Drilling - Dictionary en To en

How to Use PowerPlan Schlumberger Schlumberger Schlumberger
Email
This Manual Home Page Connect In-Touch Home Page
PowerPlan
Technical Manual
Introduction
Describes the objective and structure of the manual, and how to give feedback. Additional Resources.
Well Planning
A list of well planning considerations and constraints.
Drilling Databrowser
Description of the Standard Data Model; data hierarchy; how data is accessed and stored within PowerPlan;
Positioning and Coordinate Systems; References and Datums.
Trajectory Design
Survey Calculation Methods; Designing Well Trajectories; Special Directional Drilling Considerations;
Factors Affecting Survey Measurements; Borehole Position Uncertainty.
Automatic Trajectory Design

Three-dimensional optimized trajectory of the well path.
Close Approach
Proximity Analysis methods, Calculation outputs (Center-Center, Ellipse of Uncertainty distance,
Separation Factor, Alert Radii); Spider Maps, Traveling Cylinder Plots; Reports.
BHA Editor
Bottom Hole Assembly component catalog; Reports.
Hydraulics
The Well Circulation System; Drilling Fluid Rheology; Pressure Drop Models; Motor Hydraulics;
Downhole Tools and Tool Joint Losses; Bit Hydraulics; Hole Cleaning and Cuttings Transport.
DrillSAFE
Torque and Drag Analysis; Buoyancy, Stiffness and Tortuosity; Friction Factors; BHA Tendency; Bit Side
Force Calculations.
Pore Pressure Window

Predict and evaluate the pore pressure gradient and fracture gradient both ahead of, and behind, the drill bit.
Glossary
 Schlumberger 2002. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transcribed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, without
prior written permission of the publisher.
PowerPlan Technical Manual
How to Use This Manual
Copyright Notice
 Schlumberger 2002. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transcribed in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, including photocopying and recording, without prior written permission of
the publisher.
Schlumberger acknowledges the copyright ownership of the referenced materials within

this manual and thanks the following publishers for allowing permission to reproduce
material for inclusion in this manual:
• The Society of Petroleum Engineers
• Gulf Publishing Company
• Elsevier Science Publishers
• Prentice Hall
• The University of Texas
Use of the following symbols indicates: *, Mark of Schlumberger; †, Mark of Halliburton;

‡
, Mark of Baker Hughes Inteq.
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual explains how to perform the following
basic functions within this Adobe Acrobat Reader electronic file:
• navigate
• print
• zoom in and out
• search
• copy text and graphics
• link to internet web addresses
Page 1 of 4
INTRODUCTION
There are many different ways to use this Adobe Acrobat Portable Document Format (PDF) file; each
user will eventually find the most comfortable methods. However, in the creation of this electronic
technical manual, certain features are built in that allow one to use it more efficiently and effectively.
Some of these features are discussed in the remainder of this section.
NAVIGATION
There are three basic methods of navigating within the Adobe Acrobat Reader software:
• linked table of contents
• bookmarks and hierarchies
• scrolling
Linked Table of Contents

There is a linked Table of Contents section on the opening screen of this electronic manual. Each text
entry in the Table of Contents is linked to that section of the manual, so all the user has to do is place the
cursor over the text entry, wait until the cursor turns to a pointing finger, and click the linked text. This
action will automatically take the user to that section.
Bookmarks and Hierarchies

When the PowerPlan Technical Manual file opens, there is a vertical pane (frame) on the left side of the
screen. This pane contains a variety of text entries, with arrows next to some of the entries. Clicking on
the arrows causes them to turn 90°, revealing a hierarchy of other linked headings underneath. These
linked headings can also be clicked on to transport the user to the corresponding section.
Scrolling
As with most other software programs, the user can navigate from page to page by using the scroll bar at
the far right of the screen.
ADDITIONAL FEATURES
The Adobe Acrobat Reader software allows the user to print selected pages from within the document,
zoom in on text, copy text, copy graphics, search for items within the document, and link to web URL’s.
Printiing
To print any or all pages from the Adobe Acrobat PDF file, simply choose File > Print and then select the
desired page range (see Figure 1).
Page 2 of 4
Figure 1: Print dialog box.
Zooming in on Text and Graphics

The user may want to zoom in on the text of the document. There are two ways to zoom in on text.
1. Use the Zoom tool (magnifying glass icon) on the top toolbar to zoom in on the desired area. Hold
down the Control key and click to zoom back out.
2. Click on the magnifying glass symbol at the bottom of the screen and a dialog box appears. Make
a numerical selection and hit Enter to zoom to that magnification.
Text on some figures may not be readable when viewed at 100%. By clicking on the blue figure number
callout in text, the figure will be magnified for better readability. Click on the “Goes to previous view”
button (two left arrows) on the top toolbar to return to the previous view and magnification. Printing an
illustration will also produce readable text.
Searching for an Item
What happens if the user has a specific topic in mind, but doesn't know exactly where to find it? The
easiest way is to use the Tools > Find dialog box (see Figure 2). Type in the key word(s) to search for,
choosing keywords and starting location carefully.
(Hint: Watch the meter bar at the bottom of the screen to watch the search progress.)
Page 3 of 4
Figure 2: Print dialog box.
Copying Text
The user can copy text and paste it into another application by choosing the text toolbar button from the
top of the screen, selecting the text, and selecting Edit > Copy from the file menu. Then the user can paste
it into another application.
Copying Graphics
The user can also copy a graphic and paste it into another application by choosing Tools > Select
Graphics from the file menu. This action changes the cursor to a crosshair. Using the cursor, the user can
drag a marquee around a graphic and select Edit > Copy. Then the user can paste the graphic into another
application.
Links to Internet URL’s

There are numerous “hot links” to internet URL’s throughout the manual. Click anywhere in the blue
highlighted web address and your browser will automatically initialize and connect you to the appropriate
location.
If you do not have a default browser selected, you will be prompted to pick one the first time you click on
one of these hot links. Search for the browser executable (“netscape.exe” for Netscape or “Iexplore.exe”
for Microsoft’s Internet Explorer) and associate the executable file with your browser selection.
Page 4 of 4
1. Introduction
Schlumberger Oilfield Services

150 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land TX 77478
(281) 285-8000
CONTENTS
POWERPLAN TECHNICAL MANUAL.........................................................................................................4
Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................4
Objective of This Manual ........................................................................................................................4
Structure of This Manual.........................................................................................................................4
Feedback on This Manual .......................................................................................................................4
Additional Resources ..............................................................................................................................4
January 2002 Page 2 of 4 PowerPlan Technical Manual

Introduction
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual covers the following topics:
• objective of the manual
• structure of the manual
• feedback
• additional resources

Introduction
POWERPLAN TECHNICAL MANUAL

Introduction
This manual is intended to serve as a technical resource for users of PowerPlan. This manual is not a guide on how
to operate the PowerPlan software suite; rather, it is a tool to assist in understanding the capabilities and limitations
of the program and the physics behind the program design.
Objective of This Manual

This manual will accomplish the following:
• describe the mathematical models implemented within PowerPlan
• illustrate concepts used by PowerPlan
• illustrate the data hierarchy stored and displayed by PowerPlan
• define PowerPlan terminology in precise terms
• discuss the processes and assumptions used in PowerPlan
• explain the meaning or application of PowerPlan outputs and reports
Structure of This Manual

The information in this manual is organized to correspond with the following PowerPlan software modules:
• DataBrowser
• WellDesign
• Automatic Trajectory Design
• Survey Editor
• Close Approach
• BHA Editor
• Hydraulics
• DrillSAFE
Feedback on This Manual

If, during your use of this technical reference manual, you identify areas where the manual could be improved,
please let us know by using the following contact information:
Sugar Land Product Center

Drilling Interpretation Products
150 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land, TX 77478
USA: 1-800-874-8425
Houston: 1-713-621-1165 (manned 8 a.m. – 5 p.m. CST)
Email: Intouch-spc-dpe@slb.com
Additional Resources
You can find additional information on PowerPlan in the following resources:
• PowerPlan User Training Guide
• PowerPlan Self-training Tutorial
• PowerPlan Online Help

2. Well Planning

150 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land TX 77478
(281) 285-8000
CONTENTS
WELL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS.......................................................................................................4

Well Planning
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual provides a well planning checklist that
includes operating concerns or constraints that should be considered when designing
Trajectories.

Well Planning Considerations
WELL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

Operating concerns or constraints to consider when designing Trajectories:
! Dogleg limitations for tool capabilities?

! Can motor build the desired rate for the hole size?
! Can motor be used in rotary mode through a given formation?
! Is there a tangent (or low build section) after a high build rate to give MWD time to get out of the
high build before we start to rotate?
! Has the trajectory been laid out taking into account future field development for more difficult
wells to come?
! You can drill the profile, but can you run the completion?
! Do you have contingency fall-back points in the plan for unplanned events? (stuck BHA,
geologic uncertainties) This would be sections in the profile that would make for good
sidetracking points.
! Is the profile in the target interval within specs of running submersible pumps?
! Can the build rates you want be accomplished in the particular formation?
! Does the surveying program provide the necessary wellbore positioning precision required by all
parties involved?
! Do you hit the target(s)?
! Have you minimized the overall well tortuosity?
! Is there enough buffer space around the well for operational execution without close approach
concerns?
! Have bit trips been minimized?
! Have build sections been designed for completion before casing points are reached?
! Has maximum sail angle been minimized below constraints for wireline logging?
! Is there room left to drill if the designed build/turn rates are unattainable, without plugging back?
To not miss target, and not cross hard lines.
! Has attention been given to build/turn rates through transition zones and faults? (Reduced dogleg
so as to not introduce a sudden large dogleg as you break through the transition zone to the new
formation)
! Does the plan have inclinations that are below the threshold of good well steering, and
navigational limitations of the BHA?
! Does the trajectory accommodate the planned surveying program for dogleg limitations and
turn/build rate limitations?
! Is there expected magnetic interference and what measures will be used to minimize it?

3. DataBrowser

150 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land TX 77478
(281) 285-8000
CONTENTS
THE DATABROWSER..................................................................................................................................5
THE GEOFRAME DATABASE ....................................................................................................................6
INTRODUCTION TO DATA MODELING .....................................................................................................6
What is a Data Model?.............................................................................................................................6
Data Modeling Standards........................................................................................................................6
What is the Standard Data Model?.........................................................................................................7
DATA MODEL HIERARCHY ........................................................................................................................8
Structure, Well, and Borehole Identification Data ................................................................................8
POSITIONING AND COORDINATE SYSTEMS OVERVIEW ....................................................................10
GEOGRAPHIC COORDINATES ................................................................................................................11
Latitude and Longitude / Parallels and Meridians..............................................................................11
Points of Origin and the Prime Meridian .............................................................................................12
Ellipsoids and Geodetic Datums..........................................................................................................13
MAP PROJECTION ....................................................................................................................................14
Lambert Map Projection ........................................................................................................................15
UTM System ...........................................................................................................................................16
Oblique Mercator Projection.................................................................................................................19
USING COORDINATE SYSTEMS..............................................................................................................19
Legal Coordinate Systems....................................................................................................................19
Local Coordinate Systems....................................................................................................................21
Leaselines and Boundaries ..................................................................................................................21
Land Locations ......................................................................................................................................22
Offshore Locations ................................................................................................................................23
BOTTOMHOLE TARGETS.........................................................................................................................23
Targets and Local Coordinates ............................................................................................................23
UNIT SYSTEMS SUPPORTED ..................................................................................................................26
THE DATABROWSER LEVELS ................................................................................................................27
Project Database....................................................................................................................................28
Field.........................................................................................................................................................28
Structure .................................................................................................................................................28
Slot ..........................................................................................................................................................28
Well..........................................................................................................................................................28
Borehole .................................................................................................................................................28
Activities .................................................................................................................................................29
Target ......................................................................................................................................................30

DATA RELATIONSHIPS IN DATABROWSER LEVELS...........................................................................30

Field.........................................................................................................................................................30
Structure .................................................................................................................................................31
Slot/Well ..................................................................................................................................................34
Borehole .................................................................................................................................................36
Targets ....................................................................................................................................................36
Application of DataBrowser Structure.................................................................................................40
DATUMS AND REFERENCES...................................................................................................................42

What is the Standard Data Model (SDM)?
Section Summary
• what a data model is and how the entities within a data model are related to one
another
• how the hierarchy of data is established in the DataBrowser
• how the data is stored and accessed in the PowerPlan DataBrowser

SDM Model
THE DATABROWSER
The DataBrowser application of the PowerPlan software suite stores and displays well planning data (see
Figure 3-1). The following section covers data modeling, positioning and coordinate systems, and map
projections, followed by a discussion of the actual DataBrowser database.
DataBrowser
1. Set up database hierarchy with Field, Structure, Slot, Well, and Borehole.
2. Enter Targets.
Well Design
1. Plan well trajectory to hit target.
2. Match drilling target to geological target, incorporating survey error model output.
Survey Editor
1. Update surveys from previously drilled wells.
Close Approach
1. Calculate proximity to offset wells.
BHA Editor
1. Enter planned BHA parameters.
2. Create wellbore geometry files.
DrillSAFE
1. Calculate theoretical torque and drag values for well/BHA.
2. Calculate BHA tendency.
Hydraulics
1. Verify acceptable hydraulics and hole cleaning.
Figure 3-1: Illustration of PowerPlan workflow.

SDM Model
THE GEOFRAME DATABASE

The PowerPlan DataBrowser provides the drilling engineer’s view of the GeoFrame database. The
drilling data are stored in the more general GeoFrame database and are shareable with other GeoFrame
applications. Projection coordinate systems for individual fields and structures can be selected from a
comprehensive list of worldwide projection methods and datums. Scale factors and grid convergence for
the location are instantly displayed for the selected projection method and datum.
DataBrowser can be used to perform the following functions:

• Create new data such as fields, structures, slots, wells, boreholes, and targets.
• Edit and delete existing data in the project database.
• Browse through the model to locate specific data to work with.
• Select projection coordinate systems for individual fields and structures.
• Select a display unit system from a drop-down box that automatically converts all units of
measure.
• Select and deselect definitive surveys for boreholes.
INTRODUCTION TO DATA MODELING

This portion of the DataBrowser section describes what a data model is, the standards that are currently
set for data modeling, what the Standard Data Model (SDM) is, and how data modeling applies to the
petroleum industry.
What is a Data Model?

A data model is a collection of concepts that are used to describe a set of data and operations to
manipulate the data.1 Computer systems require data models to systematically store data for display,
retrieval, and reporting.
A data model is, in many ways, like a dictionary. Names and definitions for technical items are described.
These technical items are called entities.
A data model also provides detailed characteristics of each entity. These characteristics are called
properties. Some properties provide simple descriptive or identifying information (like color and area),
while other properties include specific information about how entities associate with other entities. The
associations between entities are called relationships.
Data Modeling Standards

For years, exploration and production (E&P) data was handled in many different ways and stored in a
variety of databases, providing little or no consistency or compatibility from one database to the next. In
1990, several major oil companies joined forces to form a corporation whose sole purpose was to develop
a data model for storing full life-cycle exploration and production information. This nonprofit corporation
was called the Petrotechnical Open Software Corporation (POSC). POSC is continually developing
higher levels of information modeling, information management, and data application standards for E&P
assets. 2

SDM Model
New technology, partnership agreements, and the requirement for enhanced benchmarking continued to
increase the demand for sharing of information between operators, service providers, and regulatory
bodies. Proprietary information structures with locally or poorly defined definitions became untenable.
With little or no worldwide industry definition of activities, comparison between partners, regulatory
bodies, and even internal legacy systems became invalid due to the different definitions in each corporate
system. Consequently, one of the major contributions of POSC is the Well Information Mapping to
Epicentre (WIME) project. The WIME project was initiated by member companies of POSC to:
“…define standards for the electronic representation of drilling and well operations which, when
implemented in computer software products, will reduce the costs of drilling, increase the
effectiveness of communication, allow more effective analysis of drilling information, and enable
faster decisions which take into account the geoscience and drilling engineering aspects of the drilling
business.” 3
The WIME project has helped the oil and gas industry to reach a consensus on the activity codes of well
operations and implement these codes in a standard data model. The resulting data modeling processes
will enable better sharing of important data throughout the entire industry.
Although traditionally data was stored with depth data as the primary focus, the WIME project is
designed to focus on time-based data. Analysis of real-time data is an important step towards continuous
efficiency improvements, cost reductions, safety advancements, and operational executions.
What is the Standard Data Model?

The Standard Data Model (SDM) is object-based because it supports the following object-oriented
modeling concepts:
• specialization - relationships structured in sets of named classes or types that have common
properties
• aggregation - relationships structured where one entity owns another
• association - relationships structured where one entity is a member of another
PowerPlan implements the following entities:

• structure, well, borehole, field, slot, and activity (plan, execute, and evalutate) identification data
• activity data model
• equipment data model

SDM Model
DATA MODEL HIERARCHY

This section addresses the various types of data that are stored in a data model and the relationship of one
set of data to another.
Structure, Well, and Borehole Identification Data

A structure is an entity of a field and represents a drilling rig, workover rig, or platform. Each structure
entity has one or more drill slot entities that represent holes in a template, conduits, or prepared sites that
allow wells to be drilled in the ground.
A well is an entity of a field and is identified by a unique well identifier (UWI). Each well corresponds to
a unique surface location that is represented by a position object.
A borehole is an entity of a well and is also identified by a UWI. There may be more than one borehole in
a given well.
Equipment Data Model

All equipment on a wellsite is placed into one of the following three categories for classification:
• borehole equipment
• tubular equipment
• casing, tubing, and drill pipe equipment
Borehole Equipment
The borehole equipment is permanent or temporary equipment that can be placed in a borehole, such as
drill strings, casing strings, tool strings, coiled tubing string, or wireline.
Tubular Equipment
The tubular equipment is general class equipment with two threaded ends that is either a single item or the
make-up of single items to form a combined unit tubular.
Casing Strings, Tubing, and Drill Pipe Strings

Casing, tubing, and drill pipe are all types of tubulars that are a single pipe or a set of identical pipes
combined to form a string. These strings are often designated by a nominal outside diameter; however, in
a data model, this nominal diameter is insufficient to completely describe casing, tubing, or drill pipe
strings because some strings are complex, like a tapered casing string. Furthermore, there are additional
components required to form a casing string, like float shoes, float collars, and centralizers.

Positioning and Coordinate Systems
Section Summary
This section discusses the various methods of positioning and the systems of
coordinates used in the oil and gas industry.

POSITIONING AND COORDINATE SYSTEMS OVERVIEW

Where once targets were described as being 1,200 ft from the surface location along N 48.6° E, they are
now often described as being located at an absolute position of NAD UTM 6,234,345.67 ft N and
474,628.34 ft E.
The following circumstances (and more) require that a well planner or directional driller understand
positioning and coordinate systems:
• the need to exchange positioning data with others
• government positioning regulations
• the need to locate and target a blown-out wellbore when the surface rig has been destroyed
The problem with positioning is that the earth is not a perfect sphere, but rather an oblate spheroid (a
squashed sphere). The radius of the earth at the North Pole is about 13 miles shorter than the radius at the
Equator. If the earth was the size of a billiard ball, the human eye could not tell the difference; but, in
modeling, this 13 miles causes many problems for the geodesist (a scientist who studies the shape of the
earth).
The problem exists because the maps and drawings that are used in directional drilling are flat. Projecting
plotting data from the surface (or subsurface) of a sphere onto a flat map is impossible without
compromises and the introduction of controlled error. Consequently, those who plan directional wells
must draw heavily upon the science of geodesy and cartography (map making) to provide a complex, yet
straightforward method of plotting surveys and well plans.
A coordinate system in PowerPlan is defined by the following criteria:

• type of coordinate system
• name of coordinate system
• location folder
• distance units
• central meridian (Universal Transverse Mercator and Transverse Mercator only)
• scale factor
• upper and lower scale latitude (Transverse Mercator and Lambert only)
• origin longitude
• false northing
• false easting
• coordinate system datum
• ellipsoid name
• Bursa/Wolf transformation type
• semimajor axis
• inverse flattening
• semiminor axis
• test points

If a coordinate system is required that is not included in PowerPlan, refer to the PowerPlan web site to
make a request at the following URL:
http://www.sugar-land.spc.slb.com/spc_open/spc_products/PowerPlan/
GEOGRAPHIC COORDINATES
To identify the location of points on the earth, begin by superimposing a network of longitude (vertical)
and latitude (horizontal) lines on the earth’s surface. The longitude lines are referred to as meridians and
the latitude lines are referred to as parallels.
Latitude and Longitude / Parallels and Meridians

The North and South Poles are the approximate ends of the axis about which the earth rotates. The
Equator is represented by an imaginary horizontal line halfway between the North and South Poles. The
parallels of latitude are formed by circles surrounding the earth and in planes parallel with that of the
Equator. If circles are drawn equally spaced along the surface of the sphere, with 90 spaces from the
Equator to each pole, each space is called a degree of latitude. The circles are numbered from 0 at the
Equator to 90 at the North and South Poles. Each degree is subdivided into 60 minutes and each minute
subdivided into 60 seconds.
Meridians of longitude are formed with a series of imaginary lines that all intersect at the North and South
Poles. These lines cross each parallel of latitude at right angles, but strike the Equator at various points. If
the Equator is equally divided into 360 parts, and a meridian passes through each mark, 360° of longitude
result. These 360° are also divided into minutes and seconds. While the lengths of degrees of latitude are
always the same on a sphere, the lengths of degrees of longitude vary with the latitude (see Figure 3-2).
At the Equator on the sphere, they are the same lengths as the degree of latitude, but elsewhere they are
shorter.

Position point P is expressed in terms of

degrees of latitude β and degrees of
longitude φ.
Figure 3-2: Standard geographic system of coordinates on the earth’s surface.
Points of Origin and the Prime Meridian

There is only one location for the Equator and one location for each of the poles that serve as references
for counting the horizontal degrees of latitude. There is not, however, a natural point of origin from which
to begin counting vertical degrees of longitude, since all meridians are identical in shape and size.
Therefore, one meridian must be arbitrarily chosen as the starting point—the point called the Prime
Meridian.
There have been many prime meridians in the course of history, swayed by national pride and
international influence. Eighteenth-century maps of the American colonies often show longitude from
London or Philadelphia. During the 19th century, boundaries of new States were described with
longitudes west of a meridian through Washington, D.C. In 1884 the Transit Circle telescope in the
Greenwich Observatory’s Meridian Building was defined as the Prime Meridian.4 To be exact, the cross
hairs in the eyepiece of the telescope specifically defined 0° longitude for the world. The degrees are
counted in positive figures to the east of Greenwich (up to 180°) and negative figures to the west. Since
the earth’s crust is always moving slightly, the exact location of the Prime Meridian line may move
slightly, too; however, despite the exact location of the line sometimes moving from one side to the other,
the reference point for the Prime Meridian is still the Transit Circle telescope.

When constructing meridians on a map projection, the central meridian—usually a straight line—is
considered the starting point (0° longitude) for calculation purposes. When the map is completed with
labels, the meridians are marked with respect to the Prime Meridian in Greenwich.
Ellipsoids and Geodetic Datums

In order to apply the use of the points of origin, meridians, and parallels, one must also have an
understanding of ellipsoids and geodetic datums.
Ellipsoids
An ellipsoid is the name of the volume obtained when an ellipse is rotated about one of its axes. An oblate
spheroid is an ellipse rotated about the shorter (semi-minor) axis. The oblate spheroid is the principal
shape used in modeling the surface of the earth.
The earth is not an exact ellipsoid, and deviations from this shape are continually evaluated; however, for
map projections, the problem has been confined to selecting constants for the ellipsoidal shape and size.
The problem has not generally been extended to incorporate the much smaller deviations from this shape,
except that different reference ellipsoids are used for the mapping of different regions of the earth.
There are over a dozen principal ellipsoids that are used. The different dimensions of the ellipsoids result
from varying accuracy in the geodetic measurements (the measurements of locations on the earth) and
from the varying curvature of the earth’s surface, caused by irregularities in the gravitational field. Until
recently, ellipsoids were only fitted to the earth’s shape over a particular country or continent. The polar
axis of the reference ellipsoid for such a region, therefore, does not normally coincide with the axis of the
actual earth, although it is made parallel.
The same principle applies to the real and assumed equatorial planes. The discrepancy between centers is
usually a few hundred yards at most. Only coordinate systems determined by satellite, such as the World
Geodetic System of 1972 (WGS72), are considered geocentric. Ellipsoids for these satellite-determined
systems represent the entire earth more accurately than ellipsoids determined from ground measurements,
but they do not generally provide the best fit for a specific region.
Geodetic Datum
A geodetic datum is defined by a set of constants that specify a coordinate system for calculating the
coordinates of points on the earth.
A geodetic datum usually consists of the following:

• an official name
• a reference ellipsoid
• a definition of how the ellipsoid is oriented to the earth’s surface
• a definition for the unit of length
• a description of the region(s) where the datum is intended for use
The reference ellipsoid is used with an initial point of reference on the surface of the earth to produce a
smooth mathematical surface that closely fits the mean sea level surface throughout the area of interest.

This surface is called the datum. The initial point of reference is assigned a latitude, longitude, and
elevation above the ellipsoid.
Once a datum is adopted, it provides the surface to which ground control measurements are referred. The
latitude and longitude of all the control points in a given area are then computed relative to the adopted
ellipsoid and the adopted initial point. The projection equations of large-scale maps must use the same
ellipsoid parameters as those used to define the local datum; otherwise, the projections will be
inconsistent with the ground control.
The North American Datum 1927 (NAD27) is the most commonly used datum for Canada, the United
States, and Mexico. The European Datum 1950 (ED50) is the most commonly used datum in the north
Sea.
MAP PROJECTION
A map projection is a mathematical formula used to convert latitude/longitude positioning on the surface
of a sphere into positioning data that can be plotted onto a flat map with some degree of controlled error
and known accuracy. Map projections are defined in a specific unit of length and usually have defined
coefficients that vary with location on the surface of the earth.
The most common positioning method uses XY Cartesian coordinates. When describing a location point
on a map, the location of the point, as it relates to the x and y axis, is expressed as a numerical coordinate
position, like (6,7). The first number represents the position of the point on the x axis and the second
number represents the position on the y axis The point described as (6,7) is 6 units to the right of the y
axis and 7 units up from the x axis. Almost all of the earth’s wellbores are located with some form of XY
coordinate system.
Two methods of creating projection coordinate systems were initially developed: the Mercator and
Transverse Mercator projections. The Mercator projection, first developed in 1569 by Gerardus Mercator,
was the maritime mapping standard in the 17th and 18th centuries, especially for navigation near the
equator. This projection was later used for mapping the world’s oceans and equatorial regions in 19th and
20th centuries. The Mercator projection is conformal, meaning that the shape is preserved locally and the
latitude and longitude meet at right angles.5 Put plainly, a conformal projection preserves the curved
angles on earth when projecting the earth onto a plane.
The Transverse Mercator projection, developed by Johann Heinrich Lambert in 1772, expanded upon
the Mercator projection with the following characteristics:
• It is used for topographic mapping (graphic delineation of land surface, as by contour lines).
• It is a Mercator rotated 90°.
• It is applied to sphere.
• It is conformal.6
From these initial map projections the Lambert, and Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM), and Oblique
Mercator map projections were developed. These projections are discussed in the remainder of this
section.

Lambert Map Projection

The Lambert Conformal Conic projection (or Conical Orthomorphic), also developed by Johann Lambert
in 1772, is currently the most commonly used map projection in the United States and throughout the
world. The Lambert map projection was Lambert’s first new projection in 1772, presented in the same
publication that contained his Transverse Mercator projection. The Lambert projection yields the greatest
similarity that any plane figure can have with one drawn on the surface of a sphere. Meridians are
equally-spaced and the parallels become further apart as the distance from the central parallels increases
(see Figure 3-3). Straight lines between points approximate great circular arcs for maps of moderate
coverage.
Figure 3-3: Lambert Conformal Conic Projection.
NOTE
The Lambert Conformal Conic projection with standard parallels 20° and 60°N. north America is
illustrated here to show the change in spacing of the parallels. When used for maps of the
conterminous United States or individual States, standard parallels are 33° and 45°N.
In the Lambert Conformal Conic projection, one or two parallels may be made standard or true to scale.
When using the Lambert Conformal Conic projection in the State Plane Coordinate System (discussed
later), the choice of standard parallels reduces the scale of the central parallel by an amount that cannot be
simply expressed in exact form. However, the scale for the central meridian of a map using the
Transverse Mercator projection is normally reduced by a simple fraction.
In the continental United States, the Lambert Conformal Conic projection is adopted as the official
projection for the State Plane Coordinate System for states of predominantly east-west expanse. A
Transverse Mercator system is prepared for the remaining states.

UTM System
On most projections the lines of longitude (parallels) and latitude (meridians) are curved. The quadrangles
formed by the intersection of these lines are of different shapes and sizes, which complicates the location
of points and the measurement of directions. Consequently, the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM)
system was developed. The UTM is the most commonly used member of the TM family and is a
worldwide specification.
In the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) system, the world is divided up into 60 equal zones, each 6°
wide between 84° north and 80° south.
NOTE
The North and South Pole regions that fall outside the UTM zones are covered by other special
projections, such as the Oblique Mercator projection that is discussed further on.
Each zone in the UTM system has its own origin at the intersection of its central meridian and the
equator. In addition, each zone is flattened and a grid is imposed upon it. Thus, the outer edges of the
zone are curved when drawn on a flat map since they follow the meridian lines on the globe. Each of the
60 zones is numbered, starting with zone 1 at the 180th meridian. The areas east and west of the
Greenwich Meridian are covered by zones 30 and 31.
Any point on the earth can be identified by the following:

• zone number
• northing (the distance in meters from the equator)
• easting (the distance in meters from a north - south reference line)

To avoid negative values for eastings, the central meridian of any zone is assigned the arbitrary eastings
value of 500,000 meters (see Figure 3-4). Along the equator a zone is about 600,000 meters wide,
tapering towards the polar region; therefore, eastings range in value from approximately 200,000 to
800,000 meters.
Equator
Origin of
false easting 0 for N Hemispheres
10,000 for S Hemispheres
Approximately 600,000 mts at Equator
Figure 3-4: Universal Transverse Mercator system of positioning.
For points north of the equator, northings are measured directly in meters, with a value of zero at the
equator and increasing toward the north. To avoid negative northing values in the southern Hemisphere,
the equator is arbitrarily assigned a value of 10,000,000 meters; therefore, displacements in the southern
Hemisphere are measured with decreasing, but positive, values in the southerly direction.

Grid North and True North

As one moves away from the central meridian, grid north and true north vary increasingly. The term
convergence is used to describe the difference between grid north and true north (see Figure 3-5).
NOTE
By convention, convergence is the angle from true north to grid north and is positive when
clockwise.
At any position on a map, true north is always aligned with the lines of longitude. When a grid is imposed
upon a map, the lines of longitude do not align with the grid lines (in general). Only at the central
meridian do the grid and longitudinal lines align; therefore, only along this line are true north and grid
north the same.
Figure 3-5: Grid convergence.

Oblique Mercator Projection

Oblique Mercator projections are used to plot zones areas that are long, thin, and at a diagonal relative to
north. This projection is used in the regions that cannot be covered by the other projection methods, such
as the Alaska State Plane Zone 5001 (see Figure 3-6).
Alaska Zone 5001
Figure 3-6: Oblique Mercator projection used in Alaska Zone 5001.
USING COORDINATE SYSTEMS

To properly use any type of coordinate system in the oil and gas industry, one must know how to apply
map projections and datums to different types of coordinate systems encountered. The two main
categories of coordinate systems one must understand are legal coordinate systems and local coordinate
systems.
Legal Coordinate Systems

The term “legal coordinate system” is used to describe the combining of all the positioning concepts
previously mentioned into a unified coordinate system for a particular geopolitical entity, such as a
country or state. The U.S. State Plane Coordinate System (SPCS) of 1927 and 1983 are two common
examples of a legal coordinate system.

State Plane Coordinate System of 1927 (SPCS 27)

The SPCS 27 was designed by the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey to enable surveyors, cartographers
(map-makers), and engineers to connect their land or engineering surveys to a common geodetic datum.
The datum chosen was the Meades Ranch in Kansas and was called the North American Datum of 1927
(NAD27). The following criteria were applied in the design of the SPCS 27:
• the (NAD27) was the geodetic datum
• a foot was the unit of length
• three different map projections were used, depending upon the U.S. positioning point
• the system applied to all 50 states and a number of island possessions and protectorates
• conformal mapping projections were used
• the maximum scale distortion was restricted to less than one part in 10,000
• a state was covered with as few zones of a projection as possible
• boundaries of projection zones were designed as an aggregation of counties
It was impossible to use plane coordinates to map a curved earth on a flat map without distorting the
angles, azimuths, distances, or area. It was possible, however, to design a map so that some of these
characteristics remained undistorted by selecting an appropriate map projection of such as the Lambert,
UTM, or oblique Mercator projection.
These same map projections were also often custom-designed to provide a coordinate system for a local
or regional project. For example, the equations of the oblique Mercator projection produced coordinates
for the northeast Corridor Rail Improvement project when a narrow coordinate system from Washington,
DC to Boston, MA was required.
Land survey distance measurements in the 1930s were typically made with a steel tape or methods even
less precise, so the accuracy ratio rarely exceeded one part in 10,000 (1:10,000). Therefore, the designers
of the SPCS 27 concluded that a maximum distance scale distortion of the 1:10,000 projection could be
absorbed in the computations without adversely affecting the survey. If distances were more accurate than
1:10,000, or if the systematic scale distortion could not be used, the scale distortion could be eliminated
by computing and applying an appropriate grid scale factor correction. (This process involves calculating
the ratio of the scale along the meridian or along the parallel at a given point to the scale at a standard
point or along a standard line, which is made true to scale.) Granted, the 1:10,000 limit was set at an
arbitrary level, but it worked well for its intended purpose and did not restrict the quality of the survey
when grid scale factor was computed and applied.
To keep the scale distortion at less than 1:10,000 when designing the SPCS 27, some states required
multiple projection zones; therefore, some states had only one state plane coordinate zone, some had two
or three zones, and Alaska had 10 zones that incorporated all three projections. With the exception of
Alaska, the zone boundaries in each State followed county boundaries. There was usually sufficient
overlap from one zone to another to accommodate projects or surveys that crossed zone boundaries, while
still limiting the scale distortion to 1:10,000.
In more recent years, survey accuracy usually exceeds the 1:10,000 ratio due to enhanced survey methods
developed since the SPCS 27. More surveyors are accustomed to correcting surveys for projection scale
distortion by applying the grid scale factor correction. When the correction is used, zone boundaries
become less important, since projects may extend farther into adjacent zones.

Local Coordinate Systems

In most cases, a directional driller will use a system of local coordinates for day-to-day activities. This
local system depends upon and has a direct relationship to all the concepts presented so far in this chapter.
In defining local coordinate systems, assumptions are often made that are not obvious, but are very
important. Care must be used in specifying local coordinate systems so that all implicit and explicit
relationships to legal coordinate systems are preserved.
Local Coordinate System vs. Legal Coordinate Systems

The local coordinate system must have its origin at a point that can be positioned in the legal coordinate
system. This point is referred to as the reference point. The reference point has a location in the legal
coordinate system and it has a location of (0,0) in the newly defined local coordinate system. This
reference point has only north and east coordinates defined. An additional reference, the vertical reference
datum, must be defined in order to measure either true vertical depth (TVD). Common examples of a
vertical reference datum are the rotary kelly bushing (RKB) on the rig floor, mean sea level (MSL), Least
Astronomic Tide (LAT), or the mud line (ML).
Unless specifically defined otherwise, a local coordinate system has each of its axes oriented parallel to
the corresponding axes of the legal coordinate system in which its reference point is defined. For all
vertical reference datums there must be a defined unit of length; however, either the customer’s
preference or governmental regulation normally dictates this unit of measurement.
Since a local coordinate system is a grid system it has to use a grid north in order to be plotted correctly.
Distances and angles can only be measured directly on a plot drawn with grid north. If true north or
magnetic north is used to plot directional survey data, the relationships between lines and points on the
plot are not linear and, therefore, cannot be measured directly with a compass or ruler. Quite often, the
error (distortion) is small. In many cases, governmental reporting requires the use of grid north.
Schlumberger’s policy is to always use grid north.
Often it is necessary to convert location data from one local coordinate system to another. An example is
acquiring data from a construction company as-built drawing for the slot pattern of a multi-well platform.
The slot locations on these drawings are usually defined relative to a drawing local reference system that
has its own origin and north reference. The well planner has the responsibility for determining the amount
of translation (moving the pattern north or east) and rotation (moving the pattern around a point) that is
required to locate the slots in the local coordinate system. In order to translate the data, at least one point
on the as-built drawing must be locatable in the legal coordinate system or the local coordinate system.
Likewise, to rotate the slot pattern into the local coordinate system, a reference line on the as-built
drawing must be related to a reference line in the local or legal coordinate system. These reference lines
are referred to as structure reference lines.
Leaselines and Boundaries

Leases are defined sections of property, both on land and water, which have clearly defined boundaries.
Leases are normally administered by local or national governing bodies. Any point within a lease can
usually be defined in terms of distance from any two adjoining boundaries (see Figure 3-7). However, this
rule is not generally true for leases on property that are defined by the old survey method of metes and
bounds. Years ago, this survey method was used to describe land parcels by measuring the length (metes)
of the boundary lines (bounds) along the irregular edges of the property. Line lengths were measured

along a horizontal level plane, and the directions were bearing angles that were measured with respect to a
previous line in the survey.7 The lines were also described in relation to natural or artificial monuments,
with the baselines defined by these monuments. When a well is placed within a piece of property defined
by metes and bounds, the well location can be described as shown below (see Figure 3-8):
300.6 ft from the S43.8°W line
248.8 ft from the N50.2°W line
Figure 3-8: Lease definition by former

Figure 3-7: Lease definitions. method of metes and bounds.
NOTE
In Figure 3-8 there are no references defined to a national or international measurement system.
This method has been used for the majority of the wells drilled on land in Texas.
Land Locations
Sometimes in planning a directional land well there are limiting factors in the positioning of the surface
location. In deviated or directional land wells, the surface location of the well will usually be determined
by the factors that originally prompted the decision to drill a deviated well.

Offshore Locations
The main difference between offshore and land locations is the number and proximity of wellbores.
Offshore platforms often have between 6 and 60 wells. Adjacent wells in the same slot or template may
only have 6 ft between the centers of the wells.
Many of the following factors directly affect installations of offshore locations and control the selection
of the platform site:
• water depth
• bottom slope
• sandy bottom versus coral reef
• local currents
BOTTOMHOLE TARGETS
When planning any well, the user must first define the objective(s) of that well. A directional well can
have one or more objectives, but the most obvious objective is the target(s). This section discusses the
way targets are defined and located relative to local coordinates.
Targets and Local Coordinates

A target can be a geological structure, a geological feature such as a fault or pinch-out, another wellbore
(as in relief well drilling), or a combination of these. There are various ways of referring to a surface
location, for example, in absolute grid coordinates (UTM, Lambert, and Oblique Mercator); or, in local
coordinates relative to some reference such as a Field reference location or a Platform reference location.
There are also various ways of referring to a target location. When planning and drilling a well, using
local coordinates relative to the well surface location is the simplest way to refer to the target.
Sometimes a location is expressed in polar coordinates. These coordinates are expressed as a distance (or
departure) and a direction (either quadrant or azimuth). Polar coordinates are derived from the rectangular
(or Cartesian) coordinates with the following formulas for determining azimuth and departure.
For azimuth:
-1
Azimuth = tan ((E/W Coord) / (N/S Coord)) ............................................................................................................(3-1)
Using the following rectangular coordinates, the following is true:

-1
Azimuth = tan (200/-500) = -21.8° ..........................................................................................................................(3-2)
Since the target is south and east of the surface location, it is determined that the direction of the target
from the rig is S21.8°E or 158.2°.
The departure is given by the following:
Departure = ( E / W ) 2 + ( N / S ) 2 .................................................................................................................(3-3)

For the above example:

2 2 1/2
Departure = [200 + (-500 )] = 538.5 m ................................................................................................................(3-4)
The target is referred in polar coordinates as 538.5 meters at azimuth 158.2°. Remember that these
equations will not work if the N/S coordinate equal to 0. If the N/S coordinate is equal to 0, the azimuth is
then E or W depending on the sign of the E/W coordinate.
NOTE
The arc tangent function normalizes the answer to a value between -90 and 90°. Always restore
the azimuth to the correct quadrant.

The DataBrowser Hierarchy
Section Summary
The following section explains how to enter positioning data for different entities within
PowerPlan and the how the data relate to one another. This material assists the user in
hitting geological targets and performing accurate anti-collision analyses.

DataBrowser Hierarchy
UNIT SYSTEMS SUPPORTED

PowerPlan supports a variety of unit systems for displaying and entering data (see Figure 3-9). When the
user selects a different unit system, all of the associated information in this PowerPlan application is
automatically updated; however, values that exist in previously generated reports and plots are not
affected by changing the unit system. The unit system can be changed independently in each application.
Figure 3-9: Unit Systems Toolbar in DataBrowser.
The unit system which an application is using is stored in the Windows NT registry so that the next time
the application is started, the unit system will be the same as before. The unit system can be changed in
any PowerPlan application, using the unit system toolbar.
PowerPlan provides the following predefined unit systems:

• AWS_Decimetric
• AWS_English
• AWS_Metric
• Canadian
• English
• Metric
• Production English
• Production Metric
• WITS_FPS
• WITS_Metric

Of these 10 units of measurement, English, Metric, and Canadian are the most commonly used. It is also
possible to create User defined units systems. Details can be found in the on-line help.
THE DATABROWSER LEVELS

The DataBrowser application uses a database hierarchy for storing data that is much like a file directory
tree. The project database is the root database entity that contains one or more fields. Each field contains
one or more structures. A structure generally contains more than one slot. Each slot contains one well and
each well contains one or more boreholes (see Figure 3-10).
Project Database
Field
Structure
Well
Borehole
Figure 3-10: The DataBrowser system of hierarchy.

From the DataBrowser system of hierarchy come the following six basic levels of structure:
• project database
• field
• structurewell
• borehole
Project Database
The project database represents a project within the GeoFrame database.
Field
A field is a subcomponent of the project database and is a geographical reference point with a specific
coordinate system assigned to it. An example of a field is East Cameron Block 286 (in the Gulf of
Mexico).
Structure
A structure is a subcomponent of a field and represents a drilling structure within a field. Examples of
structures are jack-up drilling rigs, semisubmersible drilling rigs, or production platforms.
Slot
A slot is a subcomponent of a structure and represents a location where drilling from a structure begins.
An example of a slot is one funnel in a nine-funnel template, with the other eight funnels representing
separate slots.
Well
A well is a subcomponent of a slot and is the combination of all boreholes underneath and sharing a
common slot.
Borehole
A borehole is a subcomponent of a well and is a drilled path that is defined by a set of surveys. Each
borehole in the DataBrowser contains the following three activity folders (see Figure 3-11):
• Plan
• Execute
• Evaluate
Activities
Three activities are present under each borehole and represent the phases that occur during the life of a
borehole from the drilling perspective.

Borehole folders
Figure 3-11: Borehole folders.
As suggested by the folder names, certain types of data are stored in each particular activity. Pre-drilling
data files, such as well plans or an analysis of torque and drag, are saved in the Plan activity. Actual
wellsite data files, such as the bottom hole assemblies used during specific bit runs, are saved in the
Execute activity. Post-drilling analysis files are saved in the Evaluate activity.

Target
In PowerPlan, the target is a set of coordinates that defines the geometric objective of the well plan and is
the preferred point (planned point) within the target area for wellbore intersection. Targets are defined by
name, location coordinates, a true vertical depth (TVD), orientation, and a description of the target shape.
Targets are created for fields and later assigned to boreholes. More details on target description and
parameters can be found later in the document.
Target Shape
The target shape is 2-dimensional and is extruded in the third dimension to a user-defined thickness.
Allowable target shapes are point, rectangle, ellipse, circle, polygon, and planes.
Target Size
During the drilling phase of a directional well, the trajectory of the wellbore in relation to the target is
constantly monitored. Often, costly decisions are made to ensure that the objectives of the well are met. A
well-defined target is essential in making these decisions, since the cost of drilling the well is largely
dependent upon the accuracy required.
DATA RELATIONSHIPS IN DATABROWSER LEVELS

The following section explains how to enter positioning data for different entities within DataBrowser and
the how the data relate to one another.
Field
A field reference point is defined for each field. All entities in the field, such as structures, slots, wells,
boreholes, and targets are positioned from this point. The horizontal coordinates of the field reference
point are entered in one of the following ways (see also Figure 3-12):
• geodetic coordinates (latitude/longitude)
• grid coordinates (northing/easting pairs)

Grid Coordinates
Geodetic
Coordinates
Field
Elevation
Figure 3-12: Horizontal coordinates in the field dialog box.
The field elevation, typically designated as mean sea level, serves as the absolute zero elevation for all
entities in the field. The elevation name entered refers to this absolute zero elevation of the field.
Structure
A structure reference point is defined for each structure from which all entities associated with the
structure are positioned (i.e., slots, wells, and boreholes). The horizontal coordinates of the structure
reference point are entered using one of the following methods:
• absolute (geodetic latitude/longitude or grid northing/easting)
• relative (NS/EW or polar coordinates) to the field reference point
If the structure reference point is entered absolutely, it stays in the same place, regardless of the field
reference point location. However, if the structure reference point is entered relative to the field reference
point and the field reference point is moved, the distance between the structure reference point and the
field reference point is maintained. Simply put, the structure reference point moves with the field
reference point.

The absolute or relative nature of the structure reference point is indicated in the structure dialog box by a
red arrow pointing to the geodetic/grid row if the point is absolute and the local Cartesian/polar row if the
point is relative (see Figure 3-13).
Geodetic/Grid Row
Cartesian Polar Row
Figure 3-13: Reference point in structure dialog box.

The scale factor computed at the field reference point is applied in the conversion from the local
coordinates to the grid/geodetic coordinates of the structure reference point (see Figure 3-14). In most
cases, a slight difference will be observed between the grid distance and the local distance from the
structure reference point to the field reference point. In addition, the user can set a grid north/true north
flag to indicate the orientation of the local coordinates for all entities associated with the structure. The
grid north/true north correction is equal to the grid convergence computed at the field reference point.
Limits of projection
Scale too small
Scale Scale
too too
large large
Cl
A l
B l
Grid plane C
Dl
D
Figure 3-14: Scale factor.
The structure elevation (sometimes called platform elevation, pad elevation, or drillsite elevation) is
entered relative to the field elevation, which is absolute zero. Elevation is positive up, meaning that the
structure elevation value is positive if the structure reference point is located above the field reference
point (see Figure 3-15).

BOREHOLE ELEVATION
A RELATIVE TO STRUCTURE
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
B RELATIVE TO SLOT
PLATFORM C BOREHOLE ELEVATION
RELATIVE TO FIELD
SLOT ELEVATION
D RELATIVE TO STRUCTURE
SLOT ELEVATION
E RELATIVE TO FIELD
STRUCTURE ELEVATION
F RELATIVE TO FIELD
ARROW UP
POSITIVE VALUE
ARROW DOWN
NEGATIVE VALUE
D B
F C
E
MEAN SEA LEVEL (MSL)
FIELD ELEVATION
Figure 3-15: Structure elevation values.
More is discussed on elevations in the section entitled Datums and References.
Slot/Well
In PowerPlan, the slot location and the well location are the same. Although the user can only edit
positioning data at the slot level, the well automatically inherits the slot positioning data. The slot/well
location is typically assigned to the top of the slot or the top of the wellhead. The horizontal coordinates
of the slot/well location are entered using one of the following ways:
• absolute (latitude/longitude or grid northing/easting)
• relative (NS/EW or polar coordinates) to either the structure reference point or the field reference
point

If the slot/well location is entered absolutely, it stays in the same place, regardless of the structure
reference point location. However, if the slot/well location is entered relatively and the structure reference
point is moved, the distance between the slot/well location and the structure reference point is maintained.
Simply put, the slot/well location moves with the structure reference point.
The absolute or relative nature of the slot/well location is indicated in the slot dialog box by a red arrow
pointing to the geodetic/grid row if the point is absolute and the local Cartesian/polar row if the point is
relative (see Figure 3-16).
Geodetic/Grid Row
Cartesian Polar Row
Figure 3-16: Reference point in slot dialog box.
NOTE
It is important to understand that while the slot/well location can be entered relative to either the
field reference point or the structure reference point, the positioning data is always stored relative
to the structure reference point. Consequently, if the structure reference point is entered
absolutely and the slot/well location is entered relatively, moving the field reference point will not
affect the slot/well location. The slot/well location will remain relative to the structure reference
point, which is absolute and does not move with the field reference point.

Depending on whether the structure reference point or the field reference point is used for relative
positioning, the appropriate scale factor for the reference point selected is automatically applied during
the conversion from the local coordinates (Cartesian and polar) to the grid/geodetic coordinates of the
slot/well location. In most cases, there is a slight difference between the grid distance and the local
distance from the slot/well location to the reference point. In addition, a grid north/true north flag set in
the structure is used to determine the north reference of the local coordinates. The grid north to true north
correction is equal to the grid convergence computed at the selected reference point.
The slot/well elevation can be entered relative to the structure elevation or the field elevation. If the user
enters the slot/well elevation relative to the structure elevation, PowerPlan automatically recomputes the
slot/well elevation relative to the field elevation. The converse is also true. If the user enters the slot/well
elevation relative to the field elevation, PowerPlan automatically recomputes the slot/well elevation
relative to the structure elevation. Elevation value is positive up, meaning that the slot/well elevation
value is positive if the slot/well location is located above the reference point. Elevation data is always
stored relative to the field reference point elevation. Consequently, even if a slot is entered in local
coordinates relative to the structure, the well will not change elevation even if the structure elevation is
changed.
Borehole
The borehole elevation is typically the RKB elevation of the rig used to drill the borehole. No horizontal
coordinates are entered for the borehole since the surface location of the borehole is the same as that of
the well, which is entered at the slot level.
The borehole elevation is entered relative to the elevation of the slot/well, structure, or field. Entry of one
elevation fills in the remaining elevation references. Elevation value is positive up, meaning that the
slot/well elevation value is positive if the slot/well location is located above the field or structure
reference point.
Targets
The data calculated at the target level is divided into three sections:
• target location
• target geometry
• target orientation
Target Location
The target location is entered at either the field or borehole level by clicking on the target tab (see Figure
3-17). At either level, the horizontal coordinates of the target location are entered in one of the following
ways:
• absolute (latitude/longitude or northing/easting)
• relative (NS/EW or polar coordinates) to the field reference point at the field level or the slot/well
location at the borehole level (since the borehole shares the horizontal coordinates of the slot/well
location)

Selecting the Targets tab brings up the

Targets dialog box
Clicking the New button

brings up the New Target
dialog box
Figure 3-17: Target dialog boxes.

If the target location is entered absolutely, it stays in the same place, regardless of the location of the field
reference point or the slot/well. On the other hand, if the target location is entered relatively, it is always
stored relative to the field reference point, regardless of whether the user enters the local coordinates
relative to the field reference point or the slot/well location. Targets use the same coordinate system as the
field; therefore, the Grid data entry items obtain meaning from the field coordinate system. For example,
if the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) projection is assigned to the field, the grid coordinates are
also UTM.
Let’s say, for example, that a borehole is created in a well that is positioned absolutely and the target
location is entered relative to the slot/well location. If the field reference point is moved, the slot/well
location does not move (because it was entered absolutely), but the target location does move. The
absolute or relative nature of the structure reference point is indicated by a red arrow that points to the
geodetic/grid row if the point is absolute, and the local Cartesian/polar row if the point is relative.
Depending on whether the target location is entered at the field level or at the borehole level, the scale
factor computed at either the field reference point or the slot/well location is applied in the conversion
from the local coordinates to the grid/geodetic coordinates of the target location. In most cases, there is a
slight difference between the grid distance and the local distance from the target location to the reference
point. If the target location is entered at the field level, a grid north/true north flag can be set to indicate
the orientation of the local coordinates. The grid north to true north correction is equal to the grid
convergence computed at the field reference point. This correction is applied only at the user interface;
the target location’s local coordinates are always stored relative to grid north.
NOTE
When the user enters coordinates in any of the four forms, the remaining three forms are
computed, along with the scale factor and grid convergence.
The target TVD is entered relative to the field elevation if the target is edited at the field level and relative
to the borehole Elevation edited at the borehole level. The TVD is positive down; therefore, the target
TVD value is positive if the target is located below the reference point.
NOTE
Targets can be deleted only if they are not assigned to other boreholes.

Target Geometry
The following section describes the shape, axes, rotation, strike, and dip of the target.
Shape
When defining a target shape, the default orientation of the target is a horizontal plane that intersects the
point defined by the target coordinates (absolute or local coordinates and TVD). Furthermore, the major
axis of the target shape is aligned to north.
The target shape chosen determines the additional data that must be input. The target shapes to choose
from and the additional data required for each are found in the following table:
Shape Additional Definition Data
circular radius, thickness, dip, strike

major axis, minor axis, rotation, thickness, dip,
elliptical
strike
formation plane thickness, dip, strike
point no additional data required
edit data points (x,y coordinates), thickness, dip,
polygon
strike
rectangle length, width, rotation, thickness, dip, strike
Major and Minor Axes

These are used to define the major and minor axes lengths for elliptical targets.
Target Orientation
Rotation
Rotation is the azimuth of the major axis. Measured clockwise from north, rotation is entered as degrees
of angle from 0 to 360. The target is rotated in the horizontal plane about the point defined by the target
coordinates. To position the major axis of the target to the east, a rotation angle of 90° is entered. For
south, the angle is 180° and west is 270°.
Strike
Strike (or strike line) is the azimuth perpendicular to the direction of dip and is applied after target
rotation is entered. The strike can be visualized as a line that lies in the horizontal plane and the plane of
the target, running through the point defined by the target coordinates (normally the target center). Strike
is measured clockwise from north and is entered as degrees of angle from 0 to 360. The default strike is
0°. Strike does not cause further horizontal rotation of the target—it merely defines the rotation axis for
dip. To define a dipping target with a dip direction to the north, a strike azimuth of 270° is entered.

Dip
Dip defines the angular rotation of the target about the strike (or strike line). Dip is measured in degrees
of rotation from horizontal. The direction of positive dip is always below horizontal and to the right of the
strike. To define a target dipping 5° to the west, a strike of 180° and a dip of 5° are entered.
Application of DataBrowser Structure

The DataBrowser database entities presented so far each represent physical counterparts in the oil and gas
industry. Fields are large geographical areas in which structures (drilling platforms) are located. Each
structure has one or more slots and each slot has one well from which one or more boreholes are drilled.
Targets are created for a field and then assigned to boreholes. Fields contain multiple targets and multiple
targets can be assigned to a borehole.
More information pertaining to the application of the DataBrowser entities is provided in the section
entitled Datums and References.

Datums and References
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual describes how to determine the
datums and reference points that are necessary for data input into the DataBrowser.

