part of a technology demonstration project to accelerate the
technology to offshore applications, two wells were drilled
with an RSS.
The first was an operational test conducted by drilling
vertically with the RSS. The second was a full directional test
o
o
with a build to 29 and then a drop to vertical, including a 100
directional turn.

Introduction
ConocoPhillips embarked on an active field development
program in 1997 aimed at drilling hundreds of wells over the
next few years in the Lobo trend of South Texas. Since that
time, over 900 wells have been drilled through the Wilcox
(Lobo) section ranging in depth from 7,500 to 13,000 ft.
However, in 2001, after drilling about 600 wells, the
drilling efficiency had stagnated. A program was undertaken

to find ways to reduce drilling costs sufficiently to extend the

development potential for several years.
In the previous years, great strides had been made in
increasing rate of penetration (ROP), drilling each hole section
with a single bit, and in improving general rig operation
efficiency. Any major reduction in drilling time had to
address the flat time more than the making hole times. The
most significant flat times were associated with keeping and
protecting the hole, trouble time which averaged about 1.5
days per well, and casing running operations. Stuck pipe and
lost circulation were the most consistent contributors to the
trouble events and accounted for about 75% of the trouble
time in 2000 and 2001.
A casing while drilling system was chosen for a five-well
pilot project to evaluate the impact that this technology might
have on the particular problems encountered at Lobo.
Sufficient progress was made in drilling these first wells to
justify moving to a second phase of drilling.
The second phase proved that casing while drilling could
eliminate the formation-related trouble time experienced with
conventional drilling. A major finding was the confirmation
that lost circulation was almost completely eliminated,
allowing the drilling of additional wells formerly considered
uneconomical. The wells were not drilled trouble-free, but the
trouble was associated with the mechanical equipment
limitations, which were overcome on the phase-two wells.
Fontenot1,2 provides more information about the Lobo field
and the performance on these early wells.
Full-scale implementation of the Lobo casing while
drilling program was initiated by bringing in three new rigs in
late 2002 and early 2003. These 15,000-ft rigs,3 built
specifically for ConocoPhillips, were introduced to optimize
the drilling process. They provided an increased hookload
rating; much better mobility for intrafield moves, a reduced
footprint, and a semi automated casing handling system.
The overall drilling program at Lobo has been scaled
down, with one casing while drilling rig still operating. More
than 94 wells have been drilled with casing in the area. The
incidents of lost circulation have been almost totally
eliminated in the casing drilled wells. The difficulty of
balancing lost circulation at the intermediate casing shoe while
controlling a reservoir pressure of up to 15 ppg during the trip
out to run production casing has been eliminated. In some
cases, casing drilled wells are completed with three strings of
casing when four would be required if the wells were drilled
conventionally.
ConocoPhillips is actively pursuing additional applications
where drilling with casing might provide a similar

improvement in drilling efficiency, but could provide a larger

economic impact because of the higher drilling spread costs.
A growing interest in redeveloping aging offshore properties
where directional wells are required to traverse depleted zones
with large pressure variations in the openhole section
provides an excellent opportunity to benefit from casing while
drilling. However, one impediment to directly transferring the
Lobo experience to other areas is that directional wells are
required for many of these higher cost applications; while
most of the Lobo wells are vertical.
Two Lobo wells have been casing directionally drilled
using conventional steerable motors run as a retrievable
drilling assembly and two others have used motors for
directional control in vertical wells. Although these wells
demonstrated that it is possible to directionally drill with
casing, they were not competitive with the drilling efficiency
achieved with RSSs that are commonly used offshore.
A cooperative project was put together by ConocoPhillips
Upstream Technology group and Lower 48 Exploration and
Production group to demonstrate that rotary steerable
directional systems and casing while drilling could be
combined to capture the benefits of drilling with casing while
maintaining the directional efficiency of rotary steerable
systems.
The wells drilled in this program were the first ever use of
RSS directional tools in an application where the well was
cased as it was drilled. The following sections briefly describe
the casing while drilling process, discuss the observations of
directional drilling with casing using conventional steerable
motors, and present the result of the RSS demonstration
project.
The Retrievable Casing While Drilling Process
Casing can be used as all or part of the drillstring in a number
of ways, but they can be categorized as either retrievable or
nonretrievable systems. Nonretrievable systems include both
liner drilling applications and applications with full strings of
casing where a fixed bit is used for drilling. The bit may be
drillable, where it is drilled out in order to drill the next hole
section, or it may be a conventional bit that is left in the hole
at total depth (TD).
Retrievable systems allow the bit and BHA to be changed
without tripping the casing. Use of a retrievable system is the
only practical choice for directional wells because of the need
to recover the expensive directional drilling and guidance
tools, the need to have the capability to replace failed
equipment before reaching casing point, and the need for
quick and cost-effective access to the formations below the
casing shoe.
A retrievable casing while drilling system has downhole
and surface components that enable standard oilfield casing to
be used as the drillstring so that the well is simultaneously
drilled and cased. The BHA can be changed without tripping
casing.4 A wireline-retrievable drilling assembly is suspended
in a profile nipple located near the bottom of the casing. The
top component of the BHA that facilitates the attachment to
the profile nipple is the drill lock assembly (DLA). The casing
is rotated from the surface, and the drilling fluid is circulated
down the casing ID and back up the annulus.

