SPE 59534

A Coiled Tubing-Deployed Slow-Rotating Jet Cleaning Tool Enhances Cleaning and

Allows Jet Cutting of Tubulars
Mike Connell, SPE, Perry Courville, and James Tucker, SPE, Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.

Copyright 2000, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2000 SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery held
in Midland, Texas, 21-23 March 2000.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE 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 and are subject to correction by the
author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE meetings are subject to
publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of Petroleum Engineers. Permission to
copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The
abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper is presented.
Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A, fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
Tubular restrictions from scale buildup can significantly reduce
hydrocarbon production, and buildup must be removed to restore the production capacity of a well. Although scale buildup
is a global problem, the material composition and characteristics
of scales can vary drastically, even within the same field, making
most tools on location insufficient for scale removal. A customized jet cleaning tool has recently been developed to address the
problems associated with tubular cleaning operations.
Traditional jet cleaning tools are insufficient for removing
scale buildup because they do not reliably control jet dwell time.
Jet dwell time is the relationship between the difficulty of tubular
cleaning and the time required for scale removal. Jet dwell time
increases with an increase in the hardness of the buildup material.
Ability to control dwell time is a measure of cleaning efficiency.
A new, slow-rotating jet cleaning tool can help optimize jet dwell
time for cleaning operations without repetitive cyclic effects on
a coiled tubing (CT) workstring.
The slow-rotating jet cleaning tool can also be used for
cutting tubulars. Previously, tubulars were cut by mechanical,
explosive, or chemical methods, and CT was used to deploy
positive-displacement motors (PDMs) and pressure-activated
firing devices (used for rotating the mechanical cutters and
initiating the firing sequence in explosive or chemical cutters,
respectively). For many through-tubing applications, traditional
cutting methods created significant safety risks and obstacles
such as long bottomhole assemblies, increasing service costs.
With its capability to control jet dwell time and pump abrasive
fluids, the new jet cleaning tool can reduce the safety risks and
the costs associated with traditional cutting methods.

References at the end of the paper.

This paper discusses the design and application of the slowrotating jet cutting tool, and provides case histories of the tools
use in removing scale and production buildup on tubing walls.
The paper also discusses application of the tool for performing
through-tubing cuts.
Introduction
Scale deposits on tubing walls and perforations can stop well
production, inhibit the injection of well fluids, and plug downhole
production equipment. Such problems are compounded if the
buildup is left untreated.
Early Use of CT for Cleaning. The choice of a scale-removal
treatment is often affected by cost; treatment methods such as
acidizing or milling with small-diameter tubing can be expensive.
When CT was developed in the 1970s, it provided a low-cost
option for scale removal because operations could be performed
under live well conditions, reducing downtime.
CT provided a washing action for removing buildup materials. Acids could be placed through the tubing where they
chemically reacted with the scale, allowing waste material to be
extracted from the tubing and the flow path of the fluid to be
returned to the base pipe. However, removing scale buildup with
CT was inefficient.
Several factors affected the cleaning efficiency of CT. The
fluid-pumping equipment delivered more hydraulic horsepower
to the CT than it could withstand. Approximately 80% of the
available horsepower was lost to the small string diameters and
pressure ratings of the tubing. The tools that were placed on the
end of the CT to assist with cleaning caused an additional 15%
loss of available power. Consequently, only a small percentage
of the hydraulic horsepower from surface-pumping equipment
was available for removing buildup.
Additionally, the scales varied characteristics, inconsistent
composition, and lack of uniform distribution increased inefficiency because the cleaning energies required for removing the
buildup of materials were not clearly understood. Some buildup
materials (sludges, paraffins, wax complexes, etc.) are soft and
easily removed from the tubing wall. Harder buildup materials
(water scales, calcium sulfate, calcium carbonate, etc.) and materials such as barium sulfate or strontium require more energy for
removal.