References
DATUMS AND REFERENCES

To begin to calculate well trajectories, one establish known reference points that are expressed in vertical
and horizontal measurements. The vertical measurements, called datums, are calculated as each database
entity (and physical counterpart) relates to the other database entities (and physical counterparts). The
user must measure the vertical elevations of the following entities relative to one another:
• borehole elevation (RKB) to structure
• borehole elevation to slot
• borehole elevation to field
• slot elevation to structure
• slot elevation to field
• structure elevation to field
It is not necessary to know all elevations relative to each other. For example, if the user knows structure
elevation, slot elevation, and borehole elevation all relative to the field, that is sufficient.
There are many different types of drilling structures in existence today. Figures 3-18 through 3-22 show
the four most commonly found drilling structures:
• land rigs (two types)
• platforms
• jack-up rigs
• semisubmersible rigs
Because of the diversity of these different types of drilling structures, the measurement of vertical datums
also differs from one structure to the next. A field elevation reference point is chosen to serve as the
absolute zero elevation for all entities in the field. This reference point is typically designated as mean sea
level (the average of hourly measurements of the height of the tide over a period of given time). The
following five figures illustrate the way vertical datums are measured from one type of drilling structure
to the next. All values that are measured with an arrow pointing up (above mean sea level) are expressed
in positive values, while all values with an arrow pointing down (below mean sea level) are expressed in
negative values.

References
Land Rig 1
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
B RELATIVE TO SLOT
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
C RELATIVE TO FIELD
SLOT ELEVATION
SLOT ELEVATION
E RELATIVE TO FIELD
STRUCTURE ELEVATION
F RELATIVE TO FIELD
ARROW UP
POSITIVE VALUE
ARROW DOWN
NEGATIVE VALUE
BOREHOLE ELEV
STRUCTURE ELEV A
D B
SLOT/WELL ELEV
C
F

FIELD ELEVATION
Figure 3-18: Land rig.

References
Land Rig 2
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
B RELATIVE TO SLOT
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
C RELATIVE TO FIELD
SLOT ELEVATION
SLOT ELEVATION
E RELATIVE TO FIELD
STRUCTURE ELEVATION
F RELATIVE TO FIELD
ARROW UP
POSITIVE VALUE
ARROW DOWN
NEGATIVE VALUE
BOREHOLE ELEV
STRUCTURE ELEV A
D B
C
F

FIELD ELEVATION
Figure 3-19: Land rig with slot below ground level.

References
Platform
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
B RELATIVE TO SLOT
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
C RELATIVE TO FIELD
SLOT ELEVATION
SLOT ELEVATION
E RELATIVE TO FIELD
STRUCTURE ELEVATION
F RELATIVE TO FIELD
ARROW UP
POSITIVE VALUE
ARROW DOWN
NEGATIVE VALUE
BOREHOLE ELEV
STRUCTURE ELEV A
D B
F C
SLOT/WELL ELEV
E
FIELD ELEVATION
Figure 3-20: Platform.

References
Jack-Up
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
B RELATIVE TO SLOT
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
C RELATIVE TO FIELD
SLOT ELEVATION
SLOT ELEVATION
E RELATIVE TO FIELD
STRUCTURE ELEVATION
F RELATIVE TO FIELD
ARROW UP
POSITIVE VALUE
ARROW DOWN
NEGATIVE VALUE
BOREHOLE ELEV
STRUCTURE ELEV A
D B
C
SLOT/WELL ELEV F
E
FIELD ELEVATION
Figure 3-21: Jackup rig.

References
Semisubmersible
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
B RELATIVE TO SLOT
BOREHOLE ELEVATION
C RELATIVE TO FIELD
SLOT ELEVATION
SLOT ELEVATION
E RELATIVE TO FIELD
STRUCTURE ELEVATION
F RELATIVE TO FIELD
ARROW UP
POSITIVE VALUE
ARROW DOWN
NEGATIVE VALUE
BOREHOLE ELEV
STRUCTURE ELEV A
C
F
B
D
FIELD ELEVATION
E
SLOT/WELL ELEV
FIELD ELEVATION
Figure 3-22: Semisubmersible.

References
Index
borehole Mercator projection ..........................................................14

definition of ................................................................. 28 meridians ..........................................................................11
Evaluate folder............................................................. 28 metes and bounds..............................................................21
Execute folder.............................................................. 28 northing ............................................................................16
Plan folder.................................................................... 28 oblate spheroid..................................................................10
Cartesian Oblique Mercator Projection ............................................19
positioning (xy coordinates)......................................... 14 parallels ............................................................................11
conformal ......................................................................... 14 Petrotechnical Open Software Corporation (POSC)...........6
convergence ..................................................................... 18 prime meridian..................................................................12
data model Project Database
definition of ................................................................... 6 definition of..................................................................28
hierarchy ........................................................................ 8 properties ............................................................................6
standards ........................................................................ 6 relationships........................................................................6
DataBrowser SDM
definition of ................................................................. 27 definition of....................................................................7
hierarchy ...................................................................... 27 slot
datums definition of..................................................................28
definition of ................................................................. 42 Standard Data Model ..........................................................6
degree............................................................................... 11 State Plane Coordinate System of 1927 (SPCS 27) ..........20
easting .............................................................................. 16 structure
field definition of..................................................................28
definition of ................................................................. 28 structure reference lines ....................................................21
geodesist........................................................................... 10 target
grid scale factor ................................................................ 20 definition ......................................................................30
latitude.............................................................................. 11 Transverse Mercator .........................................................14
legal coordinate system .................................................... 19 true vertical depth .............................................................21
legal coordinate systems................................................... 19 vertical reference datum ...................................................21
local coordinate systems................................................... 21 well
longitude .......................................................................... 11 definition of..................................................................28
Meades Ranch .................................................................. 20 WIME
mean sea level .................................................................. 42 definition of....................................................................7

References
1
Batini, Carlo et al., Conceptual Database Design, Redwood City, California, Benjamin/Cummings Publishing
Company, Inc. (1992).
2
Petrotechnical Open Software Corporation 11 March 1998 <http://www.posc.org/about_posc.html>
3
Petrotechnical Open Software Corporation, Well Information Mapping Into Epicentre (3 February 1998)
<http://www.posc.org/workgroups/wime/index.html>
4
The National Maritime Museum Page, National Maritime Museum, (1 January 1999)
<http://www.nmm.ac.uk/ee/mill/meridian.html>
5
The Geographer's Craft Project, Ed. Peter H. Dana, Dept. of Geography. University of Texas at Austin. (10
October 1997) <http://www.utexas.edu/depts/grg/gcraft/notes/mapproj/mapproj.html>
6
October 1997) <http://www.utexas.edu/depts/grg/gcraft/notes/mapproj/mapproj.html>
7
October 1997) <http://www.utexas.edu/depts/grg/gcraft/notes/coordsys/coordsys.html#metes>

4. Trajectory Design
Schlumberger Anadrill
150 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land TX 77478
(281) 285-8000
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................................4
WellDesign................................................................................................................................................4
Survey Editor............................................................................................................................................4
INTRODUCTION TO SURVEY CALCULATION ..........................................................................................6
SURVEY CALCULATION METHODS..........................................................................................................7
Dogleg Severity........................................................................................................................................7
Minimum Curvature Method ...................................................................................................................9
Radius of Curvature Method.................................................................................................................11
Tangential Method .................................................................................................................................14
Balanced Tangential Method ................................................................................................................15
Mercury Method .....................................................................................................................................15
Average Angle Method..........................................................................................................................16
Comparison of Survey Calculation Methods ......................................................................................17
DESIGNING WELL TRAJECTORY............................................................................................................19
Wellbore Profiles....................................................................................................................................19
Using Standard Profiles ........................................................................................................................19
Well Planning with Curved Sections....................................................................................................27
Adding a Curve ......................................................................................................................................27
SPECIAL CASES OF DIRECTIONAL DRILLING......................................................................................35
Slant-drilling / Slant Rigs ......................................................................................................................35
Inclined or Curved Conductors ............................................................................................................40
Data Input for Special Cases ................................................................................................................43
FACTORS AFFECTING SURVEY MEASUREMENTS..............................................................................46
Sag Correction to Improve Inclination Accuracy ...............................................................................46
Magnetic Field and its Affect on Magnetic Surveys...........................................................................47
Magnetic Interference............................................................................................................................58
BOREHOLE POSITION UNCERTAINTY ...................................................................................................63
Random Errors.......................................................................................................................................63
Systematic Errors ..................................................................................................................................63
Ellipses of Uncertainty ..........................................................................................................................64
Uncertainty Models................................................................................................................................64
Simple Cone.......................................................................................................................................64
Shell Error Model...............................................................................................................................65
Wolff and deWardt Error Model .......................................................................................................65
Topographic Error Model .................................................................................................................67
Defining the Outputs .............................................................................................................................76
Confidence Levels .................................................................................................................................76

WellDesign and Survey Editor
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual provides a summary of the PowerPlan
applications WellDesign and Survey Editor.

Introduction to WellDesign and Survey Editor
INTRODUCTION
Following is a brief description of WellDesign and Survey Editor, the two PowerPlan applications that
are covered in this section of the technical manual.
WellDesign
WellDesign is used to create the geometry of the well trajectory that is required to drill from the surface
to the defined target(s). WellDesign is designed for use after a database hierarchy is established and after
targets are created and assigned to the appropriate boreholes. Targets can also be created and assigned to
boreholes from within WellDesign, but these tasks should be performed in the DataBrowser module. Plan
views, vertical section views, and large-scale drill maps can also be created within the Well Design
application.
Primary tasks performed in WellDesign involve attaching the well plan to a borehole (using the tie-in
function), adding hold or continuous curve sections, and adding standard profiles that calculate the
trajectory necessary to intersect a specified target.
Survey Editor
Survey Editor is used to create new surveys; import and export survey data files; create plan views,
vertical section plots, and drill maps. The following survey computation methods are supported:
• minimum curvature
• radius of curvature
• tangential
• average angle
• balanced tangential
• mercury
• Lubinski or Wilson dogleg severity (DLS)

Survey Calculation Methods
Section Summary
• definition of dogleg severity
• different methods of survey calculation
• accuracy of survey calculation methods

Calculating Well Path from Survey Data
INTRODUCTION TO SURVEY CALCULATION

Regardless of which conventional survey method is used (single-shot, multishot, steering tool, surface
readout gyro, or MWD), the following three pieces of information are known at the end of a successful
survey:
• measured depth
• borehole inclination
• borehole azimuth (corrected to relevant North)
In order to know the latest bottom-hole position, it is necessary to perform a survey calculation that
includes these three pieces of information. Only then can the most current bottom-hole coordinates be
plotted on the directional well plot and the subsequent projections to the target be plotted (see Figure 4-1).
Legend
O – Well reference point with north, east, and vertical (z) axes
S – surface location reference point
B – survey point
a – azimuth of vertical section plane in horizontal plane from north (0° to 360° clockwise)
TVD – projection of SB (measured depth along well path) onto vertical axis z; distance is SB3
HD – horizontal displacement in horizontal plane through B; distance is B3B2
VS – vertical section; length of projection of HD onto the vertical section plane defined by its azimuth; distance is B3B2
Figure 4-1: Definitions of terms used in survey calculation methods.

NOTE
A vertical section plane is defined by its azimuth and origin point. Usually, the vertical section
passing through the center of the target is used for plotting the well profile; however, other
options for azimuth include a surface to TD setting and a manual input. For the origin, the options
include the tie-in location, TD location, surface location, and the structure reference point.
SURVEY CALCULATION METHODS

A number of survey calculation methods have been used in directional drilling. Out of all these various
methods, this section address only addresses the following six methods of calculating survey
(synonymous names included):
• minimum curvature (minimum radius of curvature, circular arc)
• radius of curvature
• tangential (backward angle, terminal angle)
• balanced tangential (acceleration, secant, trapezoidal, vector averaging)
• average angle (angle averaging)
• mercury (compensated acceleration, combined)
Of these six methods, the two most commonly used are minimum curvature and radius of curvature, so
those are presented first. Dogleg severity (DLS) is a critical parameter in the implementation of survey
calculation methods and is, therefore, described before a detailed description of the individual survey
calculation methods.
Dogleg Severity
Dogleg severity is a measurement of the curvature of a borehole and is usually expressed in degrees for
every 100 feet (x°/100 ft) of course length in the English units system or degrees for every 30 meters
(x°/30 m) in metric units. Several formulae are available for computing the total effects of a change in
both inclination and direction between survey points. In the formulae included in this section, the terms
used are defined as follows:
CD = course deviation
DL = dogleg
DLS = dogleg severity
A = azimuth
∆A = change in A from survey point 1 to survey point 2
A1 = azimuth at survey point 1
A2 = azimuth at survey point 2
I = inclination
∆I = change in I from survey point 1 to survey point 2
I1 = inclination at survey point 1
I2 = inclination at survey point 2
MD = measured depth

∆MD = MD from survey point 1 to survey point 2 = course length = CL

RF = ratio factor
D = degrees
TVD = true vertical depth
R = radius
The following two formulae are commonly used for defining the DLS:
• Lubinski formula
• Mason and Taylor formula
These formulae, however, make no assumptions about the well path and are, therefore, independent of
survey calculation methods. Both equations are trigonometric identities to use, although cosines of small
angles may be more difficult to accurately handle than sines.
Lubinski Formula
d  ∆I  2  ∆A  2 
DLS = 2 sin −1  sin  +  sin  × sin I 1 × sin I 2  ........................................................................(4-1)
∆MD  2  2  
Mason and Taylor Formula
d
cos [cos ∆ I - (sin I1 × sin I2) (1 - cos ∆ A)] .....................................................................................(4-2)
-1
DLS =
∆ MD
NOTE
The Mason and Taylor formula is to be used for the minimum curvature model only.

Minimum Curvature Method

The minimum curvature method is one of the most accurate ways to determine the position of the
wellbore and is the usually the method of choice. This calculation method fits a 3-dimensional, circular
(spherical) arc between two survey points. The minimum curvature method uses the space vectors defined
by the inclination and azimuth at each of the survey points and “smoothes” these vectors gradually onto
the wellbore path, using a ratio factor defined by the curvature of the wellbore section (see Figure 4-2).
This curvature is the dogleg. The dogleg severity is constant through any section using this method;
however, the build rate (BR) and turn rate (TR) are generally not constant.
Figure 4-2: Minimum curvature dogleg.
Dogleg
To determine the DLS, the following formula is used:
-1
DL = cos [cos (I2-I1) -sin I1 sin I2 (1-cos (A2 - A1))] .................................................................................................(4-3)
This equation is equivalent to the angle between the starting and terminating vectors, defined by the
starting and terminating inclination and azimuth. This equation can be rewritten in vector terms (using the
dot product) as the following:
-1
DL = cos (V1 dot V2) ................................................................................................................................................(4-4)
where V is defined as the following:
sin I cos A
V = sin I sin A 
cos I 

Ratio Factor
The course length (measured depth) is measured along a curve, while I and A define straight line
directions in space. It is necessary to smooth the straight-line segments onto the curve using one of the
following ratio factors (RF):
360 DL
RF = tan ...............................................................................................................................................(4-5)
DL × π 2
or,
360 1 − cos DL
RF = × ......................................................................................................................................(4-6)
DL × π sin DL
The above equations have units of degrees for DL. For small angles, where the DL is less than 0.0001, set
RF = 1, which imposes a straight line.
The ratio factor is as follows (see also Figure 4-3):
RF = Extended Chord / (∆MD / 2)
Where,
Extended Chord = tan (DL / 2)*R ..............................................................................................................................(4-7)

Extended Chord
D
∆M
DL
R = radius
Figure 4-3: Ratio factor.

For small angles, where the DL is less than 0.0001°/100 ft , set RF = 1. The increments along the three
axes can then be determined to define the position of the second survey point as follows:
∆TVD = ∆MD (cos I1 + cos I2) × RF ........................................................................................................................(4-8)

2
∆North = ∆MD (sin I1 cos A1 +sin I2 cos A2) × RF.....................................................................................................(4-9)

2
∆East = ∆MD (sin I1 sin A1 + sin I2 sin A2) × RF .....................................................................................................(4-10)

2
Minimum curvature is the most accurate and common method used today.
Radius of Curvature Method

The radius of curvature method is another accurate way of determining the position of the wellbore.
Radius of curvature computes the position of a second survey point from the position of a first survey
point by assuming constant build and turn rates. The DLS is generally not constant for any section with
non-zero build and turn rates when using this method. This calculation method fits the two survey
reference points onto the surface of a cylinder, so the wellbore can be curved in both the vertical and
horizontal planes (see Figure 4-4). The radius of curvature method of calculation is accurate for stations
spaced far apart and with higher rates of curvature that are relatively constant.
Survey 1
Figure 4-4: Radius of curvature survey method.

Vertical Projection
Taking a vertical section through the well path, by “unwrapping” the cylinder, the path between the two
stations is the arc with length ∆MD as the inclination changes from I1 to I 2 (see Figure 4-5).
Figure 4-5: Vertical projection in radius of curvature method.
Assuming I to be measured in degrees, the radius is determined using the following formula:
180 ⋅ ∆MD
Rv = ....................................................................................................................................................(4-11)
π ( I2 − I1)
From this formula, you can determine the following:
∆TVD = Rv (sin I2 - sin I1)........................................................................................................................................(4-12)
and
∆H = Rv (cos I1 - cos I2) ..........................................................................................................................................(4-13)

Horizontal Projection
To find the north and east displacements, consider a horizontal projection of the wellbore, having a radius
of curvature Rh (see Figure 4-6).
Rh
Figure 4-6: Horizontal projection in radius of curvature method.
Similar to the vertical projection, the following can be determined:
180 ⋅ ∆H
Rh = ...................................................................................................................................................(4-16)
π ( A2 − A1)
such that
∆North = Rh (sin A2 - sin A1) ...................................................................................................................................(4-17)
∆East = Rh (cos A1 - cos A2) ...................................................................................................................................(4-18)

Tangential Method
The tangential method is the oldest, least sophisticated, and most inaccurate method of calculating the
position of the wellbore. This method should never be used. This calculation method computes the
position of a second survey point from the position of a first survey point using only the inclination and
azimuth of the second survey point to determine the second survey point’s position. This method, if used
at all, should only be used for a hold section, since any curved section of the hole gives unrealistic results
(see Figure 4-7).
Figure 4-7: Tangential method definitions.
On an S-type well, if the build and drop rates are the same, the error at the end of the well is small, since
errors introduced in the build-and-drop sections will negate one another. In a build-and-hold section, the
TVD is less (shallower) than the actual TVD. With the well turning to the right in the northeast quadrant,
errors would be introduced that would result in a position too far to the east, and not far enough to the
north.
The calculation is as follows:
∆North = ∆ MD sin I2 cos A2 ...................................................................................................................................(4-19)
∆East = ∆ MD sin I2 sin A2 ......................................................................................................................................(4-20)
∆TVD = ∆ MD cos I2 ...............................................................................................................................................(4-21)
∆ Displacement = ∆ MD sin I2 .................................................................................................................................(4-22)

Balanced Tangential Method

The balanced tangential method tries to make a closer approximation of the well path by using both the
current and the previous survey results. The course length between the two survey points is divided into
two straight-line segments of equal length; therefore, if A1 and I1 are the respective azimuth and
inclination at the previous survey point, then the following is true:
∆North = ∆MD (sin I1 cos A1 + sin I2 cos A2) .........................................................................................................(4-23)

2
∆East = ∆MD (sin I1 sin A1 + sin I2 sin A2).............................................................................................................(4-24)

2
∆TVD = ∆MD (cos I1 + cos I2) ................................................................................................................................(4-25)

2
∆ Displacement = ∆MD (sin I1 + sin I2)..................................................................................................................(4-26)

2
The main reason that the balanced tangential method is more accurate than the tangential method is
because, on well paths that change direction and inclination, errors introduced into one calculation are
largely canceled by the subsequent calculation. The errors that remain tend to show too great a TVD and
too little displacement in the build section. This method is not commonly used since the formulae are
more complicated than the other conventional methods.
Mercury Method
The mercury method of calculation was first used at a U.S. nuclear test site in Mercury, Nevada (hence its
name). This calculation method combines the tangential and balanced tangential calculation methods but
includes the length of the survey tool, treating the survey tool length (STL) as a straight line (tangential).
The remainder of the course is plotted in a balanced tangential manner.
The mercury method is calculated using the following formulae:
∆TVD = 
 ∆MD − STL 
 × (cos I1+cos I2)+(STL × cos I2) ...................................................................................(4-27)
 2 
∆North = 
 ∆MD − STL  × (sin I +cos A +sin I cos A )+ (STL × sin I cos A ) ..................................................(4-28)
 1 1 2 2 2 2
 2 
∆East =  ∆MD − STL  × (sin I1+sin A1+sin I2 sin A2)+ (STL × sin I2 sin A2) ..........................................................(4-29)
 2 

Average Angle Method

The average angle method of calculation simply averages the angles of inclination and azimuth at the two
survey stations (see Figure 4-8). These averages are the assumed well path, with a length equal to the
actual course length between the two stations. If the stations are relatively close together and the curve of
the well is small, the average angle method is simple and quite accurate.
Figure 4-8: Average angle survey method.
The average angle method is calculated using the following formulae:
( I 1 + I 2) ( A1 + A2)
∆North = ∆MD sin cos .............................................................................................................(4-30)
2 2
( I 1 + I 2) ( A1 + A2)
∆East = ∆MD sin sin ................................................................................................................(4-31)
2 2
( I 1 + I 2)
∆TVD = ∆MD cos ....................................................................................................................................(4-32)
2
( I 1 + I 2)
∆Displacement = ∆MD sin = course deviation (CD) ...............................................................................(4-33)
2
∆Vertical section = CD × cos  A1 + A2  − Vertical section azimuth ..................................................................(4-34)

 
 2  

Comparison of Survey Calculation Methods

Of the survey methods addressed in this section, the two most commonly used methods are minimum
curvature and radius of curvature. Compare the accuracy between the various survey calculation methods
with the following example.
Consider a well in a due north direction with the following criteria:

• 0 to 2,000 ft MD
• build rate of 3°/100 ft
• survey stations every 100 ft
Compared to the actual TVD of 1653.99 ft, and north displacement of 954.93 ft, the relative accuracy of
the various survey methods is calculated as follows (see Table 4-1).
Calculation Error on
Error on TVD (ft)
Method Displacement (ft)
minimum curvature 0.00 0.00
radius of curvature 0.00 0.00
tangential -25.38 +43.09
balanced tangential -0.38 -0.21
mercury (survey tool = 15 ft) -0.37 -0.04
average angle +0.19 +0.11
Table 4-1: Survey method accuracy.
This example is only a demonstration of the relative accuracy of the survey methods and favors methods
that assume that the wellbore is made up of a series of arc and straight-line segments and does not include
any turns. However, methods that compare badly in a single plane situation typically behave even worse
in a 3-dimensional situation.

Designing A Well Trajectory
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan manual discusses the following topics:

• the various types of wellbore profiles
• using standard profiles
• well planning with curved sections
• case study example

Designing Well Trajectory to Target
DESIGNING WELL TRAJECTORY

The following section describes the creation of directional well geometries, using the standard curve
profiles and the individual curve sections provided by PowerPlan.
Wellbore Profiles
In general, directional well segments can be one or more of the following:
• straight – vertical section with no change in inclination or azimuth
• horizontal – horizontal section with no change in inclination or azimuth
• hold – section with no change in inclination or azimuth
• slant type (also called J profile) – section with a build-up segment (with or without turning) and a
hold segment to TD
• S-type (2D or 3D) – section with two curved segments with a hold section in between
The type of profile selected depends upon the geological objective, anti-collision concerns, drillability
(e.g., torque and drag and hydraulic issues), and the production mechanism of the well.
Using Standard Profiles
The Well Design application has conveniently grouped together the more commonly used curve profiles.
A standard profile can consist of a 2-dimensional (2-D) or 3-dimensional (3-D) profile, and provides a
well path that comprises a combination of stations (see Figure 4-9).
Figure 4-9: Standard Profiles dialog box in WellDesign.

The available profiles and their descriptions are as follows:

• Hold, Curve (2D) to fixed Target – (compute KOP, DLS)
• Curve, Hold (J-2D) from fixed KOP – (compute EOC, DLS)
• Hold, Curve, Hold (J) – (given DLS, compute KOP)
• Curve, Hold (J 2D and 3D) – (given DLS)
• Curve, Hold, Curve (S-2D) – use S-2D or S-3D (hold before target) to add an additional hold to
the profile.
• Hold or Curve to Target – a “smart” curve segment that can adjust the inclination and azimuth
of a previous station (if possible) for target-to-target alignment. The inclination, azimuth (for 3D),
and location (NS, EW, and TVD) of previous non-marker stations must all be editable. This
profile is the same as a planning target, except that the profile version picks the target location
from the database.
• Curve-Curve (2D) – two curve section in which the final inclination and DLS of each curve
segment is specified.
• Porpoise to a Plane (2D) – two curve sections that start at a given azimuth and land on a plane.
The TVD, dip, and strike of a target specify the location of the plane. A target must be chosen for
this profile to be added to the proposal.
• Land on Formation Plane (3D) – land on formation plane with one curve section. The default
landing azimuth is down dip. The azimuth can be changed after the profile is added. The TVD,
dip, and strike of a target specify the location of the plane. A target must be chosen for this profile
to be added to the proposal.
• Extended S-Curve – When selecting the Curve-Hold-Curve (S-2D) or Curve-Hold-Curve (S-3D)
profiles, the user has the option of applying a hold before reaching the target (extended S-curve).
Following are vertical section views of these standard profiles (see Figure 4-10 through Figure 4-19).
NOTE
For S-2D and S-3D, an additional option of having a hold at the end of the last curve section is
available. To add this additional hold, select End Curve Before Target.
Use a formation plane target to specify the target plane for the Porpoise to Plane and Land on
Formation Plane profiles so that the formation plane is plotted in the correct orientation on
vertical section views.

to fixed target
Figure 4-10: Hold, Curve (2D) to fixed target.
from fixed KOP
Figure 4-11: Curve, Hold (J-2D) from fixed KOP.

Hold-Curve-Hold (J-2D)
Figure 4-12: Hold, Curve, Hold (J2D or J3D).
Given DLS
given DLS
Figure 4-13: Curve, Hold (J2D or J3D).

Curve-Hold-Curve (S-2D)
Figure 4-14: Curve, Hold, Curve (S-2D and S-3D).

Figure 4-15: Hold or Curve to Target.
Curve-Curve (2D)
Figure 4-16: Curve-Curve (2D).

Figure 4-17: Porpoise to a Plane (2D).
Land on Formation (3D)
Figure 4-18: Land on Formation Plane (3D).

Extended S-Curve
Figure 4-19: Extended S-Curve.

Well Planning with Curved Sections

Certain well conditions are not favorable for planning a well to hit targets (3-dimensional points in space).
This situation is particularly true with horizontal wells because the target zone is a lithologic horizon in
the target formation that varies according to depositional environment and bed dip. Following an
overview of adding curves is an example well scenario that uses end of curve (EOC) conditions. This
example is followed by a proposed solution and a summary.
Adding a Curve
Curved stations can be used in conjunction with standard profiles or can be used separately to design the
well path (although this latter method is laborious, because each curve is calculated separately).
Typically, individual curves are used for less restrictive well plan segments, because the curves are not as
constraining as the standard profiles.
When adding a curve in WellDesign, the end of curve (EOC) conditions must be defined. After the EOC
conditions are defined, WellDesign calculates the change in inclination and/or direction of that particular
wellbore segment. The following three types of curve specifications are available when calculating the
end of curve conditions:
• constant DLS
• build rate/turn rate
• DLS at TF

Constant DLS
For the constant DLS method, the DLS for the curve section may be specified, along with a variety of end
conditions or only the end conditions can be specified to compute the dogleg severity. This type of curve
section may be used for correction runs or when the dogleg can be at any tool face. The following options
are available (see also Figure 4-20):
• Maintain constant DLS to a MD and inclination
• Maintain constant DLS to a MD and azimuth
• Maintain constant DLS to an inclination and azimuth
• Maintain constant DLS to a TVD and inclination
• Compute DLS to a TVD, inclination, and azimuth
Figure 4-20: End of Curve selections for Constant DLS.
NOTE
The constant DLS curves all use the minimum curvature method of survey calculation.

Build Rate/Turn Rate

The build rate (BR) is the rate of change of inclination/MD interval. If the build rate is negative it
becomes a drop rate. The turn rate (TR) is the rate of change of azimuth per MD interval. A positive turn
rate is a positive change in azimuth and a negative turn rate is a negative change in azimuth. The build
rate/turn rate selections allow adding a curve section with a constant build rate and/or turn rate and
specifying a variety of end conditions for the curve section. The BR/TR curves are computed assuming
radius of curvature. A selection must be made from the following three sets of options (see Figure 4-21):
• maintain the build rate to either the MD, TVD, Delta MD, or inclination
• maintain the turn rate to either the MD, TVD, Delta MD, or azimuth
• maintain both the turn rate and build rate to either the MD, TVD, Delta MD, inclination, or
azimuth
Figure 4-21: End of Curve selections for Build Rate/Turn Rate.
CAUTION
Extreme care should be taken when mixing BR/TR curves with minimum curvature types of
curves. Mixing these curves will cause jagged curves on the plot and the interpolated stations to
be such that the actual drilling operation may not be able to follow the path from one interpolated
station to the next (see Figure 4-22). Use minimum curvature and constant dogleg sections
together, and BR/TR and radius of curvature interpolation together.

Jagged
edges
on plot
Figure 4-22: Possible effects of mixing survey methods.
Dogleg Severity at Tool Face (DLS – TF)

This EOC solution, often applied to situations like setting a whipstock, uses the minimum curvature
survey method for calculating the curve station. When using this EOC option, a selection can be made
from the following three sets of options (see Figure 4-23):
• maintain the DLS to the MD
• maintain the DLS to the TVD
• maintain the DLS for a course length
• maintain the DLS to an inclination
• maintain the DLS to an azimuth

Figure 4-23: End of curve selections for DLS – TF.
Case Study Example

A good example of the above situation is a “turn-a-zontal” well in the Austin Chalk, a type of well that
occurs with the following conditions:
• when medium radius build rates are required due to the requirement for long horizontal laterals
• when casing is required in the build section, due to formation proximity and build rate
requirements
• when dual horizontal laterals are required
According to the description above, the following considerations must be planned for:
• Laterals will run southeast and northwest (for the Austin Chalk).
• Casing will be set either southwest or northeast to allow for dual horizontals (approximately 90°
for each of the laterals).
• Medium radius build rate limitations may require a “mild” build rate in which the EOC would be
below the target. This condition would require building to an inclination greater than the dip
angle to allow the lateral to “catch-up” with the target zone, followed by dropping angle to the
value of the bed dip to allow a smooth transition into the target zone. The bed dip would then be
followed to TD.

Solution
The target is a fixed TVD at 0 ft. vertical section with a dip angle, which allows for a constantly changing
target as a function of dip angle (see Figure 4-24).
Figure 4-24: Data input for “turn-a-zontal” well.
The proposed bottom hole location (PBHL) is at a TVD of 15,509 ft with local coordinates of 3,692.41 ft
south, 1,722.58 ft east. This situation means that curve stations must be used, since a number of changes
in the trajectory are required. An example description of planning this process is as follows:
1. The well kick-off point is tied into the parent survey at a depth of 15,100 ft, with the hole azimuth
as 240°.
2. Next, a curve section is inserted to reach the top of the formation at approximately 15,340 ft. A
constant DLS of 12°/100 ft to an inclination of 30° (giving a TVD close to that of the formation
top of 15,338.73 ft) is used.
3. After the casing is run and cemented, 5 ft of new formation is drilled. To obtain this new section
of hole, a hold section to a Delta MD of 5 ft is added.
4. A toolface orientation of –87.6° is set with a DLS of 30°/100 ft to an inclination of 90°
(horizontal), giving an azimuth of 152.78°.
5. A build section to an inclination of 93° is then added (with a build rate of 9°/100 ft), using the
“Build/Turn Rate to an Inclination” option).
6. The inclination of 93° is maintained at the current azimuth for 775 ft.
7. Finally, a J-shaped standard profile is then inserted to hit the target location at the intended TVD
of 15,509 ft.

The vertical section plot from WellDesign for this example well is found in Figure 4-25.
Tie-In
15100 MD 15100 TVD
0.00° 240.00° az
0 departure
15000 Constant DLS to Inc & TVD

15350 MD 15339 TVD
30.00° 240.00° az
6 departure Hold Delta MD
15100
15355 MD 15343 TVD
Build 12.00°/100 ft
Elev Ref: KB(0.00ft above Least Astronomic Tide)
30.00° 240.00° az
6 departure
15200
True Vertical Depth (1 in = 1000 feet)
BR/TR to Inclination EOC (Curve-Hold)

15684 MD 15504 TVD 16514 MD 15462 TVD
15300
93.00° 152.77° az 89.11° 152.74° az
Hold Angle 30.00° 233 departure 1062 departure
15400 Down Dip Target (PBHL)

Build 9.00°/100 ft 19529 MD 15509 TVD
Hold Angle 89.11° 89.11° 152.74° az
4074 departure
15500 Drop and Turn 7.00°/100 ft
Hold Angle 93.00°
Hold Delta MD
15600 DLS/TFO to Inclination 16459 MD 15463 TVD
15650 MD 15505 TVD 93.00° 152.77° az
90.00° 152.77° az 1007 departure
200 departure
15700
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Vertical Section Departure at 155.00 deg from (0.0, 0.0). (1 in = 1000 feet)
Figure 4-25: Vertical section plot of example well.
Summary
The above example situation is solved with curve stations because there is only one final target, but many
intermediate steps are required. This situation requires calculations at various points to determine where
the wellbore lies in relation to the target (the target TVD varies as a function of vertical section).
The spreadsheet functionality of PowerPlan is a powerful tool for this kind of solution because the user
can determine which curve routine is needed for each section. This ability enables the user to “daisy
chain” together a variety of curve and hold sections, then iterate with different values until a solution is
found.

Special Cases
Section Summary
• slant drilling / slant rigs
• inclined or curved conductors
• data input for special cases

Special Cases
SPECIAL CASES OF DIRECTIONAL DRILLING

Controlled directional drilling is used for the following reasons:
• sidetracking
• reaching inaccessible locations
• salt dome drilling
• fault controlling
• drilling multiple wells from a single wellbore
• onshore drilling to zones under bodies of water
• offshore, multi-well drilling to develop fields
• intersecting inclined oil reservoirs
• drilling horizontal wells
• intercepting blown out wells with a relief well
Occasionally, special cases of direction drilling arise where extremely shallow targets are established that
require a sharp horizontal radius over a short vertical depth. A variety of methods for reaching these
shallow targets have been introduced over the years, some which are still in existence and others that are
not. This section describes the following two special methods of directional drilling and how PowerPlan
handles these cases:
• slant rigs
• curved (or inclined conductors)
Slant-drilling / Slant Rigs

Slant-drilling is a method of drilling wells not vertically aligned with the surface (see Figure 4-26).1 Slant
or deviation drilling is typically used in offshore sites where cost prohibits the construction of multiple
platforms. In order to reduce costs, several slanted wells are drilled from a single platform, reaching
several different zones or oil pockets. As many as 20 slanted wells can be drilled from a single platform.

Special Cases
Figure 4-26: Slant-drilling with a slant rig.

Special Cases
Although slant-drilling is typically used in offshore applications, it is also used in land applications like
shallow river crossings and extremely shallow horizontal wells. Notice in the following examples how
data is entered into WellDesign to achieve a shallow river crossing with a slant rig and how the data is
then plotted for a proposal (see Figures 4-27 and 4-28).
Figure 4-27: WellDesign data sheet for shallow river crossing.

Special Cases
KOP begin 2.00°°/100 ft build

50 MD 59 TVD KOP begin 2.00°°/100 ft build Punch-out
80.00°° 45.00°° az KOP begin 90°° 1050 MD 102 TVD 1600 MD 50 TVD
35 departure tangent 90.00°° 45.00°° az 100.00°° 45.00°° az
550 MD 102 TVD 740 departure 1127 departure
90.00°° 45.00°° az
387 departure
Begin 2.00°°/100 ft build

1550 MD 59 TVD
100.00°° 45.00°° az
1092 departure
Figure 4-28: Vertical section view of shallow river crossing.

Special Cases
Notice in the following examples how data is entered into WellDesign to achieve a shallow horizontal
well with a slant rig and how the data is then plotted for a proposal (see Figures 4-29 and 4-30).
Figure 4-29: WellDesign data sheet for shallow horizontal well.
Tie-in Hold angle 30.00°°

0 MD 0 TVD
30.00°° 45.00°° az
0 departure
KOP begin 6.00°°/100 ft build

231 MD 200 TVD
30.00°° 45.00°° az
82 departure
Begin 90.00°° lateral PBHL/TD

1231 MD 677 TVD 1731 MD 677 TVD
90.00°° 45.00°° az 90.00°° 45.00°° az
666 departure 1020 departure
Figure 4-30: Vertical section view of shallow horizontal well.

Special Cases
Inclined or Curved Conductors

Another method of drilling wells that are not aligned vertically with the surface is through the use of
inclined or curved conductors.2 The use of inclined or curved conductors is generally applied in offshore
drilling to relatively shallow targets that lie between 1,300 and 7,000 ft.
Inclined Conductors
The use of inclined conductor pipe involves placing the conductor pipe in the platform at a certain angle
(usually a maximum of 30°); therefore, the kick-off point lies on an inclined course at the start of this
angle, providing a substantial increase in lateral displacement of the well. In a well with a maximum
angle of 65° and a conductor pipe inclination of 30°, only 35° of additional inclination is needed, a
situation that greatly reduces downhole friction (see DrillSAFE section for details on estimating torque
and drag losses in a proposed well).
There are advantages and disadvantages of using inclined conductors.
Advantages
• ability to reach shallow pay zones (1,300 to 4,000 ft) in shallow water depth (up to 170 ft)
Drawbacks
• if more than 170 ft of water depth, lateral displacement of conductor pipe on seabed becomes
excessive and necessary platform base becomes too large
• azimuth orientation of well decided at planning stage, possibly causing problems later if
formation is not well known
• inclination of overall drilling rig (derrick, rotary table, blowout preventers), requires use of
special equipment and causes significant drop in performance and efficiency
• wellheads in lower decks are inclined, reducing available space
• high well depth for relatively shallow pay zone (for example 8,000 ft MD for 3,000 ft TVD)
• driving of conductor pipe at seabed can be difficult
Obviously, there are more disadvantages than advantages when using inclined conductors; therefore, the
use of curved conductor pipe is often a more logical choice.
Curved Conductors
Using a curved conductor allows the use of a conventional drilling rig and standard well spacing on the
platform. The displacement of a curved conductor at the seabed is short, eliminating the need to use a
platform with an oversized base, even in relatively deep water (see Figure 4-31).

Special Cases
Platform
Curved
Conductor
Figure 4-31: Curved conductor.
As with inclined conductors, there are advantages and disadvantages of using curved conductors.
Advantages
• ability to reach shallow pay zones (1,300 to 6,500 ft) in deeper water (100 to 400 ft)
• conductor is driven just as well as vertical conductors, while maintaining inclination build-up rate
during driving
• use of very high build-up gradients provides ability to achieve 20° inclination at seabed, and 25 to
30° at the final driving depth
Drawbacks
• if water depth is less than 100 ft, the deflection at the seabed is too low
• driving of conductor pipe at seabed can be difficult if formation is too hard
• azimuth orientation of well is decided at planning stage, possibly causing problems if formation is
not well known

Special Cases
Notice in the following example how data is entered into WellDesign to compensate for a curved
conductor (see Figure 4-32).
Figure 4-32: Data input for curved conductor.
This is accomplished by a tie-in at the Well Reference Point (WRP), which would be located at the point
that the curved conductor penetrates the sea bed. The location of this point may be known by a gyro
survey, or a sea-bed template, where the actual Northing, Easting, inclination, azimuth, and TVD is
known for that point.
If a gyro survey is available the setup option is to create a well-bore to contain the conductor survey, and
always tie in any planned or actual surveys to this conductor survey at the point of conductor sea-bed
penetration.
If a gyro survey is not available, the same scenario can be setup as if there was a survey, by the creation
of a mock survey, containing the tie-in location, and one additional survey point, with a slightly greater
MD ~ +1 ft or 1m. The additional survey is required as a constraint of the Survey Editor module requiring
at least two survey points. This arrangement provides for an easier tie-in since this WRP is stored, and
does not require the user to re-enter (and verify) the tie-in information each time a new wellbore is added
to be tied in for the well.

Special Cases
When all data is entered for the curved conductors, a spider plot provides an illustration of how the well
trajectories relate to one another (see Figure 4-33). (More on spider plots is presented in the section
entitled, Close Approach.) The green plots below represent the curved conductors, red are the tied-in
surveys, and the blue is a planned well from a curved conductor.
-250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150
A-6 Curved Conductor

100 100
50 50
0 0
-50 -50
-100 A-2 Curved Conductor A-4 Straight Conductor -100
-250 -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150

<<< WEST EAST >>>
Figure 4-33: Spider plot of curved conductor.
Data Input for Special Cases

For this section the Project Database is regarded as the lowest level ellipsoid and is defined as mean sea
level (MSL).
Setting up a Field
Review the proposed Field reference point. If the vertical reference point of the Field is MSL, the
elevation of the Field reference point, with respect to the Project Database, is 0 ft. If the vertical reference
point of the Field is not MSL, the Field reference point is the difference between the vertical reference
point and MSL.

Special Cases
Setting up a Structure
Set up the Structure reference point as the elevation of the rotary kelly bushing (RKB) or similar datum.
Setting up a Slot
The Slot set-up is dependent upon the type of rig used and the type of conductor. Set up the Slot
according to the following conditions that apply.
For a “Normal” Rig:

• Set the Slot elevation to 0 ft relative to the Structure.
• Set the lateral position the same as for the Well.
For a Slanted Rig:

• Set the Slot elevation to 0 ft relative to the Structure.
• Set the lateral position offset from the Well as appropriate.
For a Curved Conductor:

• Set the Slot elevation to correspond with the riser length below the Structure.
• Set the lateral position offset from the Well as appropriate.

Factors Affecting Survey Measurements
Section Summary
This section provides information concerning the factors affecting the accuracy of
survey measurements:
• sag correction to improve inclination accuracy
• magnetic field and its affect on magnetic surveys
• magnetic interference

Factors Affecting the Accuracy of Survey Measurements
FACTORS AFFECTING SURVEY MEASUREMENTS

The following factors can affect the accuracy of survey measurements:
• sag
• magnetic field
• magnetic interference
Sag Correction to Improve Inclination Accuracy

Misalignment in the vertical plane between the survey tool axis and the borehole axis is typically called
sag. This error is created by borehole deformations or by mechanical forces acting on the bottom-hole
assembly (BHA) or wireline and is a function of the BHA and the borehole geometry. It is possible to
calculate the sag error by the use of a BHA deflection analysis tool, such as exists in DrillSAFE. The
calculated sag error becomes a 'sag correction' when added to the survey.
Sag is predominately an inclination error caused by the gravitational force acting on the BHA. The
"Inclination Sag Angle" (SA) computed in DrillSAFE represents the misalignment (in the vertical plane)
of the Survey tool (D&I sensor) to the actual borehole which it is measuring. The misalignment is
typically due to the "sag" of the MWD collar when located relative to the stabilizer(s). The SA is
generally small; minimizing it should be one of the engineer's concerns when designing BHA's. However,
when SA exists over long sections in high angle wells the impact on the final computed TVD of the well
can be significant. Sag is a function of several factors:
• BHA Design, particularly the placement of the survey tool (D&I sensor) relative to stabilizers.
• Hole Inclination, as the inclination changes so will sag. This is due to the increasing gravitational
effect on the BHA as you increase angle.
• Hole Geometry, hole overgauge and severe doglegs can effect how the BHA bends thus affecting
SA.
To compute the SA and ultimately a "survey file corrected for SA" the general procedure below is
suggested. In future versions of PowerPlan this process will be streamlined.
1. The SA is computed and output within DrillSAFE. Three files are required as inputs to the analysis;
BHA, Survey, Well Geometry. These files are created using BHA Editor and Well Design or Survey
Editor. The Survey file used can be the Planned Well Profile or the Actual Well Profile. As long as
the Planned well is consistent with the actual well, using it is preferred, as it allows you to look ahead
and have your SA's computed ahead of time. NB: Make sure your BHA includes a D&I sensor and it
is properly located. Without a D&I sensor the SA is not computed.
2. In Well Design (or Survey Editor) print out a survey report of the subject well. Manually, zone the
well in 10 degree increments of inclination across the actual/planned BHA run to be analyzed. Select
the measured depth at the end of each zone, across the interval being analyzed; for example:
Incl Zone Final Incl MD at Final Incl

40-50 deg at 50 deg 8,450 ft
50-60 deg at 60 deg 9,234 ft
60-70 deg at 70 deg 9,965 ft

3. Open DrillSAFE and load your BHA, Well Plan (or Survey file) and Well Geometry.
4. Select BSF, Bit Side Force, as your Analysis Type. Set your Mud Weight (affects buoyancy) and
Formation Stiffness (leave at 0.5). Set your Weight on Bit to ZERO (BHA condition when taking a
survey). Set the Bit Depth equal to the 'MD at Final Incl' for your first Incl Zone. Click 'RUN' then
click 'REPORT'. Look in the report at 'Summary Output'. Record the SA as reported. You also may
want to examine this first report very carefully to insure that all your input data is correct.
5. Repeat step 4 for each Incl Zone you have. If the magnitude of the SA changed by more than 50%
between adjacent Incl Zones, you should reduce the zones to 5 degree increments.
6. Before you apply the SA to your measured inclination data, you must do two things:
• Consider the magnitude of the SA. The error in the measured inclination is already +/- 0.1 degree.
If the magnitude of SA is less than 0.03 degree it should be ignored altogether. If the magnitude
of SA is greater than 0.2 degrees seek advice. Ideally, the BHA should be changed to lower the
SA.
• Compare the SA to what you think it should be when you visualize the BHA in the wellplan. If it
seems inconsistent, seek advice.
7. While drilling the well, maintain TWO Survey files; one to contain the actual measured data and the
second which has the SA applied. In the SA Survey file, add the SA to ALL the measured inclination
surveys across the Incl Zone it applies to. If the SA is 'positive' you add it to increase the measured
inclination. If the SA is 'negative' you subtract it to reduce the measured inclination. With two survey
files you can compare the effect of the SA on the result at any time.
8. Anytime time the BHA changes the analysis must be recomputed.
9. Both sets of results should be presented "CLEARLY MARKED". You can do this by 'editing' the
survey reports in EXCEL. Be cautious, but when properly applied SA correction can improve final
results.
10. When computing ellipse of uncertainty using the "Topographic" error model, the reduced error
attained by applying sag corrections can be reflected in the EOU computation through the appropriate
selection of tool code.
Magnetic Field and its Affect on Magnetic Surveys

Magnetic survey tools provide azimuth readings referenced to magnetic north not true (geographic) north.
A sound knowledge of the earth’s magnetic field is essential in understanding the corrections applied to
survey data from magnetic survey instruments such as MWD tools.
The total magnetic field experienced at a location on the earth is actually the sum of three magnetic fields
of different origins:
• the principal earth field which originates within the fluid core of the earth
• the contribution from localized magnetic features near the earth’s surface
• the transitory field generated outside the earth (caused by the rotation of the earth relative to the sun
and by the cycles of the sun’s activity)

Principal Earth Field

The earth’s magnetic field is believed to be caused by the rotation of the earth’s solid exterior, relative to
its liquid iron core. In turn, a slow rotation of the core is induced (see Figure 4-34). The magnetic field
results from the electrical currents generated by the relative motion between the liquid core and the
mantle. The magnetic poles are only roughly aligned with the axis of rotation of the earth.
Figure 4-34: Earth’s magnetic core – rotation of liquid core.
Localized Factors
Despite the meticulous gathering and inclusion of magnetic data that is built into geomagnetic models,
accuracy is affected by local anomalies originating in the upper mantle, crust, or surface of the earth,
distorting magnetic predictions. Following are examples of local anomalies:
• ferromagnetic ore deposits
• geological features of volcanic origin, such as faults and lava beds
• topographical features, such as ridges, trenches, seamounts, and mountains
Aspects of the Transitory Field

The transitory field is responsible for the following variations of the magnetic field:
• magnetic storms which may reach several hundreds of gammas (a major effect)
• secular variations of approximately 15 gammas per year (a minor effect)
• diurnal solar variation on the order of 30 to 40 gammas per day (a minor effect)
• the cyclical "Eleven Years" variation (a minor effect)

The earth’s own magnetic field extends out to approximately 8 times the radius of the planet, a region in
space where the earth’s magnetic field contacts the solar wind. On its sunward side, the earth’s
magnetosphere is compressed by high-energy particles from the solar wind (see Figure 4-35). Variations
in the solar wind produce changes in the earth’s magnetic field. Solar flare particles reach the earth in
approximately two days. The shock wave preceding the cloud of plasma from the solar flare compresses
the magnetosphere and rapidly intensifies the geomagnetic field at ground level. This compression takes
place over a few minutes and is called the sudden storm commencement, followed by the initial phase,
which lasts from 30 minutes to a few hours. The main phase produces a drop in the magnetic field
strength, due to an opposing field generated by the energized particles in the magnetosphere. This
condition is normally not a problem for locations in the Gulf of Mexico and lower latitudes; however, this
condition can have serious effects on magnetic surveys in Alaska and some parts of the North Sea.
Figure 4-35: Fluctuation's in the earth’s magnetic field.

In describing the magnetic field at any point on the earth’s surface, Figure 4-36 depicts the principal
vector components. The main parameters of the magnetic field which we consider, total field strength,
horizontal field strength, dip angle, and the declination angle.
Zenith
W
S
Y
X
D
N
E
I H
F
Nadir
Legend
• total intensity (F) – the magnetic strength, which ranges from about 23 MicroTesla around Sao Paulo, Brazil to 67 MicroTesla near
Antarctica
• vertical intensity (Z) – component of the total intensity
• horizontal intensity (H) – component of the total intensity
• inclination (I) – the angle of the field relative to the level ground (also called the dip), which is 90° at the north magnetic pole and 0°
at the equator
• declination (D) – the angle of the horizontal intensity with respect to the north geographic pole
• north-south intensity (X) – the intensity measured from north to south
• east-west intensity (Y) – the intensity measured from east to west
Figure 4-36: Orientation of vector components.

Total Magnetic Field Strength

The total magnetic field intensity is the vector sum of its horizontal component and its vertical
component. It may be referred to as the H value, HFH, magnetic field strength, or total field. The
centimeter-gram-second (CGS) system of units is the oldest of several extended versions of the metric
system. CGS electromagnetic units are used for measuring the strength of the earth’s magnetic field and
are called gammas. Some useful conversions are as follows:
• 1 gamma = 1 nano tesla (nT)
• 1 micro tesla = 1000 gammas
• 1 tesla = 109 gammas
• 1 gauss = 105 gammas
• 1 gauss = 10-4 tesla
• 1 gauss = 1 oersted
The magnetic field intensity recorded at ground level is of a much smaller magnitude than that prevailing
around the earth’s core. At the periphery of the core (approximately 2,175 miles outward from the center
of the earth), the field strength reaches 800,000 gammas. The total field intensity at the earth’s surface
ranges from 63,000 gammas close to the North Pole to 27,000 gammas near the equator.
Horizontal Magnetic Field Strength

The horizontal intensity of the magnetic field defines the direction of magnetic north. The magnitude of
this vector is computed with the following equation (definition of dip angle covered in next section
entitled, “Magnetic Dip Angle”):
Horizontal component = magnetic field strength (HFH) x cos (magnetic dip angle)
Magnetic Dip Angle (Inclination)

Magnetic dip is the angle between horizontal and the magnetic field vector (see Figure 4-37). Dip is the
angle at which the magnetic field lines enter the earth. Values for dip angle range from 90° close to the
North Pole to almost zero degrees at the equator (see Figure 4-38). There are several other points on the
earth’s surface where the dip is equal to 90°, due to local anomalies called dip holes.
Figure 4-37: Magnetic dip angle.

Figure 4-38: Magnetic dip angles at poles and equator.

Magnetic Declination Angle

The earth can be thought of as having a magnetic dipole running through its center, with north and south
poles at either end. This dipole does not correspond with the earth’s rotational axis. As a result, magnetic
north and geographic north are not aligned. The angle between magnetic north and geographic north (true
north) is defined as the magnetic declination or the angle of declination (see Figure 4-39). Depending on
where you are located on the earth, magnetic north will be a number of degrees either east or west of true
north. In early 1998, the position of the north magnetic pole was 1170 kilometers from the true North
Pole. The location of the magnetic poles is transitory, caused by complex fluid motion in the earth's outer
core that causes the magnetic field to change slowly with time. This slow, temporal change is called
"secular variation." Secular variation results in a time-dependent relationship between true north and
magnetic north. Magnetic declination is both time dependent and location dependent.
Figure 4-39: Magnetic declination angle.

Adding magnetic declination to azimuth measurements from magnetic survey tools is necessary to correct
measurements to geographic or true north reference. An easterly declination is expressed as a positive
value and a westerly declination is expressed as a negative value. Although converting from one reference
to another appears a simple task, considerable care is needed. In addition, if converting surveys to grid
north or map north, grid convergence must also be added. (see Figure 4-40).
Figure 4-40: Relationship between Wellbore Azimuth and True, Magnetic, & Grid North.
NOTE
This is one vector representation of Magnetic North, True North, and Grid North. The relative
positions of these vectors to one another are not unique.
On a global scale the behavior of the earth’s magnetic field is fairly constant and predictable; magnetic
declination can be calculated for any point on the earth at any given time. Charts depicting the declination
and rate of change (usually expressed as an annual change) are widely used. In the following illustrations
the magnitude and rate of change of the various magnetic field parameters are shown (see Figure 4-41
through Figure 4-43).3

Units: nT Units (annual change): nT/yr

Contour interval: 2,000 nT Contour interval: 10 nT/yr
Figure 4-41: Total Intensity.
Units: nT Units (annual change): nT/yr

Contour interval: 2,000 nT Contour interval: 10 nT/yr
Figure 4-42: Horizontal Intensity.

Units: degrees Units (annual change): min/yr

Contour interval: 5 degrees Contour interval: 2 min/yr
Figure 4-43: Magnetic Dip Angle (Inclination).
Calculating Magnetic Field Parameters

Creating borehole surveys for directional drilling and tracking hydrophone strings in 3-D seismic arrays
require accurate knowledge of the earth’s geomagnetic field so that magnetic surveys can be checked and
converted to the appropriate mapping frame of reference.4 PowerPlan incorporates geomagnetic models
that predict the characteristics of the geomagnetic field. The mathematical model consists of a main field
and secular variation models. These products are predictive in nature and are based on observed changes
in the main field. Localized magnetic field and transitory influences on the main field (apart from secular
variation) are not incorporated in the mathematical model.
Since the accuracy of the model is dependent upon the data from which it is derived, the model is built
with data from worldwide observatories, satellite missions, and surveys from land, sea, and air. Because
the data is constantly changing, the magnetic models are updated periodically.
PowerPlan uses geomagnetic models from two sources: the International Geomagnetic Reference Field
(IGRF) and the British Geological Survey Global Geomagnetic Model (BGGM).
The IGRF is a public domain geomagnetic model. Many organizations around the world contribute data
for the compilation of the IGRF in accordance with international scientific recommendations set in the
1950's by the International Association of Geomagnetism and Aeronomy (IAGA). The IGRF is updated
every five years and predicts the magnetic field strength and direction. The IGRF also predicts the rates of
change of these quantities on a global basis, five years in advance. IGRF-95 is the model currently
incorporated into PowerPlan. The next IGRF update is expected in the year 2000.
The BGGM is a proprietary geomagnetic model produced by the Natural Environment Research Council
(NERC) in the United Kingdom and is available through licensing from the NERC. The BGGM is revised

annually; therefore, it can maintain accuracy through the use of the most recent data and only predicts one
year into the future. Part of the modeling procedure involves rigorous quality control checks of all the
data used. Because the BGGM contains more parameters than the IGRF, it can represent smaller spatial
details of the geomagnetic field than the IGRF (down to about 3,000 km, rather than about 4,000 km).
BGGM-1999 is the model currently incorporated into PowerPlan 3.6. The updated BGGM is typically
made available to licensees in April or May each year.
PowerPlan calculates the magnetic field dip angle, declination angle, and total field strength from within
the Survey Editor or WellDesign applications. Depending on which geomagnetic model the user has in
PowerPlan; there is a valid user selectable date range. For the BGGM-1999, the valid time window is
January 2, 1940 to September 30, 2000 (see Figure 4-44).
Figure 4-44: Magnetic Parameters, Calculation Panel.