SPE/IADC 92195

The drilling assembly terminates in a pilot bit, but may

include other conventional drillstring components such as an
underreamer, mud motor, stabilizers, drill collars,
measurement-while-drilling (MWD), or logging-while-drilling
(LWD) tools.
The pilot bit is sized to pass through the casing and the
underreamer opens the hole to a size similar to what is
normally drilled to run the casing. For example, a 6-1/4-in.
pilot bit and 8-7/8-in. underreamer are commonly used while
drilling with 7-in. 23-lbm/ft casing. The underreamer can be
located immediately above the bit or above other components
run in the pilot hole.
A top drive rotates the casing for drilling and is used to
torque up the connections. The casing string is rotated for all
operations except slide drilling with a motor and bent housing
assembly for oriented directional work.
The casing is attached to the top drive with a casing quickconnect system without screwing into the top casing
connection. The hardware includes a slip assembly to grip
either the exterior or interior of the pipe (depending on pipe
size) and an internal spear assembly to provide a fluid seal to
the pipe. It is operated with the hydraulic top drive control
system. This quick-connect system speeds up the casing
handling operation and prevents damage to the threads by
eliminating one make-break cycle.
Single joints of casing are picked up from the pipe rack
and placed in the V-door to then be picked up with a single
joint elevator attached to the system. The joint is hoisted as
the top drive is raised, stabbed into the top of the casing string
in the rotary table, gripped by the quick-connect dies, torqued
to specifications, and then drilled down in a conventional
manner.
These retrievable drilling assemblies have been used to
drill over 800,000 ft (280 casing intervals) in commercial
wells with retrievable and rerunable tools. ConocoPhillips has
drilled approximately 80% of these wells. A relatively small
portion of these casing intervals, 13 to be exact, have been
drilled with retrievable steerable motor assemblies while
drilling with 7-in. and 9-5/8-in. casing.
Sufficient experience has been gained while drilling
commercial vertical wells to determine the reliability and
ruggedness of the tools and to quantify the advantages
provided in retrievable drilling assemblies. However, casing
directional drilling is still in its infancy. Optimized practices
and procedures have not been completely developed.
Directional Drilling with Steerable Motors
The intermediate hole section (7-in. casing) of Well 83 in the
Lobo casing while drilling sequence included an interval
directionally drilled with steerable motors. The directional
work was required to avoid a surface obstruction. It provides
a good example to highlight the issues involved with using
steerable motors in a retrievable drilling assembly. Fig. 1
shows the S directional profile of the well. The
well was
o
kicked off and inclination built to about 15 where the
inclination was then dropped back to near vertical as sufficient
lateral displacement was obtained.

SPE/IADC 92195

The well was drilled vertically to the kickoff point at 4,434

ft, where the vertical drilling assembly was retrieved with
wireline. A steerable motor assembly, shown in Fig. 3,
composed of a 6 -in, PDC pilot bit, 6 -in. x 8 7/8-in.
underreamer, 4 -in, 5/6-lobe 8.3-stage steerable motor with
o
1.5 bent housing, float sub, MWD, vibration sub, non-mag
drill collar, internal tandem stabilizer, and DLA was run on
wireline and landed in the casing. The assembly was
positioned in the shoe joint of casing so that all components
below the tandem stabilizer extended into open hole below the
casing.

Vertical Plot
0

Horizontal Plot

300
2000

True Vertical depth, ft

200
3000

Neet North

400

1000

100
4000

0
-300

-200

-100

Feet West

5000

Vibrations
Monitoring
sub

Drill Lock
Assembly
(DLA)

6000

MWD

7-in.
23 lbm
casing
to surf

7000

ConocoPhillips
Well 83
Casing Directional Drilling
Bottom Hole Assembly
with Steerable Motor

Tandem
Casing
Stabilizer

Float sub
casing
shoe

8000
0

1000

2000

Vertical Section, ft

Bent Housing Motor

4 -in. then 5 -in.
(1.5 deg bend)

non-mag
drill collar

Fig. 1The casing directional drilling trajectory of Well 83 drilled

with a steerable motor to avoid a surface obstruction.

The well required 18.2 days to drill to the intermediate

casing point (Fig. 2), when a comparable, trouble-free vertical
well would have taken about 8 1/2 days to drill to the same
depth. Most of the increased time required to drill the well
was due to inexperience with doing directional work with
casing and inefficiencies of the casing directional drilling
process with steerable motors. The only lost time recorded for
the interval was 10.5 hr lost because of a miss-run when
installing the first motor assembly and 6.5 hrs required to free
the casing which became stuck while sliding at 5,642 ft.
0
Set 9-5/8 surface casing

Measured depth, ft

1000

6 -in. PDC bit

(3x15 nozzles)

Fig. 3The BHA used to casing directionally drill Well 83.