A COILED TUBING-DEPLOYED SLOW-ROTATING JET CLEANING TOOL

ENHANCES CLEANING AND ALLOWS JET CUTTING OF TUBULARS

Industry Improvements. Several developments in the CT industry helped increase cleaning efficiency. First, pipe suppliers
improved tubing alloys. Manufacturers increased pipe diameter,
enabling operators to deliver more available horsepower
downhole. New quality-assurance programs encouraged CT
users to expand operations to include methods such as jet
cleaning, and the introduction of gel polymers helped reduce
friction in small-diameter tubing strings, allowing carrying mechanisms to remove waste particles from the well more efficiently.
Research on the cleaning energy required to remove various
buildup materials from tubulars led to the benchmark development of a calculated wash rate based on the type of buildup. The
wash rate correlates the fluid pump rate with the pressure drop
through CT pipe and wash nozzles. The wash rate provided a
method for calculating the speed at which tubing can be moved
though the wellbore during cleaning operations, changing the CT
cleaning process from empirical to scientific. For this approach,
the type and material composition of buildup material, the type
and rheology of pumping fluids, the length and diameter of
tubing, and the parameters of the well had to be considered. This
research was applied to jet cleaning operations, establishing a
complete process approach for wellbore cleanouts with CT.
Fluid Jet Theory
High-pressure fluid jet systems such as the slow-rotating jet
cleaning tool offer many advantages over mechanical and chemical methods of scale removal.1 Fluid jets are more efficient than
hydraulic motors because no power is lost during the transfer of
fluid energy to available torque. Jet cleaning systems can be used
to clean irregular surfaces, and damage to tubulars is minimized
because cleaning is not dependent on rotating mills.
For effective cleaning, the pressure that the fluid jet delivers
to the formation must be greater than the scale deposits compressive strength.1 Scale deposits are porous and typically deposited
in layers that are easily penetrated by fluid jets. After the jet
penetrates the scale, it forces a stream of fluid between the deposit
and the tubular, increasing pressure below the formation surface
and rupturing the deposit. The fluid then strips the deposit away
from the tubing wall. Because care must be taken to prevent
particles from bridging in the workstring, continuous reeled CT
is optimal for jetting operations.
Cleaning Energy. The ability of a fluid jet to remove buildup is
dependent on three factors1:
jet size
pressure drop across the fluid jet
the material characteristics of the deposits
The jet dwell time required for scale removal varies according
to each scales ability to bond to the pipe and to itself, the
characteristics of intermediate hydrocarbon deposits, and the
conditions causing buildup.2 Table 1 summaries the jet cleaning

SPE 59534

energy values required for various scales. These values were

collected after several years of empirical research and can be used
to determining optimum jet track speeds or nozzle sub travel rates
for scale removal.1
Use of Polymers. Long chain, high molecular-weight polymers
can be added to the jetting fluid for increased cleaning efficiency.1
Polymers cause water molecules to bond together into a macromolecular structure that promotes laminar flow, increases friction
reduction, and maximizes flow rate through the CT string by up
to 70%. The parallel structure of the molecules focuses the jet
stream and increases fluid projection from approximately 12 jet
diameters up to 60 jet diameters. This focusing effect concentrates jet power over a smaller area, which maintains the stress
applied to the target scale, thereby improving cleaning of hard
scale or large production liners below the production tubing.
Polymers can increase the amount of time that a metal surface
can be exposed to a fluid jet without significant removal of metal.
Testing has shown that adding polymer to water can reduce the
time to erosion by a factor of nine when compared to plain water.
Polymers can also help water molecules adhere to each other,
which increases jet-stream impact energy. This effect is referred
to as macromolecular bombardment.
Existing Jet Cleaning Technology
Most jet cleaning tools used to remove scale from tubulars can
be categorized as rotating or indexing. Theoretically, a cleaning
head could be designed to clean a section of pipe without rotating
or indexing, but the head would require many additional nozzles
to clean the entire pipe surface. For actual jobs, the pressure drop
across these added nozzles would be too low to effectively clean.
For this reason, computer programs are used for optimizing the
number of nozzles required for use with available pump capabilities.
For most hard scales, the maximum number of nozzles recommended by the software does not provide complete coverage of
the tubing wall in one pass without rotation of the cleaning head.
Therefore, the nozzles are arranged in patterns that provide
maximum vertical coverage either in one rotation (rotating tools),
or in each longitudinal pass through the wellbore (indexing tools).
Rotating Tools. Rotating tools (Fig. 1) are usually considered
superior to indexing tools because they allow the cleaning fluid
to reach the complete tubing wall in one pass, reducing fatigue
cycles on the CT. However, many rotating tools have deficiencies
that prevent them from effectively cleaning tubing in one pass.
Most rotating tools rely on the departure angle of the fluid
jet stream (Fig. 2) to create rotation, much like a lawn sprinkler.
Two major problems exist with this technique. First, the torque
output is minimal (6 to 7 lbf-ft), allowing the tool to stall easily
when the cleaning head contacts the tubing wall or a bridge. To
compound this problem, the tool operator has no indication that
the tool has stalled and is no longer cleaning the wellbore.