Magnetic Interference
There are two sources of magnetic interference in the drilling environment:
• drillstring magnetic interference
• external magnetic interference (i.e., fish left in hole, nearby casing, fluctuation in earth’s
magnetic field, formations with pyrite or hematite)
Any deviation from the expected magnetic field parameters sensed by the magnetic survey instrument
could indicate magnetic interference. External magnetic interference can occur as the drillstring moves
away from the casing shoe or casing window. Interference can also occur as another cased hole is
approached. All surveying instruments using magnetometers are affected by magnetic interference. In
these cases, gyroscopic (gyro) measurements may be required. Magnetic interference from the drillstring
can be corrected within certain limitations.
Drillstring magnetic interference

Drillstring magnetism can be a source of error in azimuth calculations made from magnetic survey data. It
is of drillstring magnetism that nonmagnetic drill collars are used to position the magnetic survey
instrument out of the magnetic influence of the drillstring. The survey instrument measures the resultant
vector of the earth’s magnetic field and the drillstring. Since the drillstring is like one long dipole magnet
with its flux lines parallel to the drillstring, it is primarily the Z-axis of the magnetic survey instrument
that is affected, typically increasing the magnetic field sensed along this axis. (see Figure 4-45).
Figure 4-45: Drillstring magnetism.
NOTE
In Figures 4-45 and 4-46 the Z axis reference is along the tool axis.

The magnitude of this error is dependent upon the pole strength of the magnetized drillstring components
and their distance from the MWD tool. The error will normally appear as an increased total HFH value
(higher total field strength than the earth alone). The higher total H value will remain constant regardless
of the tool face orientation or depth, as long as the hole inclination, azimuth, and BHA remain relatively
constant.
When drillstring magnetism is causing an error on the Z-axis measurement, only the horizontal
component of that error actually contributes to an error in the azimuth calculation. The horizontal
component of the Z-axis error is equal to the Z-axis error multiplied by the sine of the borehole deviation.
Therefore, affect of drillstring magnetism on azimuth error increases as the hole angle increases.
Furthermore, since the horizontal component of the earth’s magnetic field is smaller in high latitudes, the
error from the same magnetized drillstring will be relatively greater than that experienced in lower
latitudes (see Figure 4-46). A 50 gamma error has a larger effect on a smaller horizontal component
(0.53% error in Alaska compared to only 0.20% in the Gulf of Mexico).
Figure 4-46: Drillstring magnetic interference at different latitudes.
Finally, the resultant azimuth error induced by drillstring magnetism also depends on the direction in
which the BHA is drilling. The maximum azimuth error will be seen in the east-west orientation,
gradually reducing to little or no azimuth error in the north-south orientation.
The increased value of the Z-axis (due to drillstring magnetism) normally causes calculated azimuths to
lie closer to north. This error may show up when a gyro is run overlapping the magnetic survey data.
Typically, magnetic surveys affected by drillstring interference will fall to the north of the true value.

External magnetic interference

When magnetic interference from external sources is encountered (i.e., a fish in the hole or nearby
casing), all three axes of the D&I package are affected; therefore, the total magnetic field varies. (The
total H value also varies when the D&I package is close to casing joints.)
Correction for Drillstring Magnetic Interference

One way to minimize the error caused by drillstring magnetic interference is to isolate the magnetic
survey instrument by incorporating nonmagnetic drill collars in the BHA. The length of the nonmagnetic
material required depends on the pole strength of the magnetic components in the BHA, magnetic field
strength and dip angle, and the direction and angle of the borehole.
NOTE
In addition to BHA planning to minimize drillstring magnetic interference, Schlumberger has real-
time computer programs available, as part of the MWD service, to correct MWD surveys for
drillstring magnetic interference.
Estimating Drillstring Magnetic Interference

The set of equations and illustration below can be used to predict errors in azimuth that may stem from
magnetic interference from the drilling assembly (see Figure 4-47). This methodology is intended to
provide a conservative estimate of drillstring magnetic interference. As the actual magnetic pole strengths
are not known, the azimuth error from a particular BHA may be less than that estimated.
770 LP LP ......................................................................................................................................(4-35)
IF = + 2 −
x2 y ( y + c) 2
57,300 × IF × sin I × sin( Az −MD) ................................................................................................................(4-36)

AE =
H × cos Dip
IF = the calculated interfering field in micro Tesla (µT)

LP = pole strength of components below the Magnetic Survey Instrument (in µT • m2)
AE = predicted azimuth error due to interfering field (IF)
H = total magnetic field strength in gammas
Az = azimuth of the well (relative to true north)
I = inclination of the well
MD = magnetic declination
Dip = magnetic dip angle
x = length of nonmagnetic collar above Magnetic Survey Instrument
y = length of nonmagnetic collar below Magnetic Survey Instrument
c = length of magnetic material below nonmagnetic collars

For LP, one of the following values is selected. These lower pole strength values represent the higher end
of pole strength that would be typically encountered with actual BHA components.
• Stabilizer and bit = 77 µT • m2
• 30 ft or more drill collar or other BHA = 260 µT • m2
• Mud motor or turbine = 860 µT • m2
Figure 4-47: Nonmagnetic drill collar requirements.
This preceding set of equations is relatively easy to use and interpret. The absolute value of the predicted
azimuth error (AE) should be less than 0.5°; if it is not, continue adding lengths of nonmagnetic drill
collars both above and below the MWD collar until the AE value is below 0.5°.
For horizontal drilling, and especially for well paths with a medium radius of curvature, it may be
impractical to achieve a predicted azimuth error of less than 0.5°. Some operators prefer to drill with a
predicted error of 1° during the build phase of the well and then correct for it later.
If a mud motor is used to correct the well azimuth and a change in the magnetic field is observed due to
magnetic interference from the motor, the change may not be a problem if the change is known and
accounted for. A simple way of solving this problem is to survey the corrected path with a different
spacing or a different BHA.

Computing Uncertainty in Wellbore

Position
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual describes the different types of survey
errors, volumes of uncertainty, ellipses of uncertainty, the different types of error
models, and how PowerPlan incorporates survey tool error modeling.

Computing Uncertainty in Wellbore Position
BOREHOLE POSITION UNCERTAINTY

Whenever a well is surveyed, measurement errors from a variety of sources introduce some degree of
uncertainty about the actual position of the borehole. The type of errors that occur can be broadly
categorized as either random or systematic.
Random Errors
The difference between surveys (when an individual tool takes multiple surveys at the same depth) is an
example of a random error. In general, random errors tend to cancel themselves out from one survey
station to the next. Therefore, systematic survey errors are the primary cause of borehole position
uncertainty.
Systematic Errors
Systematic errors cause each survey station to be “off” in the same way. As a result, the systematic errors
from one survey to the next tend to accumulate in one direction (positive or negative).
Systematic errors originate from the following different types of sources:

• relative depth error
• reference error
• drillstring magnetization interference
• true inclination error (sag)
• survey tool misalignment
• sensor specific error
The relative depth error is the error associated with the driller’s depth (drillpipe tally miscalculation) or
wireline depth (wireline in hole miscalculation). The magnetic reference error occurs because the
magnetic declination at the drillsite is generally not known precisely. The declination used to correct
surveys is derived from a global model and does not take into account local variations in the earth’s
magnetic field that result in a magnetic declination different from the declination used to correct the
survey. A free gyro also has a reference error since it must be aligned on surface. Drillstring
magnetization interference introduces a variation in the local magnetic field that a magnetic tool uses to
measure azimuth. The true inclination error occurs because the bottom hole assembly with the survey tool
inside flexes between borehole touch points due to the forces acting on it. This results in the survey tool
being misaligned with the wellbore. Depending on the relative location of the sensor package, the
inclination may read too high or too low. (DrillSAFE can be used to determine the sag of the BHA in the
wellbore, and the correction that is applied to the inclination measurement.) The tool misalignment error
occurs for a tool that is not perfectly centralized in the wellbore. This misalignment can affect both
inclination and azimuth and is most critical at low inclination. Sensor specific errors include a decreased
accuracy at higher inclinations for some types of gyros and the misalignment of the sensors within the
tool.

Ellipses of Uncertainty
When the applicable error parameters are taken into account, the result is the definition of a volume in
space that has a certain probability of actually containing the borehole. In most circumstances, the “as
calculated” position of the wellbore from the measured surveys is contained inside this volume of space.
Ellipses of uncertainty (EOU) were originally proposed by Wolff and deWardt5 to describe the
uncertainty in a wellbore position. The EOUs of Wolff and deWardt were 2-D pictures projected onto the
horizontal plane, plotted on positional maps (spider maps) to depict the relative positional uncertainties
between wells.
Uncertainty Models
Today, there are several types of models used to account for the survey tool errors. Each model attempts
to quantify the errors for a given survey. The models differ considerably in complexity and in the methods
used to account for the errors. The following four survey error models are available in PowerPlan:
• simple cone
• Shell
• Wolff and deWardt
• topographic (TERM)
Simple Cone
The simplest survey error model to use when no tool error parameters are known is the simple cone
model. The simple cone error model consists of expanding cone sections with some initial radius at the
wellhead. The simple cone model approximates the survey errors by creating a cone-shaped volume of
space that is considered to contain the actual well path. The base of the cone increases as a function of
depth (see Figure 4-50). Each cone section can have a different expansion rate.
Since the simple cone model is the most simplistic model, it is easy to calculate and is generally the
model used for “rule of thumb” evaluations. For example, assume a survey error of 1 ft/100 ft MD. The
radius of the cone at the wellhead can be used to model the uncertainties of the wellhead location. An
additional safety factor can be added to the expanding volume (i.e., always wanting 50 ft of buffer around
the wellbore).
The simple cone model is dependent upon the defined expansion rate and MD alone, without regard to
wellbore inclination, azimuth, or tool type; however, this model does not address the depth uncertainty,
since all errors are assumed to be in the horizontal plane. Also, the inclination errors and azimuth errors
are considered to be equal, since the cone has a single radius to define its shape. Finally, when using this
model in PowerPlan, there are no default survey tools defined, so the user must decide the growth rate
(ft/1000 ft) to represent the errors for the survey tool that is used.

Figure 4-50: Simple cone method.
Shell Error Model

The Shell error model (as implemented in PowerPlan) is basically the same as the simple cone error
model. The major difference is that the Shell cones increase with depth as a function of inclination. Also,
Shell Expro has extensively tested various tool types in a test well to more closely approximate the
borehole position uncertainty in an empirical manner. As a result, PowerPlan has the constants for several
survey tool types available; however, the same limitations remain as with the simple cone model. The
Shell model does not address depth uncertainty and treats inclination error and azimuth error the same,
since the cone can only have a single radius to define its shape. Therefore, the Shell model tends to
overestimate the inclination errors in order to compensate for the generally larger azimuth errors.
Wolff and deWardt Error Model

Wolff and deWardt studied survey data for Shell in the North Sea and tried to quantify how much error
resulted from each type of systematic error for a given survey tool type. Wolff and deWardt determined
two sets of constants for each tool type: “good” and “poor.” A good survey is characterized as one where
nothing went significantly wrong and the data more or less matched the data from other tool runs. A poor
survey is characterized as one where the systematic errors are not in line with those from other tool runs.
This situation could occur in the case of extreme drillstring magnetization interference, incorrect
calculation of the magnetic declination, or a bad tool calibration.

By choosing a good or poor tool type, the user determines the growth rate of the 3-dimensional ellipse of
uncertainty and estimates the borehole position uncertainty (like the cone does in the Shell and simple
cone models). The ellipse of uncertainty is defined by the size of the following three axes:
• along-hole axis
• lateral axis
• high side axis
The along-hole axis represents the borehole position uncertainty associated with the relative depth error.
The lateral axis represents the borehole position uncertainty associated with the systematic errors that
affect azimuth (reference error, drillstring interference, and misalignment). The high side axis represents
the borehole position uncertainty associated with the systematic errors that affect the inclination
measurement (sag and misalignment).
The EOU defines a volume of space (within a certain confidence level) at a particular depth where the
actual wellpath is located. Wolff and deWardt do not explicitly state the confidence level that they
assume; however, the confidence level for the tool constants defined by Wolff and deWardt is believed to
be 95%. This confidence level means that there is a 95% chance that the wellbore is actually located
within the volume of space defined by the EOU. The figure also shows the projection of the EOU onto a
vertical plane and a horizontal plane. From these projections, a vertical axis, a major axis, and a minor
axis are determined. Depending on the orientation of the EOU, the along-hole axis, lateral axis, and high
side axis could contribute to any of the projected axes; therefore, it is not always straightforward to
determine how the projected axes will behave, especially for a 3-D well. A change in inclination or
azimuth will cause a change in the orientation of the EOU; therefore, even though the EOU continually
increases in size with depth, it is possible for a projected axis to decrease in size for an interval.
The EOU survey report created in Survey Editor or WellDesign is the primary source of EOU data within
PowerPlan. It provides the major axis, minor axis, vertical axis, and major axis azimuth. The major axis
azimuth defines the orientation of the EOU in relation to north and is quite useful in determining the
behavior of the EOU for a complex well trajectory.
Estimation of the depth uncertainty and separate treatment of azimuth and inclination uncertainties are the
main advantages of using the Wolff and deWardt method; however, the following weaknesses still
remain:
• The data is a good representation of only one part of the world (North Sea). Since the most
crucial errors are latitude dependent (magnetic declination and drillstring magnetization
interference), the ideal model would include the location as a variable.
• The specific BHA configuration can have a significant effect on the drillstring magnetization.
• The Wolff and deWardt error model makes no provision for corrections that have been applied to
the surveys (i.e. sag correction and in-field referencing). When these corrections are made, the
borehole position uncertainty is reduced and should be reflected in a smaller EOU.
Unlike the other error models in PowerPlan, the EOU calculation from Wolff and deWardt for magnetic
tools assumes asymmetry of the drillstring magnetization error. The 1-sided effect of the drillstring
magnetization error is achieved mathematically by giving the 2-sided error component an equally large
bias. This effect results in ellipse of uncertainty (EOU) centers that are south of the plotted wellbore
location. This effect is most pronounced when the drillstring magnetization error term is large, such as
when using the “Poor Mag” survey tool. On the spider plot available in the Close Approach application,

the EOU centers are south of the plotted wellbore; however, when performing proximity analyses within
Close Approach, the bias from the drillstring magnetization error term is not applied.
Wolff and deWardt did not address the treatment of error propagation between different tool types. This
treatment should depend on whether the errors from one tool run to the next are independent or dependent
in nature. If the errors are dependent, then the errors should propagate linearly. If the errors are
independent, then the errors should propagate in quadrature (square root of the sum of the squares). An
example of a dependent error is the magnetic compass error (magnetic declination error and drillstring
magnetization interference), which affects all magnetic tools in the same way on subsequent tool runs.
Thus, errors for magnetic tools should be propagated linearly. On the other hand, most gyro tool errors are
independent, since they are primarily particular to an individual tool type. Thus, errors for gyro tools
should be propagated in quadrature. Also, the errors from one tool class to the other (gyro to magnetic or
vice versa) are independent and should be added in quadrature. PowerPlan assumes a quadrature
propagation between all tool types.
Existing in PowerPlan are the tool error parameters originally defined by Wolff and deWardt, in addition
to specific error parameters for Anadrill tools. Custom survey tools can be created with the Wolff and
deWardt model by specifying the proper survey error parameters (as determined by the tool manufacturer)
or the user’s own knowledge of the tool behavior.
Topographic Error Model

The topographic error model (TERM) is the newest error model. The TERM is a simple and flexible
means of describing survey instrument performance. The TERM consists of a matrix that defines the
expected uncertainty performance for a particular survey instrument and operating environment. The
matrix represents a 3-dimensional error surface, having azimuth, inclination, and displacement error as
axes. The matrix tables contain the inclination and azimuth uncertainties of the applicable survey
instrument that the software uses as a lookup table. The inclination uncertainty is a function of inclination
only, while the azimuth uncertainty can be a function of both inclination and azimuth. An additional error
source that is taken into account is depth errors that consist of a correlated and random component. Like
Wolff and deWardt, these errors create an EOU that represents borehole position uncertainty. These errors
also accumulate on the along-hole axis, lateral axis, and high side axis. As with Wolff and deWardt, the
EOU is projected onto a vertical plane and a horizontal plane to find the vertical axis, major axis, minor
axis, and major axis azimuth.
The entries in the table are at the one-sigma confidence level, meaning that 68% of actual results should
be within this range of the true value. It should be noted that the user has the option to compute the EOUs
to any confidence level, which is set to 95% by default.
The values for inclination and azimuth uncertainties in the tables are “propagated” through the calculation
of north, east, and vertical position from the well profile (inclination and azimuth as a function of
measured depth). This calculation results in an EOU that is a statistical characterization of the position of
the well.
PowerPlan provides a comprehensive list of default survey tool configurations for the topographic model.
The entries in the data tables characterize a specific kind of instrument used in specific circumstances, for
several BHA configurations. The performance of magnetic surveying tools, for example, depends
somewhat on the local values of magnetic field strength (|H|) and dip angle. This situation is why the

tables describe expected performance at high-latitude locations (like Alaska), where the dip angle is 80°
or larger. Likewise, drill-string magnetic interference is likely to be greater if the BHA has fewer non-
magnetic drill collars isolating the MWD tool; therefore different tables are provided for a few “typical”
BHA configurations. Also, the TERM will correctly adjust the borehole position uncertainty if sag
corrections or in-field referencing have been applied to the surveys.
The tables for MWD magnetic tools include contributions from the following sources of uncertainty:
• sensor scale factor, bias, and alignment
• BHA sag
• BHA alignment
• magnetic declination
• drillstring magnetism
• depth
Tables for the default TERM’s were constructed to approximate the EOU’s provided by the instrument
supplier for a set of test wells.
A major advantage of the topographic model is the flexibility it provides. By entering the correct
constants into the “look-up” tables, any BHA configuration, location, or survey correction can be
modeled. In addition, virtually any other error model could be emulated by using the topographic model,
given the appropriate error parameters for the user-specific error model and survey tool.
Default TERM’s
The magnetic models are based on the latest industry knowledge and represent a more thorough
description of errors to expect, based on BHA configuration. The gyro and other models are based on
“black box” outputs from the operators of the various systems, as well as knowledge about error model
performance that is shared among the directional surveying community.
NOTE
The prerequisite for use of the TERM is having carried out the correct running procedures and
quality control measures for validation of the error model for the applicable instrument.
The TERM’s are listed generically in the following tables (see Tables 4-2 and 4-3). For each error model
description, the application and suggested survey instruments that fall into that genre are given. In
addition, the magnetic error models are given a BHA identity number that coincides with the table below,
which should be used as a guide to select the TERM type which most closely reflects the BHA
configuration being used.

Type Examples BHA Configuration
Assumes no drillstring magnetic interference whatsoever, and represents the

MWD1
1 absolute best case possible for a magnetic tool configured in several hundred
HLat MWD1
feet of non-magnetic collar (NMDC).
MWD2 Assumes a standard BHA configuration of one full-size (30-ft) NMDC below
2
HLat MWD2 the MWD tool and two full-size NMDC’s above, or 120 ft of NMDC.
MWD3 Assumes a standard BHA configuration of one 15-ft NMDC below the MWD
3
HLat MWD3 tool and two full-size NMDC’s above, or 105 ft of NMDC.
MWD4 Assumes a standard BHA configuration of one 10-ft NMDC below and one full
4
HLat MWD4 size NMDC above the MWD tool, or 70 ft of NMDC.
Table 4-2: TERM types and configurations.

Tool Name Description Application/Key Points Instrument/Provider List
Scientific Drilling
Surface Readout Gyro (SRG)
Gyro orientation in top of hole.
Gyro orientation system Some photo-mechanical systems Sperry Sun
requiring the gyro to be still in use for mutlishot work; Surface Readout Orienter (SRO)†
Free Gyro aligned to a foresight otherwise run on mono-conductor
bearing on surface prior to wireline. Surveys may need to be Humphrey Inc
running in hole. corrected for drift, based on time Ultimax SURVEYOR (SRG)
taken for survey.
Baker Hughes Inteq
Sigma‡
Scientific Drilling
High-accuracy, north-
Finder (Low angle <15°)
seeking gyro. Automatically Gyro orientations, singleshots,
seeks true north. Requires and multishots at any depth but Keeper (Low angle <≈3°)
being completely stationary only up to a maximum inclination
to collect a survey point. Gyrodata
North-seeking Gyro of approximately 75°. Run on
(NSG) Stationing Survey is taken by the Gyrodata Wellbore Surveyor (GWS)
electric wireline in cased and
instrument “sensing” the Rate Gyro System Battery Tool
open holes and through drillpipe.
earth’s spin vector and (RGS-BT)
Can be run as a battery-powered,
gravity vector from gyro and drillpipe-conveyed survey.
accelerometer sensors. Baker Hughes Inteq
Seeker‡
Schlumberger
High-accuracy, north- GCT Gyro*
seeking gyro operating in
“dynamic” continuous Gyro multishots, especially at Scientific Drilling
running mode. Sensor high angle, where the instrument Finder (High speed mode >15°)
package is initialized onto a is pumped downhole through Keeper (High speed mode)
NSG Continuous
stationing survey point and drillpipe using a pack-off or side-
run continuously in and out entry sub. Run on electric Gyrodata
of the hole. Depending on wireline either individually or as Rate Gyro System Continuous
survey length, intermediate part of a logging string. (RGS-CT)
stops are made for bias
updates. Sperry Sun
G2 Gyro System†
High-accuracy, high-speed,
Gyro multishots in cased holes Baker Hughes Inteq
fully inertial navigation
down to 6-inch ID. Tool OD Ring Laser Inertial Guidance Surveyor
system that uses 3-axis
prevents high-angle pumping (RIGS) ‡
Inertial Gyro sensor measurements.
through drillpipe, which limits
Highest accuracy survey
operating range to approximately Ferranti
instrument currently
65° inclination. Finds (No longer in use)
available.
Table 4-3: Survey tool names and descriptions.

Type of MWD signaling

instrument that provides Scientific Drilling
inclination only. Has a Low-angle, vertical well Teledrift
Inclination Only
pendulum device that alters applications with less than 10°
Gyro
an annular restriction, inclination. Anderguage
through which pulses are Anderdrift
transmitted to surface.
Magnetic survey instrument Open-hole logging operations.

run with wireline logging Can be run inside casing to
General Purpose Schlumberger WandT
systems, usually as part of a measure inclination only as a
Inclinometry Tool GPIT*
dipmeter log. Contains three check on vertical depth. Prone to
(GPIT)*
axis magnetometers and misalignment errors when
three axis accelerometers. dipmeter calipers are opened.
Scientific Drilling
Super Eye
Dropped down drillpipe on shoe
Gyrodata
Solid state, electromagnetic trip or last trip out of hole. Usually
Gyrodata Electronic Multishot (GEMS)
multishot system run in a run in tandem but may be run in
(Champ Tool)
type 2 BHA configuration single or triple-stack
Electromagnetic and landed in the collar configuration, depending on
Tensor
Multishot (EMS2) above the MWD tool. Has location. Used in all open-hole
Champ Tool
three axis magnetometers applications. Pumped down at
and accelerometers high angle. Must be landed in
Sperry Sun
nonmagnetic section of BHA to
ESS / ESI†
operate.
Baker Hughes Inteq
Electronic Multishot (Champ Tool) ‡
Magnetic survey tool run Schlumberger Anadrill

inside a nonmagnetic drill Powerpulse*, Slim*, Sharp*, Impulse*
Used in type 1 BHA
collar as part of the BHA
configuration, meaning
Measure While during drilling operations. A Baker Hughes Inteq
completely nonmagnetic
Drilling / mud-pulse telemetry system Navitrak‡, Teleco‡, DMWD‡
environment. Can be used to
Electromagnetic sends survey data to
indicate best possible
Multishot (MWD1 / surface for real-time survey Sperry Sun
performance, but should not be
EMS1) measurements. Has three DWD†, Superslim†
used for field data without
axis magnetometers and
consultation.
accelerometers. EMS tool Halliburton
as described above. BGD†, Datadrill†
Table 4-3: Survey tool names and descriptions (continued).

Magnetic survey tool run Schlumberger Anadrill

inside of a nonmagnetic Powerpulse*, Slim*, Sharp*, Impulse*
collar as part of the BHA
Configuration in type 2 standard
during drilling operations. A Baker Hughes Inteq
BHA (see Table 4-2)
mud-pulse telemetry system Navitrak‡, Teleco‡, DMWD‡
environment. This model to be
MWD2 sends survey data to
used for stabilized assembly with
surface for real-time survey Sperry Sun
standard survey data reference
measurements. Three axis DWD†, Superslim†
corrected only.
magnetometers and
accelerometers. EMS tool Halliburton
as described above. BGD†, Datadrill†
As above. Suffix S indicates

SAG corrected which allows
for mechanical misalignment
Configuration in type 2 standard Powerpulse*, Slim*, Sharp*, Impulse*
of the sensor package to the
BHA (see Table 4-2)
wellbore. A SAG correction
environment. This model to be Baker Hughes Inteq
is calculated and applied
used for slick assembly with Navitrak‡, Teleco‡, DMWD‡
based on the location and
MWD2-S standard survey data reference
size of the stabilizers in the
corrected. Sperry Sun
assembly relative to the
Also to be used for SAG DWD†, Superslim†
survey sensor position and
corrected data for a stabilized
takes into account the
assembly. Halliburton
bending moments of the
BGD†, Datadrill†
various BHA elements
concerned.
As above. Suffix I indicates Schlumberger Anadrill

Infield Reference corrected. Powerpulse*, Slim*, Sharp*, Impulse*
Infield Referencing refers to
the survey data being Baker Hughes Inteq
corrected using a magnetic Navitrak‡, Teleco‡, DMWD‡
BHA (see Table 4-2)
MWD2-I interference correction
algorithm which uses local Sperry Sun
used for stabilized assembly with
crustal magnetic field data DWD†, Superslim†
standard survey data Infield
from a local geomagnetic
Reference corrected.
survey giving a higher Halliburton
accuracy result. BGD†, Datadrill†
Powerpulse*, Slim*, Sharp*, Impulse*
BHA (see Table 4-2)
Baker Hughes Inteq
As above. Suffix S indicates used for slick assembly with
Navitrak‡, Teleco‡, DMWD‡
SAG corrected. Suffix I standard survey data Infield
MWD2-IS
indicates Infield Reference Reference corrected.
Sperry Sun
corrected.
DWD†, Superslim†
Also to be used for stabilized
which has been Infield Reference
Halliburton
and SAG corrected.
BGD†, Datadrill†
Table 4-3: Survey tool names and descriptions (continued).

Example parameter screens from PowerPlan are shown for the Hlat2 MWD2 example (see Figures 4-51
through 4-54).
Figure 4-51: Selection of survey tool for topographic model.

Figure 4-52: Selection of survey tool for topographic model.
Figure 4-53: Inclination uncertainties for the HLat MWD2 survey tool.

Figure 4-54: Azimuthal uncertainties for the HLat MWD2 tool.

Defining the Outputs

The EOU reports generated by PowerPlan report the following EOU parameters:
• semimajor axes dimension
• semiminor axes dimension
The major and minor semi-axes are the projection of the ellipsoid onto the horizontal plane, as outlined by
Wolff and deWardt and calculated from the error covariance matrix.
Confidence Levels
Survey uncertainty errors are assumed to follow a standard Gaussian “normal” distribution error profile.
The TERM’s have their parameters defined at the 1 sigma or 1 standard deviation level in 3 dimensions.
The 1 sigma level in 3 dimensions equates to approximately a 20% confidence level. This approximation
means that if 100 surveys of the same well were taken with the same kind of survey instrument,
approximately twenty of the calculated positions would fall within the EOU, and about eighty would fall
outside of it.
To provide for a higher confidence in survey position, the size of the resulting EOU (as computed from
the 1 sigma parameters) is scaled to match the confidence level specified. For a 95% confidence level, the
results would be scaled by approximately 2.8 times. This is the default setting which can be changed by
the user.
The Wolff and deWardt error models are estimated at the 95% confidence level for “good” and “poor”
tools as defined by the authors. Wolff and deWardt models can be configured for other confidence levels
by creating tools with the appropriate parameters for the desired confidence level.
The confidence levels of the simple cone and the Shell error models are considered a part of the original
definition of the expansion rate parameters, and are left to the user to define.

Index
Index
along-hole axis Minimum Curvature ...........................................................9

in ellipse of uncertainty................................................ 66 radius of curvature ............................................................11
build rate ............................................................................ 9 random errors
confidence levels in borehole position......................................................63
in modeling survey errors ............................................ 76 reference error
dip holes ........................................................................... 51 in borehole position......................................................63
dogleg................................................................................. 9 relative depth error
dogleg severity ................................................................... 7 in borehole position......................................................63
drillstring magnetization interference sensor specific error
in borehole position ..................................................... 60 in borehole position......................................................63
ellipses of uncertainty (EOU)........................................... 64 Shell error model ..............................................................65
high side axis simple cone error model ...................................................64
in ellipse of uncertainty................................................ 66 solar wind .........................................................................49
initial phase (IP) sudden storm commencement (SSC) ................................49
in earth's magnetic field ............................................... 49 survey tool misalignment
lateral axis in borehole position......................................................63
in ellipse of uncertainty................................................ 66 systematic errors
Lubinski ............................................................................. 8 in borehole position......................................................63
magnetic declination ........................................................ 46 topographic error model (TERM).....................................67
compensating for ......................................................... 56 true inclination error
magnetic modeling ........................................................... 46 in borehole position......................................................63
magneto pause.................................................................. 49 turn rate...............................................................................9
main phase (MP) uncertainty models
in earth's magnetic field ............................................... 49 for survey tools.............................................................64
Mason and Taylor .............................................................. 8 Wolff and deWardt error model........................................65

References
1
Natural Gas Week, Drilling for Natural Gas (6 August 96), <http://cgibin1.erols.com/clegates/DRILL.HTM>
2
Le Peuvedic, Jean, et al., Directional Drilling and Deviation Control Technology. Houston, Gulf Publishing
Company (1990).
3
United States Geological Survey, World IGRF Contour Charts (12 October 1998),
<http://geomag.usgs.gov/igrf_images.html#igrf_d>
4
Barraclough, D. R., Technical Report WM/98/25C, British Geological Survey (1998).
5
Wolff, C. M. M. and J. P. deWardt, “Borehole Position Uncertainty: Analysis of Measuring Methods and
Derivation of a Systematic Error Model,” paper SPE 9223 presented at SPE 5th Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition in Dallas (1980).

5. Automatic Trajectory Design

150 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land TX 77478
(281) 285-8000
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................................3
DETAILED DESCRIPTION ...........................................................................................................................4
Well Trajectory Representation..............................................................................................................4
Conventional Well Trajectory Representation ...................................................................................4
New Well Trajectory Representation ..................................................................................................5
Common Types of Constraints ..............................................................................................................6
Algorithm Description .............................................................................................................................9
Graident Calculations..............................................................................................................................9
Object-Oriented Implementation ..........................................................................................................11
EXAMPLES .................................................................................................................................................11
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................21

Introduction
The goal of the Automatic Trajectory Design (ATD) for directional drilling is to automatically produce a
three-dimensional optimized trajectory of the well path that reaches given multiple targets from a given
starting location, subject to different user-imposed constraints. A starting point may be the surface
location or any point on the existing well trajectory (for sidetracking or path-correction). Each target may
be a point, a 2D area (rectangle, circle, polygon), or a 3D shape (characterized with dip, strike and
rotation parameters). The well path itself can be represented as a combination of number of arc (curve)
and line (hold) stations.
ATD is a part of the Well Design Application. It represents a robust and flexible procedure that uses a
nonlinear optimization theory for automatic planning of optimized three-dimensional well paths.
Optimization algorithm provides fast and reliable solution to the problem outlined above. The algorithm
utilizes new efficient vector representation of the well trajectory. The trajectory is subject to multiple
constraints. In order to satisfy all those requirements we are introducing so-called cost- or penalty-
function that accumulate all deviations of the well trajectory parameters from the desired values.
Therefore, by minimizing the value of the cost function, the trajectory parameters eventually converge to
some optimal values that satisfy (if possible) the problem constraints. The conjugate gradient optimization
algorithm [1,2] is used here for trajectory optimization. It is fast and efficient, and provides a general
solution for the well trajectory design problem. Object-oriented implementation of this method allows
run-time dynamical construction of the trajectory geometry for any given number of survey stations, types
of applied constraints, multiple targets.
As a result of the method outlined above, an optimized three-dimensional trajectory of the well path that
reaches given multiple targets from a given starting location and satisfies different constraints can be
produced. The well trajectory is subject to the following constraints and requirements:
The imposed constraints are currently (but not limited to):
• Target hit (distance from the trajectory to target)

• Dogleg Severity constraint (range)
• Kick Of Point (preferred point and range)
• Inclination of the hold station
• Target hit at prescribed direction
• ToolFace (preferred and range)
• No-Go areas (anti-collision check, hard line, lease lines, etc)
These geometric constraints can be extended to other drilling parameters such as:
• Minimizing the effects of torque and drag

• Ensuring that the maximum pump pressure and other rig hardware limits are not exceeded.
• Optimal flowrates are used for downhole tools and motors
• Bit nozzles are sized correctly
.

Trajectory design issues and general requirements:
• Minimum number of stations with optimum target hits

• Multiple target threading
• Satisfy the imposed constraints
• Minimum wellpath length
The novel vector representation of the well trajectory is introduced here instead of classical depth-
inclination-azimuth description of the well path. In this vector description, the trajectory is represented as
set of “trajectory units”, each of those consists of the arc and line segment. It is computationally more
efficient, easy to handle in mathematical derivations, and provides a singularity free solution. It also
automatically assures trajectory continuity (no additional constraints for arc/line segments matching), and
existence of the first order derivatives.
To find the optimized well path we approached several different aspects of this problem:
• Use the most convenient trajectory representation and define set of independent variables
(generalized coordinates) for optimization problem.
• Define set of all constraints and requirements.
• Construct the cost function.
• Choose the most efficient optimization technique for cost function minimization
• Provide efficient design and implementation.
Detailed Description ATD
Well Trajectory Representation
Conventional Well Trajectory Representation:
Traditionally, the trajectory of the wellbore is represented by set of survey stations connected in a continuous curve,
where every station is described by the depth, inclination and azimuth of the wellbore. This trajectory representation
is currently used in Well Design (PowerPlan) application.
The conventional requirements for the well trajectory calculation include the absolute location of the
reference point, location of the kick-off point and the following three parameters at each survey station:
• course length (change in measured depth from previous station), ∆MD

• borehole inclination, θ
• borehole azimuth (or direction, corrected to relevant North), φ.

In order to construct the trajectory the following information is required:

r
• Starting (reference) point Po (∆MDo ,θ o , φ o ) .
• Kick-off point (position in the wellbore that begins a new curve segment)
r r
location: PKOP = PKOP (∆MDKOP ,θ o , φ o ) .
r
• Curve station information: Pi (∆MDi ,θ i , φ i ) for each curve section. Minimum curvature method
is the most common technique used for curve calculation, although others are still commonly
used in the industry [11].
r
• Length of the straight station data: Pi (∆MDi ) for each hold section (The direction of the hold
station can be deducted from the previous station information).
The detailed description of the trajectory calculation using measured depth, ∆MD , inclination, θ, and
azimuth, φ, representation can be found in the Trajectory Design section of the PowerPlan Technical
Manual [11].
New Well Trajectory Representation
The choice of measured depth, ∆MD , inclination, θ, and azimuth, φ, variables for trajectory calculation,
that is currently used in Well Design, is quite descriptive, convenient, and is natural for directional
drilling. Nevertheless, it is not very suitable for the optimization problem. Vector representation of the
trajectory is suggested here (it will be described in details later in the document) instead of using angles.
There are several reasons for introducing vector variables instead of a conventional angle representation
in trajectory optimization problem. First of all, it helps to avoid an azimuthal singularity near zero
inclination (vertical). Then, due to complexity of the mathematical derivations (taking the derivatives of
the multidimensional cost function), it is easier and more descriptive to manipulate with vectors than to
use angles and trigonometric functions and it does not put any limitation on size of the arcs. Using vectors
has also proved to be computationally more efficient, since the running time for the trajectory
optimization routine is a key user requirement.
The idea behind introducing the alternative well path description is to present the trajectory as series of
line and arc (curve stations constrained by minimum curvature requirements) segments, that would allow
flexible and descriptive well path construction, assure trajectory continuity and permit convenient
generation of the cost-function for optimization problem. As it is shown in Fig. 1, the well path starts at
the reference point and consists of the line segment for the kick off point and set of trajectory units. Each
trajectory unit (Fig. 2) is constructed from an arc segment and a line segment (Fig. 2).
Mathematically, the following set of variables provides the complete description of each trajectory unit
(Fig. 2):
r
• n1 -- 3D vector tangent to the arc segment at the starting point (beginning of the arc);
r
• v -- 3Dvector that goes from the start to the end point of the arc segment;
• l -- the magnitude of the length of the line segment.
r
First, it is assumed that the starting point, P1 , of the trajectory unit (combination of the arc and line
segment) is known (since the starting point of the current unit is the end point of the previous trajectory

r r
unit or segment), and the trajectory unit is described in (n1 , v , l ) variables, as suggested earlier. Then, the
r r
end point of the arc segment, P2 , and the normalized end tangent vector, n2 , can be easily determined
(see Fig 2):
r r r
P2 = P1 + v , (1)
and
r
r 2v r r
− n1 + r 2 (v ⋅ n1 )
r v
n2 = r . (2)
r 2v r r
− n1 + r 2 (v ⋅ n1 )
v
r
Since the line segment starts from the arc end point and continues in the end tangent vector direction, n2 ,
r
then the end point of the line segment, as well as end point, P3 , of the trajectory unit can be calculated, as
follows:
( )
r r r r
P2 = P1 + v + l ⋅ n2 . (3)
The following is the summary of the necessary information for successful trajectory reconstruction using
vector notation (some of the mathematical details were discussed earlier):
• Starting (reference) point.

• Cartesian coordinate frame F ( X , Y , Z ) attached to the reference point with its X-axis directed
along North/South direction, pointing to the North, Y-axis -- along East/West direction, pointing
to the East, and the vertical Z-axis.
• Location of the kick-off point (KOP) and the direction that defines the start of the line segment
assigned to it.
r r r r
• Number of trajectory units, N , and their description, {(n1 , v , l ) i }, i = 1,..., N , where n i 1 = n i −1 2 ,
i.e. the start tangent for the next trajectory unit is the same as end tangent calculated for the
previous trajectory unit.

Common Types of Constraints and Their Representation As A Cost

Function
In order to formulate an optimization problem, it is essential to define the cost (or objective) function that
is the subject for minimization. This cost function has to include all desired criteria, which are defined by
the constraints specified by the user. The value of the cost function, U cos t , consists of the real cost of the
trajectory (the cost is proportional to the length of the trajectory), U 0 , and penalty costs, U penalty :
U cos t = U penalty + U 0 . (4)
Constraints are included in the cost function using large penalty costs (for example, $1,000,000 per 1ft
deviation from the target). Penalty costs, U penalty , are associated with deviations from the design
parameters:
U penalty = ∑α u
types of
i i , (5)
constraints
where α i is a priority factor (weight), 0 ≤ α i ≤ 1 , for each individual constraint, u i .
The most common geometrical constraints considered in this problem include: desired range for depth of
the kick-off point ( KOPmin ≤ KOP ≤ KOPmax ), allowed range for the dog-leg severity (DLS) values
( DLS min ≤ DLS ≤ DLS max ), desired range of inclination (Incl) angles ( Incl min ≤ Incl ≤ Incl max ), the
maximum distance (dmax) from the target at which the target can be hit ( d ≤ d max ).
The KOP constraint can be applied only to a starting line segment of the trajectory. The DLS constraints
are applicable to arc segments only. The inclination limitation is valid only for line segments of the
trajectory. The “target hit” requirement is applied to the whole trajectory, i.e. the target can be reached by
either line or arc segment of the well (whichever happens to be an optimal section). The minimum length
of the trajectory constraint is applied to the whole trajectory, i.e. all arc and line segments.
There are several examples of the penalty/cost functions used in current optimization approach (see
Fig.3):
• DLS cost/penalty function:
 ( DLS j − DLS pref ) 2

 DLS
k , if DLS < DLS min ,
u j
DLS = 2 (6)
 or DLS > DLS max
 0, otherwize

Then the total cost for all DLS constraints can be given by following expression:
u DLS = ∑u j
# of arc stations
DLS . (7)
where, DLS pref is the preferred value for DLS parameter, k DLS is the “price” coefficient (in
$$cost/[DLS_units]2).
In our vector notation DLS can be determined as follows:
v v
a cos(n start ⋅ nend )
DLS i = , (8)
Larc
v v
where Larc is the length of the corresponding arc segment, n start is the start tangent of the arc, and nend is
the end tangent.
• KOP cost/penalty function:
 ( KOP − KOPpreferred ) 2
k KOP , if KOP < KOPmin ,
u KOP = 2 (9)
 or KOP > KOPmax
 0 , otherwise
where KOPpref is the preferred value for KOP parameter, k KOP is the kick-off constraint “price”
coefficient (in $$cost/length2).
• Distance from trajectory to target (for point target) cost/penalty function:
 (d − d max ) 2
 target
k 2 , if d > d max ,
 2
u j target = (10)
 (d − d max ) 2
 k1target , if d ≤ d max
 2
where
k1target << k 2 target . (11)

Then the total cost for all specified targets can be given by following expression:
u target = ∑u
# of targets
j
target . (12)
where d is a distance from the target to the closest point on well trajectory. If the target is a point target,
then l can be found analytically. If a target is two or three-dimensional, then d can be found numerically.
It is relevant to mention here that cost functions may be of the different nature and order of magnitude.
The scaling parameters are introduced for each type of the cost function.
All functions, (with the exception of the “minimum trajectory length”, where the cost is directly
proportional to the length of the trajectory), are modeled as quadratic functions: the larger the deviation of
the well parameters from the desired values, the higher the cost of the trajectory.
Algorithm Description and Gradient Calculations
The problem is formulated in a vector description of the well trajectory. The location of the starting point
and the direction of the first segment (which is the line segment that corresponds to the kick-off point)
and the number if the trajectory units are assumed to be input parameters for optimization algorithm.
In this work we using local conjugate gradient (CG) minimization technique, Fletcher-Reeves [1]
interpretation:
r
Conjugate gradient algorithm [1] for minimization of the n-dimensional function f ( x) produces a set of mutually conjugate directions
r
so that each successive step continually refines the direction toward the minimum without oscillations. The new direction vector hi +1
leading from point i + 1 is computed as follows:
r r r
hi +1 = g i +1 + γ i hi +1 ,
r r
where g i +1 is the gradient at point i+1, hi is the previous direction vector, and
r r
( g i +1 ⋅ g i +1 )
γi = r r (in Fletcher-Reeves version)
(gi ⋅ gi )
or
r r r
( g i +1 − g i ) ⋅ g i +1
γi = r r (in Polak-Ribiere implementation).
(gi ⋅ gi )
r r r r r
The next gradient g i +1 is orthogonal to all previous gradients g 0 , g1 , g 2 ,..., g i , i.e.
r r
gi ⋅ g j = 0 .
r r r r r
And the next direction hi +1 is conjugate to all previous directions h0 , h1 , h2 ,..., hi , i.e.
r r
h ⋅ Aˆ ⋅ h = 0 ,
i j
where

r
d 2 f ( x)
[ A]ij =
ˆ
dxi dx j
r r
is the Hessian matrix of the n-dimensional function f (x ) . This ensures that motion along h j does not spoil the minimization along
r r
hi . (Note: an initial direction h0 must be chosen that is equal to the initial gradient.)
CG requires the computation of the first derivatives of the objective (cost) function. The priority is to get analytical derivatives of the n-
dimensional function in order to assure good convergence of the solution to the local minimum. CG requires good starting approximation. If
we start far from the minimum the algorithm can get stuck or find another minimum.
The general approach to the optimization problem is as follows (Fig.6):

(i) Specify the set of independent variables.
In our formulation it would be the generalized coordinate vector, qVec, of the trajectory parameters. For a
trajectory constructed from N trajectory units:
qVec = {l start , {(n1 , v , l ) i }}, i = 1,..., N ,

r r
(13)
r r
where lstart is the length of the start line, n1 is the start tangent for ith trajectory unit, v is the vector from
the beginning to the end of the arc of ith trajectory unit, and l is the length of the line segment of the
corresponding unit. Then the trajectory can be completely described by a (7N + 1)-dimensional
generalized vector, qVec.
We then proceed by:

(ii) Constructing the cost function, U cos t , accordingly with user-supplied constraints.
∂U cos t 
(iii) Constructing the gradient of the cost function,  , i = 1,...,7 N + 1 .
 qVeci 
(iv) Providing a reasonable initial guess for optimization, by giving the start point and the direction of the
trajectory.
As an example here, we are using “straight” well constructed from N trajectory units as an initial
approximation for cost function minimization. It represents the straight line from the specified start point
in the direction of starting direction.
(v) Set the tolerances for the optimization algorithm. We are introducing tolerances on cost function
value, ε f , for minimization over all conjugate directions, and tolerance on variables, ε var , for line
minimization inside conjugate gradient algorithm. The run-time and number of iterations of the
optimization algorithm depends on set tolerances, so they’ve been chosen the following way:
ε f ≈ ε var = 10 −3 − 10 −4 .
(vi) Proceeding with optimization.
The flow-chart for the conjugate gradient minimization procedure is presented in Fig. 4.

Object-Oriented Implementation
We used the object-oriented approach in implementation of the optimization procedure (the schematic
chart is presented in Fig.5).
It allows:
• Run-time dynamical construction of the trajectory geometry (it does not restrict the trajectory by
any kind of the geometric profile).
• Dynamical construction of the cost function.
• Any additional constraints can be easily introduced into the problem. Different weights can be
prescribed to different types of the constraints.
• The design of the computational engine allows using any other optimization technique. It is not
limited by conjugate gradient minimization.
• Implementation of the dynamical multiple target threading (targets are no longer manually
prescribed to be hit by any particular segment of the well path).
Examples
The examples of the optimized trajectories for 2-, 3-, and 5-target test wells are presented in Figs. 7-9
respectively. The constraints for those examples were set as follows:
The DLS value for every arc segment should from 2deg/100ft to 5deg/100ft
The range for the KOP is from 0 to 2000 ft
Every target should be reached by the well within 1ft distance from the target
Minimum length of the wellpath requirement was also enforced.
We note that in these examples we used point targets, but that the algorithm is sufficiently general for off-
center hitting of two- and three-dimensional targets.
As one can see, each of planned wells represents an optimal three-dimensional trajectory that obeys all
imposed requirements. The well trajectory is not limited by any specific geometry profile and can be
dynamically constructed from any given number of survey stations. The computational time is very short
(1-2 seconds for 5-target trajectory), and the algorithm converges to an optimal solution within 200-300
iterations.
The above examples of optimized well trajectories show that optimization techniques can be efficiently
used into directional well planning software packages to provide fast and reliable solution to well design
problems.

Start (reference) Point
Kick Off Point (KOP)
Trajectory Unit # 1
Trajectory Unit # 2
Trajectory Unit # N
Figure 1. Using trajectory units for representation of the well trajectory. Each unit is a combination
of arc and line segment.

r
n1 -- start tangent unit vector
r
n2 -- end tangent unit vector
r
v -- arc vector (from arc start point to
arc end point) r
l P3
r
-- length of the line segment
r r l n2
P1
v
r r
n1 P2 LINE SEGMENT
ARC SEGMENT
Figure 2. Trajectory unit representation.

Cost Function for A rc Segm ent Dog-Leg S everity

(curvature) Constraint Cost Function for Arc/Line Segment Length
Constraints
k1 k2 6
o
5
Cost Value, U
k1
DLS pre fe rre d 4
o
Cost Value, U
DLS m in DLS m a x
3
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
2 s1
Dog-Leg S everity, DLS
1
l min
Cost Function for KOP Constraint 0
0 1 2 3 4
Length, l
k1 k1
o
Cost Value, U
Cost Function for Point Target Hit (by

single line/arc segment)
KOP min KO P m ax
5
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
KOP, depth
4
Cost Function for Line S egm ent Inclination Constraint

o
Cost Value, U
k2
k1 k1
o
2
Cost Value, U
1
Incl m in Incl m a x
k1 d max
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
0
Inclination, Incl 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Distance from Target, d
Figure 3. Cost-functions.

Starting Trajectory Configuration, Errors and tolerances

r
P = {Pi }
on algorithm convergence
r Conjugate Gradient:
Function , f (P)
 ∂f  • Find line (direction), l , of minimum gradient
Function gradient,   • Find function projection, f l , on l
 ∂Pi 
• Minimize f l :
! localize the function minimum
! perform Brent’s one-dimensional search
of the function minimum, ( f l ) min
r
! extract trajectory configuration , Pmin ,
corresponding to ( f l ) min .
• Continue until process converges
r
P
min
Figure 4. Schematic data flow-chart for conjugate gradient minimization procedure.

Required parameters:
- starting point and its
dimension
- tolerance on vector of
Virtual Base Virtual Base variables
Class: Class: - tolerance on function
- max # of iteration
-- function value at point
X
-- function gradient (n-
FUNCTION ALGORITHM
-- new point X (n-dim)
Derived: Derived:
application- generic algorithm 1 algorithm N

dependent function
function
Conjugate
Gradient
Figure 5. Object-oriented implementation of the optimization engine.

Input trajectory parameters: User-Defined Criteria:

• # of trajectory units, N • Target hit (distance from the trajectory to
• start point location, Po(x,y,z) target)
r • Dogleg Severity constraint (range)
• start tangent (direction), n0
• Kick-off Point (preferred point and range)
• etc
# of trajectory units, N
First Guess Trajectory

Cost Function Generator
Generator
Line Trajectory:
Cost Function: U cos t (qVeci )
•
qVec1stGuess = {l start , {(n1 , v , l ) i }}, i = 1,...
r r Gradient Functions:
• start point location, Po(x,y,z)

∂U cos t 
r  , i = 1,...,7 N + 1
• start tangent, n0  qVeci 
Optimized Trajectory:
•
qVecoptimized = {l start , {(n1 , v , l ) i }}, i = 1,...
r r Optimization Engine
• start point location, Po(x,y,z)
Figure 6. Process of optimized trajectory generation.

VERTICAL SECTION VIEW

PLAN VIEW
Client: Schlumberger
Well: Test
Well: Test
Field: Test -1000 -500 0 500 1000
Field: Test
Structure: A. Structure
-1000 Structure: A. Structure
Section At: 0.00 deg
3000 Scale: 1 in = 500 ft 3000
Date: July 26, 2000
Date: 26-Jul-2000
Tie-In
0
2500 2500
Target 2
4°
21.0
uth
1000
zim
2000 2000
Elev Ref: Rotary Kelly Bushing(152.70ft above MSL)
ld A
Build 4.70°/100 ft
NORTH >>>
Ho
2000
Hold Angle 33.63° 1500 1500
3000 Target 1
1000 1000
Target 1
<<< SOUTH
4000 Build and Turn 4.61°/100 ft
500 500
5000
0 Tie-In 0
Target 2
6000
-500 -500
-1000 0 1000 2000 3000 -1000 -500 0 500 1000
Vertical Section Departure at 0.00 deg from (0.0, 0.0). (1 in = 1000 feet) <<< WEST EAST >>>
Figure 7. Example of the optimized 3D well trajectory with two point targets.

VERTICAL SECTION VIEW -500 0 500 1000 1500
3000 PLAN VIEW 3000
0
Well: Test
Tie-In Client: Schlumberger
Field: Test
Structure: A. Structure
Target 2
Section At: 0.00 deg 2500 2500
1000
Date: July 26, 2000 H ol Target 3
dA
zim
u th
108
.4 3 °
Elev Ref: Rotary Kelly Bushing(152.70ft above M SL)
Build 4.15°/100 ft 2000 2000
NORTH >>>
2000
1500 1500
3000
Target 1
Hold Angle 43.38° 1000 1000

4000 Target 1
<<< SOUTH
Build and Turn 5.06°/100 ft500 500

5000
Target 2
0 Tie-In 0
Hold Angle 32.31°
6000
Target 3
-500 -500
7000
-1000 0 1000 2000 3000 -500 0 500 1000 1500
Figure 8. Example of the optimized 3D well trajectory with three point targets.

VERTICAL SECTION VIEW

Well: Test -1000 0 1000 2000 3000
-1000 Field: Test Grid North
4000 4000
Structure: A. Structure Tot Corr ( W 3.32° ) PLAN VIEW
Tie-In Section At: 0.00 deg Mag Dec ( W 3.81° ) Client: Schlumberger
Date: July 27, 2000 Grid Conv ( W 0.49° )
0
3000 3000
Hold Angle 0.00°
Build 4.43°/100 ft
1000
Hold Angle 44.51°
Elev Ref: Rotary Kelly Bushing(152.70ft above MSL)
2000 ° 2000
.92
32
NORTH >>>
2
Drop and Turn 4.18°/100 ft u th
im
d Az
2000 Target 1 H ol Target 3 Target 5
1000 1000
Hold Azimuth 0.10°

Hold Angle 0.07° Targets 1, 2 Target 4
3000 Target 2
0 0
Tie-In
<<< SOUTH
4000
-1000 -1000
Build 3.57°/100 ft
5000
-2000 -2000
Hold Angle 90.00°

Targets 3, 4, 5
6000
-3000 -3000
-2000 -1000 0 1000 2000 3000 -1000 0 1000 2000 3000
Figure 9. Example of the optimized 3D well trajectory with five point targets.

REFERENCES
1
W.H. Press, B.P. Flannery, S.A. Teukolsky, W.T. Vetterling, Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific
Computing, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press (1992).
2
Metropolis, N., Rosenbluth, A.W., Rosenbluth, M. N., Teller, A.H. and Teller, E., Equations of State Calculations
by Fast Computing Machines, J. Chem. Phys. 21, 1087- 1092, (1958).
3
Pincus, M., A Monte Carlo Method for the Approximate Solution of Certain Types of Constrained Optimization
Problems, Oper. Res. 18, 1225-1228, (1970).
4
Kirkpatrick, S., Gerlatt, C. D. Jr., and Vecchi, M.P., Optimization by Simulated Annealing, Science 220, 671-680,
(1983).
5
Kirkpatrick, S., Optimization by Simulated Annealing - Quantitative Studies, J. Stat. Phys. 34, 975-986, (1984).
6
Ingber, L., Rosen. B., Genetic Algorithms and Very Fast Simulated Reannealing: A Comparison, Mathematical
and Computer Modeling, 16(11), (1992), 87-100.
7
Suryanarayana, P.V.R., McCann, R.C., Rudolf, R.L., Mathematical Technique Improves Directional Well-Path
Planning, Oil & Gas Journal, (August 24, 1998).
8
Rudolf, R.L., McCann, R.C., Suryanarayana, P.V.R., Rupani, R.A., An Algorithm and Program to Plan Optimal
Horizontal Well Paths, Presented at the ASME Energy Sources Technology Conference and Exibition, (Feb.2-
4, 1998), Houston, TX.
9
Suryanarayana, P.V.R., McCann, R.C., Horizontal Well Path Planning and Correction Using Optimization
Techniques, Presented at the ASME Energy Sources Technology Conference and Exibition, (Feb.2-4, 1998),
Houston, TX.
10
Miele, A., Damoulakis, J.N., Cloutier, J.R., Tietze, J.L., Sequential Gradient-Restoration Algorithm for Optimal
Control Problems with Nondifferential Constraints, Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications: Vol. 13,
No 2, (1974).
11
PowerPlan Technical Manual, Schlumberger.