The first motor assembly was run for only 154 ft before
being pulled to replace the motor with a 5 -in. 7/8 lobe, 3o
stage motor with 1.15 bend. While the first motor actually
could deliver slightly higher torque than the second motor, it
was less effective when drilling with casing. Because casing
is larger in diameter than drillpipe, it tends to elongate much
more than drillpipe when the motor begins to pressure up.
This provides a positive feedback system that makes motors
with steep torque/pressure curves difficult to run while drilling
with casing. 5,6
3000

Rotary drill to KOP

2000

Under reamer
(6 1/4 to 8 7/8-in.)

Pressure

2500
2000

3000

1500

KOP
4-3/4 motor to 5-1/2 motor

4000

1000
20000

WOB

15000

Start Drop

5000

10000
5000

6000

0
35

7000

34

PU Rotary assembly

Block position, ft

33

8000

Picked up
ROP = 16 ft/hr

32

10

15

20

Days from spud

Fig. 2Time-Depth curve for Well 83. An extra 10 days were
required to drill the directional section using a steerable motor.

31
0

Elapsed Time, Mins

Fig. 4A cascading effect adds to the increased frequency of

motor stalls in casing directional drilling. When the motor starts
to stall, pressure builds causing elongation in the casing. This
pushes more weight-on-bit, accelerating the stall.

SPE/IADC 92195

An example of this effect is shown in Fig. 4; the 4 -in.

motor stalled at a depth of 4,680 ft while sliding with a rather
steady penetration rate of 16 ft/hr. As the motor stalled, the
pressure increased from about 1,250 psi to 2,550 psi and the
WOB increased from 700 lbf to 16,300 lbf. This WOB
increase was predictable. The predicted increase in WOB
resulting from a 1,300-psi increase in pressure inside casing is
16,400 lbf; the observed increase in WOB is 15,600 lbf.
The increased WOB is directly caused by the increase in
motor pressure. As the motor is loaded and the pressure
increases, the casing tends to elongate. However, since the
casing is fixed at both ends, the compressive force on the bit
increases. This increased WOB increases the torque required
to rotate the bit, which increases the pressure drop across the
motor, which further increases the WOB. Once the process
starts, it drives the motor to stall, and there is little the driller
can do about it. In deeper wells and in situations where the
friction along the string is higher, there may be no observable
decrease in surface hook load as the motor stalls, but the
downhole compressive load will increase to the same value
because the increase in WOB is independent of string length.
The 4 -in. motor was replaced with a 5 -in. slow speed
motor, which had a flatter torque to pressure response and
allowed more effective drilling. Even then, there were still a
significant number of stalls. This required that the motor be
run at a lower effective loading than when the casing was
being rotated or when sliding in conventional drillpipe
drilling.

Fig. 6The frequency of stalls seen in casing directional drilling

with a steerable motor in Well 83.

Sliding was reinitiated at 5,634 ft to begin the drop back to

vertical. Although the inclination could be increased rather
easily, decreasing inclination at the desired rate required
almost continuous sliding. The sliding once again introduced
numerous stalls (Fig. 6) and lowered the ROP. Recovering
from the stalls was quicker than when drilling with drillpipe.
Because the casing was sufficiently stiff, no reorientation was
needed after the motor stalled. The bit was simply picked up
to restart the motor and worked back to bottom to continue
drilling.
Pendulum Pilot Assembly
6000

6200

4,000

Sliding
Intervals

5,500

Steerable Motor

6,500
Rotary Pendulum

7,500
8,000
0

10

15

20

1.7

0ft
/10

6600

6800

7000

7200

7400

MWD P. Collar

7,000

Non-Mag

6,000

Directional Control

5,000

Measured Depth, ft

4,500

Measured Depth, ft

6400

7600
0

10

12

Inclination, deg.

Inclination, deg
Fig. 5The sliding intervals in the build and start of the drop for
Well 83. The steerable motor BHA was replaced with a rotary
pendulum BHA to finish the trajectory.

Fig 7The rotary pendulum BHA used to finish the drop and its
directional performance.

Intermittent sliding (Fig. 5) was used from 4,434 ft to

4,808 ft to initiate the build section and establish the desired
o
direction. When the inclination reached about 10 , the well
was drilled in the rotating mode
while continuing to build
o
inclination to slightly over 15 . Relatively few motor stalls
occurred while drilling this section in the rotary mode, and the
ROP was significantly improved.