SPE 59534

M. CONNELL, P. COURVILLE, J. TUCKER

Second, the rotational speed of most rotating tools cannot

be controlled. For the tool to clean effectively, the cleaning head
must rotate at a predictable speed so that the vertical travel speed
of the CT matches the rotational speed of the cleaning head. If the
rotational speed differs from that predicted in prejob planning, the
pipe wall will not be properly cleaned.
If the rotational speed is slower than planned, the pipe wall
will show helical bands of scale that have not been cleaned
at all.
If the rotational speed is higher than planned, the jets will
have insufficient jet dwell time on the pipe surface. When the
head spins too quickly, the scale will not be completely
removed, and additional passes may be required.
To prevent the cleaning head from rotating too quickly, tool
designers have relied on friction in the rotating parts, viscous
fluids, or magnets to regulate the cleaning head. These friction
regulators perform well in laboratory conditions, but are unpredictable in actual wells because of temperature fluctuations,
variation in fluid types, etc. Temperature fluctuations are especially difficult for viscous fluid brakes to control. As downhole
temperatures increase, fluid viscosity decreases, causing the
rotating tool to spin more quickly. Eventually, the tool will spin
too quickly to clean properly.
Varying fluid types also decrease the ability of friction
regulators to rotate the cleaning head, especially when nitrogen
is added to the cleaning fluid. Nitrogen exits the cleaning head at
a much higher velocity than liquids, causing most rotating tools
to spin out of control. Some rotating tools have been known to
spin so quickly that the bearing sections lock up. As a result, most
rotating cleaning tools are run with nitrified fluids only if a
downhole fluid separator is run above the cleaning tool to remove
the nitrogen.
Indexing Tools. Although indexing tools are unaffected by
problems with torque or rotational speed, they require multiple
passes for cleaning a section of tubing. Each pass shortens the
life of the CT string because of the additional bending cycles.
Indexing tools clean longitudinal strips along the wellbore.
After making one pass over the interval to be cleaned, the tool is
indexed 30 or 45, and a second cleaning pass is run. Three or four
passes are usually required for 360 cleaning.
Two types of indexing tools have been used. One type uses
a ratchet mechanism, which indexes 30 or 45 each time pumping
is stopped and restarted (Fig. 3). This tool is commonly used, and
provides good cleaning performance. Because it can withstand
high temperatures, it is often used in geothermal applications.
Another type of indexing tool uses a J-slot indexing mechanism (Fig. 4). This tool relies on drag springs to move an outer
sleeve through the J-slot, which indexes the cleaning head 45
whenever the tubing direction is changed. This type of indexing
tool is not commonly used because it is often obstructed by
debris.