6. Close Approach

150 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land TX 77478
(281) 285-8000
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION TO CLOSE APPROACH..................................................................................................4
PROXIMITY ANALYSIS METHODS ............................................................................................................4
Scan Analysis...........................................................................................................................................4
Proximity Analysis...................................................................................................................................4
Analysis Method Strengths and Weaknesses ......................................................................................8
CALCULATION OUTPUTS ..........................................................................................................................9
Center-to-Center Distance (ct-ct) ...........................................................................................................9
EOU Distance .........................................................................................................................................10
Separation Factor ..................................................................................................................................11
Alert Radii ...............................................................................................................................................11
GRAPHICAL OUTPUTS .............................................................................................................................12
Traveling Cylinder Plot..........................................................................................................................12
Spider Plot ..............................................................................................................................................14
REPORTS ...................................................................................................................................................17
Summary Report ....................................................................................................................................17
Detailed Report ......................................................................................................................................17

Close Approach
Section Summary
• introduction to anticollision and the Close Approach application
• methods of proximity analysis
• calculation outputs
• graphical outputs
• reports

Close Approach
INTRODUCTION TO CLOSE APPROACH

Collision with neighboring wells must be avoided, especially when adjacent wells are producing.
Anticollision planning begins with accurate surveys of the position of the subject well and all existing
wells in the vicinity, as well as a complete set of proposed well plans for the vicinity. The surveys and
well plans are used to carefully map the relationship of the proposed new well to all existing wells and
any proposed future wells.
Close Approach performs an anticollision proximity analysis of a proposed/planned well (subject well)
against the surrounding (offset) well(s). In addition to the proximity analysis, Close Approach allows the
user to output proximity maps and reports.
PROXIMITY ANALYSIS METHODS

Close Approach provides the user with the ability to perform the following analyses:
• scan analysis
• proximity analysis
Scan Analysis
The scan analysis routine identifies the offset wells that lie within the user-defined scan radius of the
subject well. The scan can be run against all wells within the database (a global scan) or against a user-
defined subset (a restricted scan). The scan only examines the offset wells at their respective well
reference points (slot location). A well with a slot location outside the scan radius that enters the radius
subsurface will not be included in the analysis. The scan analysis can be used to select the set of offset
wells to be examined more fully for anticollision proximity analysis.
Proximity Analysis
The proximity analysis provides the following three standard methods for computing separation distances
between the subject well and the offset well(s):
• normal plane
• horizontal plane
• 3-D least distance
The following illustration is provided to assist in understanding the three standard methods of computing
separation distances (see Figure 5-1).

Close Approach
Subject (proposed)
Well
Offset (surrounding)
Well
Horizontal
Figure 5-1: Three methods of computing separation distances.
Normal Plane Method

The normal plane method of computation steps down each offset well survey at the user-specified depth
intervals.
A measured depth (MD) interval is recommended for the normal plane analysis method because in
horizontal wells, a true vertical depth (TVD) interval may have several positions within the object well,
creating discontinuous results. The stepping is performed down the offset well to ensure that the proximity
of the entire offset well is analyzed, and to ensure proper analysis of perpendicularly approaching
wellbores. If no depth interval is selected, Close Approach will calculate proximity at each survey or
planning station in the offset well. At each step (interval) down the offset well survey, this method scans
the subject well survey to determine where a plane normal to the subject survey intersects the offset well
survey at the interval point. This scanning method can result in multiple planes that are all normal to the
subject well and all intersect the offset survey at the same point. Multiple solutions usually only occur in
extremely tortuous well paths but are not limited to this type of well.
The proximity line, lying in the normal plane and connecting the intersection points of the subject survey
and the offset survey, defines the center-to-center (ct-ct) distance between the surveys. The azimuth of the
proximity line will reference either north or the high side of the well. If a north reference is used, the
azimuth is computed as the angle between the proximity line (which lies on the normal plane) and the

Close Approach
projection of north onto the normal plane. If high side is used, the azimuth is computed as the angle
between the proximity line and the projection of high side onto the normal plane at that point in the
subject well (see Figure 5-2).
Figure 5-2: Azimuth proximity.
The normal plane proximity analysis method is the only method that provides undistorted close approach
results on a travelling cylinder diagram (referenced to the subject well) for all possible well profile
geometries.
Horizontal Plane Method

The horizontal plane method steps down the subject well at the user-specified depth interval.
A true vertical depth (TVD) interval is recommended for the horizontal plane analysis method because in
highly deviated wells (with inclinations at or exceeding 90° inclination) it is possible to have multiple
penetrations with the horizontal plane and multiple distances from the same point in the subject well.
Multiple penetrations are also possible within the subject well. A measured depth interval can also be
selected for this analysis, in which case the corresponding TVD at that MD in the subject well survey is
used as the depth of interest. A measured depth interval analysis is subject to the same defects as the TVD
interval but, in some instances, can provide smoother results (due to a consistent interval). However, a
given TVD interval in a highly deviated well can result in rapidly changing proximity distances. If no
depth interval is selected, Close Approach will calculate the proximity at each survey or planning station
in the subject well. At each step down the subject well survey, the horizontal line that intersects the
subject survey and the offset well survey defines the ct-ct distance between the surveys.

Close Approach
In the horizontal plane analysis, the azimuth of the proximity line can reference either north or the high
side of the well. If the north reference is used, the azimuth is a true north referenced azimuth. If high side
is used, the azimuth is computed as the angle between the proximity line and the projection of high side
onto the horizontal plane.
3-D Least Distance Method

The 3-D least distance method is algorithmically identical to the normal plane method but simply reverses
the roles between the subject and offset wells.
The 3-D least distance analysis method steps down the subject well survey at user-specified depth
intervals. A measured depth interval is recommended for this method because in horizontal wells, a true
vertical depth (TVD) interval may have several positions within the object well, creating discontinuous
results. If no depth interval is selected, Close Approach will calculate the proximity at each survey or
planning station. At each step, this analysis scans the object well to determine a plane that is normal to the
object survey and intersects the subject survey at the interval point. Perpendicular to this plane is a
tangent point of a spherical radius, centered on the interval point in the subject well survey.
Mathematically, this distance is the shortest (least) distance between the subject survey and the offset
survey.
This process can be visualized as if, at each interval point, it computes the radius of a sphere centered on
the subject survey that just touches the offset survey (see Figure 5-3).
Offset Well Path
3-D least
distance
Subject Well Path
Figure 5-3: 3-D least distance method of scanning.

Close Approach
The scanning can result in multiple planes all normal to the object well, while intersecting the subject
survey at the same point. The solution with the minimum distance is retained as the absolute least distance
solution.
Also considered as a possible solution among the multiple solutions are the end-points of the object well,
the kelly bushing (KB), and total depth (TD). These points are considered solutions even though the end
points may not necessarily fit the definition of a plane normal to the object well.
The proximity line connects the center of the sphere to the tangent point. The azimuth of the proximity
line can reference either north or high side. If the north reference is used, the azimuth is computed as the
angle between the proximity line and the projection of north onto the normal plane of the subject well. If
high side is used, the azimuth is computed as the angle between the proximity line and the projection of
high side onto the normal plane of the subject well.
Analysis Method Strengths and Weaknesses

To select the most appropriate analysis method for a subject well, review the following strengths and
weaknesses of each of the analysis methods in Close Approach.
Normal Plane
Strengths Weaknesses
Travelling cylinder plots are undistorted and depict

the true 3-D relative position of surrounding wells;
these plots are especially useful for forward
projections.
Will not detect a close well that is passing just
beyond the end of the subject wellbore.
Scanning down the offset survey ensures that no
portion of the offset well is missed. This ability is
especially important for detecting close approaches
between wells oriented perpendicularly.

Close Approach
Horizontal Plane
Limited use as an anticollision tool with high-angle,

designer wells. A spider plot provides more
information for anticollision, while depicting a
Useful for determining relative positions of
horizontal perspective.
formation penetrations that are essentially flat.
Extremely distorted travelling cylinder plots.
3-D Least Distance
Provides the true closest distance between wellbores

for a given position, which is useful in additional
applications (well injection/fluid flow analysis).
Distorted travelling cylinder plots.
Anticollision uses are for blowout intersection for
well killing procedures and for active magnetic
ranging anticollision procedures.
CALCULATION OUTPUTS
There are four calculation outputs from Close Approach:
• center-to-center distance
• ellipse of uncertainty (EOU) distance
• separation factor
• alert radii
Center-to-Center Distance (ct-ct)

Also known as the wellbore-to-wellbore distance, the ct-ct distance is the straight-line distance between
the subject survey and an offset survey (see Figure 5-4). The analysis method (normal, horizontal, 3-D
least distance) determines how the proximity line is computed. No error analysis is incorporated in this
calculation.

Close Approach
Separation Factor = CtC / (CtC – EOUsep)
Figure 5-4: Center-to-Center separation.
EOU Distance
The ellipse of uncertainty (EOU) distance is equal to the ct-ct distance minus the sum of the ellipse
semimajor axes of the subject well survey and the offset well intersection point survey.
In this calculation, the spatial orientation of the two ellipsoids is not used. The ellipse semimajor axes
are assumed to point at one another along the proximity line between the subject survey and the offset
survey. The EOU distance, calculated in this way, outputs a conservative separation result since the
maximum positional uncertainty is used.
NOTE
See the section entitled, Trajectory Design for more information on ellipses of uncertainty and
survey tool errors.

Close Approach
Separation Factor
This factor compares the ct-ct distance to the sum of the ellipse semimajor axes, using the following
equation and set of rules:
Separation factor = (ct – ct distance)/(Sum of EOU semimajor axes)

• when the separation factor > 1, the error ellipses do not overlap
• when the separation factor = 1, the error ellipses just touch
• when the separation factor < 1, the error ellipses overlap
General anticollision policies are defined for acceptable wellbore clearance by setting a minimum
tolerable separation factor, such as 1.25. This factor indicates that, at a minimum, an acceptable clearance
is an additional 25% of the combined wellbore uncertainty. The criteria for selecting such a threshold
must take into account any other safety factors that have been applied to the results, and the confidence
level for which the EOU’s are calculated.
Alert Radii
Alert radii are spherical alert zones that are set within Close Approach to aid in determining the severity
of well proximity situations. The following three sets of zones are possible (see Figure 5-5):
• major risk
• minor risk
• drilling buffer
Figure 5-5: Alert radii relationship.

Close Approach
The alert radii are defined by an initial radius at the surface, and a table of user-defined, growth rate
information. The growth rate information defines the TVD range for a cone. The cone has an initial radius
that is equal to the parameter set at the surface and grows at the user-defined rate, down to the specified
depth. The next TVD range starts where the previous range left off and grows according to next level of
user-defined specifications. The zone sizes can be set by the user and are generally defined by the
operator’s anti-collision policies or rules.
Major Risk
The major risk radii are defined as the smallest cones of the three available alert zones. The major risk
zone specifies close approaches that come so close to the nearby well that a dangerous situation exists,
even if the offset well is shut in.
Minor Risk
The minor risk radii are defined as a warning zone, so that any wells coming within the warning zone can
be shut in; however, these wells are not as critical as a well entering the major risk radii.
Drilling Buffer
The drilling buffer radii is a zone defined to ensure enough clearance from nearby wells to allow for
normal deviation from a plan during drilling operations. This buffer ensures efficiency in the drilling
operation, without adding any unnecessary expenses for anticollision purposes.
GRAPHICAL OUTPUTS
There are two types of graphical outputs from Close Approach:
• traveling cylinder plot
• spider plot
Traveling Cylinder Plot

The traveling cylinder plot is a polar plot centered on the subject survey. This plot displays the
intersections of the offset surveys with the selected projection plane (normal, horizontal, or 3-D) through
a user-defined range of depth. Azimuth values on the traveling cylinder plot may reference either north or
the high side of the well.
The traveling cylinder plot depicts a cylinder with a given radius that encloses the wellbore from one
depth to another (see Figure 5-6). Any well entering this cylinder (i.e., approaching closer than the radius
of the cylinder to the central well) is plotted and displayed graphically. The type of proximity analysis
selected determines the orientation of the cylinder cross sections enclosing the wellbore.

Close Approach
Figure 5-6: Traveling cylinder.
The traveling cylinder plot serves as a useful planning tool, enabling the planner to test various
trajectories and select the most suitable. During the drilling process, the trajectory of the well can be
extrapolated, analyzed, and plotted on the traveling cylinder plot to avoid unsafe proximity to offset wells.
No-go circles are an option that can be included on the traveling cylinder plot. The no-go circles are
circles that are centered on the proximity trace line of the offset well with a radius equal to the combined
well uncertainty (see Figure 5-7). The inclusion of no-go circles on the plot illustrates the maximum
amount of deviation from the subject well plan that can be tolerated, without causing an overlap of
uncertainty ellipses. If the outer edges of the no-go circles (towards the center of the plot) are connected
to define a no-go envelope, this line is known as a tolerance line. Tolerance lines are usually constructed
for specific depth ranges and rarely define a single envelope around an offset well; instead, many sub-
envelopes are constructed.

Close Approach
Figure 5-7: No-go circles on traveling cylinder plot.
Spider Plot
The spider plot is a horizontal projection that shows wells in a given area as if the earth were transparent
(see Figure 5-8). The well paths can be shown with TVD depth markers, indicating the TVD depth at a
particular location. The spider plot depicts the true relationship of wellbores to each other.

Close Approach
Figure 5-8: Spider Plot.
The spider plot can be configured to show both the surveys and the slot positions in a zoomed view (see
Figure 5-9).

Close Approach
Figure 5-9: Surveys and slot positions on spider plot.

Close Approach
REPORTS
There are two types of reports that Close Approach produces:
• summary reports
• detailed reports
Summary Report
The summary report provides the following information:
• the MD and TVD in the subject well at the closest EOU separation
• the MD and TVD in the subject well survey where an alert radii is crossed
• the ct-ct distance and EOU distance where the alert radii is crossed
• the size of the alert radii
• the alert status of the offset survey (flowing, drilling buffer, minor alert zone, or major alert zone)
The summary report contains the depths in the subject well survey where the alert lines are crossed and
the level of risk (status) associated with each offset well. This report can be used to reduce the number of
wells to be examined in detail.
When examining the report, if the risk status is FLOW, there is no risk associated with that well and the
point of closest approach is sufficiently distant for the offset well to remain flowing. For non-FLOW
risks, when a risk radius is crossed, the EOU separation, ct-ct separation, MD, TVD, and size of the risk
radii are given.
Detailed Report
This report lists the following details:
• a summary of the subject survey
• a list of offset surveys
• the survey type
• a detailed analysis of the proximity to each offset survey
Each summary contains a description of the offset survey, including the database hierarchy, coordinate
system, reference point, and survey program.
The detailed report also contains the following:

• ct-ct distance
• EOU distance
• angle between the azimuth reference and the proximity line
• separation factor

Close Approach
Index
3-D least distance analysis ................................................. 7 scan analysis .......................................................................4

alert radii .......................................................................... 11 separation factor ...............................................................11
center-to-center distance (ct-ct).......................................... 9 spider plot .........................................................................14
detailed report summary report
Close Approach ........................................................... 17 Close Approach ............................................................17
EOU (ellipse of uncertainty) ............................................ 10 tolerance line
horizontal plane analysis .................................................... 6 in traveling cylinder plot ..............................................13
normal plane analysis ......................................................... 5 traveling cylinder plot.......................................................12
proximity analysis .............................................................. 4

7. BHA Editor

150 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land TX 77478
(281) 285-8000
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION TO BHA EDITOR .............................................................................................................4
Inputs ........................................................................................................................................................4
BHA Component Catalog ........................................................................................................................4
Reports .....................................................................................................................................................6

BHA Editor
Section Summary
• introduction to the BHA Editor application
• BHA component catalog
• BHA reports

BHA Editor
INTRODUCTION TO BHA EDITOR

The BHA Editor application provides a means of graphically constructing a representation of a BHA
and/or complete drillstring and wellbore geometry. The BHA entities are used extensively in the
DrillSAFE and Hydraulics applications, as well as for BHA record keeping and reporting purposes. A
schematic catalog is employed that provides a simple drag-and-drop method of building a BHA and can
be customized to represent any modifications to the components. An inventory list can be generated to
reflect the available equipment at the wellsite and the catalog can be customized to represent any
modifications to the components.
Inputs
Parameters pertinent to the calculations performed within the Hydraulics and DrillSAFE applications are
clearly highlighted to minimize unnecessary inputs. If a BHA is built that includes a motor or
MWD/LWD tool, the relevant parameters are automatically transferred to the Hydraulics application to
minimize the number of inputs the user has to make in Hydraulics.
BHA Component Catalog

BHA’s are constructed by selecting individual tools from a comprehensive list in the system tool catalog.
The catalog contains the following components:
• drillpipe (various grades and wear conditions)
• heavy wall drillpipe
• drill bits
• bent subs
• jars and shock subs
• hole openers and reamers
• stabilizers (sleeve-type, string, and welded stabilizer body
• mud motors (Anadrill motors and a selection of motors from other vendors are supported)
• drill collars
• downhole sensors (e.g., pressure, density, neutron)
• MWD / LWD tools (Anadrill tools and a selection of tools from other vendors are supported)
• miscellaneous subs (including crossovers, filter subs, float subs, bit subs, junk subs, orienting
subs, pressure relief subs, and more)
• miscellaneous tubulars (wellbore )
All relevant tools show the following:

• location of sensors and the distance of the read-out port to the bottom connection
• location of the sensor relative to the read-out port (i.e., above or below)
Catalog File Format

The user is not limited to the components within the system catalog. All component properties can be
edited and fully customized to reflect different dimensions. These components can then be saved back
into the user’s own catalog.
The system tool catalog is populated with data relating to the various tool classes and is installed in the
PowerPlan system in a comma separated variable (.csv) file format. The .csv file format provides the user

BHA Editor
with the ability to easily edit the catalog files with various editing software packages (i.e., Microsoft
Excel or Notepad).
During execution of PowerPlan, the .csv catalog files are read into a more efficient file format for use in
the application. Once the .csv files are read into the new format, memory files are created with a .mem
file extension.
The user catalog tools are not stored in the .csv format once they are created, but are stored directly in the
Oracle database.
Catalog File Location

These .csv catalog files are located in the directory powerplan\system\asl_ccl.
The corresponding catalog file names for each of the tool classes are as follows:
Catalog Tool Class / File Names
Bent Sub no catalog

Bit drill_bit_cat.csv
Collar drill_collar_cat.csv
Downhole Sensor no catalog
Drillpipe drill_pipe_cat.csv
Heavy Weight Drillpipe heavy_weight_drill_pipe_cat.csv
Hole Opener Reamer no catalog
Jar/Shock Sub jar_shock_cat.csv
Miscellaneous Sub drill_collar_cat.csv
Wellbore tubular_cat.csv
Mud Motor drill_motor_cat.csv
MWD/LWD measurement_tool_cat.csv
Stabilizer drill_collar_cat.csv

BHA Editor
NOTE
There are three tool classes that do not have an associated catalog because the class is too
general in nature: Bent Sub, Downhole Sensor, and Hole Opener Reamer. Also, the Collar,
Miscellaneous Sub, and Stabilizer tool classes all use the drill_collar_cat.csv catalog, since this
catalog contains generic OD, ID, and connection information that is common among all three tool
classes.
The catalog associated with the Drillpipe tool class contains specifications and operating limitations for
drillpipe in accordance with API RP7G. An additional drillpipe condition class is added, which is not an
API specification. This class is the 10% wear class and was added to provide for more realistic field
conditions and results. In accordance with the API specification, all drillpipe wear is assumed to occur on
the OD of the tube body, with no expansion of the ID from wear. If a class for ID wear is desired, a
simple edit of the catalog is all that is required to provide this functionality.
The various operating parameters, (i.e., tube tensile yield, tube torsional yield) as contained in the
drillpipe catalog are currently not used from the catalog, but are computed within the various applications
(from the OD/ID geometry of the component). This performance data is merely included to provide for a
complete API specification catalog.
Reports
The user can import and export BHA’s and wellbore geometries to a BHA Editor format file. These
binary files are small and can be attached to an email message or shared across a network.
Two report formats are supported in PowerPlan 3.0:

• standard format
• schematic format
Standard Format
This report is compatible with Microsoft Word and includes the component and vendor names, ID, OD,
cumulative length, and fishing neck length, in addition to the standard database information (field,
structure, well, borehole, date, and BHA/geometry name). Separate tables are also included for stabilizer,
sensor, nozzle, and bent sub information.
Schematic Format
This report is compatible with Microsoft Excel includes a description of the BHA components, length,
OD, ID, and maximum OD. Options also exist for entering fishing information for individual components
and remarks concerning BHA performance.

BHA Editor
Index
catalog file format .............................................................. 4 schematic format.................................................................6

catalog file location ............................................................ 5 standard format ...................................................................6

8. Hydraulics

150 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land TX 77478
(281) 285-8000
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION TO DRILLING HYDRAULICS ..........................................................................................5

Overview of the Well Circulation System ..............................................................................................5
Mud Pumps...............................................................................................................................................7
INTRODUCTION TO DRILLING FLUIDS...................................................................................................12
What is Rheology?.................................................................................................................................12
Newtonian Fluids and Non-Newtonian Fluids ....................................................................................12
THE ROLE OF DRILLING FLUIDS ............................................................................................................12
Pressure and Force ...............................................................................................................................13
Conversion for Imperial Units ..............................................................................................................14
Application of Hydrostatic Pressure....................................................................................................14
FLUID FLOW PRINCIPLES........................................................................................................................15
Fluid Deformation ..................................................................................................................................15
Flow Regimes.........................................................................................................................................17
Viscosity and Thickness .......................................................................................................................19
MEASUREMENT OF RHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES ..............................................................................20
Pipe Flow Rheometer ............................................................................................................................20
Marsh Funnel..........................................................................................................................................21
Rotating Sleeve/Bob Viscometer .........................................................................................................21
RHEOLOGICAL MODELS..........................................................................................................................22
Newtonian Model ...................................................................................................................................23
Non-Newtonian Fluids ...........................................................................................................................24
Bingham Plastic Rheological Model ....................................................................................................27
Power Law Model...................................................................................................................................30
Casson Model.........................................................................................................................................33
Herschel-Bulkley Model ........................................................................................................................37
INTRODUCTION TO PRESSURE DROP MODELING ..............................................................................41
FRICTIONAL PRESSURE LOSS MODEL .................................................................................................42
Newtonian Flow......................................................................................................................................43
Power Law Fluid.....................................................................................................................................45
Herschel-Bulkley Fluid ..........................................................................................................................46
CHOKE PRESSURE DROP .......................................................................................................................49
EFFECT OF PIPE ECCENTRICITY............................................................................................................49
TOOL JOINT PRESSURE LOSSES ..........................................................................................................50
INTRODUCTION TO BIT PRESSURE LOSS ............................................................................................52
CALCULATING BIT PRESSURE LOSSES ...............................................................................................52
BIT HYDRAULIC POWER ..........................................................................................................................54
JET IMPACT FORCE..................................................................................................................................55

BIT NOZZLE SELECTION..........................................................................................................................55

Maximum Nozzle Velocity .....................................................................................................................56
Maximum Bit Hydraulic Horsepower ...................................................................................................56
Maximum Jet Impact Force...................................................................................................................58
INTRODUCTION TO MOTOR HYDRAULICS............................................................................................61
APPLICATIONS..........................................................................................................................................62
MOTOR ASSEMBLY ..................................................................................................................................64
Top Sub...................................................................................................................................................64
Power Section ........................................................................................................................................66
Transmission Section............................................................................................................................77
Bearing Section and Drive Shaft ..........................................................................................................80
POWERPLAN MOTOR HYDRAULICS MODELING .................................................................................90
Theoretical Background........................................................................................................................90
Necessary Data ......................................................................................................................................91
Example of Curve-fitting .......................................................................................................................91
Motor Inputs ...........................................................................................................................................94
MWD/LWD PRESSURE LOSSES..............................................................................................................98
INTRODUCTION TO HOLE CLEANING ..................................................................................................100
DESCRIPTION OF MODEL......................................................................................................................103
Drilling Fluid .........................................................................................................................................105
Cuttings ................................................................................................................................................105
Annular Size and Eccentricity ............................................................................................................106
Gravitational Force and Hole Angle...................................................................................................106
Annular Flow ........................................................................................................................................107
EFFECT OF RATE OF PENETRATION...................................................................................................108
EFFECT OF HOLE SIZE...........................................................................................................................109
VERTICAL AND LOW INCLINATION CORRELATION ..........................................................................109
EFFECT OF MUD WEIGHT AND RATE OF PENETRATION .................................................................112
EFFECT OF CUTTINGS SIZE ..................................................................................................................113
EFFECT OF CUTTINGS DENSITY ..........................................................................................................114
EFFECT OF DRILLPIPE ROTATION.......................................................................................................114
MODEL LIMITATIONS..............................................................................................................................116
PT RHEOLOGY ..............................................................................................................................................
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................
Overview .....................................................................................................................................................
Implementation ..........................................................................................................................................

Drilling Hydraulics
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual provides an introduction to drilling

hydraulics, rig circulating equipment, and calculation of pumping efficiency.

Introduction to Drilling Hydraulics
INTRODUCTION TO DRILLING HYDRAULICS

The following section covers types of mud pump equipment used and the efficiency of the equipment.
Overview of the Well Circulation System

A schematic of the drilling fluid circulatory system is shown in Figure 7-1 Mud circulates through many
pieces of equipment, including the following:
• mud pump
• discharge line
• standpipe
• rotary hose
• swivel and kelly (or top drive)
• drillpipe
• drill collars (may also include downhole tools)
• downhole motor
• drill bit
• annulus
• return line
• shale shaker
• desilter
• desander
• mud pits
• suction line

13
Figure 7-1: The well circulation system .
The mud pump draws mud in through the suction line from the mud pits and sends it out to the discharge
line. The discharge line carries the mud into the standpipe, which runs vertically up one leg of the derrick.
The mud exits the standpipe into a strong, flexible, reinforced rubber hose called the rotary hose or kelly
hose. The rotary hose joins the swivel at the gooseneck. From the swivel, the mud flows down through
the kelly (or top drive), into the drillstring, mud motor (if present), and the rest of the BHA. The mud jets
out of the nozzles in the drill bit and, during drilling, moves formation cuttings away from the bit, up the
annulus, and out of the mud return line. The return line deposits the mud over a vibrating screen called the
shale shaker. The shale shaker screens out the larger cuttings and, in some cases, dumps the cuttings into
the reserve pit; however, offshore, and in environmentally sensitive areas, the shale shaker dumps the
cuttings into a receptacle. At the end of this process, clean mud drains back into the mud tanks
(sometimes passing through de-gassers first).

The principal components of the rig circulation system include:

• mud pumps
• mud pits
• mud mixing equipment
• contaminant removal equipment
Mud Pumps
In general, mud pumps use reciprocating positive displacement pistons. Both 2-cylinder (duplex) and 3-
cylinder (triplex) pumps are common.
NOTE
For the displacement calculations of duplex and triplex pumps, see the online help of the
Hydraulics application.
Duplex pumps are double-acting pumps that pump on both forward and backward piston strokes (see
Figure 7-2). Triplex pumps are single acting pumps and are lighter, more compact, cheaper to operate,
and have output pressure pulsations less than duplex pump strokes (see Figure 7-3).
Figure 7-2: Valve arrangement and operation of a double-acting (duplex) pump. © SPE

Figure 7-3: Valve arrangement and operation of a single acting (triplex) pump. © SPE
Advantages
The advantages of a reciprocating positive displacement pump are as follows:
• ability to move fluids laden with abrasives and solids
• ability to pump large particles
• ease of operation and maintenance
• reliability
• ability to operate over a wide range of flow rates by changing the diameters of the pump liners
(compression cylinders) and pistons
Efficiency
The overall efficiency of a mud pump is determined by the product of the mechanical efficiency and the
volumetric efficiency. Mechanical efficiency is assumed to be 90%, and is related to the pump prime
mover and the linkage to the drive shaft. Volumetric efficiency of a pump with adequately charged
suction can be as high as 100%.
Generally, two or three circulating pumps are installed on a rig. For the large hole sizes in the shallow
portions of a well, two pumps can be operated concurrently to deliver the large flow rates required. On the
deeper portions of the well, only one pump is needed, and the other pumps serve as standbys for use when
pump maintenance is required.

The theoretical displacement from a double-acting pump is a function of the piston rod diameter (dr), liner
diameter (dl), and stroke length (Ls). The total volume displaced for each complete pump cycle (the pump
factor) by a pump with two cylinders is given by the following:
π
F p = ( 2) Ls (2d l2 − d r2 ) E v .............................................................................................................................(7-1)
4
where (Ev) is the volumetric efficiency of the pump. Thus, the pump factor for a single-acting pump with
three cylinders is the following:
3π
Fp = Ls Ev d l2 .................................................................................................................................................(7-2)
4
These equations are included for information, since PowerPlan only provides a utility for calculating the
pump stroke volume, and not the pump factor from the pump parameters.
The pump flowrate (Q) is obtained by multiplying the pump factor by the number of strokes (or cycles)
per unit time. Pumps are rated for the following parameters:
• hydraulic power
• maximum pressure
• maximum flowrate
If the inlet pressure of the pump is atmospheric pressure, the increase in fluid pressure moving through
the pump is approximately equal to the discharge pressure. The hydraulic power output of the pump is
equal to the discharge pressure, multiplied by the flowrate. For a given hydraulic power level, the
maximum discharge pressure and flowrate can be varied by changing the stroke rate and liner size. A
smaller liner allows the operator to obtain a higher pressure at a lower flowrate.
The pipes connecting the mud pumps to the drillstring include the following:
• surge chamber
• heavy-wall pipe connecting the pump to the pump manifold
• standpipe
• rotary hose
• swivel
• kelly or topdrive
The surge chamber dampens the pressure surges caused by a positive-displacement pump. (The discharge
line also contains a pressure relief valve to prevent line rupture, in case the pump is started against a
closed valve.) The standpipe and rotary hose provide a flexible connection that permits vertical movement
of the drillstring. The swivel contains roller bearings to support the rotating load of the drillstring, and a
rotating pressure seal that allows fluid to circulate through the swivel. The kelly, which has a hexagonal
or rectangular cross section, allows the drillstring to be rotated by the rotary table and rotary kelly
bushing. If a topdrive is used then it will provide rotational power directly and there is no rotary kelly.
Also, the swivel connects directly to the topdrive.

The frictional losses in the surface equipment within PowerPlan are estimated by representing the
equipment as an equivalent length of drillpipe in four standard configurations. For top drives, or
configurations that lie in between the four standard configurations, there is the option of entering a user-
defined equivalent length and diameter. Guidance on these values is obtained by examining the equivalent
lengths and diameters for the four standard configurations (see Table 7-1):
Table 7-1: Surface equipment specifications.

Drilling Fluids
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual provides an introduction to drilling

fluids and discusses fluid flow principles, the measurement of rheological properties,
flow regimes, and rheological models.

Drilling Fluids
INTRODUCTION TO DRILLING FLUIDS

Drilling hydraulics is an application of the principles of fluid mechanics. The properties that define a fluid
(those distinguishing a fluid from a solid) are responsible for the main phenomena of drilling hydraulics.
What is Rheology?
The science of rheology is the study of the deformation of all types of matter. The rheologist is interested
primarily in the relationship between flow rate and pressure and the influence on fluid flow
characteristics. There are two fundamentally different relationships between flow rate and pressure:
• The laminar flow regime prevails at low velocities. Flow is orderly and the pressure/velocity
relationship is a function of the viscous properties of the fluid.
• The turbulent flow regime prevails at high velocities. Flow is disorderly and governed by the
inertial properties of the fluid in motion. Flow equations tend to be empirical due to the
complexity of the flow.
These flow regimes are discussed further on in the Flow Regimes section.
Newtonian Fluids and Non-Newtonian Fluids

Common fluids, such as air and water, usually have a nearly constant viscosity, regardless of shear rate.1
These fluids are known as Newtonian fluids. Many fluids, however, have viscosities which depend
heavily upon the rate at which they are sheared. Such materials are known as non-Newtonian fluids. Non-
Newtonian materials often have relatively high viscosities and low flow velocities. Many non-Newtonian
materials are shear-thinning, meaning that their viscosity is reduced as the shear rate is increased. This
condition leads to higher velocity gradients at solid walls than with Newtonian fluids. More information
is presented on the differences between Newtonian fluids and non-Newtonian fluids further on in this
section.
THE ROLE OF DRILLING FLUIDS

Rotary drilling has two fundamental characteristics: one is rotation, and the other is the circulation of a
drilling fluid. The drilling fluid used in a well is a major factor in the success of the drilling program of
that well. During the drilling operation, the drilling fluid circulates in steel pits or tanks and is pumped
downhole to the bit. As the bit drills, drilling fluid moves the cuttings away from the teeth of the bit and
lifts them to the surface for disposal. The drilling fluid also performs the following functions:
• cools and lubricates the rotating drillstring and bit
• offsets the pressure in the formation by exerting hydrostatic pressure in the borehole
• transmits hydraulic horsepower to the bit
• minimizes the settling of cuttings and weighting material in suspension when circulation is
temporarily stopped
• supports and protects the walls of the hole
• reduces harm to the formations penetrated

Drilling Fluids
The performance of the drilling fluid depends upon the various mud properties and compromises are often
necessary. Mud performance is also affected by the drilling equipment in use. To solve drilling problems,
the properties of the mud should be adjusted to the hydraulics available. The rate of penetration achieved
in drilling is affected by the density of the mud and the nature of the suspended solids in the mud. Regular
and complete tests are essential to the control of the mud properties.
Most drilling fluids are a mixture of water, clay, weighting material (e.g., barite), and a few chemicals;
however, some formations swell in the presence of water and impede the drilling process. In these cases,
oil-base drilling fluids may be used. For environmental reasons, synthetic oil-base muds with similar
properties may also be used. In isolated cases, the operator may choose air or gas as the drilling fluid. Air
or gas exerts very little pressure at the bottom of the hole because it is less dense than a liquid and can
dramatically increase the rate of penetration.
Large fluid pressures may occur in wellbores and tubulars by the presence of drilling fluids. The presence
and nature of these pressures must be considered in every operation performed by the well planner,
drilling engineer, and directional driller.
Pressure and Force

Hydrostatic pressure is the pressure created by the weight of a static column of fluid. The downward force
on a fluid element (Fdown) at a depth (D), exerted by the fluid above it, is given by the pressure (P),
multiplied by the cross sectional area (A) of the element (see Equation 7-3).
Fdown = PA ........................................................................................................................................................... (7-3)
There is also an upward force on the element exerted by the fluid below it, given by the following:
 ∂P 
Fup =  P + ∆D  A ......................................................................................................................................(7-4)
 ∂D 
In addition, the weight of the fluid element exerts a downward force, given by the following:
Fw = Ws A∆D ......................................................................................................................................................(7-5)
where Ws = ρg is the specific weight of the fluid, ρ is the density of the fluid, and g is the rate of
acceleration due to gravity. Since the fluid is at rest, no shear forces exist and the three forces are in
equilibrium (see Equation 7-6).
 ∂P 
PA −  P + ∆D  A + Fw = 0 ...................................................................................................................... (7-6)
 ∂D 

Drilling Fluids
Rearranging this information gives the following:
∂P
= Ws .............................................................................................................................................................. (7-7)
∂D
When dealing with a drilling fluid, and treating the fluid as incompressible (for now), the specific weight
is considered to be constant with depth. Integration of Equation 7-7 with depth gives the following:
P = Ws D + P0 ......................................................................................................................................................(7-8)
The constant of integration (P0) is equal to the surface pressure and is equivalent to atmospheric pressure
(14.7 psi), unless the BOP is closed and the well is trying to flow.
Thus, the hydrostatic pressure in field (or English) units is given by the following:
P = 0.052 ρD + P0 ...............................................................................................................................................(7-9)
where ρ is the fluid density.
Conversion for Imperial Units

The number 0.052 is a conversion factor for oilfield imperial units and is derived as follows:
There are 7.48 gallons in 1 cu ft. and 144 sq. inches in 1 sq. ft; therefore, lb/gal x 7.48 gal/ft3 x (1/144)
ft2/in2 = psi/ft. Since fresh water has a density of 8.34 lb/gal, it exerts a pressure of 8.34 x 0.52 = 0.433
psi/ft.
Similarly, using S.I. (International System) units, pressure is determined by the following:
pressure (kPa) = density (kg/m3) x vertical depth (m) x 0.0098
Application of Hydrostatic Pressure

When a well is shut in during a kick, the excess pressure of the kicking formation is completely
transmitted throughout the drilling fluid. The weaker formations near the surface experience the same
increase in pressure as the more consolidated formations downhole; therefore, the weaker formations
uphole are the most likely to fracture and cause loss of circulation.
An important application of the hydrostatic pressure equation is the determination of the proper drilling
fluid density. The fluid column in the well must be of sufficient density to cause the well opposite each
permeable section to be greater than the pore pressure of the formation fluid in that section. However, the
density of the fluid must also be minimal enough to prevent any formation exposed to the pressure from
fracturing or any of the containing tubulars from bursting. A fractured formation allows drilling fluid
above the fracture depth to leak off into the fractured formation. This condition can occur rapidly and lead
to subsequent well control problems.

Drilling Fluids
Experience in a given drilling field often allows the development of guidelines for the maximum mud
density that a formation at a given depth in that field can withstand without fracturing during normal
drilling operations. It is often more convenient to compare a complex well fluid column (which may
contain a continuously varying fluid density) to an equivalent single fluid column that is open to the
atmosphere. This comparison is accomplished by calculating the equivalent mud weight (EMW). The
EMW is the pressure at a specific depth, converted into a mud weight, and is calculated by the following
(in English units):
EMW = pressure (psi) / [0.052 x TVD (ft)]
Drilling engineers seldom deal with pure liquids since drilling fluids (and cements) are primarily a
mixture of water and finely divided solids. The drilling mud in the annulus also contains the drilled solids
produced by the bit or other drilling equipment and the formation fluids that were contained in the rock.
As long as these additional materials are suspended by the fluid or are settling through the fluid at their
terminal velocity, their effect on the fluid density is calculated by computing the density of the mixture.
However, particles that have settled out (such as those forming a cuttings bed) or are supported by grain-
to-grain contact do not influence the hydrostatic pressure. The PowerPlan hydraulics application models
an approximate effect of drilling cuttings on the increase in effective hydrostatic pressure in the annulus,
as a function of the cuttings properties and rate of penetration. This model is a steady-state model that
does not assume anything about the cuttings bed height.
FLUID FLOW PRINCIPLES

Fluid flow is always considered to take place within a conductor (a cylindrical pipe) as it is pumped down
the drillstring. The nature of the conductor greatly affects the flow behavior of the liquid. Therefore, in
the modeling of flow in the wellbore, PowerPlan makes a clear distinction between flow in the drillstring
and annulus, and flow through more complex tools (i.e., mud motors and MWD/LWD tools).
Fluid Deformation
The deformation of a fluid element is caused by shear stress (see Figure 7-4). This condition occurs when
two parallel fluid layers are separated by a distance (dy) and an applied force (F) over an area (A) causes
the layers to slide past one another. The resistance to this sliding motion—the frictional drag—is called
the shear stress.

Drilling Fluids
13
Figure 7-4: Deformation of a fluid by shear.
The shear stress (τ) is defined as the applied force divided by the area over which it acts. When a force is
initially applied to a static fluid, the fluid accelerates from a velocity of zero until it reaches a constant
average velocity. During this time, the applied force (F) is greater than the frictional forces, and the net
force accelerates the fluid.
The magnitude of the shear between two layers is represented by the value of the shear rate ( γ& ). The
shear rate is the difference in the velocities between the two layers, divided by the distance of separation
(see Equation 7-10).
dv
γ& = .................................................................................................................................................................(7-10)
dy

Drilling Fluids
The relationship between the shear stress and the shear rate defines the flow behavior of the fluid (its
rheological properties). For Newtonian fluids the relationship is linear, so if the shear stress doubles, the
shear rate also doubles; however, most drilling fluids are non-Newtonian fluids and are defined by a much
more complex relationship between the shear stress and the shear rate.
Flow Regimes
There are four basic flow regimes:
• plug flow
• laminar flow
• turbulent flow
• transitional flow
Of these flow regimes, laminar, turbulent, and transitional are the most common (see Figure 7-5).
Laminar
Transitional
Turbulent
Figure 7-5: Behavior of streamlines for differing flow regimes.

Drilling Fluids
Plug Flow
In plug flow, fluid moves as a single undisturbed, solid-like body. Movement is made possible by the
slippage of a thin layer of fluid along the conductor surface. Plug flow occurs at very low shear rates.
Laminar Flow
The laminar flow of a Newtonian fluid in a circular pipe consists of concentric cylindrical shells that slide
past one another. The velocity at the pipe wall is zero, with the maximum velocity at the center of the
pipe. The shear rate (dv/dr) is at its maximum at the wall of the pipe and at zero at the center. Generally,
viscosity gives a measure of fluid thickness. Quantitatively, viscosity is expressed as the ratio of the shear
stress to the shear rate. For a Newtonian fluid this ratio is constant and the viscosity is the same at every
point in the fluid; however, for a non-Newtonian fluid, the viscosity varies with the shear rate. The
practical solution for describing flow behavior when the shear rate and shear stress vary from point to
point in the pipe is to measure these factors at only one specific point in the fluid.
Turbulent Flow
Due to the chaotic shearing motion in turbulent flow, the drilling fluid moves essentially as a plug. Only
very near the walls does a thin layer of orderly shear exist. Because very little orderly shear exists in
turbulent flow, devices that measure the fluid properties are designed to evaluate fluids in laminar flow
only.
Transitional Flow
Transitional flow is a flow regime where the fluid motion is neither completely laminar or completely
turbulent; rather, the fluid is in transition from one to the other. The width of the transitional regime
depends upon the non-Newtonian properties of the fluid and the type of flow model that is assumed.
(Flow models are discussed in the next section).
The determination of the flow regime is found by calculating the Reynolds number (Re). The Reynolds
number considers the basic factors of pipe flow and annular flow, such as the following:
• the diameter of the pipe (D)
• the average fluid velocity ( v )
• the fluid density (ρ)
• the fluid viscosity (µ)
The classical definition of the Reynolds number is defined as the following:
Dρ v
Re = ..........................................................................................................................................................(7-11)
µ

Drilling Fluids
Viscosity and Thickness

Viscosity describes the thickness of fluids in motion and is the constant of proportionality between shear
stress and shear rate for a Newtonian fluid in laminar flow. Thus, as a constant, shear rate has no effect on
viscosity. This principle is true for Newtonian fluids such as oil or water, but not drilling muds, because
most drilling fluids are shear-thinning. (Shear-thinning means that the constant of proportionality between
the shear stress and the shear rate is reduced as the shear rate increases.)
As a result of these conditions, the original scientific definition of viscosity is used in a different context
for drilling fluids than that for true fluids; however, in drilling muds, viscosity is adopted as the common
expression for describing thickness.
Mud thickness is controlled for the following reasons:

• to control circulating pressure losses in the annulus
• to provide adequate lifting capacity for the removal of formation solids
• to help control swab and surge pressures
• to minimize erosion in some unconsolidated shale formations because turbulent flow patterns
may create hole erosion and excessive hole enlargement
• because drilling penetration rates tend to be higher with low solids and thin fluids
Most drilling fluids exhibit time-dependent flow behavior. The shear stress developed in most drilling
fluids is dependent upon the duration of the shear. A time lag exists between the adjustment of the shear
rate and stabilization of the shear stress at its corresponding value. This condition occurs primarily
because the clay plates or fibers in the drilling fluid are broken into smaller particles at higher rates of
shear. The plates or fibers then aggregate into layer units as the shear rate is decreased again, with both of
these events taking a noticeable amount of time. Typically, the shear stress stabilizes much more than the
shear rate when the shear rate is reduced, rather than increased.
Gel strength describes the thickness of muds that are inactive for a period of time. Gel strength
measurements describe the time-dependent flow behavior of the drilling fluid. PowerPlan does not allow
for time-dependent gels within the rheological models. The yield stress measures the attractive forces of
the fluid under flowing conditions; however, the gel strength measures the attractive forces of the mud
under static conditions. Gel strengths typically increase with time. If the gel strength increases steadily
with time, the gel is called progressive. If the gel only increases slightly with time, it is a weak or fragile
gel (see Figure 7-6). Strong gels are usually caused by a high concentration of clays. The high clay
concentration in strong gels may cause problems, such as excessive pressure to break circulation and lost
circulation; however, these problems can be monitored and alleviated with the use of annular pressure
while drilling (APWD).2

Drilling Fluids
13
Figure 7-6: Gel strength.
MEASUREMENT OF RHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES

The measurement of fluid flow properties may be accomplished with a range of viscometric instruments,
such as the following:
• pipe flow rheometer
• Marsh funnel
• rotating viscometer
NOTE
Although this manual does not include the detailed technical derivations of the interpretation of
3
rheological measurements, there is an abundance of information found in alternative texts.
Pipe Flow Rheometer

The pipe flow rheometer is primarily a laboratory tool and is not easy to use in the field. Using this tool,
pressure drop is measured for a given length of pipe at selected flow rates. By the additional use of heat
exchangers, the pressure drop measurements can be obtained at any pressure and temperature permitted.

Drilling Fluids
Marsh Funnel
The Marsh funnel was the first method developed for determining mud viscosity. This tool consists of a
conical funnel with a short narrow tube attached (see Figure 7-7).
13
Figure 7-7: Marsh funnel.
The measurement with the Marsh funnel is made by comparing the time required for one quart of mud to
run out of the funnel to the time required for one quart of water to run out. The relative time taken for the
mud to discharge is an indication of the mud thickness. There is no quantitative basis for the relative time.
For example, when two fluids are in motion, a funnel viscosity of 200 seconds for one of the fluids is not
proof that it is thicker than the other one that requires 100 seconds. Thus, the only benefit obtained from
the use of the Marsh funnel is a detection of changes in the mud properties that may indicate potential
problems downhole. Furthermore, since only one measurement is made with the funnel, it cannot be used
to determine the properties of a non-Newtonian fluid.
Rotating Sleeve/Bob Viscometer

There are several models of rotating viscometers available. The field models are usually ambient
temperature models that run at only two speeds: 300 rpm and 600 rpm. The 300 rpm speed represents an
approximate shear rate of 511/sec and the 600 rpm speed represents an approximate shear rate of
1,022/sec. There are also variable speed rheometers and six-speed rheometers that are basically designed
for speeds of 3, 6, 100, 200, 300 and 600 rpm. In addition to the normal temperature rotating viscometers,
there are high-pressure and high-temperature rheometers available. The following illustration shows a
typical rotating viscometer (see Figure 7-8).

Drilling Fluids
13
Figure 7-8: Rotating sleeve/bob viscometer.
The analysis of fluid flow properties with the rotating sleeve viscometer depends upon several
assumptions:
• The fluid is in laminar flow.
• The fluid system is in equilibrium.
• The fluid velocity at the wall of the sleeve or bob that is rotating is zero.
• The fluid is completely defined by the fluid model.
• The fluid behavior is not time-dependent.
Maximum temperatures of 500° F and maximum pressures of 3,000 psi are generally the limit for these
rotating viscometers. The pressure limitation is not believed to be critical for water-base muds; however,
pressure is an important factor for oil-base fluids.
RHEOLOGICAL MODELS
Frictional pressure loss is an extremely important part of drilling hydraulics analysis, since large viscous
forces must be overcome to move drilling fluid through the longer, slender pipes and annuli used in the
drilling process. A rheolological model is a mathematical model used to describe the relationships
between the viscous forces present in the fluid. A rheological model also describes the flow behavior of a
fluid by expressing the relationship between the shear rate and the shear stress. For a Newtonian fluid, the

Drilling Fluids
ratio of the shear stress to the shear rate is a constant. For non-Newtonian fluids the relationship is more
complex. A generalized relationship for all non-Newtonian fluids has not yet been found, although a
common solution technique for solving the equations has been suggested. This solution technique is used
by PowerPlan.
Various models are proposed to describe the behavior of several ideal non-Newtonian fluids. This
document describes not only the models used within PowerPlan, but other models that may be used or
encountered and the relative advantages and disadvantages of these models. The following five common
rheological models are discussed:
• Newtonian
• Bingham plastic
• Power Law
• Casson
• Herschel-Buckley
Following are two sets of Fann viscometer values (adapted from Klotz) that are used for comparison in
the various rheological models described in this section (see Table 7-2).4
2
Fann Meter Dial Readings (lbf/100 ft )
3 rpm 6 rpm 100 rpm 200 rpm 300 rpm 600 rpm
Fluid 1 14 16 30 38 44 60
Fluid 2 22 25 48 58 65 76
Table 7-2: Mud rheological properties used in data fits.
Newtonian Model
The viscous forces present in a simple Newtonian fluid are characterized by the fluid viscosity. Examples
of Newtonian fluids are water, gases, and high-gravity oils. The Newtonian model is defined by the
following relationship:
τ = µγ
where
τ = shear stress
µ = Newtonian viscosity
γ = shear rate
In field (English) units, the viscosity is expressed in poises (1 poise = 1 g/cm/s). In the drilling industry,
the viscosity is generally expressed in terms of centipoises (cp), where 1 cp = 0.01 poise.

Drilling Fluids
At a constant temperature and pressure, the shear rate and the shear stress are directly proportional. The
constant of proportionality (µ) is the Newtonian viscosity. The rheological curve for a Newtonian fluid is
a straight line that passes through the origin (see Figure 7-9). The slope of the line is the Newtonian
viscosity.
5
Figure 7-9: Rheological flow curve for a Newtonian fluid.
Non-Newtonian Fluids
Most drilling fluids are too complex to be characterized by a single value for the viscosity. The apparent
viscosity measured for these fluids typically depends upon the shear rate at which the measurement is
made and the shear rate history of the fluid. Fluids that do not exhibit a direct proportionality between the
shear stress and the shear rate are classified as non-Newtonian.

Drilling Fluids
Non-Newtonian fluids that are shear rate dependent are classified as either pseudoplastic or dilatant. A
fluid is pseudoplastic if its apparent viscosity decreases with an increasing shear rate. A fluid is dilatant if
its apparent viscosity increases with an increasing shear rate (see Figure 7-10).
Drilling fluids (and cements) are generally pseudoplastic in nature and are termed shear-thinning because
of their tendency to decrease in viscosity as the shear rate increases. Shear-thinning is a very desirable
property for drilling fluids, and means that, at low shear rates or low pump rates, the fluid is more viscous
and can suspend more drilled materials (see also the section entitled Hole Cleaning).
13
Figure 7-10: Rheological flow curves for pseudoplastic and dilatant (non-Newtonian) fluids.

Drilling Fluids
Non-Newtonian fluids that have a yield stress that varies with time are thixotropic if the apparent
viscosity decreases with time after the shear rate is increased to a new constant value (see Figure 7-11).
Fluids are rheopectic if the apparent viscosity increases with time after the shear rate is increased to a
new constant value. Typically, drilling fluids (and cement slurries) are thixotropic.
Time(min)
5
Figure 7-11: Time dependent for thixotropic and rheopectic fluids.
The Bingham and Power Law rheological models approximate the pseudoplastic behavior of drilling
fluids. Modeling the thixotropic behavior of specific drilling fluids is possible (but complex), and is not
modeled with PowerPlan. Not accounting for thixotropy is usually an acceptable assumption for most
drilling conditions; however, care must be taken when the flow path consists of many area changes, or
when the drilling fluid is sitting under static conditions in the wellbore for a long time, particularly in
deep water risers.

Drilling Fluids
A comparison of the Bingham plastic, Power Law, and Newtonian rheological models is shown in the
following illustration (see Figure 7-12).
27
Figure 7-12: Schematic of Bingham plastic, Power Law, and Newtonian rheological models.
Bingham Plastic Rheological Model

A Bingham plastic will not flow until the applied shear stress (τ) exceeds a certain minimum value (τ0),
called the yield point (YP). When the YP is exceeded, changes in the shear stress are proportional to
changes in the shear rate, and the constant of proportionality is called the plastic viscosity (PV or µp). The
YP is a measure of the electrical attractive forces in the mud under flowing condition. The Bingham
plastic model is described by the following equation:
τ = τ 0 + µ pγ& ; τ > τ 0 ........................................................................................................................................(7-12)

Drilling Fluids
The units of the plastic viscosity are the same as the units for the Newtonian or apparent viscosity. The
apparent viscosity, or effective viscosity, (defined as the shear stress divided by the shear rate) varies with
the shear rate for non-Newtonian fluids. The apparent viscosity is the slope of the line from the origin to
the shear stress at a given shear rate. The slopes of the dashed lines represent the apparent viscosities at
various shear rates. The apparent viscosity decreases with increasing shear rate; therefore, Bingham
plastics are shear-thinning. As the shear rate approaches infinity, the apparent viscosity reaches a limit
(the plastic viscosity) and is the slope of the Bingham plastic line (see Figure 7-13).
Fann Meter Dial Readings (lbf/100 ft2)
Fluid 1 14 16 30 38 44 60
60
Bingham Model
50
Shear Stress(lbf/100ft^2)
40
30
20
10
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Shear rate (/s)
Figure 7-13: Fit of Bingham model to Fluid 1 rheological properties.

Drilling Fluids
The Bingham plastic model is still used extensively in the drilling industry, but does not accurately
represent drilling fluids at low shear rates and yield behavior is greatly overestimated (see Figure 7-14).
Fluid 2 22 25 48 58 65 76
80
70
Bingham Model
Shear Stress (lbf/100 ft^2)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Shear rate (/s)
Figure 7-14: Fit of Bingham model to Fluid 2 rheological properties.

Drilling Fluids
Power Law Model

The Power Law rheological model also requires two parameters to define the relationship between the
shear rate and the shear stress. The Power Law model is defined by the following formula:
τ = Kγ& n ...............................................................................................................................................................(7-13)
where K is the consistency factor, and n is the flow behavior index.
The consistency factor describes the thickness of the fluid and is analogous to the apparent viscosity. As
the consistency factor increases, the drilling fluid becomes thicker. The flow behavior index indicates the
degree of non-Newtonian behavior. When n = 1, the Power Law is identical to the Newtonian model. If n
> 1, the fluid is dilatant. If n is between zero and unity, the fluid is pseudoplastic and shear-thinning (the
apparent viscosity decreases as the shear rate increases).
Following are illustrations of the fit of a Power Law model to the fluid data given (see Figures 7-15 and
7-16). Note that the Power Law model represents Fluid 2 quite well in Figure 7-16.

Drilling Fluids
Fluid 1 14 16 30 38 44 60
60
Power Law Fit
50
40
30
20
10
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Shear rate (/s)
Figure 7-15: Fit of Power Law model to Fluid 1 rheological properties.

Drilling Fluids
Fluid 2 22 25 48 58 65 76
80
Power Law Fit
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Shear rate (/s)
Figure 7-16: Fit of Power Law model to Fluid 2 rheological properties.
Although the Power Law more accurately represents the behavior of drilling mud at low shear rates, it
does not have a yield stress; therefore, the Power Law can provide inaccurate results at very low shear
rates.
In general, a drilling fluid has both a yield stress and shear-thinning behavior. At high shear rates, all of
the models represent the fluid behavior reasonably well. A typical drilling fluid tends to behave
somewhere between the Power Law behavior and a Bingham fluid. There are other models used for
modeling drilling fluids, such as the Casson model, the Robertson-Stiff model, and the Herschel-Bulkley
model. Of these three, only the Herschel-Buckley and Casson models are described in detail in the
remainder of this section.