After the inclination was decreased to 10 , the steerable

motor assembly was pulled and replaced with a rotary
pendulum assembly as shown in Fig. 7. The pendulum
assembly was configured with the directional control portion
of the assembly in the pilot hole and the underreamer placed
immediately below the casing shoe. Drilling with
the
o
pendulum assembly decreased the inclination from 10 to less
o
o
than 2 . It remained less than 2 until the assembly was pulled
at 7,861 ft. ROP with the assembly was substantially higher

SPE/IADC 92195

when rotary drilling even though the WOB was restricted to

ensure the inclination decreased as desired. High lateral
vibrations were recorded with the vibration-monitoring sub
while drilling with this assembly.
The directional performance of the rotary assembly was
encouraging, because it confirmed that the well inclination
could be controlled in the pilot hole with the hole being
opened to accept the casing well above the active portion of
the assembly. This critical step helped develop the confidence
that an RSS could be used when drilling with casing, since
there are no RSS tools that can work above an underreamer.
The steerable motor performance when drilling with 7-in.
6
casing generally confirmed observations reported by Warren
for wells drilled in Mexico. Motors with flatter torque to
pressure performance curves work better when drilling with
casing. When even the most appropriate commercial motor is
selected, significant motor stalling can be expected when
drilling in the sliding mode. Rocking the casing to provide
rotary motion to the casing even while sliding can mitigate
this. Although the rocking can7 be accomplished manually,
automatic systems are available.
Because the drilling assembly must pass through the
drillstring, the motor size must be smaller than the ID of the
casing. This makes the motor, turning both the underreamer
and pilot bit, less powerful than could be used when drilling
the same hole size conventionally. In addition, the drilling
assembly is more tilted in the wellbore, which enhances the
tendency to build inclination but makes dropping inclination
more difficult. Using an expandable stabilizer above the mud
motor can mitigate this strong directional building tendency.
However, there is little that can be done
about the motor
6
power when drilling with 7-in. casing. For larger casing
sizes, the motor power issue less significant because much
more powerful motors (relative to hole size) are available that
will pass through the casing being used as the drillstring.
Two Emerging Technologies
Early applications of casing while drilling provided an
opportunity to develop surface equipment and procedures to
effectively handle casing, equipment to protect the casing and
connections while drilling, and a robust and reliable system for
locking and unlocking the BHA to the casing.
The initial application and subsequent evolution of the
system components were primarily focused on onshore
vertical wells where the cost of learning could be tolerated.
This development work identified field applications that
would benefit from reducing lost circulation and eliminating
problems associated with drilling depleted zones. Although
these wells have a specific problem addressed by drilling with
the casing, they were mostly vertical, eliminating a level of
complexity in operations. Casing while drilling has developed
to the point where these operations are routine, and the
hardware operates as reliable as other rig systems. But the
difficulties in applying PDM technology to casing directional
drilling remain.
Meanwhile, RSSs were being developed to solve problems
in wells at the other end of the scale. It had become difficult
to use PDM steerable systems in extended-reach directional
and horizontal wells where the ratio of displacement to true
vertical depth is high. Orienting a motor for a directional

correction was taking as many as six hours at measured depths

of 25,000 ft or more. RSSs, while very expensive, eliminated
orientation or sliding operations and made it possible to drill
wells such as the record breaking Wytch Farm Well, M-16 to
8
37,000 ft MD. As RSSs improved, became more durable, and
costs went down, they were applied to less technically
demanding offshore projects. At first RSSs were applied on
deepwater wells. As the significant efficiency in directional
operations became well known, directional operations moved
away from motors to RSSs in the North Sea, the Gulf of
Mexico shelf, and other offshore developments. RSSs are
now used in about 60% of offshore directional wells.
Successes in reducing losses in historically problematic
formations have sparked interest in applying casing while
drilling to similar situations offshore. The difficulties in
casing directional drilling posed a roadblock. Directional
operations with PDMs in smaller hole sizes were not effective.
RSSs were therefore an obvious avenue to investigate. The
difficulty was that there was very little overlap in logistics and
methodologies for merging these two technologies. At this
point, participants from ConocoPhillips, Tesco, and
Schlumberger pooled resources to test this approach to casing
directional drilling.
A Two Well Test
Applying the use of a rotary steerable system to casing
directional drilling was not as simple as shipping a set of tools.
These questions arose:

Will there be difficulties with stiffness ratios and

vibrations?
What will the directional control and tendency be?
How can the rig supply higher revolutions per minute
(rpm) for effective RSS use?
How will the flow and pressure requirements of RSS
and MWD systems impact casing directional drilling
operations?