Design of the Slow-Rotating Jet Cleaning Tool

To prevent problems associated with existing rotating and indexing jet systems and to ensure good torque capability and rotational speed control, tool developers designed the slow-rotating
jet cleaning tool (Fig. 5). Because the immediate cleaning ability
of a fluid jet is limited, jet dwell time increases cleaning capacity.
The fluid jet of the slow-rotating tool is concentrated over a small
target area, completely removing buildup before passing to
another area. This procedure is more effective than multiple
passes over the same area.
Tool Components. The design of the slow-rotating jet head allows
for applications such as pumping of nitrogen and abrasive fluids,
nitrogen assists for scale removal, and jet cleaning with clear
fluids. A mud motor provides constant and predictable rotational
speed (rev/min), and high torque capacity and availability. A
5
/6-in. lobe rotor/stator configuration with a single-stage power
section was chosen for its relatively low speed (900 rev/min) and
short length (20 in.).
Because of the tools high torque output, a clutch was
incorporated into the cleaning nozzle. The clutch allows the
cleaning head to slip at 50 lbf-ft of torque at operating conditions.
This torque value prevents the tool from becoming damaged, but
provides adequate torque to prevent the cleaning head from
stalling whenever it contacts the tubing wall or a soft bridge.
The tools 50-gal/min flow rate limit is well suited for CT
applications. The tool was given an outer diameter (OD) of
1.75 in. to enable operators to pass it through 2 3/8-in. completions.
To ensure a long tool life, an oil-filled transmission section was
added to protect gears and bearings from annular and pumped
fluid.
Additionally, a custom gear set was designed to achieve a
rugged, compact, high speed reduction by simply changing three
gear pieces. The gear set was designed to reduce rotational speed
by a factor of 45:1; however, optional gear sets can achieve
reductions of over 130:1. With the reduction factor of 45:1, the
rotational speed of 900 rev/min is reduced to 20 rev/min.
Customized Software. Because cleaning requirements vary according to the buildup material, nozzles on the slow-rotating jet
cleaning tool must be customized for each job. A software
program accommodating rotational jet velocity was developed
based on existing field-proven programs. The program prompts
users to enter as much data as possible into a form; this data is
used for calculating the optimum size and number of jets and the
vertical travel speed. Because a change in any one factor can
dramatically change the outcome of the job, performing calculations with the software is the only accurate method of predicting
job results. Common entries for input data are listed as follows:
bottomhole pressure at total depth
cleaning energy required to remove scale
cleaning-fluid density

A COILED TUBING-DEPLOYED SLOW-ROTATING JET CLEANING TOOL

ENHANCES CLEANING AND ALLOWS JET CUTTING OF TUBULARS

reel core diameter

CT length
CT OD
CT pressure limit
CT wall
jet-head OD
jet size
maximum working depth
minimum annulus velocity to remove cuttings
number of jets
pressure loss across jets
target ID
tool pressure loss
tool output (rev/min)
work interval

The software calculates the data entered into the form and
provides outcomes for the following entries. Common entries for
output data are listed as follows:
annulus velocity
annulus volume
circulation time
CT volume
pressure drop in coiled tubing
required polymer volume
time to clean 100 ft
total fluid required
total job time
vertical travel speed
Case History
The slow-rotating jet cleaning tool was first used on four gasstorage wells where salt/paraffin deposits and sand fill decreased
well production. Previous attempts had been made to restore well
production by running casing and perforating the tubing above
the storage interval. Downhole video was used to photograph the
casing before and after treatment. Figs. 6 and 7 show the
condition of the well before treatment.
Treatment Procedure. Foam treated with an acid/solvent blend
was pumped through the cleaning tool over the storage interval.
After the tubing was tripped over the storage interval, a treatment
fluid containing an acid/solvent blend was pumped and allowed
to soak for approximately 2 hours. Next, nitrogen was pumped to
remove the cleaning fluids until the well was flowing only gas.

SPE 59534

Results. Well production for gas-storage wells cannot be measured accurately for at least 1 year after treatment, but production
on all four wells is expected to increase based on results of the
post-job downhole video survey. Figs. 8 and 9 show that the jet
cleaning tool thoroughly cleaned the casing walls and perforations, and removed sand fill from the bottom of the casing. The
choked flows for two of the four treated wells showed immediate
improvement.
Cutting Tubing with the Slow-Rotating Jet Cleaning
Tool
During development of the slow-rotating jet cleaning tool for
scale-removal operations, designers realized that the tool could
also be used in tubing-cutting applications. Testing was conducted to verify the tools effectiveness for pumping sand-laden
fluids during cutting operations.
Testing. Four cutting tests were conducted for the slow-rotating
jet cutting tool:
Test 1. The tubing was not cut completely, because of the
sand settling from the fluid and the insufficient pressure drop
across the nozzles.
Test 2. To increase the pressure drop across the nozzles, the
jet cleaning tool was fitted with smaller nozzles. The test
slurry was mixed on-the-fly (on location) to prevent settling.
Breakthrough occurred after 9 minutes; 4 minutes later, the
pipe was completely severed.
Test 3. The sand was mixed at a slightly lower concentration.
A sleeve was also installed over the tubing to determine the
possible damage to casing strings external to the tubing. The
CT was completely severed after 6 minutes, and casing
damage was minimal. No damage was found on the casing
wall farthest from the tubing, and the casing string had a
slight groove (approximately 0.06 in. 4 in.) where the tubing
contacted the casing.
Test 4. The tubing used for testing was more representative
of standard oilfield tubing than the softer linepipe grade used
for the first three tests. Pressure was applied to the tubing
joint to simulate downhole pressure conditions. Breakthrough
occurred at 20 minutes, and the tubing was cut completely
6 minutes later (Fig. 10).
Results. The rotational speed of the slow-rotating jet cutting tool
is optimal for cutting operations, and testing shows that hydrostatic pressure does not significantly affect the cutting efficiency
of the tool.