Drilling Fluids
Casson Model
The Casson model is a hybrid between the Bingham and Power Law model and allows for both yield
behavior and shear-thinning within the framework of a two-parameter model. It allows confident
extrapolation to high shear rates, and is claimed by several authors to give a good representation of the
rheology of water-base muds (ref-see Otto’s paper).6 (This model is not supported in PowerPlan 3.0, but
is supported within the gas-kick simulation software Sidekick. This model is defined by:
τ 1/ 2 = k o1 / 2 + k11/ 2γ&1 / 2 .........................................................................................................................................(7-14)
The constants k0 and k1 can be evaluated from experimental data by the least-squares fit to the square
roots of the shear stress and shear rate values. The effective Casson yield stress is k0 and the effective
Casson high shear rate viscosity (or Casson plastic viscosity) is k1.
The user may desire to interpret the Casson parameters or convert the parameters from one system to
another. The Casson parameters are related to the Bingham parameters by the following relationships.
The existing constants γ1 = 511 s-1, and γ2 = 1,022 s-1 are used, which are the shear rates corresponding to
the 300 and 600 rpm Fann readings.
The Casson yield stress is τc and the viscosity is kc. The Bingham yield stress is τb and the viscosity is µp.
There is an intermediate calculation made before displaying the Bingham values. Two variables (τ1, τ2)
are defined as follows:
(
τ 1 = τ c + k cγ 1 ) ..........................................................................................................................................(7-15)
2
and
(
τ 2 = τ c + k cγ 2 ) ........................................................................................................................................(7-16)
2
Rearranging gives the following:
τ − τ1
µ = 2
γ − γ1
p ....................................................................................................................................(7-17)
2
and
γ 2τ 1 − γ 1τ 2
τb = ................................................................................................................................................(7-18)
γ 2 −γ1
From these two values, the correspondence between the Casson and Bingham model parameters is
evident.

Drilling Fluids
At the wellsite, the choice of an accurate model is best accomplished by graphing the viscometer data
from the mud engineer. These data typically consist of three quantities: the 300 and 600 rpm readings and
the gel strength. The position of the gel strength along the shear stress axis predominantly determines
which model is the best to use. If the gel strength is high and near the yield point, the fluid is best
approximated by the Bingham model. If the gel strength is very low, the fluid is better approximated by
the Power Law model. If six or more Fann readings are available, the Herschel-Bulkley model (next
model covered) is best, unless the yield stress is very low (close to zero). In these cases, the non-linear
least-squares fit of a Herschel-Bulkley model may produce a negative yield stress.
The Casson model intercepts the shear stress axis at some point between the origin and the yield point that
depends upon the ratio of the yield point to the plastic viscosity (see Figure 7-17).
13
Figure 7-17: Casson fluid intercept as a function of the shear stress.
The intercept on the shear stress axis is given as a percentage of the yield stress. By comparing the gel
strength to the intercept point, one may determine the accuracy of using the Casson model.

Drilling Fluids
The following illustration shows the effect of fitting a Casson model to the Fann 300 and 600 rpm data
(see Figure 7-18). Note that for a two-parameter model, the Casson model provides a much better
agreement than the Bingham model for Fluid 1, and provides a fair representation of the low shear rate
behavior of the fluid.
Fluid 1 14 16 30 38 44 60
60
Casson Fit
50
40
30
20
10
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Shear rate (/s)
Figure 7-18: Fit of Casson model to Fluid 1 rheological properties.

Drilling Fluids
The Casson model does a much poorer job, however, of fitting the data for the second fluid (see Figure 7-
19).
Fluid 2 22 25 48 58 65 76
80
Casson Fit
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Shear rate (/s)
Figure 7-19: Fit of Casson model to Fluid 2 rheological properties.

Drilling Fluids
Herschel-Bulkley Model
The Herschel-Bulkley model is probably the most complete model currently in use. This model is also
sometimes referred to as yield-pseudoplastic because it encompasses both yield behavior of a non-
Newtonian fluid and also allows for shear-thinning. The equation for a Herschel-Bulkley fluid is as
follows:
. m
τ = τ HB + K HB γ ..............................................................................................................................................(7-19)
where,
τHB = the Herschel-Bulkley yield point

KHB = the Herschel-Bulkley consistency factor
m = the Herschel-Bulkley flow behavior index
Due to the complexity of this model, analytical solutions are not readily available for pressure drop
models. Furthermore, since there are three coefficients in the rheological model, at least three Fann
readings are necessary to define the model. Within PowerPlan, all six Fann readings (3, 6, 100, 200, 300,
and 600 rpm) must be entered if the Herschel-Bulkley model is to be used.
Determination of the best fit parameters is not straightforward, because there are three unknowns. Klotz
and Brigham provide one method that enables the user to define Herschel-Bulkley coefficients from Fann
data, given an initial guess of the yield stress and a minimization procedure that is not defined. The
method used within PowerPlan is a more powerful, generic, non-linear least-squares routine (Levenberg-
Marquardt routine).7 This method is very efficient and is now the standard in non-linear least-squares
routines. The discrepancies in the values for the fitted parameters given with PowerPlan and the method
described in Klotz and Brigham are due to the differences in the minimization techniques. The
Levenberg-Marquardt method is a full multi-parameter minimization routine that uses both inverse
Hessian and steepest descent methods, without the need for a guessed value input by the user.
The fit of the Herschel-Bulkley model to the data given in the table is clearly the best fit to the data for
both fluids (see Figures 7-20 and 7-21). Anadrill recommends the use of the Herschel-Bulkley model
when all six Fann values are available to provide the most accurate representation in the corresponding
pressure drop models.
There are certain circumstances—particularly for fluids with low yield stress values—where the fit to the
Fann data may give a negative yield stress. In these cases, it is likely that the Power Law model is a more
appropriate fit to the fluid rheology. PowerPlan prompts the user in these cases.

Drilling Fluids
Fluid 1 14 16 30 38 44 60
60
Herschel-Bulkley Fit
50
40
30
20
10
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Shear rate (/s)
Figure 7-20: Fit of Herschel-Bulkley model to Fluid 1 rheological properties.

Drilling Fluids
Fluid 2 22 25 48 58 65 76
80
Herschel-Bulkley Fit
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Shear rate (/s)
Figure 7-21: Fit of Herschel-Bulkley model to Fluid 2 rheological properties.

Pressure Drop Modeling
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual covers the frictional pressure loss
model, choke pressure drop, tool joint pressure losses, and the effect of drillpipe
eccentricity.

INTRODUCTION TO PRESSURE DROP MODELING

Flow conditions in drillpipe are usually turbulent and are, therefore, only influenced by the viscous
properties of the mud to a minor extent. The effective shear rate at the pipe wall is generally between 200
and 1,000 reciprocal seconds. The conduit dimensions are typically known quite accurately, so pressure
losses are also determined quite accurately. The only uncertainties involved are the tool joint losses and
the roughness of the pipe walls. The pressure loss in the drillpipe is about 20 to 45% of the pressure loss
over the entire circuit (the standpipe pressure).
Flow velocity through the bit nozzles is extremely high, corresponding to shear rates of 100,000
reciprocal seconds. The pressure loss across the nozzles can be calculated accurately because it depends
upon the coefficient of discharge, which is essentially independent of the viscous properties of the mud.
The pressure loss across the bit nozzles is typically about 50 to 75% of the standpipe pressure.
Flow in the annulus is usually laminar and is, therefore, a property of the viscous properties of the mud.
Shear rates are generally between 50 and 150 reciprocal seconds. The pressure loss from the bit to the
surface comprises only about 10% of the standpipe pressure in a conventional hole geometry (it is higher
in slim holes). However, knowledge of the pressure and flow in the various sections of the annulus is very
important when dealing with such problems as hole cleaning, induced fracturing, and hole erosion.
Unfortunately, accurate prediction of the flow relationships is usually difficult because of the numerous
unknowns and uncertainties. Perhaps the greatest of the unknowns is the true diameter of the hole, which
may be as much as twice the nominal diameter in enlarged sections of the hole, decreasing the rising
velocity by a factor of at least five.
The influence of the drillpipe rotation on the velocity profile is also difficult to account for.8, 9, 10, 11 There
are equations available for helical flow, but there is debate about whether fluid elements actually follow a
helical path in the presence of rotation, and these equations were derived for drillpipe rotating
concentrically in a vertical hole. In practice, the drillpipe whirls around in a seemingly random manner,
particularly in deviated wellbores. Furthermore, equations for flow in eccentric annuli show that the
annular velocity is greatly reduced when the drillpipe lies against the low side of the hole (as in
directionally drilled wells); therefore, equations based on concentric annuli are seriously in error. Neither
is there a way to account for the influence of thixotropy on the viscosity of the mud as the mud rises in the
annulus. The high shear rates in the drillpipe and bit reduce the structural component of the viscosity to a
very low value. The shear rates in the annulus are far lower, but change in each annular section,
depending upon the drill collar, drillpipe, casing diameters, and degree of hole enlargement. The viscosity
adjusts to each shear rate, but may take time to do so, and might never reach an equilibrium value (except
in long sections of gauge or cased hole).
To summarize, accurate pressure losses in the drillpipe and bit are reasonably easy to predict, but pressure
losses in the annulus are much more questionable; however, quite accurate losses are obtained for the
whole circulatory system because the annular loss (usually) forms such a small percentage of the total
loss. The results of the field tests of Fontenot and Clark support these conclusions.12
The rigorous flow equations and testing procedures described in this document are suitable for laboratory
investigations and for detailing the models used in the PowerPlan software. A number of methods of
making wellsite hydraulic calculations are published, the complexity of which varies according to the

authors’ acceptable degree of accuracy. Whittaker has reviewed these procedures and makes the
following recommendation for making annular pressure calculations:
“When drilling in formations that enlarge significantly, calculate the pressure loss in the drillpipe and
in the bit nozzles and subtract this figure from the sum of the standpipe pressure. The resulting figure
is the annular pressure loss.” 13
The above method is open to the objection that the pressure loss in the bit and drillpipe form such a large
proportion of the system pressure losses that a small error will cause a large percentage error in the
annular pressure loss. To estimate accurate annular pressure losses while drilling, the use of an APWD
sensor may be more appropriate.
The pressure loss in the open hole section can also be determined in the field by calculating the pressure
loss in the cased hole section and subtracting that loss from the total annular loss. PowerPlan also
expresses the additional effects of the annular pressure losses (and of suspended cuttings) in terms of the
equivalent circulating density (ECD). The ECD is defined as the effective mud weight at a given depth,
created by the total hydrostatic (including cuttings pressure) and dynamic (friction loss) pressures.
FRICTIONAL PRESSURE LOSS MODEL

The model described in this section is based upon the analyses of Reed and Pilehvari,14 with
modifications for the effects of pipe eccentricity by Haciislamoglu and Cartalos.15 The eccentricity
effects, which were ignored up to and including Drilling Office 3.0, have been included into Drilling
Office 3.1 and are provided in this document for additional information.
The standard API methods for drilling hydraulics assume either a Power Law or Bingham plastic
rheology model. As presented in the preceding section (Drilling Fluids), most drilling fluids correspond
more closely to the Herschel-Bulkley model. This distinction is particularly important for the annular
geometries that are typical of normal drilling conditions where shear rates are low, the Power Law model
underestimates, and the Bingham model overestimates frictional pressure drops. These two models also
respectively underestimate and overestimate the pump rates required for transition from laminar to
turbulent flow. The model described briefly below (and in more detail by Reed and Pilehvari) is
developed for non-Newtonian flow through pipes and concentric annuli. The method is based upon
relating non-Newtonian flows to Newtonian flows, and the definition of an effective diameter is a key
concept within the model. This concept is important because it accounts for both geometric and non-
Newtonian effects on frictional pressure gradients in pipes and annuli.
The analysis is valid for laminar, transitional, and fully turbulent flow regimes. The method incorporates
new transition criteria that account for the delay in flow transition with increasing ratio of inner to outer
diameters in concentric annuli. These criteria agree with experimental data reported in the literature
presented by Reed and Pilehvari. When using the same viscometer data, the results from the analyses
(included below) show that the transition from laminar to turbulent flow occurs at higher pump rates than
for a Power Law fluid, but significantly lower than for the corresponding Bingham plastic. For turbulent
flow, the Colebrook equation is modified so that the equation applies to non-Newtonian flows through
pipes and annuli with smooth or rough walls. The method also accounts for the effects of wall roughness
on frictional pressure gradients in transitional flow. The iterative solution proposed below is slightly more
time-consuming than a direct calculation using explicit friction factors, but avoids the necessity for

computationally expensive finite-difference or finite-element simulations (previously the standard for

turbulent and transitional flow of Herschel-Bulkley fluids).
Lamb’s diameter, hydraulic diameter, and equivalent diameter are defined in the following equations:
Lamb’s Diameter
Do2 + Di2 − ( Do2 − Di2 )

DL = ................................................................................................................... (7-20)
D 
ln o D 
i
Hydraulic Diameter
Dhy = Do − Di
.................................................................................................................................................. (7-21)
Equivalent Diameter
Deq = D L2 / Dhy
................................................................................................................................................. (7-22)
The calculations must then be separated into Newtonian and non-Newtonian flow regimes, as found in the
following sections.
Newtonian Flow
(τ = µγ)
Calculations are given for the following flow regimes of a Newtonian fluid:
• laminar pipe flow
• laminar annular flow
• turbulent pipe flow
• turbulent annular flow
• transitional pipe and annular flow
Laminar Pipe Flow

The Reynolds number (Re) is defined as Re = ρf VD / µ, where D is the pipe inner diameter, V is the
fluid velocity in the pipe, µ is the Newtonian viscosity, and ρf is the local fluid density. The laminar
friction factor is given as follows:
f lam = 16 / Re ....................................................................................................................................................(7-23)
The corresponding frictional pressure gradient is given by the following:
∂P
= 2 f lam ρ f V 2 / D ...................................................................................................................................... (7-24)
∂L

Laminar Annular Flow

The analysis for annular flow is similar to that of pipe flow, except that the Reynolds number for annular
flow is based on the effective diameter (Re = ρf VDeq / µ,) and the frictional pressure gradient is based on
the hydraulic diameter, as follows:
∂P
= 2 f lam ρ f V 2 / Dhy .................................................................................................................................... (7-25)
∂L
Turbulent Pipe Flow

The Colebrook equation is the friction factor correlation used in the PowerPlan Hydraulics application.
Other friction factor correlations are described by Jensen and Sharma.16 The Colebrook equation—
modified for pipe roughness (ε)— is given by the following implicit equation:
 
1
f turb
= −4 log 10  0.269 ε D +

.
1255
( ) 
Re f turb 
............................................................................................. (7-26)
Turbulent Annular Flow

The Colebrook formulation (Equation 26) is also used for turbulent annular flow, except that the
Reynolds number is based upon the equivalent diameter.
Transitional Pipe and Annular Flow

Following the analysis given by Reed and Pilehvari, PowerPlan defines the intermediate (fint) and
transitional (ftr) friction factors given by the following equations:
f tr = 1.390532 × 10 −9 Re 2 ..............................................................................................................................(7-27)
(
f int = f tr−8 + f turb
−8
)
−1 / 8
...................................................................................................................................... (7-28)
f tot = ( f int12 + f lam )

12 1/12
....................................................................................................................................... (7-29)
ftot is the friction factor used throughout the transition zone.
The flow is then determined to be transitional and laminar if ftot < 16.1 / Re, unless the friction factor is
within 1% of the turbulent friction factor calculated from the extended Colebrook equation. The
corresponding pipe and annular pressure drops are then expressed as in Equations 24 and 25 respectively,
but with the total friction factor (ftot) used in the definition.

Power Law Fluid

.
(τ = K γ n )
Calculations are given for the following regimes of a Power Law fluid:
• turbulent pipe and annular flow
Laminar Pipe Flow

In laminar pipe flow an effective diameter (such as the friction factor) is defined. The Reynolds number
relation for laminar flow is still given by Equation 23. Thus, the following applies:
Deff = 4nD / (3n + 1) ..................................................................................................................................... (7-30)
The average wall shear rate is defined as follows:

.
γ = 8V / Deff ......................................................................................................................................................(7-31)
The effective viscosity becomes as follows:
µ eff = K (8V / Deff ) n −1 ..................................................................................................................................... (7-32)
Consequently, the Reynolds number and friction factor are as follows:
Re = ρ f VDeff / µ eff .......................................................................................................................................... (7-33)
f lam = 16 / Re .................................................................................................................................................... (7-34)

This calculation is a little more complex, due to the nature of the geometry; however, a good solution is
given by Reed and Pilehvari. First, the parameters are given that describe the new effective diameter and
allow for the effects of both the annular geometry and the non-Newtonian behavior of the fluid:
Y = 0.37n
[
Z = 1 − 1 − ( Di / Do ) Y ] 1/ Y
G = (1 + Z / 2)[(3 − Z )n + 1] / [(4 − Z )n]
The effective diameter is defined as follows:
Deff = ( Do − Di ) / G ....................................................................................................................................... (7-35)

The pressure loss is given by the following:
n
∂P  4 K  8v 

= ........................................................................................................................................(7-36)
∂L  Dhy  Deff 

Turbulent Pipe and Annular Flow
The turbulent friction factor is modified for the non-Newtonian behavior by both the definition of the
generalized Reynolds number (one based on the effective viscosity) and a modification for the Power
Law index. These modifications are expressed as follows:
 
1  ε
= −4 log 10 0.269 D +
 ( )
1.255n  ................................................................................ (7-37)
( Re f turb(1−n/2 ) ) 
− 0 . 75
n
f turb 
For turbulent annular flow, the pipe diameter is replaced by the effective diameter (Deff) and the Reynolds
number is calculated using the effective diameter.

For transitional pipe and annular flow, a similar approach is taken as for that of the Newtonian fluid;
however, the friction factor must be modified again for the non-Newtonian behavior as follows (with the
appropriate choice of pipe or annulus Reynolds number):
9.49 × 10 −9
f temp =
(4.767 − 2.167n 2 ) Re 2
...................................................................................................................... (7-38)
fint and ftot are defined as in Equations 28 and 29, with the same criteria to decide the transitions between
laminar/transitional and transitional/turbulent, as for the Newtonian case. Finally, the pressure losses are
given by Equations 24 and 25, with the total friction factor (f tot) used in their definitions.
Herschel-Bulkley Fluid
( τ = τ 0 + Kγ& m )
Calculations are given for the following regimes of a Power Law fluid:
• turbulent pipe and annular flow

This definition now includes a yield stress (τ0). To express this in generalized Newtonian form, i.e., as
τ = K ' ( 8V / D) , the following definition is given:
N
∂ ( ln τ )
N= .......................................................................................................................................... (7-39)
∂ (ln(8V / D))
For annular flow, the pipe diameter in Equation 39 is replaced by the equivalent diameter Deq.
Laminar Pipe Flow

Govier and Aziz have shown that for a Herschel-Bulkley fluid, N is given by the following implicit
equation:
 (1 + m) 2τ 0 
( )
1 2 K (8V / Deff ) m
= −3 + τ 0 + K (8v / Deff ) m  + +  .......................(7-40)
N  mK (8V / Deff )
m
A(3m + 1) A(2m + 1) 
where
( K (8V / D ) )
2
2τ 0 K (8V / Deff ) m τ 02
m
eff
A= + + ...........................................................................(7-41)
(3m + 1) (2m + 1) (m + 1)
and
4 ND
Deff = ................................................................................................................................................(7-42)
(3 N + 1)
Thus N must be solved iteratively. Once N is obtained, the effective shear rate is calculated as follows:
.
γ = (8V / Deff ) .................................................................................................................................................. (7-43)
The effective viscosity and the Reynolds number are then computed as follows:
.
τ0 + Kγ m
µ eff = . .............................................................................................................................................. (7-44)

γ
Re = ρ f VDeff / µ eff .......................................................................................................................................... (7-45)
The friction factor can then be given by the Newtonian format (f lam = 16 / Re) and the corresponding
definition of the frictional pressure gradient as given in Equation 24.


For annular flow, PowerPlan uses an analysis similar to that developed for the Power Law fluid
(Equations 30 through 38), but replaces the Power Law index (n) with the generalized index (N) in
Equation 35. Therefore, N must be solved again in an iterative manner, due to the dependence of the
effective diameter upon G, (which is, in turn, a function of N).

This analysis is also identical to that given for the Power Law fluid, with the Power Law index replaced
by the generalized index and the friction factor calculated with the appropriate pipe or annular Reynolds
number. The intermediate and total friction factors are also defined in a similar manner.
Turbulent Pipe and Annular Flow

The turbulent friction factor for pipe flow of a Herschel-Bulkley fluid is given by Equation 37. For
turbulent annular flow the pipe diameter is replaced by the effective diameter, and the Reynolds number
is calculated with the effective diameter.
Example Pressure Drop Calculation

The following illustration provides an example of the pressure drop calculation for a given fluid for
Bingham, Power Law, and Herschel-Bulkley fits to the Fann rheometer data (see Figure 7-22). For low
shear rate/laminar flow, the Power Law underestimates and the Bingham model overestimates the
frictional pressure drop, when compared to that given by the Herschel-Bulkley model; in turbulent flow,
the trend reverses. The Power Law model predicts the onset of turbulence before the Herschel-Bulkley
and Bingham models.
Figure 7-22: Comparison of pressure drop calculations for different rheological models.

CHOKE PRESSURE DROP

The PowerPlan Hydraulics application allows the user to add back-pressure to the system if circulation is
not going up the choke line. The default position is to have the choke wide open (i.e., zero additional
pressure drop). A choke position of zero (closed) while circulating is not allowed, and the user is given a
warning.
The pressure drop through the choke is given by the following expression:
2
 1 4

 kρ  Q flow   
 − 1 .......................................................................................(7-46)
∆Pchoke =  m   
 2  C pos Achokeline   C pos

 
where,
Qflow is the flowrate in the choke line (of cross-sectional area Achoke line), ρm is the drilling fluid density, and
Cpos is the choke position [varying between zero (fully closed) and unity (fully open)]. k is a discharge
coefficient of order unity.
More details on the various values from which to choose the orifice coefficient (depending on the shape
of the orifice) are also available from Daugherty, Franzini, and Finnemore.17
EFFECT OF PIPE ECCENTRICITY

Frictional pressure loss calculations in the narrow annuli of slim-hole operations (and sometimes coiled
tubing operations) require accurate pressure loss predictions. Haciislamoglu and Cartalos18 have
developed easy-to-use, realistic correlations for laminar, transitional, and turbulent flow regimes that are
validated by experimental data for Power Law fluids.
The non-dimensional eccentricity is defined as follows:
δ
e= ........................................................................................................................................................... (7-47)
ro − ri
where δ is the offset and ro, ri are the respective outer and inner radii of the annular geometry.
The ratio of the pressure drop (R) for an eccentric annulus to that in a concentric annulus is also defined.
Reed and Pilehvari show the following for a uniformly eccentric annulus in laminar flow:
0.8454 01852 0.2527

e  Di   Di   Di 
Rlam = 1 − 0.072   − 15
.e 2
n  + 0.96e 3
n  ........................................ (7-48)
n  Do   Do   Do 

For turbulent flow, a slightly different relation is obtained as follows:
0.8454 01852 0.2527

e  Di   Di   Di 
Rturb = 1 − 0.048   − (2 / 3)e 2
n  + 0.285e 3
n  ..............................(7-49)
n  Do   Do   Do 
In the transitional regime, R varies with the Reynolds number in a complex manner. Reed and Pilehvari
give tables from which an approximate value for the eccentricity effect is obtained. However, given that
in eccentric flow the instantaneous eccentric position of the drillstring affects the time/Reynolds number
at which the transition to turbulent flow occurs, a steady-state approximation is made to represent this
complex scenario.
PowerPlan does support input for eccentric drillpipe. The correlations given in Equations 48 and
49 are used to provide approximate modifications to the laminar and turbulent pressure drops.
TOOL JOINT PRESSURE LOSSES

Tool joint pressure losses (in PowerPlan 3.6 or later) in the drillpipe are handled by calculating the
additional pressure loss from the constriction given by the tool joint ID (automatically determined from
BHA Editor catalog), the annular restriction between the tool-joint OD (also from BHA Editor catalog),
and the open hole/casing sections. A default tool joint length of 10% of the drillpipe joint length is
assumed. This input can be altered by the user where appropriate.

Bit Hydraulics
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual covers the calculation of bit pressure
losses, bit hydraulic power, and bit nozzle selection.

Bit Hydraulics
INTRODUCTION TO BIT PRESSURE LOSS

Calculating pressure loss across the drill bit has two main applications:
• Nozzle sizes can be selected that optimize the hydraulic power or impact force at the bit,
improving both chip removal and general hole cleaning.
• Combined with other parasitic pressure losses (such as drillstring, tools, motor, and annulus), the
observed standpipe pressure can be compared to the total calculated pressure drop. Hence, an
estimate of the pump volumetric efficiency is obtained. A drop in the volumetric efficiency is
usually an early indicator of pump failure.
CALCULATING BIT PRESSURE LOSSES

To understand bit pressure losses, an understanding of the terminology used is important. An orifice is an
opening (usually circular) that is characterized by the thickness of the wall or plate in which it sits. The
orifice is usually very small relative to the size of the opening. A nozzle is a converging tube (if used for
liquids). A jet is a stream that issues from a nozzle, orifice, or tube.
Conventional bits incorporate a number of nozzles through which the drilling fluid is forced at a high
velocity (see Figure 7-23).
Bit
Bit Nozzle
Hole
Pbit v v v
Figure 7-23: Flow through jet bit nozzles.

Bit Hydraulics
The jet velocity is calculated from the following equation:
Q
v= .........................................................................................................................................................(7-50)
∑ Anoz
where
v = jet velocity
Q = flowrate through the bit
Anoz = total flow area of the nozzles
NOTE
Even if the nozzles in the bit are of differing sizes, the velocity through each nozzle is the same.
The velocity of the fluid through the orifice is only a function of the pressure drop across the
orifice (the fluid density).
The ratio of the area (A) of a jet to the area of the orifice (Ao) or other opening is called the coefficient of
contraction (Cc). Thus, Ao = Cc Ao.
The velocity that would be attained in the jet if friction did not exist is the ideal velocity (vi). The actual
velocity (v) is less than the ideal velocity, due to the presence of friction in the passage of the fluid
through the nozzle. The ratio of these two quantities is the coefficient of velocity, expressed as v = Cvvi.
The ratio of the actual rate of discharge, Q (or flowrate through the nozzles), to the ideal rate of discharge
Qi (the flow occurs if there is no friction and no contraction) is defined as the coefficient of discharge,
expressed as Q = Cd Qi.
The standard formula for pressure loss through an orifice is as follows:
 1  ρv 2
∆Porifice =  2 − 1 ................................................................................................................................... (7-51)
 Cv  2
where ρ is the drilling fluid density.
The pressure loss caused by turbulence at the orifice outlet is given by the following equation:
ρv 2
∆Pturb = Cc .................................................................................................................................................(7-52)
2

Bit Hydraulics
The coefficients Cc and Cv are empirically determined and depend upon the shape of the orifice. The
value of Cc for a fixed-nozzle, square-edged outlet is unity. The total pressure drop across the ∆Pbit is
given by the sum of Equations 51and 52:
1 ρv 2
∆Pbit = .................................................................................................................................................(7-53)
Cv2 2
For bit nozzles within the Hydraulics application, PowerPlan assumes that Cv = 0.95; therefore,
approximately 90% of the total pressure loss at the bit is due to turbulence at the orifice outlet, and only
10% due to pressure loss through the orifice. The bit nozzles are designed to maximize the portion of the
pressure loss that works on the formation.
BIT HYDRAULIC POWER

Power is the rate of doing work; therefore, bit hydraulic power (in Watts) is expressed in terms of the
pump energy by the following equation:
PH = ∆Pbit Q ........................................................................................................................................................(7-54)
Expressing this equation in English units (with pressures in psi and flowrates in gallons/minute), power in
horsepower is as follows:
∆Pbit Q
PH = .......................................................................................................................................................(7-55)
1714
A common field interpretation of hydraulic power is to express the power as a function of the bit diameter
(or hole area) and the bit horsepower per square inch of hole area (HSI); therefore, the bit HSI is given by
the following equation:
 4 
HSI =  2 ∆Pbit Q .......................................................................................................................................(7-56)
 πd bit 
where dbit is the diameter of the bit. In English units (hp/sq. in) this equation becomes as follows:
 1.2732 
HSI =  ∆Pbit Q ...................................................................................................................................(7-57)
 1714 

Bit Hydraulics
JET IMPACT FORCE

The purpose of the jet nozzles is to improve the cleaning action of the drilling fluid at the bottom of the
hole and the rate of penetration. Although the cleaning action of a jet bit is complex, it is often believed
that the cleaning action is maximized by applying the most hydraulic impact force of the fluid as possible
against the bottom of the hole. If it is assumed that all of the jet nozzle flow impacts the bottom of the
hole and comes to rest after striking the bottom of the hole, then the rate of change of momentum is given
by the following equation:
∆ (mv) m∆v
Fimp = = = ρQv .........................................................................................................................(7-58)
∆t ∆t
Rearranging for the nozzle velocity gives the following equation:
Fimp = 2QCv ρ∆Pbit ....................................................................................................................................(7-59)
In English units (psi, gallons/minute, and lb/gal), the jet impact force (in pounds) is given by the
following equation:
Fimp = 0.01823QCv ρ∆Pbit ..........................................................................................................................(7-60)
BIT NOZZLE SELECTION

Selection of the correct bit nozzles is one of the most frequent uses of hydraulics software programs.
Significant increases in the rate of penetration are achieved with the correct nozzle selection, because
more efficient hole cleaning avoids re-drilling cuttings, and can actually destroy rock in softer formations.
As noted in Bourgoyne et al., 19 true bit hydraulics optimization is currently unachievable due to the
following competing factors:
• operational costs
• bit wear
• nozzle plugging and erosion
• drilling fluid suspension characteristics
• hole stability problems
The most commonly used parameters to optimize drilling hydraulics ensure that the well is completed
safely, with a minimum of formation damage, and at the lowest possible cost. Safety considerations and
wellbore stability constraints usually dictate the drilling fluid density. To minimize formation damage,
pressure surges are reduced by the use of low gel-strength muds; however, the recent advent of APWD
measurements have also enabled real-time operational decisions that impact the efficiency of the drilling
process. A combination of choosing the correct mud system and using sound operational practices permits
drilling close to the minimum mud density required without compromising safety. The rheological
properties of the drilling fluid must also adequately suspend and remove cuttings from the wellbore.
Certain formations may require increased gel strength and viscosity to suspend cuttings and prevent pack-
offs during connections.

Bit Hydraulics
After the correct drilling fluid and rheological properties are defined, the optimal nozzle size and flowrate
are required. The flowrate is primarily dictated by the pump limitations and hole cleaning requirements,
particularly for deviated wells; however, avoiding turbulent flow in the vicinity of drill collars minimizes
hole erosion. The minimum and maximum pump flowrates dictate the choice of the pump liner, which, in
turn, imposes a limitation on the pump pressure. With the constraints of minimum and maximum flowrate
and maximum standpipe pressure, the required flowrate and nozzle sizes can be chosen to maximize a
given parameter. The most common parameters to maximize are the following:
• bit nozzle velocity
• bit hydraulic horsepower (or HSI)
• jet impact force
Current field practices are such that nozzle sizes are selected with one of these parameters at a maximum.
Maximum Nozzle Velocity

As expressed by Equation 53, the nozzle velocity is directly proportional to the square root of the pressure
drop across the bit; therefore, the nozzle velocity is maximum when the pressure drop across the bit is
maximum. The pressure drop across the bit is maximum when the pump pressure is maximum and the
frictional losses in the drillstring and annulus (and other components of the circulatory system) are
minimum.
There are also other constraints on the pressure loss at the bit, such as operational limitations for mud
motors. This subject is discussed in more detail in the section entitled Motor Hydraulics.
Maximum Bit Hydraulic Horsepower

Bit horsepower is not necessarily maximized by using the maximum pump horsepower. The parasitic
pressure losses (all other pressure losses in the system, except those due to losses at the bit) are an
important parameter in nozzle optimization. It is often assumed that the parasitic pressure losses are a
simple Power Law function of the flowrate. The hydraulic horsepower is the product of the pressure and
the flowrate. Typically, Maximum Bit Hydraulic Horsepower occurs when the bit pressure drop is 65% of
the total standpipe pressure.

Bit Hydraulics
The following illustration shows the power required at surface to maintain the maximum standpipe
pressure (see Figure 7-24).
13
Figure 7-24: Surface power / standpipe pressure relationship.
For each flowrate, the power available to the bit is the hydraulic power at the surface, minus the parasitic
pressure loss, expressed as follows:
Wbit = (Psurf Q ) − (PparasiticQ ) .............................................................................................................................(7-61)
Maximum power at the bit occurs when the first derivative of this function (with respect to the flowrate)
is zero, expressed as follows:
 ∂Pparasitic 
Psurf − Pparasitic − Q  = 0 ................................................................................................................(7-62)
 ∂ Q 
This equation is the general expression for finding the flowrate that corresponds to the maximum power at
the bit. With the assumption of the parasitic losses being proportional to the power of the flowrate (m),
Equation 62 becomes the following:
Psurf
Pparasitic = ..............................................................................................................................................(7-63)
(m + 1)
Therefore, the flowrate required to maximize the bit hydraulic horsepower occurs when the parasitic
pressure losses are a given fraction of the surface pressure. Knowing the actual pressure loss at two
flowrates provides sufficient information to calculate the pressure loss exponent and the optimum
flowrate.

Bit Hydraulics
Maximum Jet Impact Force

Similar techniques to that for optimization of the maximum bit horsepower can be obtained to find the
optimum flowrate that maximizes the jet impact force. The jet impact force is given by the following:
Fimp = 2QCv ρ∆Pbit ....................................................................................................................................(7-64)
In a similar manner, this force is maximum when the first derivative of this expression (with respect to the
flowrate) is zero. Assuming a similar relation for the parasitic pressure losses gives the following
equation:
2 Psurf
Pparasitic = .............................................................................................................................................(7-65)
(m + 2)
From this point, the user can find the optimum flowrate; therefore, the flowrate that gives the maximum
jet impact force or maximum bit hydraulic horsepower is obtained. This calculated flowrate might
conflict with those values obtained from hole cleaning or pump requirements, or the maximum and
minimum operating limits defined by tool operation or motor performance. Typically, the Maximum Jet
Impact Force occurs when the bit pressure drop is 50% of the total standpipe pressure.
Some operators prefer to limit power to 5 hp/sq.in (or similar value). PowerPlan only displays the
hydraulic horsepower per hole area (bit HSI) at the current flowrate and nozzle selection, and does not
optimize. The optimized nozzle selection is left to the discretion of the user. For example, the user can
enter the total flowing area of the bit nozzles (or the nozzle configuration) and obtain the pressure loss at
the bit. From the given flowrate and nozzle configuration, the hydraulic horsepower at the bit is
calculated. This process requires some optimization experience.
After a desired pressure drop at the bit has been selected, the user can work backwards to select the bit
nozzles that give the required rate at the selected flowrate. The total flowing area that gives the pressure
drop can be divided into a number of different nozzle configurations, particularly since the jet nozzles
need not all be of the same size. The online help provides the nozzle configurations that correspond to a
range of total flow areas (TFA). Sometimes it is necessary to run a bit with large nozzles in order to
circulate LCM. This option necessarily causes a decrease in both the impact force and the bit hydraulic
horsepower. For example, 2-16/32 in. nozzles have approximately the same TFA as 3-13/32 in. Reducing
the number of nozzles from three to two (for the same TFA) boosts hydraulic power by a factor of 2.25
and increases the impact force by 50%.
Bourgoyne et al. note that it may be possible to achieve a higher level of bit hydraulics than is needed to
adequately clean the bottom of the hole when the following conditions exist:
• Large, high-pressure pumps are available.
• The parasitic pressure loss is low because of a large diameter drillstring and a low-viscosity
drilling fluid.

Bit Hydraulics
It is not necessary to provide a higher level of bit hydraulics than is necessary. Under the above
conditions, the pump energy should be reduced by decreasing the flowrate until the required level of bit
hydraulics is obtained, with the pump operated at the maximum operating pressure. However, the user
must bear in mind that the most significant region (with respect to hole cleaning efficiency) could be
further up the wellbore, particularly in a highly deviated or tortuous wellbore.
In practice, there is not a great deal of difference in optimizing the bit hydraulics with respect to the bit
horsepower or the jet impact force. If one is at the maximum, the other is close to 90% of its maximum.
In summary, if the percentage pressure drop at the bit is between 50 and 65%, the best flowrate is being
selected for good bit cleaning under most conditions. This may not be the best flowrate for all situations,
depending upon other factors such as chip removal, possible hole erosion, and downhole tool or motor
limitations.

Motor and Tool Hydraulics
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual provides an introduction to mud motors
and covers the following topics:
• effects of various factors on mud motor performance
• pressure losses
• prevention of mud motor failures
• motor troubleshooting information
• motor hydraulics modeling
• MWD/LWD pressure drop modeling

Motor Hydraulics
INTRODUCTION TO MOTOR HYDRAULICS

Since the first turbodrill patent was awarded in 1873, designs and ideas for downhole motors have
proliferated. Today, positive displacement motors (PDM) dominate oilfield operations and offer distinct
operational and economic advantages over conventional rotary drilling in many conditions. The
performance of the drilling assembly is often vastly improved by optimizing the hydraulics of the motor.
There are fundamental differences between the operating characteristics of a positive displacement motor
(also known as a Moineau motor) and a turbine or turbodrill. Turbine motors operate at an approximately
constant pressure drop for a given fluid density and flowrate. The pressure drop is proportional to the
fluid density and the square of the flowrate (similar to the flow through an orifice or an MWD tool). It is
not usually possible to calculate the torque, rpm, or efficiency of a turbine motor to any degree of
accuracy without resorting to equipment specification tables.
The following illustration shows a typical turbodrill (see Figure 7-25). The fluid enters the top of the sub
and travels past the stators and rotors. Unlike the PDM, the turbine power output is optimal only over a
limited range of operating conditions. PowerPlan does not offer support for modeling turbines.
13
Figure 7-25: Turbodrill motor.

Motor Hydraulics
The motor performance analysis in the Hydraulics application allows the user to optimize the drilling
performance of an Anadrill PowerPak motor and other motors in the BHA Editor catalog. Every
PowerPak motor is designed to perform efficiently within a range of fluid flowrates. The motor
performance model automatically displays (both numerically and graphically) the ranges for each motor.
Variations above or below the recommended volumes and related pressure drops across the bit may
decrease motor efficiency and life. The model enables the user to determine the following for a motor at a
given flowrate:
• on- and off-bottom pressure drops
• optimal mechanical horsepower
• on-bottom rpm
• downhole torque
• weight-on-bit
The model also incorporates the effects of a rotor nozzle. The rotor nozzle enables part of the flow to
bypass the motor power section and can extend the capacity of the motor and its flexibility in matching
motor performance to other hydraulic and downhole conditions.
The motor pressure drops are integrated with the overall hydraulics software so that the relevance of the
motor configuration to the desired pressure drop can be investigated as a function of pump flowrate, mud
weight and rheology, bit nozzles, and drillstring geometry.
APPLICATIONS
The PDM has been used in both straight-hole drilling and directional drilling. In the sliding mode, the
hole follows the direction of the bent-housing on the motor. In directional drilling applications, downhole
motors permit more control of the wellbore direction (and more effective deviation control) than
conventional rotary methods. PowerPlan is designed to enable the most efficient use of Anadrill
PowerPak motors, although the software also analyzes other motors. The software contains a full list of
motors and their properties.
PDMs can also be used for coring, under-reaming, milling, template drilling, and other operations. In
straight-hole drilling, motors function as a performance drilling tool that increase the rate of penetration
(ROP) and reduce casing wear by minimizing drillstring rotation. A cross section of a typical motor
assembly is shown in the following illustration (see Figure 7-26).

Motor Hydraulics
Figure 7-26: Motor assembly cross section.
Compact design and high-torque capabilities make the PowerPak motors ideal for both of the following
situations:
• conventional directional drilling (when a well path is steered to follow a planned geometric
course)
• geosteering (when the well or drainhole is steered to optimize the local position within the
reservoir, with regard to geological, fluid, and structural boundaries)

Motor Hydraulics
For conventional directional drilling, an adjustable bent-housing in the transmission section and a
stabilizer on the bearing section allow the PowerPak motor to drill in either an oriented (sliding) or rotary
mode. In rotary mode, both the bit and drillstring rotate. The rotation of the drillstring negates the effect
of the bent housing and the bit drills a straight path parallel to the axis of the drillstring above the bent
housing.
In sliding mode, only the bit rotates. The motor changes the well course in the direction of the bent
housing, and the drillstring slides down the hole after the bit. In this mode, the motor is oriented in the
same way as for conventional directional drilling, making the motor useful for kick-off or course
corrections.
The PowerPak steerable motor makes it possible to drill complete hole sections with one BHA and to
attain various combinations of hole size and build-up rate.
In each of the applications described above, the adjustable bent housing can be quickly set on the rig
floor. Housings are available for 0 to 2º and 0 to 3º bend angle ranges. The PowerPak extra curve motor
(XC) has a surface-adjustable 0 to 4º bend mechanism.
MOTOR ASSEMBLY
The PowerPak steerable motor consists of four major subassemblies:
• top sub – consists of a crossover sub, dump valve, float sub, and flex sub
• power section – consists of a rotor and a stator that convert hydraulic energy into mechanical
rotary power
• transmission section – transmits rotary drive from the power section to the bearing section and
also incorporates the adjustable bent housing
• bearing section – supports the axial and radial loads during drilling and transmits the rotary drive
to the bit through the drive shaft
Top Sub
The top sub of the PowerPak motor can be a crossover sub, a dump valve, float sub, or flex sub.
Historically, PowerPak motors used a dump valve as a top sub; however, in most cases, the use of a dump
valve is not necessary. Although PowerPak dump valves are reliable, it is not recommended to run a
dump valve unless required. In these cases, use a crossover sub instead.
Crossover Sub
The crossover sub for a PowerPak motor is a sub that has a conventional box thread and a non-standard
pin thread for the PowerPak stators. A crossover sub is used as the top sub of the motor for most
operations. A dump valve, float sub, or flex sub is only used when necessary.

Motor Hydraulics
Dump Valve
A dump valve can be added to the top of the power section. The dump valve prevents “wet trips” (pulling
pipe full of fluid) by allowing the drillpipe to drain when pulling out of the hole. The PowerPak dump
valve also acts as a crossover sub, connecting the stator to a standard API-type thread.
When circulation rates are low, or when there is no circulation, a spring holds the bypass piston in the
upper position, keeping the ports open and allowing the drilling fluid to flow into or out of the drillstring
(see Figure 7-27).
Figure 7-27: Dump valve assembly.
The piston moves down, closing the bypass ports at a threshold that is considerably less than the
minimum circulation rate for the motor (which is given for the motor in the Hydraulics output property
sheet). Drilling fluid is then directed through the motor section. When circulation stops, the bypass piston
is released and the bypass ports reopen.
Float Sub
Float subs for PowerPak motors incorporate commercially available float valves. The float subs also act
as crossovers between conventional API threads and Anadrill threads.

Motor Hydraulics
Flex Sub
For tough drilling conditions, a flex sub can be run as the top sub of a PowerPak motor. The flex sub acts
as a crossover sub, and it may include a float valve. The conditions for using a flex sub are as follows:
• frequent motor stalling
• rocking the BHA to help sliding
• back-reaming
• high dogleg severity (more than 12º/100 ft)
Power Section
The power section of the motor converts hydraulics energy from the drilling fluid into mechanical power
to turn the bit. This power is achieved by reverse application of the Moineau pump principle. A PDM
motor operates by forcing the drilling fluid between a helical motor and a sealing stator. A known and
constant amount of rotation is required to pass a fixed volume of fluid through the system, so the motor
rpm is proportional to the flowrate. Because any resistance to turning causes an increase in pressure, the
pressure drop across the motor is proportional to the rotary torque. The rotational force is transmitted
through a transmission shaft and drive shaft to the bit.
The PowerPak rotor is manufactured from corrosion-resistant steel, and usually has 0.010 in. of chrome
plating applied to reduce friction and abrasion. Rotors that are coated with tungsten carbide are also
available for reduced abrasion wear and corrosion damage. PowerPak rotors are bored to accept bypass
nozzles for high-flow applications.
The stator consists of a steel tube with an elastomer (rubber) lining molded into the bore. The elastomer in
the lining is specifically formulated to resist abrasion and hydrocarbon-induced deterioration.
The rotor and stator have similar helical profiles, but the rotor has one less spiral (or lobe) than the stator
(see Figure 7-28). In an assembled power section, the rotor and stator form a continuous seal at their
contact points (along a straight line), producing a number of independent cavities. As fluid (water, mud,
or air) is forced through these progressive cavities, it causes the rotor to ratchet around inside the stator.
This movement of the rotor inside the stator is called “nutation.” For each nutation cycle made by the
rotor inside the stator, the rotor turns (ratchets) the distance of one lobe width. The rotor must nutate for
each lobe in the stator to complete one revolution of the bit box. A motor with 7:8 rotor/stator lobe
configuration and a speed of 100 rpm at the bit box has a nutation speed of 700 cycles/minute.
NOTE
Although the preceding process describes fluid motion through the cavities as water, mud, or air,
PowerPlan currently does not model air drilling.

Motor Hydraulics
Figure 7-28: Power section assembly.
The power section of a downhole motor is designated by its rotor/stator lobe configuration. For example,
a 4:5 power section has four lobes in the rotor and five in the stator. Generally, the higher the number of
lobes, the higher the torque output of the motor and the slower the speed. PowerPak motors are available
in 1:2, 3:4, 4:5, 5:6, and 7:8 lobe configurations. Torque also depends upon the number of stages (a stage
is one complete spiral of the stator helix). PowerPak motors have a standard length power section or a
longer extended power (XP) power section. The XP power sections have more stages, providing greater
torque, without a decrease in rotational speed. The XXP motors (with an extra-long power section) are
also available in certain sizes.

Motor Hydraulics
Rotor/Stator Lobe Ratio

The lobes on a rotor and stator act like a gearbox. As their numbers increase for a given motor size, the
torque output by the motor generally increases and its output shaft speed generally decreases. The
following illustration shows an example of the general relationship between power section speed and
torque and the power section lobe configuration (see Figure 7-29). Because the mechanical power of the
motor is defined as rotational speed (rpm) multiplied by torque, a greater number of lobes in a motor does
not necessarily produce more horsepower. Motors with more lobes are actually less efficient because the
seal area between the rotor and stator increases with the number of lobes.
Figure 7-29: Output shaft speed as a function of the rotor/stator lobe ratio.
The mechanical horsepower of the motor is given by the following equation:
HPmotor = T × rpm ..............................................................................................................................................(7-66)
Expressing this equation in English units, where the mechanical power is given in horsepower, the output
shaft rotary speed is in rpm, and the output torque is in ft-lbf, Equation 7-66 becomes the following:
T × rpm
HPmotor = .............................................................................................................................................(7-67)
5252

Motor Hydraulics
Rotor/Stator Interference Fit

The difference between the size of the rotor mean diameter (valley to lobe peak measurement) and the
stator minor diameter (lobe peak to lobe peak) is defined as rotor/stator interference fit (see Figure 7-30).
Figure 7-30: Rotor/stator interference fit.
Motors are usually assembled with the rotor sized larger than the stator. This process produces a strong
positive interference seal called a positive fit. Motors run with a rotor mean diameter more than 0.022
inches larger than the stator minor diameter at downhole conditions are very ‘strong’ (capable of
producing large pressure drops), but they usually have a reduced life because premature chunking
develops (see the following subsection entitled, “Failure Modes and Prevention”).
If increased downhole temperatures are anticipated, the amount of positive fit is reduced during motor
assembly to allow for the swelling of the elastomer lining in the stator. An oversize stator is usually
required to obtain the correct amount of interference between the rotor and the stator for temperatures
above 200º F. If the anticipated circulating temperature of the well is above 225º F, the interference fit
must be a flush (negative) fit, in which the rotor mean diameter is the same size as or smaller than the
stator minor diameter when the motor is assembled in the shop.

Motor Hydraulics
Spiral Stage Length

The stator stage length is defined as the axial length required for one lobe in the stator to rotate 360°
along its helical path, around the body of the stator; however, the stage length of a rotor is not equivalent
to the stage length of the corresponding stator. A rotor has a shorter stage length than its corresponding
stator. The equation that describes the general relation of the rotor stages to the stator stages is as follows:
n
Rotor stages = stator stages .......................................................................................................................(7-68)
n +1
where,
n = number of rotor lobes

rotor stages = number of stages (360° turns) on the rotor
stator stages = number of stages (360° turns) in the stator/power section
For example, in a PowerPak A675 model motor, with a 4:5 lobe and a 4.8-stage power section, the power
section and the individual stator each have 4.8 stages; however, the rotor has more than 4.8 stages, and
actually has six full rotations of a lobe (5/4 x 4.8 = 6). The following illustration shows the stage length of
a rotor (see Figure 7-31). The number of stages of a power section is also determined by simply counting
the number of rotor stages and reversing the calculation.
Figure 7-31: Spiral stage length.
Stage length is dependent upon the lobe pitch angle of the spiral. As the pitch angle increases (resulting in
a tighter spiral and shorter stage length), the force vector perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the
rotor (torque) and the volume of the cavity within the stage decrease. This condition results in a reduction
of torque output and an increase in motor speed. Conversely, a decrease in pitch angle produces a longer
stage length, resulting in an increase in torque and a decrease in speed.

Motor Hydraulics
Long-stage motors usually produce higher torque and fewer revolutions per minute than short stage
motors. The drawback for long-stage motors is that as the seal length along the rotor/stator increases with
stage length, both the efficiency of the seal and the speed of the motor decrease. The primary application
for long stage designs is in air drilling.
Number of Stages
Using a power section with more stages is the only way to effectively increase the power of a motor. The
additional stages of XP power sections can produce more torque or spread the load on the motor, running
each stage at a lower pressure drop. Running at a lower pressure drop usually extends the life of the
stator.
The XP power sections are also used in high temperature wells. The loose fit initially required to allow
for stator swell in hot wells often means that a regular length power section is too weak to drill when first
tripped into the well, until the stator has time to swell. An XP power section can be assembled with an
extremely loose fit between the rotor and stator and still produce enough power to drill; however, the
overall length of the motor and the cost of the parts increase when using XP power sections.
Pressure Drop Per Stage

The maximum designed pressure drop per stage is a function of the lobe profile and the hardness of the
elastomer lining. Changes in the hardness of the elastomer affect not only the pressure drop, but also the
resiliency and life of the elastomer.
Failure Modes and Prevention

The elastomer lining in the stator tube is usually the element that fails first in the power section. The
causes of rubber failure in a stator are chunking, debonding, and junk damage.
Chunking
Chunking describes a stator in which the rubber across the top of the lobes rips away. Chunking
occurs when the strength of the friction force between the rotor lobe and the stator lobe exceeds
the strength of the rubber in the stator. The magnitude of the friction force between the rotor and
the stator is affected by the lubricity of the mud, interference fit between the rotor and the stator,
nutation speed, and pressure drop. Most stator failures result from chunking.
Debonding
Two bonding agents are used in stators. One agent bonds the steel to the tube, the other agent
bonds to the stator elastomer, and both agents bond to one another. Debonding is defined as the
failure of one, two, or all three bonds in the stator. Stators failing from debonding typically have
large sheets of loose elastomer. These sheets of elastomer usually have a smooth back surface
where the stator was molded against the steel tube.
Junk Damage
Junk damage is caused by pumping junk through a motor. Pumping junk through the stator
creates sharp cuts along the spiral path of the stator, and may also damage the rotor along the
same path.

Motor Hydraulics
It is difficult to prevent debond failures; however, debond failures are rare. Certain measures can prevent
chunking failures and junk damage. The most obvious prevention technique is to ensure that no junk gets
into the mud system or into the drillstring. Chunking prevention is a combination of techniques involving
the following:
• rotor/stator fit
• bottomhole temperature
• drilling mud selection
• proper operation (performance curves)
• lost circulation material
• nozzled rotors
• dogleg severity
• stator age tracking
Rotor/Stator Fit
The interference fit of the rotor and stator is critical to the performance and overall life of the elastomer in
the stator tube. A motor with too much interference (rotor much bigger than the stator) runs with a high
differential pressure, but will develop premature chunking after as few as six to eight circulating hours.
The chunking may be uniform or follow a spiral path through the motor.
A rotor/stator interference fit that is too loose produces a weak motor that stalls at a low differential
pressure. Motor stalling is when the torque required to turn the bit is greater than the motor is capable of
producing. When a motor stalls, the rotor is pushed to one side of the stator and the mud is pumped across
the seal face on the opposite side of the rotor. The lobe profile of the stator must deform for fluid to pass
across the seal face. This condition causes very high fluid velocity across the deformed top of the stator
lobes and leads to chunking. When sliding, chunking caused by a motor stalling has a straight path along
one wall of the stator tube. With surface rotation, chunking caused by motor stalling can be uniform or
follow a spiral path. To prevent chunking, the appropriate rotor/stator interference (or clearance) must be
carefully selected, relative to downhole mud temperatures.

Motor Hydraulics
The PowerPlan “PowerFit” utility enables the user to select the correct fit through the use of a simple
Excel spreadsheet and input parameters (see Figure 7-32).
PowerPak Interference Calculator. Version 2 (1 Aug '98)
Motor Code Well Data Motor Running Data
A475XXP5683
BHCT. / °F Expected Pressure
150 drop across motor / psi
400
TVD. / ft.
5000 Mud Type
Water Based Mud
Workshop Temp. / °F Fluid density / ppg
70 10
Motor Dimensions Measured Rotor & Stator Serial Number

stator Dimensions / in.
Rotor Major Diameter 4.200 Rotor Serial Number
Rotor Minor Diameter 2.800
Stator Minor Diameter 3.350 Assembly date
Measured Interference / in 0.150
Recommended 0.008 Acceptable deviance ±0.015

Interference / in.
Use standard stator and standard rotor
Figure 7-32: Rotor/stator interference fit.
Mud Temperature
The circulating temperature dictates the amount of interference in assembling the rotor/stator. The higher
the anticipated downhole temperature, the lower the compression required between the rotor and the
stator. The reduction in the interference during motor assembly compensates for the swell of the
elastomer downhole because of temperature and mud properties. If there is too much interference between
the rotor and stator at operating conditions, the stator will experience high shearing stresses, resulting in
fatigue damage. This fatigue leads to premature chunking failure. Failure to compensate for stator swell
from downhole temperature is a leading cause of motor failure.