After operations begin on a directional well, the trajectory

objectives must be met or the well will be abandoned. Risks
and contingencies have to be quantified.
The ConocoPhillips-Tesco-Schlumberger team decided on
a two-well test program. First, an RSS would be deployed in a
vertical well. An RSS has a verticality mode in which the tool
senses deviation away from vertical and then thrusts the bit
back to vertical. This process takes place in a closed-loop
fashion. The tool is added to the BHA. No MWD system is
needed, and the tool operates automatically, virtually
transparent to drilling operations. This well would test the
BHA configuration, operational functionality, and directional
performance of the RSS in the retrievable drilling assembly.
Downhole-recorded data would confirm tool operations. The
standard single-shot surveys would confirm the directional
performance of the system. This test could run from 500 ft to
the entire 7-in. section. Operations could return to the standard
BHA configuration if there were significant problems.
Success of the vertical well test along with lessons learned
would lead to approval for drilling a full directional well. The
BHA for the second well would be more complex. An MWD

SPE/IADC 92195

system and full directional drilling operations would be

needed to follow a planned trajectory. The inability to drill
directionally would possibly require changing rig operations to
conventional drillpipe drilling, a significant expense.
Rotary Steerable System Vertical Test
The verticality test took place in Well 89 about 30 miles
northeast of Laredo, Texas, in June 2004. Operations with 9
5/8-in. casing, 8-in. bit, and 12-in. underreamer had drilled
to 588 ft where the 9 5/8-in. casing was cemented in place. A
4-in. RSS and a 4-in. drill collar were added to the
standard verticality BHA on 18 June 2004. This configuration
was run from 614 to 4,821 ft in 105 hr. Single-shot surveys
taken about 500 ft apart showed the well was nearly vertical.
Not much more was known during the run. Drilling proceeded
normally. Higher-than-expected casing vibrations were
attributed to the longer BHA stick-out. The run was terminated
at a planned replacement of the underreamer. The operation
continued to the 7-in. section TD of 7,620 ft. The RSS was
retrieved, inspected, and found to be in good order. The RSS
was returned to the shop, where the operational data were
extracted from the tool. A gyro survey of the 7-in. casing
drilled section was taken.
3.0
RSS Verticality Test

2.5

Inclination, deg

RSS bias unit

did not stabilize
2.0

TD 7 casing
section

RSS
fully
operational

performance led to approval for the second, full directional,

test.
Rotary Steerable System Full Directional Test
Most of the wells in the Lobo trend development are vertical.
Well 91 was no exception, but a unique opportunity presented
itself. The proposed location was about 1,200 ft to the south of
Well 79, which was drilled in March 2004. The team proposed
to use the old location of Well 79 and drill an S-shaped
trajectory over to the target location of Well 91. While this
would save the costs of building a new location, the additional
costs of a directional well are more than three times the
location costs. This was the best option to test RSSs in a full
directional trajectory, because a directional well was not
planned for the remainder of 2004.
A review of the Well 79 pad showed that the remaining
open space for the rig put the well in nearly a direct line
between its target location and the rig. This location added
complications to the trajectory design. The basic plan called
for a build to 29 and then a drop into the target 1,200 ft away.
Now the trajectory would have to be routed around Well 79 to
avoid colliding with the producing well. Well 91 would kick
off along an azimuth that was 40 east of the target azimuth,
build to 29 and start a 100 turn to the right. During the later
stages of the turn, the drop would be initiated, bringing the
well into the target. This profile resembled those used on large
multi-well offshore platforms. Fig. 9 shows both wells as
drilled.
Vertical Plot

Horizontal Plot

1.5

Displacement, ft
0

1.0

1000

Easting (E/-W), ft

2000

-600

0.5

1000

0.0
1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Well 79

TVD, ft

200

TD
Well 79

Surf
Loc

-200

Depth , ft

Fig. 8The gyro survey run for the 7-in. section of Well 89. There
is a slight build tendency during the RSS verticality test where the
tool was not effective and after the test ended at 4,821 ft. Full
RSS control was established between 3,710 ft and 4,821 ft and the
inclination is nearly vertical.

2000

800

-200

200

Northing (N/-S), ft

-400

3000

4000

Surf
Loc

-400

-600

-800

Well 91

5000

Well 91
-1000

6000

The operational data showed that the RSS directional

control unit did not stabilize on a gravity reference until 14:40
on 21 June 2004. At this time the bit was at 3,710 ft. Because
of verticality or a tool problem, the tool had been unable to
determine which way was up and, as a result, had been
ineffective. Fig. 8 is a plot of the gyro well inclination for the
7-in. section. The well had drifted out to 2.25 of inclination at
3,600 ft. At 3,800 ft, the well snapped back to a nearly
vertical 0.25. The RSS problem resolved itself at 3,710 ft, the
tool became directionally functional, sensed the inclination,
and brought the well back to vertical. Verticality continued for
the remainder of the test. There is not much directional data in
a verticality test, but a review of the operations and

target
-1200

7000

Fig. 9The trajectories of wells 79 and 91 as drilled. Well 91 had

to circumvent Well 79 to avoid collision risks.

Another complication added to the well operations design.

Specifications called for the 9 5/8-in. casing to be set at 1,270
ft. The 9 5/8-in. casing point for Lobo wells varied between
550 and 2,400 ft. Experience showed that the deeper casing
point wells had more problems with vibrations and casing
whirl when drilling the 7-in. section. Adding a straight PDM
to the BHA above the underreamer addressed this problem.