SPE 59534

Conclusion
The slow-rotating jet cleaning tool unites proven high-pressure
fluid jet technology with new downhole tool technology to
provide an optimized scale-removal system. The tool helps
prevent the problems associated with traditional methods of
removing scale from tubulars by ensuring constant and predictable rotational speed, which enables operators to control the jet
dwell time for cleaning efficiency.
Applications for the jet cleaning tool include removal of
scale, deposits, and fill in live well situations. Additionally, the
jetting tool can be used for tubing-cutting operations, reducing
the safety risks associated with explosive and chemical cutting
methods. The tool also provides an alternative to mechanical
cutting tools, which tend to be much longer and require more
lubricator length.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. for permission to publish this paper. We also thank Dan Jockel for contributing information for the case history.
References
1.

2.

M. CONNELL, P. COURVILLE, J. TUCKER

Fowler, S.H.: A Reeled-Tubing Downhole Jet Cleaning System,

paper SPE 21676 presented at the 1991 Production Operations
Symposium, Oklahoma City, Apr. 7-9.
Cobb, C. C. and Zublin C. W.: New Coiled Tubing Jet Cleaning
System Reduces Costs. PEI (1985) No. 57, 56-66.

Table 1Approximate Cleaning Energy Values

Material

Cleaning Energy
(lb per ft/in. 2)

Barium sulfate (BaSO4)

7,000

Silicates

6,000

Calcium carbonate (CaCO3)

5,500

Calcium sulfate (CaSO4)

4,500

Carbonate, sulfate, and silica (SiO2)

3,800

Water scales with hydrocarbons

3,200

Coal tar

3,000

Coke and coke complexes

2,500

Wax and wax complexes

2,000

Paraffins

1,200

Sludges

1,000

Semisolids (mud and gel)

800

Semiliquids

500

SPE 59534

om001767

A COILED TUBING-DEPLOYED SLOW-ROTATING JET CLEANING TOOL

ENHANCES CLEANING AND ALLOWS JET CUTTING OF TUBULARS

Fig. 1Typical rotating cleaning tool.

om001768

Fig. 2Conventional rotating tools rely on offset jet placement to spin

the cleaning head.

Indexing Tool

Jetting Tool

Fig. 3Ratchet indexing cleaning tool.

ccd01113

M. CONNELL, P. COURVILLE, J. TUCKER

ccd01114

SPE 59534

Fig. 4J-slot indexing tool.

SPE 59534

om001764

A COILED TUBING-DEPLOYED SLOW-ROTATING JET CLEANING TOOL

ENHANCES CLEANING AND ALLOWS JET CUTTING OF TUBULARS

om001766

Fig. 5Slow-rotating cleaning tool.

om001771

om001772

Fig. 7Scale buildup at 3,599 ft before cleaning.

Fig. 6Scale buildup at 45 ft before cleaning.

Fig. 8After cleaning at 45 ft.

om001770

M. CONNELL, P. COURVILLE, J. TUCKER

om001769

SPE 59534

Fig. 9After cleaning at 3,599 ft.

A COILED TUBING-DEPLOYED SLOW-ROTATING JET CLEANING TOOL

ENHANCES CLEANING AND ALLOWS JET CUTTING OF TUBULARS

SPE 59534

om001765

10

Fig. 10Cutting test on 3 1/2-in., 12.95-lbf-ft N80 tubing.