Motor Hydraulics
Drilling Fluids
PowerPak motors are designed to operate effectively with all types of oil- and water-base mud systems, as
well as with oil-emulsion, high-viscosity and high-density drilling fluids, air, mist, and foam. Drilling
fluids often have many different additives, some of which have a detrimental effect on the stator
elastomer and stainless steel/chrome-plated rotor.
Oil-base mud (OBM) generally causes stators to swell. If oil-base drilling fluids are used, it is important
to consider the effects of bottomhole circulating temperature and the “aniline point” on the stator, which
is made of nitrile rubber. The aniline point is the lowest temperature at which equal volumes of freshly
distilled aniline and oil are capable of mixing completely. Aromatics (such as aniline) can swell and
deteriorate nitrile rubber. The lower the aniline point of an OBM (compared with the circulating
temperature of the mud), the more severely the rubber parts can be damaged. Therefore, when OBM is
used, low-aromatic, low-toxicity mud (with an aniline point above 200° F) is recommended, and the
bottomhole temperature aniline point should be recorded.
The naptha base of many pipe corrosion inhibitors can cause excessive swelling of the elastomer,
particularly when the inhibitor is added to the system in slugs. Slugging causes high concentrations of the
product to make contact with the elastomer.
Chloride in muds can severely corrode the chrome plating on standard rotors. In addition to the damage
caused to the rotors by corrosion, the rough edges left on the rotor lobes damage the stator by cutting the
top off the elastomer in the stator lobe profile. These cuts reduce the effectiveness of the rotor/stator seal
and cause the motor to stall at a low differential pressure.
For OBM with supersaturated water phases and for salt muds, rotors coated with tungsten carbide are
recommended.
Motor Performance Curves

The difference between the on- and off-bottom drilling pressure is defined as the differential pressure
(also referred to as “Delta P” in the PowerPlan Hydraulics module). The power section of the motor
generates this pressure difference. The larger the pressure difference, the higher the torque output of the
motor and the lower the output shaft rotary speed (rpm).
Motors run with too much differential pressure experience premature chunking (in as little as six pumping
hours) in a manner similar to stators that have too much interference (compression) between the rotor and
stator. The chunking follows a spiral path or is uniform throughout the stator body. Running a motor at or
close to the rated maximum differential pressure severely reduces the life of the stator.
The PowerPak performance curves in the Hydraulics application provide a useful guide for determining
the optimum amount of differential pump pressure and flowrate for the motor; however, there is no “best
point” on the curves where the motor should be run. The intersection of the torque line with the motor
speed in the PowerPak Motor Handbook does not indicate the optimum running conditions.

Motor Hydraulics
To extend the life of the motor, the motor should be run at no more than 90% of the maximum rated
horsepower output for a given flowrate. The flowrate should also be kept below 90% of the maximum
rate. Running at the maximum rated level for any parameter (pump rate, weight-on-bit, differential motor
pressure or rotary table speed) reduces the overall life of the motor, particularly the stator. The use of XP
power sections and rotor nozzles should be considered if these operating limits produce unacceptable
motor performance levels.
Lost Circulation Material

Lost circulation material (LCM) can cause the following problems when it is pumped through a motor:
• stator wear
• material can plug off inside the motor (usually at the dump valve if one is used, or at the top of
the output shaft or radial bearing)
However, LCM can be used with PowerPak motors if the following precautions are followed:
• Add LCM evenly (avoid pumping slugs).
• Minimize the use of hard, sharp-edged materials such as a nut plug, coarse mica, and calcium
carbonate chips, since these materials cause stator wear by abrasion.
Although these guidelines help minimize the plugging problems associated with LCM, they cannot
completely eliminate the possibility of plugging the motor or bearing section.

Motor Hydraulics
Nozzled Rotors
The PowerPak rotor is bored and able to be fit with a nozzle to bypass part of the flow and extend the
motor capacity and enhance flexibility in matching the motor performance to other hydraulic or downhole
conditions (see Figure 7-33).
Figure 7-33: Nozzled rotor.
The amount of fluid bypassed is determined by the nozzle size, pressure drop through the power section,
and fluid density. For performance drilling in larger diameter hole sections, adding a rotor nozzle allows
the total flowrate to be increased to aid with hole cleaning and cuttings removal. In special applications,
such as spudding, under-reaming, or hole opening in large holes, adding a rotor nozzle reduces the bit
speed at high flowrates.

Motor Hydraulics
A simple hydraulics calculation determines the size of the rotor nozzle. Alternatively, as in the PowerPlan
calculation, the pressure drop across the power section can determine the flowrate that is bypassed
through the nozzle. In this case, the nozzle flowrate is given by the following equation:
2∆Pmotor
Qnozzle = Anozzle ...............................................................................................................................(7-69)
ρ
where,
Anozzle = total flowing area through nozzle

∆Pmotor = pressure drop across power section
ρ = drilling fluid density
Motors with nozzled rotors are often over-pumped when off-bottom. The amount of fluid bypassed
depends greatly upon the pressure drop generated by the power section. This pressure drop is typically
100 to 150 psi when off-bottom, whereas nozzles are sized assuming a power section pressure drop of 300
to 500 psi. Nozzled rotor motors should not be operated at flowrates higher than the normal (non-nozzled
rotor) pump limits when circulating off-bottom.
Dogleg
Rotating a motor in a high-dogleg interval in a well can cause damage to the stator. The geometry of the
wellbore causes the motor to bend and flex, especially if the motor has a bent housing. Because the stator
housing is the weakest portion of the motor, it bends the most. As the stator housing bends, the elastomer
pushes on the rotor and bends it, causing excessive compression on the stator lobes and leading to
chunking.
Transmission Section
The transmission assembly, which is attached to the lower end of the rotor, transmits the rotational speed
and torque generated by the power section to the bearing and drive shaft. The transmission assembly also
compensates for the eccentric movement of the rotor nutation and absorbs its downthrust.

Motor Hydraulics
Rotation is transmitted through the transmission shaft, which is fitted with a universal joint at each end to
absorb the eccentric motion of the rotor (see Figure 7-34). Both universal joints are packed with grease
and sealed to extend their life.
Figure 7-34: Transmission assembly.

Motor Hydraulics
The transmission section accommodates the surface-adjustable bent housing (see Figure 7-35). The
transmission in most motors allows for 0 to 3° of bend in the housing. The maximum bend for XP motors
is 1.83° because the larger diameter shaft required for high torque leaves less clearance in the
transmission. Bend settings greater than 1.83° cause the transmission in an XP motor to rub against the ID
of the adjustable bent housing.
Figure 7-35: Surface-adjustable bent housing assembly.

Motor Hydraulics
Bearing Section and Drive Shaft

The bearing section transmits drilling thrust and rotational power from the transmission shaft to the drill
bit. This section consists of a forged steel drive shaft supported by both axial and radial bearings (see
Figure 7-36).
Figure 7-36: Axial bearing assembly.
Because the bearing section of a downhole motor is the component most exposed to harsh conditions,
PowerPak motors are designed to ensure maximum operational efficiency by taking the following factors
into account:
• drilling fluid properties
• WOB
• side loading
• rotational speed
• pressure drop across the bit
Depending on the directional requirements, the bearing housing can be fitted with either a rig-floor
replaceable sleeve stabilizer, an integral blade stabilizer, or a rotating stabilizer.

Motor Hydraulics
The axial bearings consist of multiple mud-lubricated ball races that support the WOB load when drilling
and the hydraulic downthrust when circulating off-bottom, drilling with less than the balanced WOB, and
back-reaming (see Figure 7-37).
Green balls
Red balls
Figure 7-37: Axial bearing loading.
The tungsten carbide radial journal bearings mounted above and below the axial bearings serve a dual
purpose:
• to counteract the side force on the bit when drilling
• to restrict the flow of mud through the bearing section so that only a percentage of the total mud
flow is used to lubricate the bearings (both radial and axial)
The amount of fluid that goes through the bearing is based on the bit pressure drop developed by the bit
nozzles and the radial bearing clearance. For proper cooling of the bearings, the bit pressure loss must be
in the range of 250 to 1,000 psi. If rig hydraulics require a bit pressure drop of less than 250 psi, the motor
can be assembled with a special radial journal bearing that has a low bit pressure drop.

Motor Hydraulics
Radial Bearing Clearance

The actual leak-flow through the radial bearings is more complex than a single bit nozzle equation for
several reasons:
• The bearings are cylindrical restrictions.
• The drive shaft moves to one side (due to load) so the flow area is not uniform, with zero
clearance on one side and approximately 0.015 in. on the other.
• With a narrow flow channel, mud viscosity become important.
• Drive shaft rotation also disturbs the flow causing a greater restriction.
The upper radial bearing clearance has a smaller flow area than, and is in series with, the lower radial
bearing. The same flowrate passes through both, so the pressure drop is different for both lower and upper
bearings. The sum of the two pressure drops is the same as the bit pressure drop, which is in parallel flow.
PowerPak motors have standard-, low-, and high-pressure clearance configurations. Typically, a clearance
that gives a leak flow of 3 to 5% of the pump flowrate should be sufficient to give a representative
flowrate across the bearings.
Bearing Failure Modes and Prevention

In order to prevent bearings from failing, the following criteria should be assessed:
• WOB
• bit pressure drop
• mud solids
WOB
The aggressive nature of PDC bits generally precludes high bit weights; however, Tricone bits are often
run with high bit weights that accelerate the wear of the balls and races of the axial bearings. The races in
the mud-lubricated axial bearings are case-hardened. The wear rate of the races is not linear, because the
amount of wear increases when they have worn past their hardened area. Just because a motor has only
minor wear after a long run does not mean that the bearings are capable of repeating the same run time.
Motors with XP power sections do not have higher WOB limits than regular motors. The additional
torque output of an XP motor does not allow running more WOB. Because a PowerPak motor at or near
the maximum WOB decreases the life of the axial bearing, a limit of 80% of the rated maximum WOB is
recommended for long runs.
Bit Pressure Drop

Bit pressure drop is the amount of force acting to push mud through the radial and axial bearings. The
fluid flow passing through the bearings must be high enough to cool and lubricate the bearings; however,
too much flow will wash out the bearings.
Because they are designed to restrict flow, the radial bearings allow a high bit pressure drop (1,500 psi).
The minimum bit pressure drop is 250 psi for standard bearings and 100 psi for low bit pressure drop
bearings. Problems can occur with too little pressure drop (particularly when motors are surface-tested
without a bit), because virtually no fluid passes through the bearing section and the radial bearings can
overheat rapidly. Motors should not be surface-tested for more than 1 minute without the minimum 100
or 250 psi pressure drop.

Motor Hydraulics
Mud Solids
The bearing section is compatible with most mud systems. Highly abrasive mud systems can cause
excessive wear on the entire bearing pack (radial and axial). Examples of highly abrasive muds include
those with more than 2% sand, and systems that use hematite or similar substances for weighting agents.
Housings and Threads / Rotary Speeds

Rotating motors at speeds above 80 rpm can damage the elastomer in the stator. High rotary speed
increases the amount of centrifugal force generated by the rotor and the transmission, resulting in
increased wear of the stator, transmission, radial bearings, and internal connections. The larger the bend
setting, the more susceptible motors are to damage. In addition, the horsepower supplied to the bit from
surface rotation of the drillstring must be transferred through the stator to the rotor inside the power
section. The following table provides a guide for the maximum speed at available bend angle settings (see
Table 7-3). To extend the motor life it is recommended to run the motor at no more that 80% of the
maximum rated speed.
0°° to 3°° Housing Maximum 0°° to 2°° Housing Maximum

Bend Setting rpm Bend Setting rpm
0.00° 200 0.00° 200
0.39° 160 0.26° 170
0.78° 120 0.52° 140
1.15° 60 0.77° 120
1.50° 40 1.00° 90
1.83° Not Recommended 1.22° 60
2.60° Not Recommended 1.73° Not Recommended
Table 7-3: PowerPak maximum speed as a function of bent housing angle.
Dogleg Severity Limitation

Dogleg severity (DLS) is a measure of the curvature of the wellbore. The following table summarizes the
maximum DLS in which PowerPak motors can safely run in the sliding mode, and the maximum bend
angle above which the motors cannot be rotated, except for orientation purposes (see Table 7-4).

Motor Hydraulics
Max. Bit Absolute Max.

Max. DLS with Max. Bit Offset Max. Bend
o o Offset Bend for XP
Motor 3 Bend with 1.5 Bend o for
o with 1.5 Bend o Power
( /100 ft) (in.) Rotation ( ) o
(in.) Sections ( )
A213XP 50 0.76 1.51 1.5 1.83
A238M 62 0.97 1.93 1.5 1.83
A287M 51 1.02 2.03 1.5 1.83
A350M 36 1.15 2.30 1.5 1.83
A475M 20 1.52 3.03 1.5 1.83
A675M 19 2.21 4.42 1.5 1.83
A800M 17 2.53 5.07 1.5 1.83
A962M 15 2.92 5.83 1.5 1.83
A1125M 13 3.08 6.15 1.5 1.83
Table 7-4: PowerPak dogleg severity limitations.
NOTE
The information in Table 7-4 does not apply to short radius motors, but information for these
motors can be found in the section entitled, Short Radius Drilling.
JOB PREPARATION
The PowerPlan Hydraulics and PowerFit applications can help tailor the motor hydraulics to the particular
operating conditions.
Motor Selection
Hole diameter and flowrate usually dictate the tool diameter. After the diameter has been chosen, the
other specifications can be selected.
Dump Valve
Running a float valve above the motor can reduce the probability of plugging the dump valve. If a float
valve is run and plugging is still a potential problem, a crossover sub can be run instead of a dump valve.
Rotor/Stator Configuration
The rotor/stator configuration affects the bit speed (rpm) at a given flowrate. A range of rotor/stator
configurations is available, according to the application. When OBM is used, the 4:5 ratio is preferred to
7:8 for minimizing possible elastomer damage.

Motor Hydraulics
Rotor Nozzle
A rotor nozzle should be specified if high flowrates are anticipated (possibly because of hole cleaning
concerns).
Bent Housing Setting

The degree of bend depends on the anticipated maximum DLS in the hole section and the diameter of any
stabilizers. The PowerPlan DrillSAFE application helps predict tendencies for the BHA for the selected
bent housing settings. Nevertheless, local experience should be taken into consideration, even if it has
been obtained using different steerable motors.
Bit Selection
When selecting the bit to run with a PowerPak motor, the following factors should be taken into account:
• directional control
• expected run duration
• drilling program
• type of cutting structure required
• fluid passage design
• expected ROP
• estimated rotating time
Fluid flow passages must have a total flow area that will not cause excessive back-pressure to the
PowerPak restrictor bearings.
NOTE
A widely accepted guideline for directional applications is to select a bit with a tooth structure at
least one grade harder than the grade selected for rotary drilling in the same formation.
Hydraulic Considerations
Every PowerPak motor is designed to perform efficiently within a range of fluid flowrates. These
flowrates are shown in the Hydraulics output window every time a motor is included in a BHA that is
loaded into Hydraulics. Variation above or below the recommended flowrates and the related pressure
drop across the bit may lead to decreased motor life and efficiency.
Troubleshooting
By paying careful attention to variations in the mud flow pressure, it is possible to detect many common
downhole problems that occur while drilling and take corrective action before a costly trip becomes
necessary. Information to identify and correct common problems is given in the following table (see
Table 7-5). Coupled real-time internal and annular pressure measurements may also help detect the onset
of problems.

Motor Hydraulics
Secondary Possible
Observation Remedial Action
Observation Explanation
Stop rotation immediately.

Pull off bottom. Shut down pumps
ROP drops Unchanged flowrate
Motor stalling if pressure drop is not observed.
Pressure surges Torque increases
Resume drilling carefully. Apply
WOB carefully.
ROP drops Same as above (pump stroke

Flowrate drops Motor stalling
Constant pressure forced down by motor stalling).
Normal WOB Pull off bottom. Reciprocate string.

Bit balling
Torque decreases Eventually increase flowrate.
ROP decreases
Proceed with care. When stabilizer
Pressure increases
hanging occurs while sliding, drill a
Normal WOB Stabilizers hanging or
few feet in rotation. Eventually pull
Torque increases reaming
out of hole to reduce bend in SAB
housing.
ROP decreases Normal WOB Junk in hole Proceed carefully to wash junk
Irregular pressure Irregular rotary torque Cone locking away and/or pull out of hole.
Normal WOB Washout or dump valve Pull off bottom. Look for trends on
ROP decreases Normal torque failure charts. Pull out of hole.
Pressure decreases
Normal WOB Formation change Adapt parameters.
String ID obstructed
ROP normal Normal WOB, torque Recycle pumps with various
Possible pack-off in
Pressure surges Flowrate unchanged flowrates; reciprocate string.
annulus
Normal WOB, torque Look for trends on charts. Pull out

Washout
Flowrate unchanged of hole.
ROP normal
Pressure decreases
Abnormal mud return and
Mud losses Follow lost circulation procedure.
pit levels
ROP increases ----------------------------------- Formation change Adapt parameters.
Table 7-5: Troubleshooting common problems.

Motor Hydraulics
Air Drilling
PowerPlan 3.0 is not configured to model the effects of drilling with air or foam. Special long-stage
power sections are available for these applications. The air volume requirements for a PowerPak motor
vary depending upon the system pressure. In general, the maximum allowable volume of surface gas
(ft3/min) is equal to the following:
maximum flowrate (gpm) x standpipe pressure (psi)

110
As the surface pressure decreases, so does the maximum volume of air. Motor-stalls when using air do
not produce the sudden increase in standpipe pressure that occurs with water- or oil-base mud. The
compressibility of the air and the volume of the drillpipe result in a gradual increase in air pressure when
the motor stalls. This effect increases with measured depth and drillpipe size. The sudden decrease in
ROP is a better indicator of a stalled motor when drilling with air.
A small nozzle should be used in the rotor when using PowerPak motors on air. This configuration helps
bleed off air pressure before and during the making up of connections, reducing the amount of runaway
experienced by the motor.
Short Radius Drilling

Short radius drilling is highly recommended when it is more desirable to kick off below a problem
formation, external casing shoe, or internal completion component. A short-radius well requires less total
drilling and minimizes the need for an isolation packer or liner by keeping both the curve and the lateral
within the desired portion of the reservoir. The PowerPak XF and PowerPak XC motors are two of the
motors recommended for this type of drilling.
PowerPak XF Motor
The PowerPak extra flex (XF) motor has articulations above and below a shortened power section and is
used for drilling curves down to a 40-ft radius. High build rates are achieved by locating the three points
of contact at the bearing section. The build mechanism consists of the bit, rotating stabilizer, bent
housing, and a pair of shimmable pads that act like an offset, field-adjustable stabilizer. A significant
innovation of this motor is the stabilizer geometry located in the bit drive sub (see Figure 7-38). As this
second point of contact rotates, it smoothes out steps or ledges created by the bit offset and allows easier
sliding of the BHA. The stabilizers and pads are easily configured on the rig floor to achieve build rates as
high as 145°/100 ft (see Figure 7-39).

Motor Hydraulics
Figure 7-38: XF short radius motor, near-bit stabilizer, and bit.
Figure 7-39: XF short radius motor adjustable pads.

Motor Hydraulics
Above the bearing section, motor flexibility is achieved with articulations above and below the power
section. These pressure-sealed ball and socket mechanisms act much like the universal joints on an
automobile drive train, transmitting torque, yet bending in any plane (see Figure 7-40). This feature
allows the system to rotate while drilling and negotiate severe doglegs (without regard to orientation)
when tripping in and out of the hole.
Figure 7-40: Articulation mechanism.
If greater drilling horsepower is required, the system has the capability of combining a second power
section and another articulation. Both roller-cone and PDC bits can be used, depending on the formation.
It is generally recommended that a roller-cone bit be used for drilling the curve to reduce reactive
fluctuations in motor torque and improve control of the toolface.
PowerPak XC Motor
The PowerPak extra curve (XC) motor is capable of drilling curves down to a 65- to 70-ft radius. The
three points of contact for the build are at the bit, the pad at the bend, and the top end of the power
section. Although the bit offset is much greater than that of the XF motor, the flexibility of the
components allows the XC motor to bend, compensating for the higher bit offset and allowing a safe trip
in and out of the hole. The surface-adjustable 0 to 4° bend mechanism is similar to that of conventional
PowerPak motors and is easily configured on the rig floor. The ability to kick off and turn in difficult
situations (such as soft cement plugs or whipstock faces) makes the XC motor popular in the field.

Motor Hydraulics
POWERPLAN MOTOR HYDRAULICS MODELING

Due to the complexity of motor hydraulics, an empirical model is assumed for the flow behavior. The
relationships between the motor rpm, torque, and pressure drop across the power section are described in
the following section. The details in this section also enable the user to add a motor to the catalog when
one is not present. All current Anadrill PowerPak motors (and their associated properties and power
curves) are currently within the BHA Editor catalog, and are supported by the Hydraulics analysis
module.
Theoretical Background
The two basic parameters that define the mechanical output of the motor are torque and rpm.
The typical relationships between torque and rpm, on-bottom pressure, off-bottom pressure, and flowrate
can be expressed by the following equations:
......................................................................................................................................(7-70)
T = a + c(∆P + Poff )
RPM = (e + fQ) + ( g + hQ) P + (i + jQ) P 2 .............................................................................................(7-71)
where,
T = torque
RPM = motor rpm
∆P = difference between the on- and off-bottom pressure drop differences
Poff = off-bottom pressure drop
P = ∆P + Poff = total pressure drop across motor power section
Q = mud flowrate
a, c, e, f, g, h, i, j are empirical coefficients that are to be determined from curve-fitting
From torque, rpm, and flowrate, the mechanical and hydraulic horsepower curves can be reconstructed if
given the necessary data. The PowerPlan algorithms determine the modifications to the pressure drop that
occur when a rotor nozzle is present, so power curves for nozzled motors do not need to be digitized.

Motor Hydraulics
Necessary Data
Either power curves or digitized data are acceptable, although the digitized data are preferable, since they
are typically more precise than that obtained from the user digitizing the power curves.
The minimum data that enable PowerPlan to accurately represent the motor performance are as follows:
• torque and rpm as functions of differential pressure (on- and off-bottom pressure drop difference),
or as functions of the total pressure drop across the motor
• off-bottom pressure drop as a function of flowrate (Note that the off-bottom pressure drop is
sometimes given independent of flowrate as a single value. Alternatively, it can be derived from
the total pressure drop at the maximum torque and the maximum operating torque, as for the
Drilex motor example included in the next section, entitled “Example of Curve-fitting.”)
• general specifications of the motor (OD, linear weight, length, connection size and type, make-up
torques for both connections, bit size range, and minimum and maximum motor flowrates)
• recommended operating differential pressure
Example of Curve-fitting
In the following example of curve-fitting, the data used is for the Drilex DIR675 Directional PDM. The
minimum and maximum flowrates for the motor are 300 gpm and 650 gpm respectively. From the data in
the Drilex motor handbook the following detailed steps describe how to produce the curve fits and enter
the data into PowerPlan (all data are in English units).
1. Use the torque vs. differential pressure data at two different values of the differential pressure as
follows:
2500 = a + c(300 + Poff )

3620 = a + c(450 + Poff )
2. Solve these equations simultaneously to give c = 7.4667.
3. From the maximum operating torque and total pressure data, the following is given:
3300 = a + 7.4667 × 550

⇒ a = −806.6
4. From any point in the torque vs. pressure differential data the following is given:
3050 = −806.6 + 7.4667 × (375 + Poff )

⇒ Poff = 141
5. The rpm data is fitted in two stages. The first stage breaks the rpm into a quadratic equation that is
solved for each individual flowrate, as follows:

Motor Hydraulics
RPM = A + BP + CP 2 for each flowrate.
Thus, from the rpm vs. pressure data, quadratic equations are fit to each flowrate. In the following
example, the table of values is built up (see Table 7-6):
Flowrate (Q) A B C
300 77.9 0.07323 -1.6476E-4
400 102.6 0.0802 -1.6450E-4
500 128.7 0.101 -1.834E-4
600 151.2 0.1164 -1.8924E-4
Table 7-6: Table of values.
An example of one of these curve fits is shown in the following illustration (see Figure 7-41).
190
185
RPM 180
175
170
165
160
200 300 400 500 600 700

Total Pressure (psi)
Figure 7-41: Quadratic curve fit for motor rpm vs. flowrate.

Motor Hydraulics
6. For each flowrate, PowerPlan builds up a set of quadratic curves (as the preceding table shows). Then
each of the fitted coefficients is split into a linear function of flowrate as follows:
A = (e + fQ )
B = ( g + hQ)
C = (i + jQ )
7. Linear fits are performed on each of these functions in turn (see Figure 7-42).
B
160
140
A coefficient
120
100
80
300 350 400 450 500 550 600

Flowrate (gpm)
Figure 7-42: Linear fit to fitted quadratic coefficients.

Motor Hydraulics
8. The coefficients in the following table are derived from the curve fit (see Table 7-7):
Coefficient Value
a -806.6
b 0
c 7.4667
d 0
e 4.4
f 0.246
g 0.02507
h 1.5031E-4
i -1.339E-4
j -9.234E-8
Table 7-7: Coefficients from curve fit.
Motor Inputs
The model enables you to determine the following for your motor at a given flowrate:
• on- and off-bottom pressure drops
• optimal mechanical horsepower
• on-bottom rpm
• downhole torque
• weight on bit
The model also incorporates the effects of a rotor nozzle. The rotor nozzle enables part of the flow to
bypass the motor power section and can extend the capacity of the motor and its flexibility in matching
motor performance to other hydraulic and downhole conditions.
The motor pressure drops are integrated with the overall hydraulics software so that the relevance of the
motor configuration to the desired pressure drop can be investigated as a function of pump flowrate, mud
weight and rheology, bit nozzles, and drillstring geometry. Mud weight is only currently accounted for in
the flow through a rotor nozzle. For more details, see the Anadrill PowerPak Steerable Motor
Handbook.
Wear
The default setting for wear (0%) represents a brand new motor. Realistically, motors do not perform
perfectly, due to wear of the internal components. Allowance for this condition is made by entering a
wear factor. Typical values vary between 10 and 25%. This parameter effectively reduces the maximum
mechanical horsepower output by the motor. Exploring the sensitivity to this parameter, PowerPlan can
be used to obtain a match to the actual performance of the motor as measured on the rig.

Motor Hydraulics
Rotor Nozzle
The Anadrill PowerPak motor is bored and can be fitted with a nozzle that bypasses part of the flow to
extend the motor’s capacity and enhance flexibility in matching motor performance to other hydraulic and
downhole conditions. For performance drilling in larger hole sections, adding a rotor nozzle allows
increased total flow to clean the hole and remove cuttings. In special applications (spudding, under
reaming, or hole opening in large holes), adding a rotor nozzle reduces the bit speed at high flowrates.
Typical nozzle configurations are 12/32 in. and 18/32 in.; however, the PowerPlan Hydraulics model
allows the user to enter any size nozzle. This feature is particularly useful for examining how flow
bifurcates between a hole opener and the motor.
Example of Flow Partition with Hole Opener and Motor

In the following illustration, the quantities are defined as follows (see Figure 7-43):
• Qpump is the pump flowrate
• Qmotor is the flowrate powering the motor (assumes there is not a rotor nozzle in the motor, so it is
calculated as the flowrate through the bit nozzles)
• Qho is the flow through the hole opener

Motor Hydraulics
Figure 7-43: Flow partition with hole opener and motor.
In the preceding example, the hole opener is effectively acting like a rotor nozzle; therefore, the flow
through the hole opener nozzles is determined only by the pressure drop across the motor power section,
the nozzle area, and the mud density. To perform this analysis with PowerPlan 3.0, the user should enter
the hole opener total flow area (TFA) as an effective rotor nozzle diameter. Thus the effective hole
diameter is given by the following equation:
4 Aho
d eff = 32 ...............................................................................................................................................(7-72)
π
where the diameter is given in thirty-seconds of an inch. This number is to be placed in the edit box
marked “Rotor Nozzle” on the motor input property sheet. Having entered the pump flowrate in the rig
equipment property sheet (as well as the mud weight), the analysis can be run.

Motor Hydraulics
In the following example, these parameters are used:

• pump flowrate = 1,040 gpm
• mud weight = 8.5 ppg
• hole opener TFA = 0.589 in2
• bit TFA = 0.942 in2
• motor = A962M5630
The results are found as a function of the pressure drop across the motor by typing in the desired motor
pressure drop in the “PDM Pressure Drop” edit box in the motor results property sheet.
From the preceding example come the following values (see Table 7-8):
Motor Pressure (psi) Bit Flowrate (gpm) Hole Opener Flowrate (gpm)
0 1,040.0 0
100 840.2 199.8
200 754.7 282.6
300 693.9 346.1
400 640.3 399.7
500 593.1 446.9
Table 7-8: Pressures and flowrates.
Bearing Spacing
In the bearing spacing field, the user enters the size (in inches) of the gap through which the flow that
lubricates the bearings passes. This value should not be confused with the distance between the bottom of
the bearing section and the top shoulders of the bit box (axial bearing spacing), which is measured
frequently in the field to determine bearing wear. The default value is 0 in. (oil-lubricated, sealed
bearings). If the value of this parameter is non-zero, the bearing spacing is used to determine the bearing
flowrate. Typically, with mud-lubricated bearings, the bearing flowrate is approximately 3 to 5% of the
total flowrate, and is between 0.1 and 0.3 in. Details for each motor are available in the Anadrill
Equipment Guidelines.
WOB / Downhole Torque / Delta P

Typically, the torque is proportional to the differential operating pressure. The WOB and the torque are
related by a factor dependent upon the type of bit, type of formation, and hole cleaning efficiency for the
use of a downhole motor. For Anadrill motors, refer to the Anadrill PowerPak Steerable Motor
Handbook for typical operating ranges of these parameters.

Motor Hydraulics
The following equation relates the downhole torque to the WOB, using the bit type:
12 × DTOR
WOB = .......................................................................................................................................(7-73)
1000 f bit d bit
where the weight on bit is in thousand ft-lb force (klbf), the downhole torque (DTOR) is in ft-lb, and the
bit diameter (dbit) is in inches. The following factors (fbit) are used for each bit type:
• insert = 0.06
• milled tooth = 0.08
• PDC = 0.25
• diamond = 0.1
On-Bottom Pressure
PowerPlan does not have motor performance curves available for all non-catalog motors; therefore, the
only present option is to enter the operating on-bottom pressure drop for the motor for the given pump
flowrate.
MWD/LWD PRESSURE LOSSES

The flowpath through Measurement While Drilling/Logging While Drilling (MWD/LWD) tools is
complex. A detailed mathematical representation of the pressure drop according to this flowpath is not
appropriate within the framework of the PowerPlan model.
Two options are currently available for calculating the pressure losses through tools. If the tool in the
BHA Editor has a known pressure drop coefficient (k), the pressure drop is modeled as a function of the
mud weight and flowrate by the following equation:
1
∆Ptool = ρQ 2 ................................................................................................................................................. (7-74)
k
where ρ is the mud density, and Q is the pump flowrate.
The PowerPlan Hydraulics application indicates (upon loading from the BHA Editor) tools that do not
contain a valid pressure drop coefficient, by highlighting the tool name in the input panel. A pressure drop
as a function of the pump flowrate can then be determined by manually entering the known pressure drop
as a function of the mud weight and flowrate.

Hole Cleaning
Section Summary
• the parameters involved in efficient hole cleaning
• gravitational force and hole angle
• variables affecting cuttings movement
• effect of hole size
• effect of mud weight and rate of penetration
• effect of cuttings size
• effect of cuttings density
• effect of drillpipe rotation

Hole Cleaning
INTRODUCTION TO HOLE CLEANING

Efficient hole cleaning is vital for the successful drilling of directional and extended reach wells;
however, optimization of hole cleaning remains one of the major challenges while drilling these types of
wells. When planning or drilling a deviated well, one of the key parameters to determine is the minimum
flowrate required to transport drilled cuttings to the surface and keep the hole clean. This minimum
flowrate is called the critical transport rate (CTR). If inadequate flow is used, cuttings will settle on the
low side of the hole and form a large stationary bed, which may result in severe drilling problems (i.e.,
high torque and drag, hole pack-off, stuck pipe). It is crucial to know the CTR when planning and drilling
a deviated well so that adequate and economical drilling equipment is selected and the optimum drilling
parameters are determined. This knowledge has become increasingly important over recent years, as the
demands of field developments have dictated more high-angle and extended reach wells.
Bern (pers. comm) has presented a useful schematic relating the field controllability of pertinent hole
cleaning parameters to their relative importance in efficient cleaning (see Figure 7-44).

Hole Cleaning
Flow rate
Drillpipe
eccentricity
Mud
rheology
Rate of
cuttings transport
penetration
Influence on
Hole size
Cuttings
Hole angle
density
Drillpipe
Mud weight rotation
Cuttings
size
Ability to
control
Figure 7-44: Key variables influencing cuttings transport.
The controllable variables include the following:

• mud flowrate
• rate of penetration
• mud rheology (although there are questions as to how accurately downhole rheology is
controlled)
• mud weight
• hole angle
• hole size

Hole Cleaning
The uncontrollable parameters are those that cannot be adequately allowed for during the planning phase,
including the following:
• drillpipe eccentricity
• cuttings density
• cuttings size
Both cuttings density and drillpipe eccentricity have significant effects on hole cleaning ability; however,
one cannot really know the eccentricity at each point in the well. One can be fairly certain, though, that in
a highly deviated hole, the pipe is lying on the bottom of the hole (i.e., fully eccentered). Cuttings size
does not appear to make much difference to the CTR within the expected range of cuttings sizes.
The mud flowrate is probably the most important parameter in determining effective hole cleaning. For
fluids in laminar flow, fluid velocity alone cannot effectively remove cuttings from a deviated wellbore.
Fluid velocity can disturb cuttings lying in a cuttings bed, pushing them up into the main flow stream;
however, if the fluid has inadequate carrying capability, many of the cuttings will fall back into the
cuttings bed again (and the cycle repeats). Mechanical tools, pipe rotation, and/or back-reaming can help
in such situations, but the process is inefficient. In highly deviated wells, circulation rates are often
controlled by pressure drop limitations in the circulatory system or ECD limitations.
Drilling fluid rheological properties are normally measured at atmospheric pressure and a typical
laboratory temperature of 120° F; however, during drilling, wellbore fluids are exposed to a range of
pressure and temperature conditions. For the best results when studying fluid behavior, it is important to
apply drilling fluid rheological parameters that are either measured or calculated under downhole
conditions.
Previous models of cuttings transport were based on the traditional particle slip velocities in vertical
geometries (the classical Moore and Chien19 correlations). These expressions are highly idealized and
often bear no relevance to the actual problems faced by the planner/drilling engineer in a deviated well,
where CTR’s can be significantly higher than those for vertical sections. In rotary drilling applications,
both the fluid and rock fragments are moving. The situation is further complicated by the fluid velocity
varying from zero at the pipe wall to a maximum somewhere in the annulus. As Bourgoyne19 states,
because of the complexity of this situation, drilling personnel have relied primarily upon observation and
experience for determining the lifting ability of a fluid. In practice, either the flowrate or the effective
viscosity of the fluid is increased if problems related to inefficient cuttings transport are encountered. This
situation has resulted in a tendency towards the use of thick muds and high annular velocities; however,
these factors can have the following adverse effects:
• can be detrimental to the rate of penetration
• may cause severe pressure losses in certain sections of the wellbore
• can decrease motor efficiency
Numerous models have been described that investigate a range of variables on cuttings transport and bed
formation. The model used within PowerPlan is an adaptation of that described by Luo, Bern, and
Chambers.20

Hole Cleaning
DESCRIPTION OF MODEL
The model described by Luo et al. is based upon an analysis of the forces acting upon a cutting that rests
on the low side of the wellbore. There are two types of forces:
• forces that tend to hold cuttings in the bed
• forces that tend to move cuttings out of the bed
Forces that hold cuttings in the bed primarily consist of gravity, which causes the cuttings to settle and
form a bed, and its magnitude equals the submerged weight of the cuttings in the fluid. A frictional force
is also induced if the cuttings start to slide on the surface of the wellbore.
Forces that move the cuttings out of the bed include the lift force and the drag force. The lift force tends
to lift the cuttings into the main flow, where the cuttings can then progress up the wellbore. This force
arises due to either the asymmetric distribution of fluid velocity around the cuttings, the turbulent eddies
in the annular flow, or a combination of the two. The drag force tends to drag or roll the cuttings out of
the bed to move forward, and is caused by the viscous drag on the upper exposed surface of the cuttings.

Hole Cleaning
Experiments have shown that, depending on hole angle and fluid properties, the flow of cuttings/liquid
mixtures in the annulus may show different patterns upon reaching the critical flowrate. The modes of
cuttings transport, and their effect on the ECD, are as follows (see Table 7-9 and Figure 7-45).
Transport Mode Description
Flow velocity is not sufficient to transport the cuttings and a bed

stationary bed
grows as the cuttings are deposited.
Only the drag force is strong enough to force the cuttings along the
wellbore; therefore a moving bed is formed on the low side of the
wellbore.
moving bed
Often occurs when the fluid viscosity is high and the flow regime is
laminar.
If the fluid velocity is increased above that for the bed to move, the
lift force may be sufficient for cuttings to be picked up, but not
sufficient to keep them in suspension continuously. In this case,
there is a cuttings concentration gradient across the annulus, with
more cuttings in the lower half. This condition occurs at high fluid
asymmetric suspension velocities (which produce a strong lift force), and/or at low angles,
where the gravitational force component is small compared to the lift
force.
Often occurs when the fluid viscosity is low and the flow regime is
turbulent.
The lift force is strong enough to overcome the gravitational force in

symmetric suspension the direction normal to the flow, so that the cuttings are lifted away
from the wellbore/pipe wall and kept in suspension.
Table 7-9: Cuttings transport modes.

Hole Cleaning
Figure 7-45: Modes of cuttings transport and their influence on ECD.
Buckingham Pi theory is used to identify the relevant dimensionless groups that control the transport
behavior. The following variables are relevant to the analysis:
• drilling fluid
• cuttings
• annular size and eccentricity
• gravitational force and hole angle
• annular flow
Drilling Fluid
Only the flow in the vicinity of a cuttings bed affects the initiation of cuttings movement; therefore, the
apparent viscosity (µa) can be used to describe the fluid rheological behavior. The viscosity, together with
the fluid density (ρ f), describes the fluid properties.
Cuttings
Two parameters are used to define the properties of the cuttings: the cuttings diameter (dcut) and the
cuttings density (ρcut). The calculation of the CTR is not modified as a function of the cuttings shape.

Hole Cleaning
Annular Size and Eccentricity

Theoretically, three parameters are required to define the annular size and eccentricity: the pipe diameter,
the wellbore diameter, and the standoff. However, Luo et al. assume that the initiation of cuttings flow is
affected only by flow on the low side of the wellbore, and that the annular gap is large when compared to
the cuttings size. Consequently, only one parameter is necessary: the annular gap at the lowest position,
defined as follows:
 dh − d p 
G =   − e ............................................................................................................................................(7-75)
 2 
where dh and dp are the respective diameters of the wellbore and the drillpipe, and e is the drillpipe
eccentricity (the offset distance between the axes of the drillpipe and the wellbore).
Gravitational Force and Hole Angle

The parameter describing the gravitational force is given by the following:
g ( ρ cut − ρ f ) ......................................................................................................................................................(7-76)
where g is the acceleration due to gravity; however, this calculation is simplified by combining the above
parameter with that describing the effect of the hole angle (φ). Relative to the direction of the annular
flow, a change in the hole angle only affects the gravitational force, while all other forces remain the
same. The gravitational force component, acting against the cuttings lifting up from the wellbore, is
expressed as the following:
g ( ρ cut − ρ f ) sin(φ )
The gravitational force acting against the cuttings sliding or rolling on the wellbore surface is expressed
as the following:
g ( ρ cut − ρ f )(cos(φ ) − Fs sin(φ )) ..................................................................................................................(7-77)
where F5 (<1) is the friction coefficient between the cuttings and the wellbore surface.
Analysis of the first term (the force against lifting) reveals that its value increases as the hole angle
increases, leveling off at 90°; therefore, the effect on the CTR should follow the same trend. The second
term (the force component against rolling), however, gives an opposite trend as a function of hole angle.

Hole Cleaning
Annular Flow
Because the initiation of cuttings movement is only relevant to the fluid dynamics on the low side of the
annulus, the critical wall friction velocity (v*c) is used to describe the local dynamic condition of annular
flow (the magnitudes of the lift force and drag force). The friction velocity is related to the wall shear
stress by the following:
τ 
v*c =  w  .....................................................................................................................................................(7-78)
ρ 
 f 
Variables Affecting Cuttings Movement

Under a given set of conditions, the critical transport rate can be calculated based on the friction velocity
(or the wall shear stress). There are seven independent variables that affect the critical conditions for the
initiation of cuttings movement in the annulus. Six of the seven variables are discussed below; the seventh
(the effect of drillpipe rotation) is discussed later in this section. The seven variables can be combined
into four dimensionless groups, as follows.
Group 1
v*2c
Π1 = .......................................................................................................................(7-79)
 ρ cut − ρ f 
d cut g   sin(φ )
 ρ 
 f 
This group is the ratio of the lift force to the effective gravitational force (modified particle Froude
number), and its effect is significant as long as the gravitational force is important.
Group 2
d cut v*c ρ f
Π2 = .................................................................................................................................................(7-80)
µa
This group is essentially the particle Reynolds number, and represents the ratio of the inertia force to the
viscous force.
Group 3
d cut
Π3 = ............................................................................................................................................................(7-81)
G
This group represents the influence of the cuttings size, relative to the size of the annular gap. The
presence of cuttings lying on the wellbore affects the velocity profile across the annulus and the lift/drag
force on a cutting. This parameter is assumed small.

Hole Cleaning
Group 4
ρf
Π4 = ...........................................................................................................................................................(7-82)
ρ cut
This group represents the effect of cuttings inertia.
Buckingham Pi Theory
Based on the four groups of variables, the Buckingham Pi theory gives the general relationship that
describes the initiation of cuttings movement as the following:
f (Π 1 , Π 2 , Π 3 , Π 4 ) = 0 ...................................................................................................................................(7-83)
Scaling analysis, and the experimental data presented in Luo et al. indicated that the groups Π3, Π4 were
small; therefore, the condition for the initiation of cuttings transport can be expressed by the following:
Π 1 = aΠ b2 ............................................................................................................................................................(7-84)
where the coefficients a and b are obtained by multi-parameter, non-linear regression analysis from data
from Luo et al. The data selected to define these coefficients were at inclinations greater than 30° for a
fixed cuttings injection concentration, and for an eccentered annulus only. Unlike other authors, Luo et al.
found that there was virtually no difference between the critical transport rate in concentric and eccentric
annuli. In the model described here, data has been fitted from additional sources.21, 22, 23
EFFECT OF RATE OF PENETRATION

A correction factor is applied to account for the effect of the ROP. This correction is as described by Luo
et al., and simply modifies the critical transport rate (Qc) as follows:
c
Qc = Qo (0.75 + ) ............................................................................................................................................(7-85)
6
where Qo is the critical transport rate at zero ROP, and c is the cuttings injection concentration by
percentage volume (based on the ROP and mud flowrate).
NOTE
The effect of cuttings on the ECD can also be allowed for as a separate option to the cuttings
transport calculation.

Hole Cleaning
The relative amount of drilled cuttings (by volume) to the fluid volume in the annulus is given by the
following ratio:
(
Tbu dD )  πd
dt 
2
bit

4 
ψ= .................................................................................................................................(7-86)
Vbu
where Tbu, Vbu are the respective bottoms up time (for the selected pump flowrate) and annular volume,
dD / dt is the rate of penetration, and dbit is the bit diameter. Hence, the effective density of the fluid
allowing for the suspended cuttings is given by the following:
ρ eff = ψρ cut + (1 −ψ ) ρ f ..................................................................................................................................(7-87)
NOTE
PowerPlan assumes that there is steady state cuttings transport and a uniform distribution of
cuttings in the annulus. The program does not attempt to model the development of a cuttings
bed.
EFFECT OF HOLE SIZE

The model described in Luo et al. was developed based on the experimental data obtained in an 8-in.
flowloop. The data presented in their paper and others was analyzed to produce a correlation that modifies
the CTR as a function of the annular spacing. The CTR is modified as follows:
  d  
'
Qcrit = Qcrit α + β exp− γ  out  ............................................................................................................(7-88)
  
   d in
where α,β,γ are empirical parameters determined from fitting to data, and din , dout are the respective pipe
OD and annular ID respectively.
VERTICAL AND LOW INCLINATION CORRELATION

The model described in the preceding sections is only valid for inclinations above 30°. For hole
deviations between zero and 30°, interpolation is used between the model described for vertical holes
(below), and the value obtained for the new model at 30°.
For vertical holes the classical analysis of Moore is used, and it is noted that Doron et al.24 currently
recommend that the critical velocity for vertical holes be twice the particle settling velocity.

Hole Cleaning
The vertical settling velocity is based upon the particle Reynolds number, which is itself a function of the
slip velocity as follows:
ρ f Vsl d cut
Re p = ...............................................................................................................................................(7-89)
µa
where Vsl is the particle slip velocity, and the following is true:
 4g   ρ 
Vsl =  d cut  cut − 1 ............................................................................................................................(7-90)
 3 f   ρ f 

This equation is solved iteratively, depending upon the particle flow regime. Thus, the following solutions
exist:
Re p ≤ 3 .......................... f = 40 / Re p
3 < Re p < 300 .............. f = 22 / Re p ……………………………………………………………………………(7-91)
Re p > 300 ..................... f = 1.5

Hole Cleaning
The following illustration shows a comparison between the PowerPlan model and the model given in Luo
et al. (see Figure 7-46). The agreement for angles greater than 30° is good. The discrepancy for angles
below 30° is due to the different constraints for vertical slip velocities. The model used by Luo et al. is
undocumented.
PowerPlan Model
Luo et al. Model
Figure 7-46: Comparison between PowerPlan model and Luo et al. model.

Hole Cleaning
EFFECT OF MUD WEIGHT AND RATE OF PENETRATION

In the following example, a default cuttings size of 0.1 in. and density of 2.6 SG are used. The mud
rheological properties are kept constant (using a Power Law model) at K = 300 cP and n = 0.7. The mud
weight varies from 1,000 to 2,000 kg/m3 and the ROP varies from 10 to 30 m/hr. The critical transport
rate in a horizontal 8.5 in. hole is given in the following illustration (see Figure 7-47).
Figure 7-47: Effect of mud weight and rate of penetration on critical transport rate.
Notice that the CTR is inversely proportional to the mud density, which is consistent with previous
experimental results.25 This condition is due to the increasing mud density reducing the effective weight
of the cuttings, making the cuttings easier to remove. The CTR also increases with ROP as annular
loading increases.

Hole Cleaning
EFFECT OF CUTTINGS SIZE

In the following illustration the variation of the CTR with cuttings size is shown (see Figure 7-48). The
mud weight is 12 ppg, and the ROP is 65 ft/hr. All other properties are the same as the previous example.
The cuttings size is varied from 0.025 in. to 0.175 in. The CTR decreases as the cuttings size increases.
This condition is counterintuitive and is an artifact of the dimensional analysis used to produce the model.
The variation with cuttings size is not significant, given the inherent uncertainty in the calculation. The
variation is approximately 10% for an order of magnitude change in the cuttings size.
Figure 7-48: The effect of cuttings size on critical transport rate.

Hole Cleaning
EFFECT OF CUTTINGS DENSITY

The variation of the CTR with the cuttings density is shown in Figure 7-49. The cuttings size in this case
is kept constant at 0.1 in., while the cuttings density varies from 1.8 to 3.0 SG. The CTR increases with an
increase in cuttings density, similar to the variation with the mud density for a fixed cuttings density.
Figure 7-49: The effect of cuttings density on critical transport rate.
EFFECT OF DRILLPIPE ROTATION

Oftentimes in the field, rotation of the drillpipe improves the efficiency of hole cleaning, particularly in
directional wells. This viewpoint has not always been the case. In past years, the effect of drillpipe
rotation was thought to be minimal. This view was based on the results of controlled flowloop
experiments where the pipe was forced to rotate about its own axis with the use of stabilizers. In practice,
the motion of the pipe changes at different positions along the wellbore; nevertheless, the drillpipe has
both rotary and orbital motion, even when in tension. Sanchez et al. hypothesized that in most cases it is
the orbital motion, and not the rotation, that improves hole cleaning.26 When the pipe is rotating about its
axis, it causes the velocities to be slightly higher on one side of the hole than the other, resulting in a
pseudo-helical flow. The orbital motion of the pipe improves the cuttings transport in two ways:
• The mechanical agitation in an inclined hole sweeps the cuttings resting on the lower side of the
hole into the upper side of the hole, where the fluid velocity is higher.
• The orbital motion can expose cuttings under the drillstring cyclically to velocities that were
previously too low for transport.

Hole Cleaning
The benefits of pipe rotation to hole cleaning are a function of the following parameters:
• rotary speed
• hole inclination
• flowrate
• mud rheology (downhole)
• cuttings size
• height of cuttings bed (if already established)
Over 600 tests were conducted at the University of Tulsa cuttings transport facility. Tests were carried out
in a 100-ft, 8-in. section, with 4.5-in. drillpipe. The experiments focused on the following:
• effect of drillpipe rotation on cuttings concentration while drilling (steady state conditions)
• bed erosion once drilling stops
• patterns of cuttings transport
The results of the tests highlighted the complexity that the inclusion of rotation brings. The conclusions of
the experiments were are follows:
• Pipe rotation is significant and usually beneficial, but can initiate bed sliding at intermediate
deviations.
• Rotation can cause as much as an 80% reduction in cuttings concentration, particularly at high
deviations.
• In horizontal sections, high rotary speeds are generally most beneficial at low flowrates.
• Pipe rotation improves bed removal when drilling has stopped.
• Both residual concentration and erosion time are reduced, although at intermediate inclinations
one must be careful of the downward motion of the bed that can be started by the initiation of
rotation.
• Orbital motion is not necessary in all cases.
• Care must be taken when the mud motor has a bent sub.

Hole Cleaning
MODEL LIMITATIONS
The current model within PowerPlan is an idealized, semi-empirical model that does not account for
many of the complex flow scenarios that can occur downhole. Specifically, the model has the following
limitations:
• Hole size - The deviated cuttings transport calculation is only valid for a diameter ratio (drillpipe
diameter to annular diameter) greater than 0.2 (e.g., the largest hole section for deviated
calculations is 5 in. drillpipe in 20 in. casing/hole).
• Hole angle - No allowance is made for the behavior of cuttings transport in upwardly inclined
wells. For well inclinations above 90° the calculation is assumed to occur at 90°.
• Cuttings shape - In practice, the shape of the cutting affects the formation of the cuttings bed and
the nature of both the cuttings suspension and agglomeration into a bed. The model described in
Hydraulics assumes no dependence on the shape of the cutting.
• Drillpipe rotation - Rotating the drillpipe can have a huge effect on the efficiency of hole
cleaning. An account is made in the PowerPlan hydraulics model (for the internal version of
Drilling Office only using fuzzy logic algorithms) for the effect of rotation on either the drilling
fluid’s relation to cuttings transport or the mechanical agitation that can stir up cuttings.
• Drillstring eccentricity - The drillstring eccentricity can have an important effect on the ability
to clean the hole, particularly in highly deviated/horizontal sections where the pipe is usually
fully eccentric. Account of the eccentricity and its corresponding effect on annular pressure losses
is made within the PowerPlan model. No account is made for the potential of pack-off around
BHA restrictions (e.g., stabilizers).
• Cuttings bed height - The PowerPlan model only gives an indication of the flowrate needed to
clean the hole, not the distribution of the cuttings in the annulus, or the height of any cuttings bed
that may form.
Despite the above shortcomings, the model can give reasonable predictions of the critical transport rate
needed to clean an inclined borehole under most conditions.

P-T RHEOLOGY
Section Summary
• Temperature Simulation
• Mud Properties Input Property Sheets
• Mud Rheology Model

P-T Rheology
INTRODUCTION
This module allows the prediction of pressure and temperature-dependent mud properties. The properties that are
addressed are:
Mud density – the density varies linearly as a function of the pressure and temperature,
Mud rheology – the mud rheology uses the models described by the MudCADE application, which were
ascertained to be more relevant than those in the current version of the SideKick gas-kick simulator (v4.0)
[28].
The addition of pressure and temperature dependent mud properties requires temperature data. This could be
supplied from a number of different sources:
• The modified Holmes and Swift model used in SideKick (SCR model).
• User-defined temperature data.
• Input from the WEST temperature simulator in the form of ASCII data.
OVERVIEW
One of the largest sources of errors in the pressure drop predictions made by hydraulics models is the neglect of the
pressure and temperature dependence of both the mud density and the mud rheological parameters. These errors are
enhanced in HPHT and deepwater wells where the temperature fluctuations can be large. Both oil-base muds, and
synthetic drilling fluids can also be highly compressible. The previous version of Drilling Office ignored the
contribution of both pressure and temperature.
IMPLEMENTATION
Temperature Simulation
The addition of pressure and temperature dependence requires access to a temperature profile for the
drilling fluid inside the drillstring/BHA and outside in the annulus. As soon as the P-T dependence is
enabled an additional property sheet labeled ‘Temperature’ appears that includes all of the necessary
inputs to either calculate or define the drilling fluid temperature within the drillstring and annulus. This
interface is a slight modification to the one already used within SideKick and gives access to a calculation
module, the ability for the user to define their own profile or to copy/paste data from the WEST
temperature simulator.
The model is a steady-state temperature calculation that requires details of the surface ambient
(air/ground) temperature, and an average circulating pump flowrate This flowrate is also the default pump
flowrate for the hydraulics calculation (from the Bit/Flow page). The geothermal gradient is also required
(see Figure 1).

P-T Rheology
Figure 1-Sample Temperature Profile.
To allow for offshore installations (and particularly for deepwater operations), the model includes a more
complete definition of the external temperature profile in the water.
Mud Properties Input Property Sheets
There are three different options for entering rheology data within Drilling Office 3.0 Hydraulics, and the
inclusion of the new rheology model necessitated some changes to the interface that was used in previous
versions of Drilling Office, in addition to the new temperature specification described earlier.

P-T Rheology
The three options are as follows:
1. No P-T Dependent Rheology
This is the same functionality as was in Drilling Office. All rheology models are available, although the
method of rheology model selection and the pair of data input for Power Law and Bingham Plastic
models are now selected from drop down list-boxes in stead of radio buttons. This is the default screen,
with Bingham model selected and PV-YP as the default input method. All other values of the rheological
parameters (K and n, and the corresponding Fann 300 and 600 values) are calculated, as in the previous
version of Drilling Office (see Figure 2).
Figure 2-No P-T Dependent Rheology.
2. P-T Dependent Rheology Enabled – Model Calculated Values
In this case, additional information is necessary to specify the mud rheology, and so that the mud
compressibility and expansivity can also be allowed for. Note that pressure and temperature dependence
can only accurately be applied to a Bingham rheological model. However, if the Power Law model is
selected the calculated (or input) K and n values are converted to PV and YP values, and the pressure and
temperature corrections carried out, and the corrected values of PV and YP converted back to appropriate
K and n values for use in the pressure drop algorithms. The reference temperature and pressure defaults to
68 degF and 14.7 psi (atmospheric) respectively. These values are those at which the rheology and the
mud density are measured.
The oil-water ratio is necessary to ensure that the correct compressibility and expansivity are calculated,
in addition to the correct rheological model (see Figure 3).

P-T Rheology
Figure 3-Pressure and Temperature-Dependent Rheology/Model Calculated Values.
3. User-defined Pressure and temperature dependent rheology
In this case, the user must still define a reference temperature and pressure for the mud
compressibility/expansivity calculation. However, the user now enters Fann data for a range of pressures
and temperatures (see Figure 4).
Figure 4-Pressure and Temperature-Dependent Rheology/User-Defined Values.