SPE/IADC 92195

This addition was a significant operational change from the

test in the vertical Well 89; therefore, the dynamics of the
BHA were different and the MWD was run below the motor.
MWD systems had not been run below a mud motor in
field wells, and it was thought their telemetry would be
severely attenuated as the pressure wave threaded up through
the rotor-stator configuration of the motor. Survey operations
in the MWD had to be different. MWD systems traditionally
gather survey data upon detecting the start of pressure or flow
when the mud pumps are engaged after making a connection
for a joint or stand of drillpipe. In this case the mud pumps
engaged after the connection to add a joint of casing. This
pumping action caused the BHA to rotate because the motor is
above most BHA components. Pumping degraded the survey
accuracy. The MWD system was designed to take the survey
when pressure dropped to zero (hydrostatic), and before the
connection, when the BHA was still. MWD systems are
adopting this tactic as more operations in conventional
drillpipe drilling are adding straight motors in upper BHA
sections.

7-in.
23 lbm
casing
to surf

DLA
(Drill Lock
Assembly)

8 jts
7 5/8-in.
casing

Tandem
Casing
(internal)
Stabilizer

Casing
shoe

Tandem
(external)
Stabilizer

The underreamer was placed directly below the mud

motor. This opened the pilot hole to 8 7/8 in. When the pumps
were off, the arms of the underreamer collapsed so that the
maximum diameter of the tool was slightly less than 6 1/8 in.
To be retrievable, all components of the BHA had to be
smaller than the internal diameter of the casing. A jet sub was
added to the BHA below the underreamer to divert 20% of the
flow from the bit. The pilot hole below the underreamer was 6
1/8 in. Flow rate in 6-in. holes is usually 250 gal/min; the
flow rate in 8-in. hole is typically 450 gal/min for adequate
hole cleaning. Experience with casing while drilling has
shown that 350 gal/min is an optimum flow rate for this
drilling environment. The RSS in the pilot hole had a limit of
280 gal/min. The jet sub supplied a compromise: 350 gal/min
were supplied to the 8 7/8-in. hole section; 280 gal/min went
through the bit, because 70 gal/min were diverted through the
jet sub port.

Conoco Phillips
Well 91
Casing Directional Drilling
Bottom Hole Assembly
With Rotary Steerable System

MWD system

6-in. Straight
Motor

Total Length
Stick-out Length

112 ft
85

Hanging weight
(in mud)

6200 lbm

Filter sub
Tesco
Under reamer
(6 1/8 to 8 7/8)

4 Rotary
Steerable System

Jet Sub
(1x10 nozzle)
6 1/8 PDC bit
(4x10 nozzles)

Fig. 10BHA for casing directional drill with an RSS.

The BHA design for the 7-in. section of Well 91 had

several innovative features, as shown in Fig. 10. It is 112 ft
long with 85-ft stick-out below the shoe of the 7-in. casing.
Starting from the top inside the casing is the DLA. Below the
DLA is a tandem casing stabilizer. This has two stabilizer
blade sections that are gauged to the internal drift diameter of
the 7-in., 23-lbm/ft of 6.26 in. This stabilizer is designed to
take most of the vibrations of drilling away from the DLA,
reducing wear on it. The mud motor is below the tandem
casing stabilizer, a relatively large motor with a 6-in. diameter.
The motors sole purpose is to allow drillstring rotation to be
lowered when dealing with vibrations issues. The motor adds
the rpms back into the BHA and bit to maintain a good ROP.
Casing directional drilling is similar to drillpipe drilling,
because similar bits are used and therefore similar rates are
desired, typically 120 to 180 rpm. The probability of whirl
problems meant that surface cycles could be limited to 50 rpm.
The motor would add 100 turns to the drillstring, bringing it to
the optimum range.

Fig. 11The rig crew preparing to run the RSS and PDC bit in a
casing directional drilling BHA.

Below the jet sub was the external tandem stabilizer. This
configuration was designed to reduce vibrations and wear on
the underreamer. The gauge of these two stabilizer sections
was 6 1/8 in. minus 1/16 in. Below these sections was a slim
MWD system. The RSS, a push-the-bit type,9 was installed
below the MWD. The bit was a 4-blade PDC bit with -in.
cutters, the same type used to drill this section in other wells in
these fields. The bit and RSS are shown in Fig. 11.
Drilling operations started in the 7-in. section at 1,278 ft.
The proposed kickoff point was 2,100 ft. The RSS was
programmed for verticality mode as in the previous well. The
MWD telemetry was strong. The attenuation was 40 to 50%
instead of the expected 90%. Surveys indicated the wellbore
was nearly vertical. At kickoff point, the RSS was
programmed for three sets between 135 and 160 magnetic
toolface at 60%; therefore, the well kicked off at a compass
direction of 150 (30 East of South) at 60% of full thrusting
capabilities of the RSS. Magnetic directions or toolface are
typically used until the wellbore is at a greater than 5

SPE/IADC 92195

inclination. Once this was accomplished, the RSS was set to

an 18 gravity toolface at 60%. This specified direction was
18 right of straight up in the well (gravity is down) at 80% of
full thrust. The well continued the build with a slight turn to
the right. The build was accomplished as planned. Fig. 12
shows the first six sets in drilling the kickoff.
20

100

18

157m@60%

110

Inclindation, deg

14
12

120

160m
@80%

135m@60%
10

130

18g
@80%

140

36g@100%

18g@100%
150

Azimuth, deg

16

6
4

Vertical mode
180g@80%

160

azimuth
170

inclination

2
0
2000

2100

2200

2300

2400

2500

2600

2700

2800

2900

180
3000

Measured Depth, ft

Fig. 12The first six RSS tool face instruction sets (sets) in the
kick-off of Well
91. The well kicks-off at 2,100 oft starting at an
o
at about 1.9 /100ft turning to
azimuth of 135 . The build continues
o
an azimuth between 160 and 170 .

There were problems holding the correct azimuth and then

stabilizing the turn. Drilling passed around the nearby well and
turned toward the target location. Twenty-six sets sent to the
RSS in the drilling of this section had sufficient drilling
footage to evaluate. Twenty-four of these were judged to be
directionally effective (see Fig. 13).
build
sets

0 Up

100%
80%
turn
sets

60%
270 Left

The kickoff run continued to 4,067 ft, where pressure

spikes indicated BHA problems. The BHA was retrieved by
wireline. The motor was locked up and a washout was found
in the body of the RSS, though it was judged operational
before the trip out. The motor was removed from the BHA and
not replaced. The bias unit of the RSS was replaced and
drilling continued. Drilling was slower, and it was difficult to
keep surface turns above 60 rpm. The run was terminated
when a replacement motor arrived on location.

40%
20%

The motor was added back on the third run, restoring the
BHA to the design configuration. Drilling proceeded normally
for 200 ft before the ROP dropped significantly. The BHA
was pulled, and a mistake was discovered. The wrong size
underreamer had been run. The underreamer has a small
stabilizer section on it. This stabilizer was 6 in. when it
should have been 6 1/8 in., the bit size. This too-large
stabilizer piece had worked until harder formations were
encountered. The underreamer was replaced, and drilling
continued normally until 5,420 ft where the casing became
differentially stuck. This event caused 50 hr of lost time.
Directionally, the build and turn had been finished, and the
drop was underway. Drilling then continued to 6,360 ft. The
o
well was now at 4 of inclination. A pressure drop indicated a
washout in the BHA. Surface inspection showed the washout
in the connection between the jet sub and external tandem
stabilizer. The jet sub was dropped from the BHA, and drilling
continued to section TD of 6,950 ft.
Casing Directional Drilling Operation Considerations
Drilling torque can become an issue in drilling-with-casing
operations. The 7-in., 23-lbm/ft casing connection used in this
project has an operational torque limit of 16,000 ft-lbf.
Torque and drag calculations can be used effectively to model
the expected torque for the planned trajectory and expected
tortuosity, just as is done in conventionally drilled directional
wells. Fig. 14 shows the modeled versus actual drilling torques
for Well 91. The rotating friction factor at 33% is higher than
in wells using drillpipe.
12

90 Right

drop
sets

180 Down

Fig 13A graphical representation of the twenty-six RSS sets

used to build, turn and drop the 7-in. casing directional drilling
section of Well 91. Sets consisted of a tool face angle or direction
(variations on up, down, left, and right) and a power setting from
20 to 100%. 0% is considered neutral or the natural rotary
tendency of the BHA. Magnetic toolfaces are considered at zero
toolface angle or straight up. Twenty-four of these sets were
effective and are shown in blue. The two ineffective sets are
shown in red. The objective of those two were to drop and turn to
the right. They were judged ineffective, as the well path did not
drop, though the turn did continue.

Torque, 1000 ft-lbf

10

Rotating
Friction factor = 33%
(blue curve) model

Actual drilling torque values

(red points)

Run 1
0
1000

2000

3000

2
4000

4
5000

5
6000

6
7000

Measured Depth, ft

Fig. 14Drilling torque measurements (red) versus the modeled

torque (blue) from a torque and drag analysis using a 33%
rotating friction factor for the 7-in. section of Well 91.

SPE/IADC 92195

Well Days
0

10

12

Measured Depth (ft)

TD 9-5/8 casing section

Well 79
(red)
60

30

Well 91
(blue)

0
20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Casing Joint Number

Fig. 16ROPs calculated for each joint of casing drilled in the

vertical Well 79 and directional Well 91. Using various statistical
methods, the ROPs are within 10% of each other.

Conclusions
1. Directional wells can be drilled with casing using steerable
motors but success is difficult to achieve in holes smaller than
8 in. The smaller sizes of BHA components required to fit
through small holes give less-than-optimal power to steer the
underreamer and bit.
2. RSSs can be effective in 8-in. casing-drilled holes.
Directional control in the pilot hole is sufficient to guide the
larger casing to a directional target.