P-T Rheology
The details of the model calculation if there are one, two, or three or more sets of measurements are given
in the following section. Water-base mud rheology corrections can only be accurately calculated from
three or more sets of rheology values and the calculations should be based on linear interpolation. Oil-
base mud rheology corrections should be based on exponential interpolation. In this case we also need to
fit an exponential line through the rheology data and give the user the option of visualizing the fit to the
data by means of highlighting the values they want to see, then plotting the curve from a menu item:
Options-> P-T Fit Type Check (see Figure 5).
Figure 5-Pressure and Temperature-Dependent Rheology Fit Check.
The best-fit through the Fann data can be achieved with a standard routine from Numerical Recipes [3].
Note that the Fit Type can be set independently of the mud type and Oil-Water Ratio.
Algorithms
In the following we give the details of the algorithms used to calculate both the pressure and temperature
dependence of the mud density, and the oil-based mud and water-based rheology correlations that are
used for a Bingham fluid.

P-T Rheology
Density Variations (Compressibility and Expansivity)

In the following we assume a linear dependence of the mud density on both the temperature and the
pressure, based on the following relationship:
ρ ( P, T ) = ρ ( P0 , T0 )[1 + α ( P − P0 ) − β (T − T0 )] …………………………………………………………(1)
where,
α = λα o + (1 − λ )α w ……………………………………………………………………………………………..(2)
β = λβ o + (1 − λ ) β w ……………………………………………………………………………………………..(3)
and,
λ is the oil-fraction, and we use the following isothermal compressibilities and expansivities:
Isothermal water compressibility α w = 4 × 10 −10 Pa −1 ,

Isothermal oil compressibility α o = 5 × 10 −10 Pa −1 ,
Water thermal expansivity, β w = 6 × 10 −4 K −1 ,
Oil thermal expansivity. β o = 4 × 10 −4 K −1 .
See, for example, Figure 6:
Figure 6-Sample Pressure and Temperature-Dependent Density Variations

P-T Rheology
Note that you should see a discontinuity at the bit due to the pressure drop across the bit.
Other, more complex, models may be adopted for these parameters as they become available or are
deemed more appropriate. For example, we may wish to use the following expression for the coefficient
of the isothermal compressibility of brine, with the brine salinity (S in mg/l) set to zero:
1
αw = …………………………………………………………………………………….(4)
A1 P + A2 S + A3T + A4
with,
A1 = 7.033
A2 = 0.5415
A3 = −537.0
A4 = 403,300.0
Note in this case the pressure is in psi and the temperature is in degF, and is only valid for temperatures
between 200 and 270 degF, and pressures between 1000 and 20,000 psi [2]. The compressibility is given
in units of psi-1
Similarly, if we require more detailed control over the input specification of the oil isothermal
compressibility, we could follow the expression given in [29] for the undersaturated black oil
compressibility, and set the gas-oil ratio to zero:
B1 + B2 Rsb + B3T + B4γ g + B5 ( API )

αo = ………………………………………………………………(5)
B6 P
where,
B1 = −1433.0
B2 = 5.0
B3 = 17.2
B4 = −1180.0
B5 = 12.61
B6 = 1.0 × 10 5
and γ g is the specific gravity of separator gas at separator pressure of 100 psig. API is the gravity of
stock-tank oil in degAPI. The temperature, T, and pressure, P, are in degF and psi respectively. R sb is the

P-T Rheology
solution gas-oil ratio (scf/STB) at the bubble point pressure. Correlations for isobaric thermal expansion
of oils and water are also available, and may be used if necessary.
Mud Rheology Model

The rheology correlations only applies to the Bingham Plastic Rheology model coefficients. However, if
the user selects Power Law, a power law model is fitted through the Fann data, the K and n values
converted to PV and YP values, and these values are then pressure and temperature corrected, converted
back to K and n values for use in the pressure drop routines. A least-squares analysis is used from
Numerical recipes to perform the Power law fit by looking at the logarithm of the Fann readings vs the
log of the shear rate. We give the caveat that there tends not to be a good correlation between Bingham
fluids and Power Law fluids.
The expressions for the pressure and temperature dependence of the PV and YP are as follows:
 1 1   P P 
PV = PV ( P0 , T0 ) exp  B −  + C  − 0  …………………………………………………………...……(6)
  T T0   T T0 
 1 1   P P 
YP = YP( P0 , T0 ) exp  E  −  + F  − 0  ……………………………………….………………..……… .(7)
  T T0   T T0 
where PV ( P0 , T0 ) and YP( P0 , T0 ) are the PV and YP at the reference temperature and pressure (or at
the first set of user defined values).
Three different algorithms are used depending upon the number of data points entered.
1. One Measurement at Reference Pressure and Temperature ( P0 , T0 )

This will be used when the pressure and temperature dependence is turned to “on”, or when we are using
just one set of user-defined data. In this case, we simply use the following values for the coefficients
B,C,E,F.(where temperatures are in K, and pressures are in Pa).
B = E = Tcoef
C = F = Pcoef
Note Values for Tcoef and Pcoef are strictly confidential.
2. (a). Two measurements at one pressure – at ( P0 , T0 ) and ( P0 , T1 )

In this case we assume the values of the coefficients C and F, and solve for the other two coefficients as
follows:
C = F = Pcoef

P-T Rheology
 T T   PV ( P0 , T1 ) 
B =  0 1  ln   − CP0 …………………………………………………………………………(8)
 T0 − T1   PV ( P0 , T0 ) 
 T T   YP( P0 , T1 ) 
E =  0 1  ln   − FP0 ……………………………………………………………………….(9)
 T0 − T1   YP( P0 , T0 ) 
(b). Two measurements at one temperature – at ( P0 , T0 ) and ( P1 , T0 )

In this case we assume the values of B and E, and solve for the other two coefficients as follows:
B = E = Tcoef
 T   PV ( P1 , T0 ) 
C =  0  ln   ……………………………………….………………………….………………..(10)
 P1 − P0   PV ( P0 , T0 ) 
 T   YP( P1 , T0 ) 
F =  0  ln   …………………………………………………………………………………(11)
P −
 1 0 
P YP ( P0 , T0 
)
(c). Two measurements at different pressures and temperatures – at ( P0 , T0 ) and ( P1 , T1 )
In this case, we assign the values of B and E and compute the other two coefficients:
B = E = Tcoef
 1   PV ( P1 , T1 )  
C =   B (T0 − T1 ) − T0T1 ln    ……………………………………………………(12)
1 0 − P0T1  
 PT  PV ( P0 , T0 )  
 1   YP( P1 , T1 )  
F =   E (T0 − T1 ) − T0T1 ln    ……………………………………………………(13)
1 0 − P0T1  
 PT  YP( P0 , T0 )  
3. Three or more measurements
If there are three or more Fann readings available, then the PV’s and YP’s of each set of readings must
first be found as in the above cases and we must then fit all of the parameters using a best-fit to the data.
In this case, we solve for the coefficients B,C, such that we satisfy:

P-T Rheology
 n   PV     Pi P0   
2
 1 1
Min∑ ln i
 −  B −  + C  −   
 
i =1   PV 0    Ti T0   Ti T0   
The solution is as follows:
n n n n
∑ xi2 ∑ yi z i − ∑ xi zi ∑ xi yi
C= i =1 i =1 i =1 i =1
2
……………………………………………………..…………………………(14)
n n
  n
∑
i =1
xi2 ∑ y i2 −  ∑ xi yi 
i =1  i =1 
n n
∑ xi z i − C ∑ x i y i
B= i =1
n
i =1
………………………………………………………………………………………….………(15)
∑x
i =1
2
i
where,
1 1
xi =  −  ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…….(16)
 Ti T0 
P P 
yi =  i − 0  ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………(17)
 Ti T0 
 PVi 
z i = ln  ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…….(18)
 PV0 
where PV0 = PV ( P0 , T0 ) , and PVi = PV ( Pi , Ti ) .
Similarly, we can also derive expressions for E and F:
n n n n
∑x ∑yφ −∑xφ ∑x y
2
i i i i i i i
F= i =1 i =1 i =1 i =1
2
……………………………………………………….……………………….(19)
n
 n n

∑
i =1
x ∑ y −  ∑ xi y i 
2
i
i =1  i =1 
2
i

P-T Rheology
n n
∑xφ i i − F ∑ xi y i
E= i =1
n
i =1
………………………………………………………………………………………………(20)
∑x i =1
2
i
where,
 YP 
φ i = ln i  …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….(21)
 YP0 
YP0 = YP( P0 , T0 ) , and YPi = YP( Pi , Ti ) .
See, for example, Figure 7 and Figure 8:
Figure 7-Sample Pressure and Temperature-Dependent Plastic Viscosity

P-T Rheology
Figure 8- Sample Pressure and Temperature-Dependent Yield Point
For Water-base drilling fluids, existing models (such as those used within SideKick) were deemed
unsuitable, and a linear interpolation technique can be adopted.
It is assumed that the PV and YP have the following form:
PV = PV0 + ζ ( P − P0 ) + κ (T − T0 ) …………………………………………………………………..………...…...(22)
YP = YP0 + µ ( P − P0 ) + ε (T − T0 ) …………………………………………………………………………………….(23)
The WBM linear interpolation will only be performed if there are three or more user-defined values,
otherwise the OBM analysis will be used. The expressions for the coefficients ζ , κ , µ , ε obtained from
the minimization least-squares analysis are as follows:
n n n n
∑ xi2 ∑ yi z i − ∑ xi z i ∑ xi yi
κ= i =1 i =1 i =1 i =1
2
……………………………………………………………………………….….(24)
n n
  n
∑
i =1
x ∑ y −  ∑ xi y i 
2
i
i =1
2
i
 i =1 

P-T Rheology
n n
∑x z i i − κ ∑ xi y i
ζ = i =1
n
i =1
…………………………………………………………………………………………….……(25)
∑x i =1
2
i
where,
xi = ( Pi − P0 )
y i = (Ti − T0 ) …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..(26)
z i = ( PVi − PV0 )
Similarly, for the Yield Point Interpolation, we obtain,
n n n n
∑ xi2 ∑ yi z i − ∑ xi zi ∑ xi yi
ε= i =1 i =1 i =1 i =1
2
…………………………………………………………………………………(27)
n
 n
 n
∑
i =1
xi2 ∑ y i2 −  ∑ xi yi 
i =1  i =1 
n n
∑ xi z i − ε ∑ xi y i
µ= i =1
n
i =1
………………………………………………………………………………………………..(28)
∑x i =1
2
i
Note that a similar analysis has to be performed to determine the PV and YP for each pair of pressures
and temperatures from the entered Fann data before we perform the minimization. In this case we are
fitting a curve of the form:
.
τ = YP + PV γ ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………(29)
.
where τ is the shear stress, and γ is the shear rate. We have to convert the shear rate and the shear stress
to the appropriate units based on the Fann rpm value. This is already done in the code for the Herschel-
Bulkley analysis.
Method of Calculation
As the mud density is now a function of the pressure and the mud rheology is also a function of the
pressure and temperature we must proceed from a known conditions at the surface (taken in this case to
be the outlet) around the circulatory system so that we can calculate the pressure and density and
frictional pressure losses at each point in the system.

P-T Rheology
The temperature profile is fixed by the information provided on the Temperature input property sheet and
is mapped to the corresponding grid points.
We proceed from the outlet, down the annulus, through the bit and up the drillpipe (through MWD/LWD
tools and motor (if one is present) calculating consistent rheological parameters until we
calculate the standpipe pressure at the surface. In the following schematic of the circulatory path we
illustrate the points at which densities and pressures are calculated.
The lengths in the hydrostatic calculation are vertical displacements; this is not indicated on the
schematic. We require two co-located grid points at the bit to handle the pressure drop across the bit, and
the corresponding density discontinuity just below the bit and inside the drillstring (see Figure 9 and
Figure 10).
Figure 9-Sample Pressure Profile

P-T Rheology
Pout , Tout P0 = Pout + ∆Pchk Pspp = PN +1 + ∆Psurf ( ρ N +1, PVN +1, YPN +1)
ρout ( Pout ,Tout ) ρ 0 = ρ ( P0 , T0 )
PV0 = PV ( P0 , T0 ) Direction of
YP0 = YP( P0 , T0 ) fluid flow
Chokeline Surface Equip.
0 PN +1 = PN − ρ N gl N + ∆P f
N+1 N
ρ N +1 = ρ ( PN +1 , T N +1 )
ρ0
l0 PV N +1 = PV ( PN +1 , T N +1 )
ρN lN YPN +1 = YP( PN +1 , T N +1 )
Direction of
Mathematical
solution
P1 = P0 + ρ 0 gl 0 + ∆P f 1 N PN = PN −1 − ρ N −1gl N −1 + ∆Pf
0 N −1
ρ1 = ρ ( P1 , T1 ) ρ N = ρ ( PN , TN )
PV1 = PV ( P1 , T1 ) l1 ρ1 ρ N −1 PVN = PV ( PN , TN )
l N −1
YP1 = YP( P1 , T1 ) YPN = YP( PN , TN )
P2 = P1 + ρ1 gl1 + ∆P f 2
1
ρ 2 = ρ ( P2 , T2 )
PV2 = PV ( P2 , T2 ) ρ2
YP2 = YP( P2 , T2 )
l2
3
P3 = P2 + ρ 2 gl 2 + ∆P f
2
ρ 3 = ρ ( P3 , T3 )
l3 ρ
PV3 = PV ( P3 , T3 ) 3
YP3 = YP( P3 , T3 ) ρ
n+4
Pn + 4 = Pn +3 − ρ n +3 gln +3 + ∆Pf
n+3
ρn + 4 = ρ ( Pn + 4 , Tn + 4 )
Annulus side Bit (n+1)
ρn +3 ln + 3 PVn + 4 = PV ( Pn + 4 , Tn + 4 )
Drillpipe side Bit (n+2)
YPn + 4 = YP( Pn + 4 ,Tn + 4 )
Co-located grid points
n ρn ρ n+ 2 n+3
Pn = Pn−1 + ρ n −1 gl n −1 + ∆P f
n −1
ρ n = ρ ( Pn , Tn ) ln ln + 2
PVn = PV ( Pn , Tn )
Pn+1 = Pn + ρ n gl n + ∆P f
YPn = YP( Pn , Tn ) n Pn + 3 = Pn + 2 − ρn + 2 gln + 2 + ∆Pf
n+2
ρ n+1 = ρ ( Pn+1 , Tn +1 )
ρn +3 = ρ ( Pn +3 , Tn + 3 )
PVn +1 = PV ( Pn +1 , Tn+1 )
PVn + 3 = PV ( Pn +3 , Tn + 3 )
NOTE: YPn+1 = YP( Pn+1 , Tn+1 )
• Friction YPn +3 = YP( Pn +3 , Tn +3 )
Pn+ 2 = Pn+1 + ∆Pbit ( ρ n+1 )
loss: ∆P fi = f ( ρ i , PVi , YPi )
ρ n+ 2 = ρ ( Pn+ 2 , Tn+ 2 )
• Lengths for hydrostatic PVn + 2 = PV ( Pn+ 2 , Tn+ 2 )
calculations are TVD
YPn+ 2 = YP( Pn+ 2 , Tn+ 2 )

P-T Rheology
Note: As the pressure and temperature affects the mud rheology around the circulatory system, we also
amended the hole cleaning calculation so that the local viscosity (effective viscosity) is stored at the
appropriate grid points, and used in calculating the critical transport rate.

SWAB AND SURGE
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual covers the calculation of swab and
surge pressures and safe tripping speeds for given trip margins.

Swab and Surge
SWAB AND SURGE
This module for calculates swab and surge pressures and safe tripping speeds for given trip margins.
Pressure distributions are to be given both graphically and numerically in the report.
Overview
Pulling and running both drillstring and casing strings causes pressure swabs and surges that can have
sever implications for the behavior of the wellbore. If the pressure drops below the formation pore
pressure, an influx may be taken and a well control event occurs. Surges that cause formation breakdown
may lead to lost circulation.
The purpose of this section is to review the calculation techniques for the implementation of a swab-surge
module within the Drilling Office suite of planning applications. In addition, we give a detailed
description of the numerical model.
Swab and Surge Models
Swab and surge pressures and the accompanying models have been studied for many years with the
following conclusions:
• Fast tripping speeds have the most impact on the magnitude of the surge pressures
• Small annular clearances (“slimholes”) and high mud viscosity cause high surge pressures
• Steady-state models (see later) can be inadequate
When running pipe in the hole, fluid is displaced in the wellbore. When the pipe end is closed, nozzles are
blocked, or there is a float valve in the bottomhole assembly (BHA), the displaced fluid is forced to go up
through the annulus between the pipe and the wellbore. When the pipe end is open, the displaced fluid
flows up through the inside of the drillpipe (and nozzles, etc.) as well as through the annulus. In both
situations, there is an increase in the fluid pressure in the wellbore below the pipe. The pressure increase
propagates as a wave towards the bottom of the well, and generates surges in the fluid in the entire
wellbore. A typical pressure surge is usually a decaying oscillatory motion, due to the elasticity of the
drillstring and wellbore, and the fluid compressibility and inertia.
Predictions of swab and surge pressures are based upon two types of models: steady state and dynamic:
• Steady State Models – The pressure surge is calculated based on the increased frictional pressure
due to the displaced fluid flowrate and pipe movement [31-33]. Bodin’s model [34] is the basis
for the model described in this section, and includes the effects of pipe movement, and the inertia
effects due to pipe acceleration/deceleration. Fluid compressibility, drillstring elasticity, and
wellbore expansivity are all neglected.
• Dynamic Models – These models take account of transient (time-dependent) flow, fluid
compressibility and inertia, and drillstring/casing elasticity. Some models also account for the
effects of wellbore compliance.

Swab and Surge
Steady state models may both overpredict and underpredict surge pressures, and cannot predict the
transient oscillatory nature of true swab and surge pressures. Gu [35] noted that a dynamic model was
probably not necessary for coiled-tubing drilling due to the small accelerations and uniform running
speeds. Steady state models are computationally efficient and easy to develop and maintain, and require
less input data. Dynamic models are CPU intensive and generally require more input information than
may be available for quick runs in the field. Only dynamic models can be used to adequately study the
effects of pipe acceleration. The WF-SURGE (The “Enertech Model”) is currently the most
comprehensive model available. Note also that steady state models do not allow the calculation of precise
surge pressures below the bit. The dynamic model solves the governing equations for one-dimensional
compressible flow, and can give more accurate pressure predictions below the bit.
The steady state model was the model adopted for use within Drilling Office because of the following
requirements:
• Small CPU consumption

• Robustness
• Easily applied in field applications
• Tends to be conservative
• Core algorithms already used within the CADE applications (CemCADE, MudCADE)
The model used is a combination of that specified by Bodin [34] using some recommendations by Exlog
[35] and Bourgoyne [36].
The following features are included:

• User-defined trip margins: estimates of safe tripping speeds will be presented for critical
components of the drillstring.
• Plots of EMW (Equivalent Mud Weight) as a function of depth
• Approximation of the effects of acceleration/deceleration (following Bodin [34])
• Calculate swab and surge pressures for open and closed ended pipes, blocked nozzles and float
subs.
Model Description
There are two approaches for determining steady-state swab and surge pressures:
9. Assuming fluid levels are equal in drillpipe and annulus at all times - In this case, the distribution of
the displaced fluid is dependent upon the cross-sectional areas of the annulus and drillpipe. The main
disadvantage is that the greater restriction of the flow provided by the nozzles and the drillpipe mean
that the flow in the annulus exceeds that calculated by this method. Therefore, a second method is
usually adopted, and is the main method chosen for use in Drilling Office.
10. U-tube Model – In this case, due to the continuity of the pressure boundary condition at the bottom of
the drillstring, we assume that the hydrostatic and frictional pressures in the pipe and through the bit
are equal to those in the annulus. As we are neglecting mud compressibility and expansivity we will
assume that the frictional pressures are equivalent on both sides of the U-tube. This solution is
iterative, and is described in more detail later.

Swab and Surge
When pulling out of hole (POOH) we assume that both the pipe and annulus are kept full of fluid.
However, when running in hole (RIH), the fluid level in the drillstring may drop well below that in the
annulus, particularly when bit nozzles are present. This effect can frequently be observed as a pit volume
higher than expected, string weight less than expected, and a considerable volume pumped before the
standpipe pressure builds up while breaking circulation. When the fluid level in the drillstring is below
that in the annulus, a greater hydrostatic pressure exists in the annulus, and the fluid will tend to want to
U-tube from the annulus into the drillstring. In this case, the flow distribution calculated by equating the
annular and drillstring frictional losses gives an annular flow (and a corresponding surge pressure)
slightly higher than actually exists. Because this error is small and conservative, and at this point, there is
still no reliable way to track the fluid level in the drillpipe, we will assume that the method of equating
frictional pressure losses on each side of the U-tube is generally acceptable.
Non-Newtonian Effects
Laminar flow surge pressure equations can be derived for Bingham and Power Law rheological models,
although the resulting equations are usually too complex for simple field applications. Burkhardt
presented a simplified method. This method uses an effective fluid velocity in the annular flow equations.
Burkhardt [31] suggested that the total effective fluid velocity in the annulus, Vann , is given by relating
the pipe running speed V p and the velocity component of the fluid flow produced by the displacing pipe,
V by the following:
Vann = V + K V p
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
….(1)
where K is the fluid ‘clinging constant’, and depends upon the ratio of the drillstring and hole diameters.
Following Bodin [33] we assume that the Newtonian clinging constant for both laminar and turbulent
flow regimes is as given below. We assume that for non-Newtonian flows the laminar clinging factor
applies for both laminar and turbulent flow:
α 2 − 2α 2 ln(α ) − 1
K lam =
2(1 − α 2 ) ln(α )
…………………………………………………………………………………………..(2)
α 4 +α 
  − α 2
 1+α 
K turb =
1−α 2
…………………………………………………………………………………………..(3)
where α = d out / d hole is the ratio of the pipe outer diameter to the hole inner diameter.

Swab and Surge
din
dout
dhole
Figure 1: Pipe/Annular Geometry
For closed-ended pipe:

 Apipe 
V = V p  
 Aann 
…………………………………………………………………………………………..(4)
and,
πd out
2
A pipe =
4
…………………………………………………………………………………………..(5)
π
Aann = 2
(d hole − d out
2
)
4
…………………………………………………………………………………………..(6)
Thus, for a closed-ended pipe the effective velocity becomes:
 d2 
V = V p  2 out 2 
 d hole − d out 
…………………………………………………………………………………………..(7)
For an open-ended pipe,

π
A pipe =
4
(d 2
out − d in2 )
……………………………………………………………………………..……………(8)

Swab and Surge
Therefore, the effective annular velocity becomes:

 d 2 − d in2 
V = V p  2out 
 d hole − d out
2

…………………………………………………………………………………….…….(9)
Pressure Losses due to Orifice Restriction
The nozzle pressure loss formulation is already given in Drilling Office for bit nozzle hydraulics
calculations. The same formulation is used when assessing the swab/surge flows through bit nozzles.
Following the Drilling Office technical document, the pressure losses through the bit nozzles are
calculated by the following:
 1  ρVnoz
2

∆Pbit =  2 
 Cv  2
………………………………………………………………………………………….(10)
where Vnoz is the jet velocity, ρ is the mud weight, and C v is the discharge coefficient.
Pipe Acceleration
Acceleration and deceleration effects can be significant. Swab pressures can occur when the pipe is
stopped suddenly during pipe running. This can be sufficient to swab an influx while tripping in; this
influx can go unnoticed while it is circulated up the wellbore until it starts to expand and/or break out of
solution.
The inertial pressure component can be found by considering the equilibrium of a fluid element of length
dz and cross sectional area A . Following Bodin [33] this gives:
  ∂P  
− PA +  P +  dz  A = Mγ = ρAdzγ
  ∂z  
…………………………………………………………………………..(11)
where γ is the fluid acceleration, M is the mass of the fluid element. This reduces to:
∂P
= ργ
∂z
…………………………………………………………………………………………………(12)
The relationship between the fluid acceleration in the annulus, γ , and the pipe acceleration, a p is given
by:
 A pipe 
γ = a p  

A
 flow 
…………………………………………………………………………………………...………(13)
where A flow represents the cross-sectional area the fluid crosses while flowing.
a p is positive for pipe acceleration and negative for pipe deceleration.
Therefore, the inertial contribution to the annular pressure gradient is as follows:

Swab and Surge
 ∂P   A pipe 
  = ρa p  

 ∂z  acc  A flow 
………………………………………………………………………..…………………….(14)
For a pipe closed at the end, and no pump flow:
2
Apipe Apipe d out
= =
A flow Aann 2
d hole − d out
2
……………………………………………………………………….…………..,,,….(15)
For a pipe with an open end, the fluid acceleration can occur inside and outside the pipe at different
rates. Burkhardt [31] approximated the flow ratio as follows:
A pipe 2
d out − d in2
= 2
A flow d hole − d out
2
+ d in2
………………………………………………………………………,,,…………(16)
where d in is the inner diameter of the pipe.
Solution Scheme
There are three different scenarios that we must account for:

1. Pipe Closed.
2. Pipe Open, Pumps On.
3. Pipe Open, Pumps Off.
We consider each of these scenarios in turn, and detail the solution scheme.
Pipe Closed
In this case we solve directly for the pressure drop in the annulus. This will be the case if we have closed
ended pipe, blocked nozzles or a float sub in the BHA (or sufficient back pressure from the motor such
that flow preferentially goes up the annulus).
The pressure drop in the annulus is given by the sum of all of the annular section pressure losses and the
inertia effects. Therefore,
 ∂P   ∂P 
∆Pann = ∑ Lanni   + ∑ Lanni  
i  ∂z  frici i  ∂z  acci
………………………………………………………….………..…(17)
where Lanni is the length of an annular section i of constant cross-sectional area. The pressure drop is
evaluated using the standard annular pressure drop routines already within Drilling Office, and the
following velocities in each annular section:
 2
d out 
Vanni 
= ±Vp  K + 2 
2
i
………………………………………………………………….……….(18)
The sign is taken to be positive while RIH, and negative when POOH. The acceleration term is given by:

Swab and Surge
 ∂P   d2 
  = ± ρa p  2 out 2 
 ∂z  acc i  d hole − d out i
……………………………………………………………………………….(19)
The sign is positive for pipe acceleration, and negative for pipe deceleration.
Pipe Open, Pumps On
In this case, we can still solve directly for the pressure drop in the annulus for the moving pipe, because
there is flow down the drillpipe and up the annulus. Therefore, we solve Eq.17 for the total annular
pressure drop:
 ∂P   ∂P 
∆Pann = ∑ Lanni   + ∑ Lanni  
i  ∂z  frici i  ∂z  acci
……………………………………………………………..………(20)
In this case the following annular velocity is used in the frictional pressure drop calculation:
 d 2 − d in2 
Vanni = V pumpi ± V p  K + 2out 
2
i
………………………………………………………………….………(21)
where V pumpi is the contribution to the annular velocity from the pump flowrate at annular element i . The
sign is taken to be positive while RIH, and negative when POOH. The acceleration term is given by:
 ∂P   d2 −d2 
  = ± ρa p  2 out 2 in 2 
 ∂z  acc i  d hole − d out + d in  i
………………………………………………………………..………...(22)
The sign is positive for pipe acceleration, and negative for pipe deceleration.
Pipe Open, Pump Off
In this case, the fluid displaced is free to flow in the annulus or drillstring. However, since the drillstring
or annulus have a common pressure at the bottom, the total frictional losses in the pipe and annulus are
assumed to be the same. However, the problem is that we now have to find how the flow partitions in the
drillstring and annulus to give the equal frictional pressure drops. In general, the annular velocities are
given by:
(
Vanni = ± V + K V p )i
…………………………………………………………………………...…………..(23)
This becomes,
 2
d out − d in2 
Vanni 
= ±Vp  K + 2 
2
i
……………………………………………………………………………..(24)
The sign is taken to be positive while RIH, and negative when POOH.

Swab and Surge
We will assume that the fluid flowrate in the drillstring and annulus are given by q p and q a respectively.
The total displaced rate of fluid is given by:
π
q tot = q p + q a = V p 2
(d out − d in2 )
4
…………………………………………………………………………….(25)
Let us define the annular flow fraction as:
qa
fa =
qtot
………………………………………………………………..………………………………(26)
Therefore,
q a = f a qtot
……………………………………………………………………………………………….(27)
and,
q p = (1 − f a )qtot
………………………………………………………………………………………………..(28)
We must solve the following equation that equates the frictional losses in the pipe and annulus. Note we
assume that the inertial term is zero when POOH (as documented by Bodin [33]):
 ∂Pann   ∂P   ∂Ppipe 
∑L anni  
 ∂z  frici
+ ∑ Lanni  ann  − ∑ L pipe j 
 ∂z  acci
 − ∆Pnoz − ∑ ∆PMWDk − ∆Pmotor = 0
i i j  dz  fric j k
………………………………………………………………………………………………….(29)
where the annular friction losses are calculated using the local annular velocity Vanni , and the drillpipe
frictional losses are calculated using the local pipe velocity V pipe j , which are given in turn by:
4  f q  
Vanni = ±   2 a tot 2  + K V p 
π  d hole − d out i 
……………………………………………………………...………….(30)
where the positive sign is used for RIH, and,
 4  (1 − f a )qtot  
V pipe j =    m V p 
π  d in2   j
.………………………………………………………………………….………(31)
where the negative sign is used in the pipe for RIH.
The nozzle losses are based on the following:
 1  ρ (1 − f a ) 2 qtot
2
∆Pnoz =  2  2
 Cv  2 Anoz
…………………………………………………….………………………..(32)
where Anoz is the total flow area of the bit nozzles.

The pressure drops in the MWD/LWD tools are as follows:

Swab and Surge
1
∆PMWDk = ρ (1 − f a ) 2 qtot
2
η
…………………………………………………………..……………..…..(33)
where η is the empirical pressure drop coefficient that is documented in the BHA catalog. For user
defined tools (i.e., those tools that do not have a pressure drop coefficient in the BHA editor catalog)
where we assume a linear pressure drop relationship the pressure drop is given by determining the linear
coefficient ϕ from the user input, and then using:
∆PMWDk = ϕρ (1 − f a )qtot
………………………………………………………..……………..……..(34)
The motor pressure drops are ignored (unless we are advised of another method for swabbed flow in a
motor, i.e., is there a low limit threshold pressure drop).
The solution technique are based on a first guess for f a , and then iterating the solution of Eq.29 until we obtain
convergence, and a value of f a that gives equal pressure drops on both annular and drillpipe sides of the U-tube.
Eq.20 then gives the swab/surge pressure. Note that if the flowrate in the annulus is in a different direction than the
flowrate in the drillstring interior, then the roots of a f a greater than unity or less than zero are possible. Values of
f a >1 tend to occur when the internal area is very small compared to the annular area. Values of f a <0 tend to occur
when the annular clearance is small in comparison to the internal area. In the case of closed end pipe f a =1 and the
iterative solution scheme is not required; the alternative scheme is documented above in the section on closed ended
pipe. A standard solver such as Brent’s method is used for the solution of Eq.29. This is the best solver as we are not
easily able to calculate the derivative of Eq.29.

References
Index
aniline point ..................................................................... 74 laminar flow .....................................................................18

Bingham plastic rheological model ................................. 27 mud motor
Casson rheological model ............................................... 33 dump valve ..................................................................65
centipoises ....................................................................... 23 flex sub ........................................................................66
chunking float sub .......................................................................65
in motor failure ........................................................... 71 top sub ..........................................................................64
coefficient of contraction ................................................. 53 nutation ............................................................................66
coefficient of velocity...................................................... 53 pipe eccentricity
debonding effects of ......................................................................49
in motor failure ........................................................... 71 plug flow ..........................................................................18
Delta P ............................................................................. 74 power law rheological model ...........................................30
dilatant PowerFit ..........................................................................72
fluids ........................................................................... 25 pseudoplastic fluids .........................................................25
equivalent diameter ......................................................... 43 Reynolds number, ............................................................18
equivalent mud weight .................................................... 15 rheopectic
funnel viscosity ............................................................... 21 fluids ...........................................................................26
Herschel-Bulkley model .................................................. 37 thixotropic
hydraulic diameter ........................................................... 43 fluids ...........................................................................26
ideal velocity, .................................................................. 53 turbulent flow ..................................................................18
junk damage viscosity ...........................................................................19
in motor failure ........................................................... 71 well circulation system ......................................................5
Lamb’s diameter .............................................................. 43

References
1
Guidelines for Good Convergence in Computational Fluid Dynamics, NAFEMS (13 March 1999),
<http://www.nafems.org/cfdwg/nonnewt.html.>
2
Hutchinson, M and I. Rezmer-Cooper: “Using Downhole Annular Pressure Measurements to Anticipate Drilling
Problems,” paper SPE 49114, prepared for the 1998 SPE Annual Technical Conference, New Orleans,
Louisiana.
3
Aziz, K and G. W. Govier: The Flow of Complex Mixtures in Pipes, Florida, Robert E. Krieger Publishing
Company, (1972).
4
Klotz, James A. and William E. Brigham: “To Determine Herschel-Bulkley Coefficients.” Journal of Petroleum
Technology. (November 1998) 50, No. 11, 80-81.
5
Bobok, E., Fluid Mechanics for Petroleum Engineers, Budapest, Hungary, Elsevier Science Publishers (1993).
6
Houwen, O. H. and T. Geehan, “Rheology of Oil-Base Muds,”paper SPE 15416 (1986).
7
Flannery, B.P.,et al.: Numerical Recipes, Cambridge University Press (1989).
8
Bode, D. J., Noffke, R. B., and Nickens: “Well Control Methods and Practices in Small Diameter Wellbores,”
Journal of Petroleum Engineering, (November 1991) 1,380 – 1,386.
9
McCann, R. C., et al.: “Effects of High-speed Pipe Rotation on Pressures in Narrow Annuli,” SPE Drilling and
Completion, Volume 10, No. 2 (June 1995), 96 – 103.
10
Lockett, T. J., Richardson, S. M., and W. J. Worraker: “The Importance of Rotation Effects for Efficient Cuttings
Removal During Drilling,” paper SPE 25768 presented at 1993 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference in Amsterdam.
11
Lockett, T. J., Richardson, S. M., and W.J. Worraker: Numerical Simulations of Transitions in Axial-Rotary Flows
in an Annulus, Eurotech Direct, Birmingham, AL (1991).
12
Fontenot, J. and R. K. Clark: “Field Measurements of the Effects of Drillstring Velocity, Pump Speed, and Lost
Circulation Material on Downhole Pressures,” paper SPE 4970 presented at the 49th annual Fall meeting in
Houston, TX (1974).
13
Whittaker, Alun: Theory and Application of Drilling Fluid Hydraulics, Boston, MA, IHRDC Publishers (1985).
14
Reed, T. D. and A. A. Pilehvari: “A New Model for Laminar, Transitional, and Turbulent Flow of Drilling Muds,”
paper SPE 25456 (1993).
15
Haciislamoglu, M. and U. Cartalos: “Practical Pressure Loss Predictions in Realistic Annular Geometries,” paper
SPE 28034 (1994).
16
Aziz, K and G. W. Govier: The Flow of Complex Mixtures in Pipes, Florida, Robert E. Krieger Publishing
Company (1972).
17
Daugherty, R.L., J.B.Franzini, and E.J.Finnemore: Fluid Mechanics with Engineering Applications, McGraw Hill,
Singapore (1989).
18
Haciislamoglu, M. and U. Cartalos: “Practical Pressure Loss Predictions in Realistic Annular Geometries,” paper
SPE 28034 (1994).

References
19
Bourgoyne, A. T. et al.: Applied Drilling Engineering, SPE Textbook Series, Vol. 2, Richardson, Society of
Petroleum Engineers (1986).
20
Luo, Y., P. A. Bern, and B. D. Chambers: “Flow Rate Predictions for Cleaning Deviated Wells” paper SPE/IADC
23884 (1992).
21
Walton, I. C.: “Computer Simulation of Coiled Tubing Wellbore Cleanouts in Deviated Wells Recommends
Optimum Pump Rate and Fluid Viscosity,” paper SPE 29491 (1995).
22
Clark, R. K., and K. L. Bickham: “A Mechanistic Model for Cuttings Transport,” paper SPE 28306 (1994).
23
Peden, J. M., J. T. Ford, and M. B. Oyeneyin: “Comprehensive Experimental Investigation of Drilled Cuttings
Transport in Inclined Wells Including the Effects of Rotation and Eccentricity,” SPE paper 20925 (1990).
24
Doron, P., D. Granica, and D. Barnea: “Slurry Flow in Horizontal Pipes – Experimental and Modeling,” Int. J.
Multiphase Flow. Vol. 13, No. 4, 535-547 (1987).
25
Luo, Y. et al.: “Simple Charts to Determine Hole Cleaning Requirements in Deviated Well,” paper SPE/IADC
27486 (1994).
26
Sanchez, R. et al.: “The Effect of Drillpipe Rotation on Hole Cleaning During Directional Well Drilling,” paper
SPE 37626 (1997).
27
Darley, H.C.H. and George R. Gray: Composition and Properties of Drilling and Completion Fluids, Houston,
TX, Gulf Publishing Company (1988).
28
Allouche, M., “HPHT Rheology of Drilling Fluids – Engineering Review”, Dowell Departmental Note RDP
96013.
29
McCain, W.D, Jr., “The Properties of Petroleum Fluids – Second edition”, PennWell publishing.
30
Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific Computing (Second Edition).
31
Burkhardt, J.A., “Wellbore Pressure Surges Produced By Pipe Movement”, JPT, June 1961, pp. 595-605.
32
Jorge, N.D.M., and Santos, O.L.A., ”Three Modified Calculation Procedures for Estimating Swabbing Effect in
Horizontal Wells”, SPE 27022, 1994, pp. 919-928
33
Bodin, D., “Surge and Swab Pressures”, April 12 1996, Dowell Report RDP 96015.
34
Gu, H., “Surge and Swab Pressures in Coiled Tubing Drilling”, April 18, 1997, Dowell report DL 11033.
35
“Theory and Application of Drilling Fluid Hydraulics”, edited by Alun Whittaker, Exlog.
36
“Applied Drilling Engineering”, Bourgoyne, A.T.,Jr, et al., SPE Textbook Series Vol2.

9. DrillSAFE

150 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land TX 77478
(281) 285-8000
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION TO DRILLSAFE................................................................................................................5
INPUTS AND OUTPUTS FOR DRILLSAFE ................................................................................................5
Inputs ........................................................................................................................................................5
Outputs .....................................................................................................................................................6
BUOYANCY ..................................................................................................................................................6
STIFFNESS AND TORTUOSITY..................................................................................................................7
Stiffness ....................................................................................................................................................7
Tortuosity .................................................................................................................................................7
Importance of Stiffness and Tortuosity.................................................................................................9
INTRODUCTION TO TORQUE AND DRAG ..............................................................................................16
MODES OF OPERATION ...........................................................................................................................16
TORQUE AND DRAG ANALYSIS TYPES.................................................................................................17
Single Point Torque and Drag ..............................................................................................................18
Multiple Point Torque and Drag (MTAD)..............................................................................................18
FRICTION FACTORS .................................................................................................................................19
Drilling Mud ............................................................................................................................................19
Effect of Differential Sticking................................................................................................................20
Effect of Cuttings Bed ...........................................................................................................................22
Effect of Unstable Formations..............................................................................................................24
Summary of Friction Factors (Coefficients of Friction) .....................................................................26
FORMATION STIFFNESS ..........................................................................................................................27
TORQUE AND DRAG ANALYSIS OUTPUTS ...........................................................................................27
Calculating the Axial Load....................................................................................................................27
Side Forces.............................................................................................................................................34
Stresses ..................................................................................................................................................36
Tripping Loads .......................................................................................................................................38
Torque Loss and Surface Torque ........................................................................................................39
INTRODUCTION TO BHA TENDENCY .....................................................................................................41
BHA TYPES ................................................................................................................................................41
Rotary BHA’s..........................................................................................................................................41
Steerable BHA’s .....................................................................................................................................43
Rotary Steerable BHAs..........................................................................................................................44
CALCULATING BHA TENDENCY .............................................................................................................46
Hole Enlargement ..................................................................................................................................47
Formation Stiffness ...............................................................................................................................47
Bend Angle .............................................................................................................................................47
Average Inclination................................................................................................................................48
Weight on Bit..........................................................................................................................................48
Stabilizer Placement ..............................................................................................................................48
Other Considerations ............................................................................................................................51
Simulation of Rotary Tendency............................................................................................................51
Rotary Steerable Tendency ..................................................................................................................51

BHA Tendency Rose..............................................................................................................................52

SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................................53
INTRODUCTION TO BIT SIDE FORCE .....................................................................................................55
PURPOSES OF BIT SIDE FORCE ANALYSIS .........................................................................................55
INPUTS .......................................................................................................................................................55
OUTPUTS ...................................................................................................................................................55
DRILLSAFE APPENDIX A .........................................................................................................................58
FINITE ELEMENT MODEL.........................................................................................................................59
Stress/Strain Equation of a Beam Element .........................................................................................60
Stress/Strain Equation of Drillstring....................................................................................................64
EXTERNAL APPLIED FORCES ON DRILLSTRING.................................................................................66
Pre-stress Forces...................................................................................................................................66
Gravity Forces........................................................................................................................................67
Contact Forces Between Beam Element and Wellbore .....................................................................67
Frictional Forces ....................................................................................................................................68
INITIAL BOUNDARY CONDITIONS ..........................................................................................................70
ITERATIVE SOLUTION TECHNIQUE........................................................................................................71
DRILLSAFE APPENDIX B .........................................................................................................................72
INTRODUCTION TO MESHING .................................................................................................................73
PRE-MESHING THE BHA COMPONENTS ...............................................................................................73
MESHING THE BHA SUBCOMPONENTS ................................................................................................74
Element Length ......................................................................................................................................74
Element Stiffness...................................................................................................................................75
WELLBORE CURVATURE ........................................................................................................................76
SWAB AND SURGE ........................................................................ ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
Overview .......................................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Swab and Surge Models .............................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Model Description........................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Non-Newtonian Effects................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Introduction to DrillSAFE
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual provides an introduction to and

summary of the DrillSAFE application.

INTRODUCTION TO DRILLSAFE
DrillSAFE is used in the planning stage of a well to compute the expected friction (torque and drag)
losses along the drillstring while tripping, rotary drilling, or sliding by providing a finite element analysis
of the drillstring and BHA within the 3-dimensional wellbore. The program models the component
stiffness, which is important for short radius wells and for running casing or tubulars; the program
facilitates optimization of the best well path by analyzing the effects of borehole profile changes on
friction losses. DrillSAFE also allows the user to perform an analysis of the tripping loads to investigate
possible problems while sliding or using a downhole motor in a directional well. Furthermore, DrillSAFE
can be used as the well is drilled to ensure that the actual well profile is within the optimal limits of rig
equipment and drillstring tubulars. For post-event analyses, data acquired during the drilling operation
with downhole weight and torque measurements is compared to simulation data to identify particular
trouble zones and is used to improve subsequent operations.
The four distinct analyses available within DrillSAFE are as follows:

• single point torque and drag analysis
• multiple point torque and drag analysis (tripping loads analysis)
• BHA tendency analysis
• bit side force calculations
INPUTS AND OUTPUTS FOR DRILLSAFE

The input data necessary for performing a DrillSAFE simulation and the outputs provided are given
below.
Inputs
The following information is entered into DrillSAFE:
• wellbore directional profile (proposal or survey)
• detailed BHA configuration (including dimensions and individual component weights)
• casing profile/wellbore geometry
• friction factors for cased hole and open hole as a function of operation (sliding, rotating, reaming)
• mud weight
• formation stiffness (a measure of the resistance of the formation)
• torque on bit
• weight on bit
• block weight
• tool face setting
• depth of bit in wellbore (and incremental depth for tripping loads analysis)
• drillstring revolutions/minute (rpm) and rate of penetration (if calculating translational friction
factors)
The well plan can also include “tortuosity” to produce a rippled effect that can be added to the well
inclination and azimuth to simulate the small doglegs that occur in a real well survey. Activating this
option in DrillSAFE allows the user to obtain more realistic values of the drag force and torque loss,
particularly in the vertical section of the wellbore.

Outputs
The following outputs are possible from the different DrillSAFE analyses:
• axial load/torque profile
• side force profiles (magnitude and inclination and azimuthal components)
• stresses (Von Mises, yield, and axial, torsional, and bending components)
• displacement of the BHA in the wellbore
• multiple-depth hookload and surface torque profiles
• sinusoidal buckling
• BHA tendencies (equilibrium build and turn rates)
• bit side force components
These outputs are documented in both listings and plots and are used to provide an overall view of any
potential problem areas in the wellbore. The plots can also be scaled and used in conjunction with the
listings for in-depth analysis.
BUOYANCY
Buoyancy is the net upward hydrostatic force imposed on an object in the wellbore and is caused by the
pressure of the drilling mud.1 When an object is immersed in the wellbore, the pressure below the object
is greater than the pressure above. The resulting pressure differential is the source of the buoyancy force
on the object.
Determining buoyancy is crucial to well planning because buoyancy reduces the amount of drillstring
weight that is calculated/measured on the surface when the drillstring is in the wellbore fluid. This weight
reduction is determined by a “buoyancy factor.” This buoyancy factor must be considered for vertical,
horizontal, and inclined sections of the wellbore.
The effective weight (buoyed weight) in a vertical section is given by the following:
 ρ 
Weff = Wair 1 − mud  ......................................................................................................................................(8-1)
 ρ metal 
where Wair is the weight of the pipe in air,

ρmud is the density of the drilling fluid, and
ρmetal is the density of the drillstring component.
In deviated and horizontal sections, an allowance is made for the wellbore inclination on the buoyancy
force, which applies both axially and laterally on objects in the wellbore fluid. The effect of buoyancy on
buckling can also be significant (see section on critical buckling for a detailed description of buckling
considerations).

STIFFNESS AND TORTUOSITY

Both stiffness and tortuosity can significantly affect the planning of a well and can be considered with
DrillSAFE. The two topics are inherently linked, and one should not be considered without the other.
Stiffness
The stiffness of a drillstring is an important matter to consider in planning a well, since the actions of the
driller on the surface change the forces on a drillstring downhole.2 The components of drillstring stiffness
include axial, torsional, and bending stiffness. There are two basic types of torque and drag models used
to calculate drillstring stiffness: the stiff-string model and the soft-string model.
Soft-string Model
The soft-string model assumes that the axial forces and moments (tension and torque) are supported by
the drillstring, and the lateral forces (contact forces) are supported by the wellbore. Further, the model
assumes that the drillstring tends to deform to the shape of the borehole, and thus has continuous contact
over the whole length of the drillstring. The forces are then balanced on the individual elements.
Stiff-string Model
The stiff-string model accounts for the drillstring bending stiffness by not allowing sections of the
drillstring to be in contact with the wellbore. This technique produces a more realistic analysis of the
stresses and loads acting upon the drillstring and borehole, especially in highly tortuous wells or in wells
with sections of high dogleg severity. DrillSAFE uses a stiff-string model, because it provides a more
complete physical model.
Tortuosity
When planning a well, the well path generated from geometric considerations (kick-off points, build rate,
turn rate) is a set of “smooth curves.” When using a well plan in torque and drag analyses, the predicted
torque and hookloads are always lower than those obtained from the actual survey. These torque and
hookload variances are due to hole irregularities that are created in the drilling process (see Figure 8-1).

Figure 8-1: Hole irregularities in actual well path vs. planned well path.
To better simulate the torque and drag in an actual well, tortuosity (series of local doglegs) can be added
to the smooth well plan to more closely match the irregularities occurring in actual drilled wellbores. In
DrillSAFE, tortuosity can be applied selectively through depth zoning. Different degrees of tortuosity can
be added to a well plan in up to five wellbore sections.
Tortuosity is applied in DrillSAFE using one of the following three types of mathematical models:
• sine wave
• random independent inclination azimuth (RIIA)
• random dependent inclination azimuth (RDIA)
All three models are characterized by two quantities:
A - the maximum magnitude of local doglegs (maximum variation of inclination and azimuth),
T - the periodicity in measured depth of dogleg insertion
Sine Wave
When using the sine wave model, the inclination and azimuth vary by an amount given by the following
expression:
A sin (2π ∆MD / T) where, ∆MD = the measured depth interval over a particular section.

The maximum dogleg variation to be added to the DLS of the plan is given by the following:
4A
∆DLS =
T ........................................................................................................................................................(8-2)
Random Independent Inclination Azimuth

For the RIIA tortuosity model, the inclination and azimuth vary randomly and independently in the
interval [-A, A] every depth interval T.
In this case, the maximum dogleg variation is given by the following:
2A
∆DLS = ........................................................................................................................................................(8-3)
T
Random Dependent Inclination Azimuth

In most cases, the RDIA model is the most representative model. In this model, the inclination variation is
the same as in the RIIA model. The azimuth variation depends on the inclination of the borehole, using
the following formula:
Tortuous azimuth = azimuth obtained by RIIA model/sin (borehole inclination)
Thus, the azimuth variation can change significantly in the lower inclination borehole sections. In this
case the maximum DLS variation is given by the following:
2A
∆DLS =
T ........................................................................................................................................................(8-4)
NOTE
Since the tortuosity applied in the random independent and random dependent models is
“random,” no two results are identical. Variation in DrillSAFE outputs will be observed when
applying tortuosity.
Importance of Stiffness and Tortuosity

The main difference between stiff and soft string models and their representation of the drillstring
behavior is the mathematical model used to compute the side forces.
Before a full description of the differences between the two models is presented, the components of the
side force that occurs downhole must be defined. The following illustration shows the three main
components of the side force (see Figure 8-2):
• side weight
• curvature side force
• bending side force

Wn : side weight = linear weight x sin( inclination )
Wn
Wn FB
FB
T
FC
Wn
FC
FB FB
curvature side force FB : bending side force
FC = T x string curvature (zero in soft string model)
T
Total Side Force = -Wn + FC + FB
Figure 8-2: Side force components.
The first component of the side force is the side weight (Wn), which is the component of the drillstring
weight that is perpendicular to the borehole axis. The side weight tends to force the drillstring to the low
side of the hole.
The second component is the curvature side force (Fc), which is the product of the tension and curvature
of the drillstring in the contact area. A drillstring in tension is analogous to a piece of string that has a
tension force applied at each end. When the string is in tension, its natural tendency is to be straight. To
curve the string, a side force must be applied at some contact point on the string. In the same way, the
borehole must apply a side force on the drillstring at various contact points to cause the drillstring to
curve.
The final component is the bending side force (FB). The bending force is similar to the curvature side
force, but is a result of the drillstring bending stiffness, not the tension. The drillstring wants to remain
straight in its natural state. When the drillstring is bent, there is a natural restorative force that “springs” it
back to its original straight position. This situation is analogous to a ruler that is bent slightly and then
released. The “spring back” force is the bending side force between the drillstring and the borehole.
The inclination of the well affects which side force component has the greatest impact on the total side
force. As the inclination increases, the normal component of the drillstring weight (side weight) increases;
therefore, the side weight contribution to the total side force becomes more important. As inclination
decreases to zero, the side weight becomes negligible; hence the curvature side force and bending side
force contribute most of the total side force in low inclination sections. Both soft- and stiff-string models
calculate the side weight identically.
The curvature and the tortuosity of the well have a large impact on the side force distribution. Figure 8-3
illustrates the borehole/drillstring contact for a “low” tortuosity well (local DLS less than well curvature).
The two models in this case agree if the bending side force is much less than the curvature side force. All

untortured well trajectory designs fall into this category. Both the stiff- and soft-string models should give
the same results for a given untortured plan.
LOW TORTUOSITY WELLS

(local DLS << well curvature)
Wn
T STIFF & SOFT STRING / BOREHOLE CONTACT

T
Figure 8-3: Borehole contact in low tortuosity wells.
The following illustration compares the borehole/drillstring contact for both models in high tortuosity
wells (see Figure 8-4). The classification of low/high tortuosity depends on the well. For a hold section,
the well curvature is zero; therefore, any tortuosity causes this section to subsequently become a high
tortuosity section.
HIGH TORTUOSITY WELLS

(local DLS >> well curvature)
Wn
Wn
T
SOFTSTRING/ BOREHOLECONTACT T
T : axial load,
Wn Wn : component of
Wn drillstring weight
perpendicular to
borehole axis
T T
STIFFSTRING/ BOREHOLECONTACT
Figure 8-4: Contrasting borehole contact in high tortuosity wells between soft- and stiff-
string models.

For the soft-string model, the drillstring curvature is always equal to the wellbore curvature; therefore, the
drillstring is always in contact with the borehole for a soft-string model. By ensuring that every inch of
the drillstring follows the curvature of the wellbore, the soft-string model overestimates the contact area
and curvature side forces in a high tortuosity well. The stiff-string model, by contrast, allows the
drillstring curvature to be different than the wellbore curvature. As a result, the contact areas are reduced
and the curvature side forces are more realistic.
For a low inclination well, where the side weight is nearly zero, the difference in the curvature side force
between the soft- and stiff-string models is much more pronounced in the presence of tortuosity, and the
curvature side force is dominant.
Since the stiff-string model correctly simulates the drillstring curvature and stiffness, it calculates a more
accurate torque loss in a low inclination wellbore. In fact, for a vertical wellbore with no curvature, the
drillstring never contacts the borehole (assuming it was concentric in the hole) if the clearance is
sufficient (see Figure 8-5). For example, in an 8 ½ in. vertical hole with a local DLS of 1°/100 ft, the
drillstring only contacts the borehole if the pipe outer diameter is greater than 6 ½ in. The soft-string
model cannot take into account the clearance between the drillstring and the borehole for a vertical well.
R
θ d
Rθ DLS × ∆MD
2 2
d≈ =
2 2
no contact if: ODs < ODh − 2d
∆MD: survey interval

ODs
ODh
Figure 8-5: Clearance in a vertical borehole.

Example of Model Difference

The example well used for highlighting the differences between the models is offshore in the Gulf of
Mexico. The well is nearly vertical (inclination less than 1.5°) over the first 15,000 ft, builds to 34° up to
17,000 ft, holds inclination between 17,000 and 21,600 ft, and drops to TD at 23,500 ft. The well has
10 ¾ in. casing set at approximately 13,300 ft with an 8 ½-in. open hole section to TD.
Figure 8-6 shows the side forces calculated by the soft- and stiff-string models, and an analytical
calculation based on the local wellbore curvature and the axial load (tension) over the near vertical section
of the wellbore. The soft-string model and the local curvature side force (analytical) agree for the entire
low inclination section of the well. This agreement confirms the assumption made by the soft-string
model that the drillstring curvature follows the wellbore curvature exactly (i.e., the drillstring is in
constant contact with the borehole). By contrast, the stiff-string model calculates a much lower side force
in the vertical hole section because it correctly models the stiffness and the curvature of the drillstring. By
allowing the drillstring to react naturally to the forces applied to it, the stiff-string model calculates a
much more accurate torque loss. The superiority of the stiff-string model is most apparent in the case of
the vertical hole section, where the curvature side forces and bending side forces are dominant.
Figure 8-6: Side force and wellbore curvature.

The assumption made by the soft-string model that the drillstring curvature follows the wellbore curvature
exactly gives the model an unrealistic dependency on the survey interval (with respect to the calculated
torque loss), even in a low inclination section of the well. Torque loss and side forces are calculated by
both models with surveys taken every 100 ft (obtained from the original survey data, which was recorded
every 25 ft by suppressing the intermediate survey stations). The torque loss calculated by the soft-string
model changes from 23,100 ft-lb for the 25-ft surveys to 15,200 ft-lb in the case of the 100-ft surveys. In
the stiff-string model, the value changes much less, from 14,100 ft-lb to 13,800 ft-lb.
NOTE
Dividing the well plan into sections enables more accurate control of the degree of tortuosity over
pertinent zones. For instance, in the vertical/low deviation sections an actual survey is likely to be
more tortuous than in high inclination/horizontal section.