4. The casing string design for casing-drilled directional wells

is different from that in vertical wells. Directional wells have
more side forces and are more susceptible to differential
sticking.

3000

4000

5000

7000

90

3. In casing-drilled wells, pressure and flow operational

requirements of RSSs require consideration when selecting
nozzle size and BHA design.

2000

6000

120

14

1000

150

Rate of Penetration, ft/hr

Modeling can accurately predict torque values, which can

help detect excess torque that develops when casing string
vibrations or whirl occurs. There is also a variation in torque
with changes in rpm not usually seen with conventional
drillpipe drilling. The discussion and analysis of these
dynamic effects warrants a separate paper.
The incident of stuck casing was unusual for the Lobo
wells drilled with casing. Losses on the vertical wells had been
greatly reduced, and stuck-pipe problems had become
infrequent. The casing could be left stationary for a longer
time at connections. The various sticking problems in these
directional wells showed that reducing time spent with the
casing stationary was important. The casing string design for
vertical wells had developed to the point where 7 5/8-in. flush
joint heavyweight casing without centralizers was used for
the bottom eight joints. The number of centralizers had also
been reduced on the 7-in. casing as the drilling program
progressed. While this worked well in the vertical wells, it
probably increased risk of differential sticking in directional
wells. A review of the casing string design for casing
directional drilling is underway.
The time-depth curves for directional Well 91 and nearby
vertical Well 89 are shown in Fig. 15. The total footage is
comparable to 4,500 ft. The two instances of nonproductive
time in the directional well, the over gauge stabilizer, and the
sticking problems added 85 hr to the well time. A comparison
to the time-depth curve for Well 83 in Fig. 2 shows that
substantial timesavings are gained with RSSs versus motors in
casing directional drilling. Well 91 has greater directional
complexity than Well 83.

Well 79

Well 91

TD 7 casing section

Fig. 15The time-depth plot comparing the vertical Well 79 with

the casing directionally drilled Well 91.

A total of 132 joints were casing directionally drilled in the

7-in. section of the directional well. This can be closely
compared with the 128 joints of casing drilled in the nearby
vertical well. The ROPs on a joint-by-joint basis for the
directional well were slightly lessby about 10%than the
ROPs in the vertical well. Fig. 16 shows the ROPs for both
wells.

5. MWD systems run below mud motors can maintain reliable

data transmission. The signal attenuation was less than
expected. The MWD survey should be taken in the quiet time
when the pumps are down instead of when the pumps first
come back up after the connection, as is the common practice.

Acknowledgments
The authors thank ConocoPhillips for taking a leadership
position in developing casing directional drilling. Brett
Borland of ConocoPhillips Upstream Technology Group and
Rob Utter of Schlumberger were instrumental in securing
aspects of this project. Finally, we thank the many people in
the three companies who worked hard on these wells. Their
multiple, individual, and specific expertise made the concept
of this project become reality.

10

References
1. Fontenot, K., Warren, T., and Houtchens, B.: Casing Drilling
Proves Successful in South Texas, World Oil (October 2002)
27-32.
2. Fontenot, K., Highnote, J., Warren, T., and Houtchens, B.: Casing
Drilling Activity Expands in South Texas, paper SPE 79862
presented at the 2003 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference,
Amsterdam, 19-21 February.
3. Fontenot, K., Highnote, J., Strickler, R., Beierbach, E., and
Angman, P.: New Rig Design Enhances Casing Drilling
Operation in Lobo Trend, paper WOCD-0306-04 presented at
the World Oil 2003 Casing Drilling Technical Conference,
Houston, 6-7 March.
4. Warren, T., Tessari, R., and Houtchens, B.: Casing Drilling with
Retrievable Drilling Assemblies, paper OTC 16564 presented
at the 2004 Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, 3-6
May.
5. Warren, T., Houtchens, B., and Madell, G.: Directional Drilling
With Casing, paper SPE 79914 presented at the 2003
SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, 19-21 February.
6. Warren, T., Tessari, R., and Houtchens, B.: Directional Casing
while Drilling, paper WOCD-0430-01 presented at the World
Oil 2004 Casing Drilling Technical Conference, Houston, 3031 March.
7. Maidla, E. and Haci, M.: Understanding Torque: The Key to
Slide-Drilling Directional Wells, paper IADC/SPE 87162
presented at the 2004 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Dallas,
2-4 March.
8. Meader, T., Allen, F., and Riley, G.: To the Limit and Beyond
The Secret of World-Class Extended-Reach Drilling
Performance at Wytch Farm, paper IADC/SPE 59204
presented at the 2000 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New
Orleans, 23-25 February.
9. Downton, G. and Carrington, D.: Rotary Steerable Drilling
System for the 6-in Hole, paper SPE/IADC 79922 presented at
the 2003 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, 19-21
February.

SPE/IADC 92195