Torque and Drag Analysis
Section Summary
• the different types of torque and drag analyses available from DrillSAFE
• friction factors
• side forces
• stresses
• tripping loads
• torque loss and surface torque

INTRODUCTION TO TORQUE AND DRAG

A major consideration in the planning of a directional or horizontal well profile is the effective
transmission of the drillstring weight and rotation to the BHA. Torque is the rotational component of the
contact force between the drillstring and the wellbore, while drag is the axial component. Torque losses
are due to frictional torque generated by contact between the drillstring and the borehole. Drag losses are
due to frictional force against sliding motion and are generated by the contact between the drillstring and
the borehole. Drag losses are important during both drilling and tripping operations. DrillSAFE computes
the expected friction losses along the drillstring while tripping, rotary drilling, or sliding. DrillSAFE
facilitates the selection of the most appropriate well path and analyzes the effects of borehole profile
changes on friction losses. The effect of these changes on the drillstring behavior are then compared to the
mechanical limits of the drillstring, the rig’s rotary, and the rig’s hoisting equipment.
Torque and drag losses, when analyzed and calculated as part of the planned drilling trajectories, provide
an indication of the “drillability” of a well (the ease with which the well can be drilled). These
calculations are then used in conjunction with the trajectory design of the well to optimize the well plan.
The DrillSAFE torque and drag analyses can be made in single point or multiple point variations. The
DrillSAFE single point torque and drag analysis performs a complete analysis for a given set of drilling
parameters and operating mode. The multiple point torque and drag (MTAD) analysis includes the option
to perform runs with varying friction factors for calculation of hook loads and surface torques over a
range of user-specified, bit-measured depths while tripping, sliding, or reaming.
MODES OF OPERATION
Torque and drag analysis is performed in the following three main operation modes:
• rotating on bottom/off bottom
• sliding in/out
• reaming in/out

Each operating mode requires the user to enter data into DrillSAFE that is a function of the operating
mode. Following is a flow-chart that illustrates the different criteria involved in each operating mode (see
Figure 8-7):
Torque and Drag
Rotating Sliding Reaming
Torque on Bit
Torque on Bit Well Parameters
Well Parameters
Well Parameters Rotating Friction Factors
Sliding Friction Factors
Rotation Friction Factors Compute Translate
Friction Factors
Sliding In Sliding Out Reaming In Reaming Out
WOB > 0 WOB > 0

WOB = 0
WOB = 0 Steerable Drilling WOB = 0 Rotating Drilling
WOB > 0 Reaming Out
WOB = 0 Pick Up
On Bottom Off Bottom WOB = 0
Pull at Bit Pull at Bit
Slack Off
Reaming In
Figure 8-7: Operating modes in DrillSAFE.
TORQUE AND DRAG ANALYSIS TYPES

There are various types of torque and drag analyses that can be run on a BHA, based on the particular
mode of operation that is selected. DrillSAFE provides you with the tools to perform the following
analyses:
• single point torque and drag
• multiple point torque and drag (with single friction factors)
• multiple point torque and drag (with multiple friction factors)
Overpull calculations are available in single point torque and drag and multiple point torque and drag with
single friction factors. The user can set a pull force at the bit while sliding or reaming out of the hole,
allowing the user to determine the maximum overpull force that can be safely applied to the BHA.

Single Point Torque and Drag

The single point torque and drag analysis performs an analysis at any single point of the drill string and
bit depth for a given set of drilling parameters and operating mode. The analysis accounts for the
effect of individual BHA component stiffness and the effect of formation stiffness. An automatic 3-
dimensional mesh generation and mesh refinement procedure is used to reduce computation error.
Reducing computation error is especially important in sections where high-curvature and high-stress
concentrations occur. See Appendix B for more information on the mesh generation.
Single point torque and drag also allows the user to predict the drillability of each well design based on
the mechanical yield strength of each drillstring component. During the well planning phase, the user can
perform the following actions:
• Check the maximum Von Mises stress against the yield stress on each drillstring component and
determine if the component is appropriate for the operation.
• Examine the side forces between the drillstring and the wellbore or casing to identify potential
keyseat, casing wear, or stuck pipe areas.
• Check the maximum bending stress against the fatigue limit on each drillstring component and
the impact on the overall life of the component.
Multiple Point Torque and Drag (MTAD)

MTAD analyses can be run with single friction factors or multiple friction factors over a range of user-
specified bit depths.
MTAD with Single Friction Factors

This analysis allows the user to select the optimum well path trajectory for torque and drag considerations
among different designs. Running this analysis along the well trajectory in different drilling operations
locates the critical bit-measured depths, such as maximum hook load and maximum surface torque. By
coupling this analysis with the single point torque and drag analysis at these bit-measured depths, the
appropriate drillstring configuration and rig equipment limitations can be identified.
MTAD with Multiple Friction Factors (Tripping Loads Analysis)

This analysis performs the same calculations as the MTAD with a single friction factor analysis, except
that up to five values of friction coefficients can be input for sliding and rotating, either in cased hole or
open hole sections of the wellbore. This analysis allows the user to examine the sensitivity of the
calculated surface torque and hookloads to variations in the friction factor.
This MTAD analysis performs calculations of the hookload (pick-up load and pick-up overpull) when
tripping out, and the slack-off when tripping in. The surface torque can also be calculated over the same
range of user-specified, bit-measured depths.
Overpull Calculation
Overpull may be encountered if the bit becomes stuck—either mechanically (a pack-off) or
differentially—while either sliding or reaming out of the hole. This condition can cause a dramatic
increase in the axial load along the length of the drillstring, leading to the potential failure of a drillstring

component. DrillSAFE can examine the overpull to determine the maximum hookload that can be safely
allowed. Overpull can also cause significant stretching of the drillstring.
DrillSAFE simulates overpull by applying a downward force at the bit. To activate this option the user
must select ‘Overpull Calculation’ from the menu, the analysis type must be set to Torque and Drag, and
the operating mode to either ‘Sliding Out’ or ‘Reaming Out’. The weight on bit edit box will change to
Pull at bit when this calculation option is selected; the amount of pull can then be entered.
FRICTION FACTORS
Friction is a result of the contact between the drillstring and the wellbore during both lateral and axial
movement of the drillstring. Torque losses and drag losses are experienced because of the frictional force
involved in rotating, sliding, and reaming with the drillstring in the wellbore. A friction factor is defined
as the ratio of the force required to move an object, divided by the side force between the object and the
surface on which it is resting.3 The friction factor is always less than unity. (For more details concerning
the specification of the frictional force see Appendix A).
Depending upon the nature of the drillstring motion, frictional forces may be one of the following:
• drag forces (axial motion of the drillstring only – sliding mode)
• frictional torque generated by rotation only (rotating mode)
• a combination of both translation and rotation friction (i.e., torque and drag – reaming mode)
There are numerous factors that determine the friction encountered in the actual drilling of the well, such
as the drilling fluid program, lithology, use and type of drillpipe protectors, differential sticking, cutting
beds/removal, and unstable formations (sloughing shales and swelling clays).
Drilling Mud
The drilling fluid program greatly affects the friction factors that are encountered during the drilling of a
well. The choice of mud types and the type of formation determine the lubricity of the mud. In a
conventional well, torque and drag friction factors are usually within 20% of the predicted amount;
however, in extended reach or highly deviated wells, torques can vary substantially with the lubricity of
the drilling fluid.4
Selection of Mud Type

Selection of the mud type can make a significant impact on drilling efficiency and stability because
friction factors can vary widely with the choice of oil-base or water-base mud systems. Water-base
systems may perform well in the upper sections of a horizontal well, but perform poorly in the lower
sections. Overall, friction factors are reduced by the application of an oil-base mud system.
Additives
Additives to the drilling mud determine the effectiveness of the mud to the drilling application.5 For
example, gel strength (the ability of the fluid to suspend particles) is significantly more important in
horizontal drilling than in vertical drilling.

Bentonite is widely used as a mud additive in directional drilling. Bentonite particles build a wall cake on
the inside of the borehole, sealing the walls of the borehole and minimizing the drilling fluid that enters
the formation.
Polymer additives are used to prevent “skin damage” (formation damage) caused by solids and fluids
entering the formation. Polymers lubricate and increase gel strength, inhibiting the absorption of fluids
into the formation; however, polymers can only be added to water- or brine-base mud.
Lost circulation material (LCM) is added to mud when the wellbore fluid escapes into the formation and
does not continue its cyclical travel from the mud pits, down into the well, and back to the surface. LCM
can form beds on the low-side of the well, producing much lower friction between the drillstring and the
formation. This lower friction reduces torque and drag values.
Effects of Drilling Fluid on Friction

The following table displays how the drilling fluid affects friction factors in different borehole
environments (see Table 8-1).
Borehole Environment Oil-base Mud Water-base Mud Brine
Casing 0.14 – 0.23 0.29 0.34
Shale 0.17 – 0.24 0.27 0.27
Sandstone 0.21 – 0.32 0.37 0.41
Notes:
1. Figures based on most current data.
2. High friction coefficients recorded for sandstone are attributed to increased surface roughness.
3. For synthetic oil muds, use oil-base mud data.
4. Values +/- 0.02
Table 8-1: Drilling fluids and friction factors.
Effect of Differential Sticking

Differential sticking occurs when the drillstring is held against the wellbore by an imbalance of the
hydrostatic pressure in the wellbore with the pore pressure of a permeable formation. When the
hydrostatic pressure is greater than the pore pressure, the difference is called the “overbalance.” When
this overbalance acts on an area of the drillstring, the drillstring can become differentially stuck.
Differential sticking typically occurs in one of the following situations:

• drillstring is moving slowly or not at all
• contact is made between the drillstring and the wellbore
• overbalance is present
• BHA is adjacent to a thick, permeable formation
• filter cake becomes very thick (see Figure 8-8)

For a filter cake to form, As filtrate migrates into As the mud cake
the mud pressure must the permeable formation, thickens, it forms a barrier
be greater than the the borehole walls act as that reduces the amount
formation pressure and a screen that prevents of filtrate escaping to the
the formation must be the mud solids from formation. As the loss of
permeable. passing. The solids filtrate decreases, the
accumulate to form the filter cake buildup slows
filter cake. and eventually stops.
Figure 8-8: Thick filter cake can contribute to differential sticking.
Differential sticking is reduced or eliminated by the following actions:

• designing casing setting depths to minimize overbalance across potential trouble spots
• limiting mud weight to minimum required for hole stability and well control
• using oil-base mud
• keeping fluid loss to a minimum
• keeping the drillstring moving at all times to minimize downtime
• rotating the drillstring while tripping in and out of the hole when the BHA is adjacent to high-risk
zones
• minimizing BHA length
• maximizing BHA standoff from the wellbore where possible
• using spiral drill collars
• tracking differential pressure
• maintaining thin, strong filter cake
• making frequent wiper trips through permeable zones
Depending on operating modes, differential sticking of the BHA can be simulated in DrillSAFE as an
additional down weight on bit (sliding in) or as an overpull at the bit (sliding out), instead of a variation of
friction factors.

The magnitude of differential pressure sticking can be enormous. The overpull is given approximately by
the following calculation:
Overpull = (mud pressure – formation pressure) x contact area x friction factor
For example, with an overbalance of 1,500 psi, a length of 5 in., a sand thickness of 30 ft, and a friction
factor of 0.3, the overpull can be as high as 810,000 lb.
Effect of Cuttings Bed

Cuttings removal is important for efficient drilling. If a cuttings bed forms, the local friction factor can
increase significantly, up to the point of getting stuck (see Figure 8-9). Discrepancies from background
friction trends calculated by DrillSAFE can be used to identify such zones (see Figure 8-10).
Figure 8-9: Effects of poor cuttings removal.

Figure 8-10: Effects of poor hole cleaning.
Modifications to the mud weight, yield point, and pipe rotation can all significantly increase cuttings
transport efficiency. The drilling mud must be circulated at an adequate volume and pressure to
accomplish the following objectives:
• keep the drill bit cool
• clean the bottom of the hole (to prevent redrilling cuttings)
• provide a jetting action to help drill the hole by hydraulic erosion
• transport the cuttings out of the hole
To achieve proper cuttings removal, the upward annular velocity of the mud must exceed the downward
slip velocity of the cuttings (see Figure 8-11); otherwise, the cuttings will settle in the bottom of the hole
and interfere with forward progress of the bit. Cuttings transport is discussed in more detail in the
Hydraulics section.

Figure 8-11: Slip velocity and mud velocity for a vertical hole.
NOTE
While turbulent flow is best for cuttings removal, it also erodes the hole more than laminar
(smooth) flow; therefore, laminar flow is typically used in soft formations to prevent or reduce
hole washout.
Effect of Unstable Formations

The condition and characteristics of a formation will greatly effect drilling efficiency, whether the well is
vertical or horizontal. Formation stability must be controlled mechanically and/or chemically to avoid
sticking problems in zones of potential difficulty. Two types of formation conditions that can adversely
affect drilling and the potential friction that is encountered are sloughing shales and swelling clays.
Sloughing Shales
Shale is a fine-grain, clay rock with slate-like cleavage that sometimes contains oil-yielding substances.
When drilling into shale zones, difficulties can arise from the partial or complete collapse of the borehole
walls. If the shale begins to slough (collapse) and the shale pieces are too large to be circulated to the

surface, the shale can fall down around the drill bit and cause high torque and drag (see Figure 8-12). The
effect can be a gradual or sudden increase in drag. Indications on the rig include increases in pump
pressure and overpull on connections.
Figure 8-12: Shale falling down around BHA.

Deviation and azimuth are very important factors in the borehole stability of shale zones because the
formation behavior changes with the hole inclination. Safe drilling conditions are typically achievable in
inclinations up to 60º (see Figure 8-13). When planning a well, plan the borehole trajectory, inclination,
and azimuth within a safe range and follow a preplanned mud program. If unstable formations are
encountered, a contingency plan should be used (short trips, mud lubricity, etc.).
Figure 8-13: Effect of hole deviation & mud weight on borehole stability.
Swelling Clays
Clay is a soft, plastic-like earth with minerals that are essentially insoluble in water but disperse
extremely small particles under hydration, shearing forces, and velocity effects. Clays in the formation
can absorb water (called “hydration”) from the drilling fluid and cause the formation to swell and cause
greater friction. Polymer additives in the drilling mud can inhibit this absorption process and increase
lubricity in the wellbore.
Summary of Friction Factors (Coefficients of Friction)

Friction factors depend on mud types, the formation of different borehole sections (cased or open hole),
and the drillstring equipment in the hole. Friction factors between 0 and 1 represent the resistance against
the drillstring motion due to contact with the borehole. Friction factors are entered according to the
operating mode selected (rotating, sliding, or reaming). Following are the ranges of friction factors for
drilling fluids based on Schlumberger’s worldwide experience (see Table 8-2). The data is an average
over both cased and open hole sections.

Drilling Fluid Rotating Friction Factor Sliding Friction Factor
Water-Base 0.25 - 0.28 0.30 - 0.40
Oil-Base 0.17 - 0.21 0.20 - 0.30
Table 8-2: Friction factors for drilling fluids.
Friction factors in the wellbore must be monitored throughout all phases of the drilling operation.
Monitoring these factors can prevent stuck pipe; as the sticking point is approached, the side force
progressively increases. DrillSAFE cannot simulate this increase in side force due to sticking; thus an
increase in friction is manifested as an increase in friction factor.
FORMATION STIFFNESS
Formation stiffness is a parameter used in DrillSAFE to characterize and measure the hardness
(“elasticity”) of the formation. For most formation types, the value is between 0.1 (soft formation: rate of
penetration is greater than 100 ft/hr) and 1 (hard formation: rate of penetration is less than 10 ft/hr). In a
torque and drag analysis, the effect of changing formation stiffness is typically only a concern in high
curvature wells with a very stiff BHA, but has important implications in the analysis of BHA tendency
The formation stiffness parameter can be calibrated by either torque and drag analysis or by BHA
tendency analysis for specific well sections, using offset well data.
TORQUE AND DRAG ANALYSIS OUTPUTS

The torque and drag models produce both tabular and graphical outputs of the following analyses:
• critical buckling load
• torque losses and surface torque
• side forces
• stresses (axial, bending, and torsional)
• drillstring displacement (This plot is only available in BHA Tendency and Bit Side Force
Calculation modes)
Calculating the Axial Load

The DrillSAFE analysis indicates the drillstring/BHA tension and compression forces, as well as torque
losses for the bit depth that is selected. Drillpipe has a low resistance to applied bending moments and
tends to fail by buckling when subjected to excessive vertical compression loads. Buckling forces are
resisted by the inertia and stiffness of the pipe. The axial load analysis also calculates the neutral point
position of the drillstring and the critical buckling load point. The neutral point within DrillSAFE is the
position above which the drillstring is in tension (when a compressive load is applied), and below which

the drillstring is in compression. The critical buckling load and axial load curves are used to identify the
safety margins for the planned drillstring weight and the maximum compressive load.
Critical Buckling
The critical buckling load of a drillstring is the maximum compressive axial load that particular points of
the drillstring can withstand before buckling. The analysis of these points identifies the following
conditions:
• the onset of the transition to sinusoidal buckling
• the sections of the drillstring in tension and compression
• the location of the neutral point
Due to the added complexity that buckling introduces to drag prediction, it is necessary to describe the
various stages of deformation that a string can undergo with excessive axial compression. When the
applied weight on bit (WOB) is less than critical, the compressive load of the drillstring can be supported
without buckling (see Figure 8-14).
Figure 8-14: Compressive forces on drillstring.

Once the critical buckling load is exceeded, the string deforms into sinusoidal (“snaky”) buckling (see
Figure 8-15). In this state, the string snakes back and forth along the low side of the well.
Figure 8-15: Sinusoidal buckling.
A further increase in WOB induces even higher compressive loads. If the critical buckling load is
exceeded, the string can no longer support the sinusoidal configuration and will deform into a helix,
coiling up against the side of the well, with a change in direction with every few turns (see Figure 8-16).
Fortunately, helical buckling is not common in high inclination wells because the helical buckling load
for conventional pipe is usually so high that the tendency is to run out of string weight before helical
buckling can occur.
Figure 8-16: Helical buckling.

A significant increase in torque and drag is an inevitable result of operating in a post-buckled state, due to
increased wall contact forces that increase frictional effects (see Figure 8-17). These forces are
perpetuated and further exacerbated by confinement of the string in the wellbore and the increase in the
amount of pipe surface area actually coming into frictional contact with the side of the well, due to the
buckled configuration of the pipe.
Critical buckling load

Pre-buckling
Axial and transverse
Displacement
displacements
Post-buckling
Only axial displacements
Figure 8-17: Displacement of drillstring before and after buckling.
Any initial increase in drag increases compression in the drillstring, thus leading to more buckling and
higher contact forces. These factors affect the transmission of WOB, since the applied weight is supported
by the wellbore friction, rather than the bit. This condition can lead to lock-up of the pipe. If lock-up
occurs, the pipe cannot be pushed any further downhole because continued slack-off at surface will not
result in any increased WOB. In this state, fatigue of the pipe material can occur, due to high cyclic
stresses induced as a result of rotation. Additionally, pipe failure can occur if the localized stresses in the
buckled region become excessive, especially if rotating in a washout zone.

DrillSAFE only calculates the limit of sinusoidal buckling, and does not currently model the post-buckled
or lock-up states. DrillSAFE uses the following formula6 for the prediction of the onset of buckling:
 EI weff sin (θ ) 
Fsin = 2  ...............................................................................................................................(8-5)
 a 
where
Fsin = critical compressive axial load to begin sinusoidal buckling
E = Young’s modulus of the tubing
I = moment of inertia of tubing cross section
weff = buoyed linear weight of the tubing
θ = inclination of the hole
a = annular spacing or radial clearance between tubing and borehole
Simple analytical modes exist for the determination of helical buckling and lock-up. However, these
modes often do not take into consideration the true 3-dimensional nature of the problem, and there are
concerns that they predict the onset of lock-up too early as a function of the applied weight on bit.
Depending on the simplification assumptions made in these analytical models, a critical helical buckling
limit of 1.414 Fsin or 2.8 Fsin is proposed.7, 8 A better approach is a numerical method based on finite
element analysis to study the post-buckling behavior.

The plot in Figure 8-18 represents the axial and critical buckling load while slide drilling with a WOB of
20,000 lb in a horizontal wellbore. Sinusoidal buckling occurs in the drillstring sections where the axial
load is below the critical buckling load (between 10,000 and 11,000 ft MD). The plot also shows the
neutral point (where axial load is zero) around 8,000 ft.
Axial Load / Critical Buckling Load Plot

SLIDING WITH WOB
Casing FF = 0.20, Openhole FF = 0.30,
Mudweight = 10.00, WOB = 20.00, TOB = 0.00
Well: W-13
Date: March 29, 1999
150
120
Axial Load
90 Buckling Load
60
30
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
-30
-60
-90
-120
-150
Measured depth (ft)
Figure 8-18: Axial load / critical buckling load plot.
To avoid buckling in these sections, the user can reduce the applied WOB, thereby reducing the absolute
axial load and shifting the red curve up. Alternatively, the user can increase the bending stiffness by
replacing one or more of the drillstring components (e.g., adding more heavy wall drillpipe HWDP). This
modification will locally shift the buckling load curve down.
An effective application of HWDP is a combination of the following methods:

• replacing drillpipe with HWDP in buckling sections
• adding HWDP below the buckling sections down to the bit

Replacing Drill Pipe with HWDP

HWDP is stiffer than drillpipe, so replacing any drillpipe in a buckled section with HWDP will reduce
buckling. This method is effective when the buckling sections are located in a section of the borehole
where they exceed the critical inclination. The critical inclination (θc) is defined as the inclination where
the axial weight is equal to the sliding friction force, obtained as follows:
θc = atan (1/µ), where µ is the sliding friction coefficient.
Adding HWDP Below Buckling Sections

This practice reduces the absolute value of the axial load in the string sections where the inclination is
below the critical inclination (see Figure 8-19).
Figure 8-19: Friction factor vs. critical inclination.

The axial load is reduced by the amount:
Weff (θ) [cos (θ) - µ sin (θ)],
where Weff is the buoyant weight of the HWDP and

(θ) is the average inclination.
Fortunately, in high angle wells, the force of gravity pulls the drillstring to the low side of the wellbore,
stabilizes the drillstring, and allows it to carry axial compressive loads without buckling. However, one
must also consider the hydraulic implications of adding more heavy-wall drill pipe. In certain
circumstances, the rig pumps may not be able to handle the additional parasitic pressure losses to
maintain hole cleaning with a sufficient flowrate.
Side Forces
The side force outputs display the location of significant drillstring/wellbore contact points. The force is
normal to the borehole axis and is given as the total force over a specified length of drillstring. This
analysis can be used to highlight the location of significant drillstring/wellbore contact points that may
lead to longer term well problems, such as key seating and casing wear.

Figure 8-20 shows the side forces for the same drilling parameters for the BHA, wellbore geometry, and
survey as the axial load plot (sliding in with a WOB of 20,000 lb). The red curve illustrates the magnitude
of the side force, while the blue curve shows the position of significant borehole contact on the “top” and
bottom of the wellbore. For example, the majority of the contact in the lower section of the wellbore is
created by the drillstring lying in the horizontal part of the wellbore. However, there is significant contact
on the top part of the wellbore between 1,000 and 2,000 ft MD. The pink line (azimuth) shows how little
lateral side force there is in the upper wellbore section, while between 10,000 and 12,000 ft, there is more
side force(where there is a turn in the wellbore).
3
Magnitude
2 Inclination
Azimuth
1
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
Measured depth (ft)
Figure 8-20: Side force plot (sliding with WOB).

Stresses
DrillSAFE calculates the axial, bending, and torsional stresses, in addition to the “total” drillstring stress.
Figure 8-21 shows the stresses for off bottom rotation, instead of sliding. The individual stress
components are also shown.
Yield Stress
Stress Plot
80 % Yield Stress
ROTATION OFF BOTTOM
60 % Yield Stress
Casing FF = 0.20, Openhole FF = 0.30, Von Mises Stress
Mudweight = 10.00, WOB = 0.00, TOB = 0.00 Axial Stress
Well: W-13
Client: Schlumberger Twist
Date: March 29, 1999 Bending: Magnitude
120000
100000
80000
60000
40000
20000
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
Measured depth (ft)
Figure 8-21: Stress plot (rotation off bottom).
Axial Stress and Torque Loss

Axial stress output displays the drillstring/BHA tension and compression forces and torque losses for the
bit depth selected. As indicated before, the critical buckling load (indicating the onset of the transition to
sinusoidal buckling) and the position of the neutral point are also displayed. DrillSAFE takes into account
that the force of gravity in high-angle wells pulls the drillstring to the low side of the wellbore, stabilizing
the drillstring and allowing it to carry axial compressive loads without buckling. The critical buckling
load curve and axial load curves are used to visually identify the safety margins for the planned weight
and the maximum compressive load that can be carried.

Bending Stress
Bending stress is generated when the drillstring/BHA bends and each cross-section of the drillstring is
subjected to a bending moment. This action generates a tensile stress on one side and a compressive stress
on the other. As the drillstring rotates, these stresses reverse and consequently cause fatigue of the metal.
Torsional Stress
Torsional stress is the shear stress generated by drillstring torque.
Axial, bending, and torsional stresses combine to form the Von Mises Stress (or triaxial stress), expressed
as follows:
Von Mises stress =

(σ axial + σ bending ) + 3σ torsional
2 2
When calculated, these stress values are compared with the drillstring component yield stresses to
determine whether the component elastic limit is exceeded. The yield stress of a string component is the
maximum stress that it supports before breaking or inducing any permanent strain. In the DrillSAFE
detailed stress report, the text is written in red when the actual stress exceeds 80% of the component’s
stress (maximum safety factor = 80%).

Tripping Loads
The tripping load (multiple point torque and drag) plot is used to examine the sensitivity of the drilling
parameters (hookload and surface torque) to variations in the friction factors. This plot allows the user to
determine the maximum friction factor with which a drillstring can be safely operated or handled with the
available rig equipment (see Figure 8-22). In the following example, a casing friction factor of 0.2 and
two open hole friction factors (0.2 and 0.3) are used during the tripping in and tripping out operations, and
a maximum hookload of about 260,000 lb is obtained. If this value exceeds the maximum pull force of the
drillstring, the drillstring must be redesigned, or the friction factors must be reduced by changing the mud.
Figure 8-22: Tripping loads analysis plot.

Torque Loss and Surface Torque

Torque loss is the frictional torque generated by contact between the drillstring and the borehole. Surface
torque is the applied torque at the top of the drillstring and is the sum of the bit torque, frictional string
torque, mechanical torques, and dynamic torques. The outputs of surface torque and torque loss are
calculated as a function of measured depth.
Like the plot for tripping in and out, a similar analysis can be made for the surface torque (see Figure 8-
23). These cases investigate the sensitivity of the surface torque while rotating on bottom to variations in
the open hole friction factor. If the open hole friction factor is increased from 0.2 to 0.35, the surface
torque also increases. Comparing these surface torque profiles to the individual component make-up
torques will identify the range of operating parameters and rig equipment specifications necessary to drill
the well.
Figure 8-23: Surface torque plot.

BHA Tendency Analysis
Section Summary
• the different types of BHA’s that are modeled
• calculation of BHA tendency
• effects of hole enlargement, formation stiffness, weight on bit, and stabilizer
placement

INTRODUCTION TO BHA TENDENCY

Directional wells are drilled by incorporating components in the BHA that cause the hole to deflect in a
desired manner.9 Predicting the directional tendency of a BHA is a key element in improving the
efficiency of the directional drilling process. Finite element models attempt to represent the detailed
physical interactions between the BHA and the wellbore while drilling; however, effective use of these
models is sometimes hindered by parameters that are difficult to quantify, particularly the strength of the
formation and variations in hole gauge.
Directional wellbores are drilled by incorporating components into the BHA that cause the hole to deflect
in an appropriate manner. Stabilizers between drill collars cause a bowing action that can build, hold, or
drop inclination. Rotary directional drilling is difficult to predict, and requires years of experience for a
directional driller to achieve the desired results. Steerable systems, introduced about 15 years ago have a
bend in them. A positive displacement motor (PDM) turns the bit below the bend.
BHA TYPES
The two basic types of BHA’s used for directional drilling are rotary BHA’s and steerable BHA’s.
Rotary-steerable BHA’s are also being used for specific directional drilling tasks.
Rotary BHA’s
Before the advent of MWD tools and/or steerable motors, the classic approach to directional drilling
involved many trips in the hole with several types of BHA’s to begin the kick-off, and subsequently build
and hold the inclination for a single hole section (see Figure 8-24). Once the initial deflection and
direction of the well was achieved with the bit/mud motor/bent subassembly, the remainder of the well
(apart from correction runs) was drilled using conventional rotary drilling techniques.

Drill Pipe MWD Tool
Stabilizer
Drill Collar
Non-magnetic
Drill Collar
Bent Sub
Shock Sub
Stabilizer
Near-bit
Stabilizer
MWD Tool
Bit
Figure 8-24: Typical rotary BHA.
This conventional technique is still used today because some operators prefer to have the extra runs in the
hole to clean the hole and reduce friction factors. Occasionally, this type of BHA is the more cost-
effective choice, but it also requires more equipment on location and the drilling trajectory can be difficult
to predict.

Steerable BHA’s
The arrival of steerable motors made it possible to drill a complete hole section with a single BHA
consisting of a bit-steerable motor, string stabilizer, and MWD combination (see Figure 8-25). Steerable
systems have a bend in them, with a positive displacement motor (PDM) that turns the bit below the bend.
The bend is held stationary at the desired attitude or tool face angle, resulting in wellbore curvature as
drilling continues. This approach causes significant cost savings in trip time and reduced drillstring wear.
Non-magnetic
Drill Collar
MWD Tool
Stabilizer
Steerable Motor
Stabilizer
Figure 8-25: Typical steerable BHA.
With a steerable BHA, the objective is to kick off the well and build inclination to the maximum angle
along the desired hole direction. This build is performed mainly in the sliding mode. On reaching
maximum angle, the drillstring is turned at a slow rate (30 to 60 rpm). Ideally, in the slant section, a
condition of close to zero side force at the bit is achieved with the steerable BHA. Thus, very little
orientation is necessary after the maximum angle is achieved.
The introduction of surface-adjustable and downhole-adjustable bent housings has made steerable motors
even more versatile. The directional driller is no longer “caught-out” if the desired dogleg severity is not
achieved by a particular bent housing. The bent housing can simply be adjusted on the surface or
downhole to compensate for and correct the hole trajectory.

Time is lost in tripping rotary BHA’s to alter their directional characteristics and in slower drilling with
steerable systems where the bend settings are less than optimal. Steerable system directional drilling is
more predictable than the rotary method; however, problems can still arise in predicting the directional
tendency of both types of directional BHA’s.
Rotary Steerable BHAs

As new designer wells extend beyond 10 km and bring additional reserves within reach, the demands on
drilling systems have grown accordingly. Horizontal and extended reach well designs are becoming more
complex, and the limitations of standard directional drilling methods (using steerable downhole motors)
are becoming increasingly apparent. While good planning can minimize problems, in extreme well
designs the issues of torque, drag, and efficient hole cleaning are now critical, limiting wellbore design
and constraining operational capabilities.
Rotary steerable system (RSS) technology addresses these demands. The ability to continuously rotate
while steering produces a faster, more controllable drilling system that results in a smoother, cleaner,
longer wellbore. The Schlumberger PowerDrive* system is leading development of today’s RSS. There
are two principal components (see also Figure 8-26):
• a bias unit that applies a lateral force to the bit while it constantly rotates at the bit speed
• a control unit (a roll-stabilized platform within a non-magnetic collar that contains self-powered
electronics and sensors that set the direction and magnitude of the force vector applied to the bit
by the bias unit)
Control Unit Bias Unit
Figure 8-26: Rotary steerable general assembly.
*
Mark of Schlumberger

The bias unit is normally connected directly to the drill bit. Three exterior pads are kept in constant
contact with the formation by internal, mud-powered actuators. A 3-way disc valve controls the flow of
mud to the actuators. When deviation is required, each actuator is extended in sequence (once for each
revolution of the bit) against the side of the hole opposite the intended bias direction (see Figure 8-27).
The pads are in constant contact with the wellbore, extending and retracting in a smooth continuous
action. When no deviation is required, the PowerDrive system is put in neutral mode by causing the pads
to push in every direction, effectively canceling each other out. The directional programming is altered
from surface using a sequence of mud pulses.
Annulus
Fully extended Direction of

actuator pad deviation
Static Control
Valve
Figure 8-27: Steering assembly.
Torque and drag are major concerns when designing and drilling extended-reach wells; as the limitations
of rigs and tubulars are approached, feasible reach is determined by these considerations. When drilling
with a motor in slide mode, torque and drag also produce unwanted tool face fluctuations. The effects of
reactive torque can produce tool face oscillation, reducing directional control.
Uneven application of WOB causes varying torque demands as the depth of cut changes. This varying bit
torque generates torsional loading and unloading of the drillpipe, leading to a continuously moving
toolface. Overcoming this effect while using steerable motors often requires compromises in bit cutter
design and WOB. The lack of tool face control encountered with motor systems can result in doglegs that
lead to high tortuosity. This tortuosity impacts running casing and completion strings, and increases
friction between the drillstring and borehole – a common problem when drilling with steerable motors.
Overcoming the friction while maintaining a steady WOB is difficult. As reach and length of section
increase, this problem intensifies. PowerDrive reduces this problem. Everything outside of the tool
rotates, and nothing needs to be held stationary against the wellbore. Tool face control is excellent and
tool face orientation is not affected by depth or drillstring elasticity.

CALCULATING BHA TENDENCY

Early directional tendency predictions were based on classical engineering mechanics relationships. These
routines often worked well in limited geographical areas (e.g., one oil field) and usually required
significant expertise. Steerable systems introduce stress concentrations into the BHA that were more
difficult to model. Further improvements in tendency predictions required 3-dimensional stress models
and a wider set of field data for validation. The increased use of finite element programs and directional
drilling databases on more powerful computers in field work made accurate tendency predictions
possible. However, these models still required a great deal of expertise to use them efficiently. DrillSAFE
combines the accuracy of detailed finite element calculations with an easy-to-use interface.
Calculation and prediction of BHA tendency determines the “equilibrium” build/drop rates and turn rates
for a BHA (with or without bent sub). The equilibrium rate is the build/drop rate (BDR) at which the
BHA performance is expected to stabilize after a long drilling run of the BHA. In other words, it is the
dogleg severity of the wellbore when the lateral rate of penetration of the drill bit becomes constant and
the side force at the bit is approximately zero.
When beginning to drill with a BHA that has an equilibrium rate significantly different from the existing
hole curvature, there is a “break-in” period before the BHA produces the equilibrium rate. The distance of
this break-in period depends on many unknown drilling parameters, such as the following:
• lateral cutting ability of the drill bit
• lateral cutting variation vs. the rpm at the bit
• formation type at each point of the wellbore
• additional side force at the bit generated by the hydraulic jetting force
In most drilling conditions, the depth of penetration for the "break-in" period is much less than the BHA
length. In a method similar to the torque and drag analysis, the BHA is meshed into 3-dimensional beam
elements; however, in the BHA tendency module, the whole BHA (up to the first section of drillpipe) is
considered. If the BHA is shorter than 200 ft, then the length of the BHA, plus the necessary length of
drillstring is used to obtain the 200-foot length.
The BHA is initially “placed” in a straight hole with an inclination specified by the user as the final
desired inclination at the bit. The contact between the borehole and the BHA is then calculated identically
to the torque and drag analysis, followed by a calculation of the reactive force at the bit. Depending on the
magnitude of the side force at the bit, an appropriate value for the hole curvature is generated with the
same inclination at the bit. The contact between the BHA and the curved wellbore is calculated and the
new side forces at the bit are computed. The solution is found iteratively until the equilibrium curvature of
the wellbore is found with the side force at the bit approximately zero (i.e., there is no lateral cutting).
From the equilibrium curvature, the corresponding build and turn rates of the BHA are displayed.
Factors that have varying degrees of effect on the BDR tendency of a steerable BHA are:
• hole enlargement
• formation stiffness
• bend angle
• average inclination
• weight on bit
• stabilizer placement

Hole Enlargement
Hole enlargement usually has the largest effect on the build/drop rate tendency (BDR) of a BHA. A BHA
with stabilizers is more sensitive to hole enlargement than a BHA without stabilizers. In DrillSAFE the
hole enlargement is expressed as a diameter enlargement.
Formation Stiffness
Similar behavior to that of hole enlargement occurs with formation stiffness. A BHA with stabilizers is
more sensitive to formation stiffness than a BHA without stabilizers. There is much more variation in
BDR in softer formations, while harder formations produce a more consistent BHA performance.
Bend Angle
The angle of the bend in a steerable system has a significant effect on the BDR as a function of tool face
angle. These angles range from 0 to 3 degrees. Below a minimum bend angle setting (usually about ½
degree), the BHA will drop even with a zero or straight up toolface. These BHA’s have a rotary drop
tendency called a “pendulum effect.” (see Figure 8-28).
Figure 8-28: Pendulum effect of side force.

With a small bend angle, the bend is not in contact with the borehole wall and cannot play the role of a
bearing point. Furthermore, there is an optimum distance above the bit that maximizes the build tendency.
Above or below this position, the BHA tendency changes quickly from drop to build.
Average Inclination
BHA tendency is more sensitive to the average inclination at the bit on a rotary BHA than on a steerable
BHA. This condition can be explained by considering the side force at the bit. The side force at the bit of
the BHA is mainly due to bent sub knees and the weight of the drill collar sections between the
stabilizers.
Weight on Bit
The predicted BHA (equilibrium) tendency within DrillSAFE is least sensitive to the weight on bit
(WOB), due to the assumption of linear elasticity of the drillstring and the formation. This assumption is
only valid when the WOB is such that the axial load is below the critical buckling limit of the BHA.
Above this limit, the side force at the bit is affected more significantly by the WOB.
Stabilizer Placement
All BHA’s cause a side force at the bit that leads to an increase in hole inclination (positive side force -
fulcrum effect), no change in inclination (zero net side force - lockup BHA), or a drop in inclination
(negative side force - pendulum effect). In addition, changes in hole direction, such as bitwalk (natural
wellbore turning tendency due to bit/formation interactions) may be either minimized or increased by
specific rotary BHA’s and drilling parameters. More on bit side forces is provided in the section entitled,
Bit Side Force Analysis.
If an axial load (WOB) is applied, a positive (bending) force is introduced and the tangency point moves
closer to the bit. Subsequently, the pendulum force is reduced and a condition of zero net side force is
achieved at some point. If stiffer drill collars are used, a larger pendulum force results and a higher WOB
must be used to achieve a balanced condition. Consequently, stabilizers are placed between drill collars to
control the bowing action that builds, holds, or drops inclination in a directional well.
Stabilizers are generally added to a BHA in quantities of two or more. The placement of stabilizers in a
BHA has a great effect on BDR. The most common types of stabilizer BHA’s are as follows:
• two-stabilizer
• multiple stabilizers (more than two)
• undergauge near-bit stabilizer
• undergauge second stabilizer

Two-stabilizer BHA’s
The simplest multiple stabilizer BHA has a “near-bit” stabilizer (3 to 6 feet above the bit) and a second
stabilizer at some distance above the first (see Figure 8-29).
Figure 8-29: Two-stabilizer BHA.
For a given WOB, the distance from the bit to the first stabilizer (L1) and between the stabilizers (L2)
determines the tangency point. If tangency occurs between the bit and the bottom stabilizer, negative side
force results. The second stabilizer increases the negative side force by reducing the effect of the positive
building force. The further apart the stabilizers are, the greater the side force is at the bit.

The WOB is one of the most important ways of controlling buildup rate in the break-in section before the
equilibrium tendency is reached. As WOB increases, so does the side force on the bit (see Figure 8-30).
At 20,000 lb WOB, At 30,000 lb WOB, At 40,000 lb WOB,

side force = 855 lb side force = 962 lb side force = 1,002 lb
Figure 8-30: Effect of increased WOB on side force.
Multiple Stabilizer BHA’s

Addition of a third stabilizer approximately 30 feet above the original top stabilizer has a significant
effect on the response of a building BHA. In a “lock-up” BHA (one with a small window for inclination),
the use of a third stabilizer is essential; otherwise, the BHA behavior can be erratic and unpredictable.
However, in a drop-off (pendulum) BHA, a two-stabilizer assembly is normally sufficient, since a third
stabilizer would have negligible effect.
Undergauge Near-bit Stabilizer

If the “near-bit” stabilizer (stabilizer nearest the bit) is undergauge, a loss of bit side force results. With a
buildup BHA, the rate of buildup is reduced by this stabilizer placement. With a lockup BHA, a drop in
inclination results. The more undergauge the stabilizer is, the greater the effect on the BHA. In drop-off
BHA’s, use of an undergauge near-bit stabilizer at the start of the drop-off is recommended in S-type
wells.

Undergauge Second Stabilizer

If the second stabilizer is undergauge, it becomes easier to build angle and get a tangency point below it.
The more undergauge the stabilizer is, the greater the effect on the BHA. In holding (locked) BHA’s, an
undergauge second stabilizer is usually deliberately included in the BHA to reach a condition of zero net
side force at the bit.
Unless a condition such as differential sticking occurs, it is advisable to limit the number of stabilizers in
any BHA to three to keep rotary torque within acceptable limits and reduce mechanical wear on the hole.
Other Considerations
Two other important parameters to consider with steerable system BHA’s are the slide follow-through
and tool face angle. These are operational parameters of a BHA run that change during drilling.
A BHA run is a series of depth segments that can alternate between slide drilling and rotary drilling. The
bend is positioned at varying tool face angles during the sliding segments. There may be a lag in the
tendency from one mode to the other (called the “follow-through”) that is expressed as an additional
percentage of the sliding segment footage. A positive percentage means that the sliding tendency carries
on into the rotary section, while a negative percentage means part of the sliding section acts like a rotary
section.
Tool face angle is part of a finite element tendency analysis run. Because the tool face angle may be
different among the slide drilling segments, a separate run is required for each tool face angle
encountered.
Simulation of Rotary Tendency

When running BHA tendency with a PDM motor and a bent sub set to (for example) 1.5°, DrillSAFE will
give you two outputs:
• bent angle = 0° (an approximation of rotary tendency)
• bent angle = 1.5° (sliding tendency)
If the multi-bend angle option is set, the user will get seven outputs. The first (bent angle = 0) is for rotary
tendency.
With slick BHAs or BHA’s with a sleeve stabilizer, DrillSAFE tends to overemphasize the drop tendency
of the BHA. A current workaround is to run the model for values of the tool face from 0 to 180° in 20°
increments and compute the average tendency. This process will be more representative than a single
tendency run.
Rotary Steerable Tendency

DrillSAFE is not currently configured to accurately predict the tendency of the PowerDrive rotary
steerable system. However, one could investigate the effects of the pads by adjusting the maximum OD of
a near-bit stabilizer, or the imposed bit side force.

BHA Tendency Rose

A BHA run is a sequence of rotate/steer or slide sections (see Figure 8-31). A tendency calculation has to
be made for each section to calculate the predicted BDR tendency for the BHA run. The rotary BDR,
multiplied by the rotating footage, yields the curvature for all of those sections. The steered sections with
differing steerable BDR’s and turn rates must be treated separately.
8 ft
24ft TFA=10R
8 TFA=0
8
6 TFA=20L Sliding Segements
16
31 18 TFA=5R
10 TFA=45R
Rotary Segments 20
28 TFA=140R
29
31
Figure 8-31: Example of BHA run.
Directional drillers usually set and record tool face angle in 5-degree increments around a compass-type
rose in a slide sheet. A DrillSAFE analysis result is, therefore, necessary for all 72 possible tool face
positions, in order to reconcile a steerable BHA run. However, the curve rate is symmetric, and 5-degree
increments can be reliably interpolated from 10-degree values of the toolface. The 3-D curve rate
calculated from the steerable BDR and turn rate can be graphed on a polar plot that represents the tool
face rose. These plots show the curve rate that the BHA would deliver for the different tool face settings.

An example “tendency rose” is shown in the following illustration (see Figure 8-32). More details of the
possible patterns that can be obtained as a function of stabilization are given in the SPE paper by Lesso,
Chau, and Lesso9.
0
Tendency Rose -20
-10 12 10
20 BHA 38xxx.04
-30 30
Toolface Angle 10
-40 40
vs
-50 8 50
Curve Rate
-60 6 60
-70 4 70
-80 2 80
-90 0 90
-100 100
-110 110
-120 120
-130 130
-140 140
AINCL: 79.2 deg
-150 150
-160 160 Pattern: Egg Shaped
-170 170
180 Tendency Radius: 8.6 deg/100ft
Figure 8-32: Example of a tendency rose.
SUMMARY
As a predictive tool, the calculation of BHA tendency is useful in the planning and execution of
directionally drilled wells. The well trajectory planner can pick the BHA’s for each section of a particular
wellbore based on the performance history of BHA’s used in that particular field. Planners and directional
drillers, either in the design stage or at the wellsite, can make adjustments in the BHA stabilizer
placement and gauge, and in the steerable bent housing angle to achieve the desired curve rates. The
history of BHA performance guides the BHA selection process, while a finite element tendency analysis
allows accurate calculation of the stabilizer placement and steerable system settings.

Bit Side Force Analysis
Section Summary
• the purposes of a bit side force analysis
• inputs and outputs for the bit side force analysis

INTRODUCTION TO BIT SIDE FORCE

Bit side force is the contact force between the bit and the formation (normal to the borehole axis). This
force can be broken down into two components: the inclination component and the azimuth component.
The inclination component is the projection of the bit side force onto the vertical plane formed by the
vertical axis and the borehole axis at the bit. This component generates the build or drop tendency of a
BHA. The azimuth component is the projection of the bit side force onto the horizontal plane. This
component generates the left/right turn tendency of a BHA.
PURPOSES OF BIT SIDE FORCE ANALYSIS

The bit side force analysis can be used for two purposes:
• Coupled with the BHA tendency analysis, it can be used to determine the equilibrium rate in
terms of the magnitude of the side force at the bit.
• It can be used to study the mechanical behavior of the BHA, such as the position of the BHA in
the wellbore, contact forces, and mechanical stresses in the borehole. This information is useful
for studying tool failure, stabilizer wear, and stuck pipe problems.
INPUTS
The bit side force analysis includes the input of the following criteria:
• finite element modeling with automatic mesh generation and mesh refinement
• the effect of the formation stiffness
• the use of actual surveys and wellbore geometries
• multiple bent subs (up to three)
• an allowance for the tool face setting
• multiple stabilizers, including those on the motor or MWD/LWD tools
• the calculation of the side force at the bit
• the calculation of the sag angle (tilt angle) and inclination (D&I) sensors in MWD tools
• the calculation of side forces at any point of the BHA
• the calculation of the axial forces along the BHA
• the calculation of the sinusoidal buckling load along the BHA
• the calculation of all relevant stress quantities (axial, torsional, bending, and Von Mises stresses)
OUTPUTS
The following DrillSAFE plot illustrates the distribution of the side force along the drillstring during the
slide drilling phase with a WOB of 25,000 lbf, and a tool face setting of 45° (see Figure 8-33). Two
components of the side force are shown in the plot. The build (or inclination) side force, FINC, and the turn
(or azimuthal) side force, FAZI. The side force plot is slightly different from that given in the torque and
drag analysis in that it is displayed as a function of the distance from the bit, not the bit measured depth,
with a default range of up to 200 ft from the bit.

Side Forces
Mudweight = 10.00, WOB = 25.00, TOB = 0.00, Bit Measured Depth = 14089.33
Well: W-13
500
400
300
Magnitude
200 Build
Turn
100
-100
-200
-300
-400
0 10 20 30 40 50
Distance from Bit (ft)
Figure 8-33: Bit side force plot.
The inclination side force is positive if the contact point between the drillstring and the wellbore is on the
high side of the borehole. If the contact point is on the low side, the inclination side force is negative. The
azimuthal side force is positive if the contact point is on the right side (looking down the wellbore from
the surface) and negative if it is on the left side.
NOTE
In the example plot the azimuthal side force is non-zero because the well has a 3-dimensional
trajectory.
The following illustration also shows the displacement of the BHA in the borehole for the example given
in the preceding illustration (see Figure 8-34). The positions of the stabilizers are clearly seen (near bit,
and approximately 30 ft from the bit). The illustration highlights that the significant contact with the
borehole is at the position of the two stabilizers.

Mudweight = 10.00, WOB = 25.00, TOB = 0.00, Bit Measured Depth = 14089.33
Well: W-13
0.08
0.06 Transverse Disp: Inclination

Transverse Disp: Azimuth
0.04 Wellbore: High Side
Wellbore: Low Side
0.02
0.00
-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
-0.08
0 10 20 30 40 50
Distance from Bit (ft)
Figure 8-34: BHA displacement plot.
The side force unit is force per length; in the horizontal section of the borehole it is the buoyant linear
weight of the drillstring component. DrillSAFE uses force per 30 feet as the side force unit for drillpipe,
due to the placement of tool joints. Lower sections of the BHA generally consist of short components (bit,
stabilizers, etc.), so using the same unit generates spikes in these sections.
High side forces can cause problems such as casing wear, key seating, and stuck pipe. The side force
magnitude along the drillstring depends heavily upon the well path. A good design of the well path
accomplishes the following:
• minimizes the side force distribution
• minimizes the torque profile
• reduces the difference in the hookload between different drilling operations (mainly between
tripping in and tripping out)
The user can also consider the following objectives for minimizing side force distribution:
• design well paths with DLS increasing with TVD when possible
• use drill pipe with low linear weight

DRILLSAFE APPENDIX A
Numerical Solution Technique

FINITE ELEMENT MODEL

Consider a drillstring as an assembly of different pipe-shaped tools (e.g., bit, drill collars, drill motors,
stabilizers, MWD tools). Each component has its own mechanical properties, such as weight, length,
stiffness, internal diameter, and external diameter; therefore, each component also has its own specific
mechanical behavior. The mechanical behavior of a drillstring is determined by the equilibrium
displacements caused by externally applied forces. The fundamental principle of the finite element
method is that if the continuous displacements and rotations at a few points in the domain can be
determined, then values at all other points can be evaluated through interpolation. The nature of the
interpolation functions depends on the type of element considered.
In DrillSAFE, the displacements and rotations of a drillstring are interpolated using three-dimensional
beams. Each beam is defined by two nodes with six degrees of freedom (DOF) at each node, including
three displacements (Ux, Uy, and Uz) and three rotations (Rx, Ry, and Rz), yielding 12 DOF for each
element (see Figure 8-35).
Z
Y
RY (2)
RY ()
UY ()
1
RX ()
1 1 UY (2)
UX ()
1
RX (2)
X UX (2)
Node 1 Node 2
UZ (2)
UZ ()
1
RZ (2)
RZ ()
1
Figure 8-35: Three-dimensional beam element.
The interpolated displacements (Ux, Uy, and Uz) and rotations (Rx, Ry, and Rz), at a distance x from the
first node of the beam, are calculated using the following polynomial functions:

  x
u X ( x ) = U X (1) + (U X (2) − U X (1) ) L 
  
 x
rX ( x ) = R X (1) + ( R X (2) − R X (1) ) 
 L
 x x x  x
uY ( x ) = U Y (1) p1   + L RZ (1) q1   + U Y (2 ) p 2   + L RZ (2 ) q 2  
 L L L  L  ......................................(8-6)

  x  x  x  x
u Z ( x ) = U Z (1) p1  L  − L RY (1) q1  L  + U Z (2 ) p 2  L  − L RY (2 ) q 2  L 
        
 ∂u Z
rY ( x ) = − ∂x

r ( x ) = ∂uY
 Z ∂x
where L is the length of the beam, and
 p1 (ξ ) = 1 − 3ξ 2 + 2ξ 3

 p 2 (ξ ) = 3ξ − 2ξ
2 3
 .....................................................................................................................................(8-7)
q1 (ξ ) = −ξ + ξ
2 3
q (ξ ) = 1 − 2ξ 2 + ξ 3
 2
In a beam element in the drillstring, there are two types of external loads that can be applied at a node of
this element: a force vector (Fx, Fy, and Fz) or a moment vector (Mx, My, and Mz).
Stress/Strain Equation of a Beam Element

Under the hypothesis of linear elasticity, the deformation of the beam is considered as the superposition
of the following four conditions:
• tension/compression
• torsion
• bending in the (X,Y) plane
• bending in the (X,Z) plane
Beam in Tension/Compression
Following is the equilibrium equation of a beam in tension/compression (see also Figure 8-36):
[K X ]{q X } = { f X } ..................................................................................................................................................(8-8)

with
− 1 U X (1)   FX (1) 
[K X ] = EA 
1
{q X } =  , {fX } =   ...............................................................(8-9)
1
,
L − 1 U X (2)  FX (2)
where E is Young’s modulus and A is the cross section of the element.
UX (2)
UX (1)
FX (1) FX (2)
Figure 8-36: Beam in tension/compression
Beam in Torsion Mode

Following is the equilibrium equation of a beam in torsion mode (see also Figure 8-37):
[KT ]{qT } = { fT } ..................................................................................................................................................(8-10)

with
− 1  RX (1)  M X (1) 
[KT ] = GA 
1
{qT } =  , { fT } =   .............................................................(8-11)
1
,
L − 1  RX (2 ) M X (2)
where G is the shear modulus of the element.
RX (1) RX (2)
M X (1)
M X (2)
Figure 8-37: Beam in torsion mode.

Beam in Bending Mode in (X, Y) Plane

Following is the equilibrium equation of a beam in bending mode in the X, Y plane (see also Figure 8-38):
[KY ]{qY } = { fY } ..................................................................................................................................................(8-12)

with
 12 6 L − 12 6 L  U Y (1)   FY (1) 
   R (1)  M (1) 
4 L2 − 6 L 2 L2 
[KY ] = 3 
EI 
, {qY } =  Z , { fY } =  Z  ........................................(8-13)
L symmetric 12 − 6 L 
  U Y (2 )  FY (2 ) 
 RZ (2 ) M Z (2 )
 4 L2 
UY (1), FY (1)
RZ (2), MZ (2)
RZ (1), MZ (1)
UY (2), FY (2)
Figure 8-38: Beam in flexion (X, Y) plane.
Beam in Bending Mode in (X, Z) Plane

Following is the equilibrium equation of a beam in bending mode in the X, Z plane (see also Figure 8-39):
[K Z ]{qZ } = { f Z } .................................................................................................................................................(8-14)
with
 12 6 L − 12 6 L  U Z (1)   FZ (1) 
   R (1)  M (1) 
4 L2 − 6 L 2 L2 
[K Z ] = 3 
EI 
, {qZ } =  Y , { f Z } =  Y  ........................................(8-15)
L symmetric 12 − 6 L 
  U Z (2 )  FZ (2 ) 
 4 L2   RY (2 )  M Y (2 )

Therefore, the stress-strain equation relating the applied forces to the displacements for a single beam
element is as follows:
[K E ]{qE } = { f E } .................................................................................................................................................(8-16)
with
K X 0 0 0  q X   fX 
0 K 0 0 q  f 
[K E ] =  T , {qE } =  T , { f E } =  T  .....................................................................(8-17)
 0 0 KY 0  qY   fY 
  qZ   f Z 
 0 0 0 KZ 
Where [K E ] is the element stiffness matrix,

{qE } the element displacement vector, and
{ f E } the element applied force vector.
RY (2), MY (2)
UZ (1), FZ (1) RY (1), MY (1) UZ (2), FZ (2)
Figure 8-39: Beam in flexion (X, Z) plane.

Stress/Strain Equation of Drillstring

The previous equation is a simple linear system expressed in the element coordinate system (X, Y, Z) of
each beam element. When solving for the whole drillstring, all elements are expressed in the same
coordinate system (a “global” coordinate system). The coordinate system has the bit as the origin and the
x-axis points to the east, the y-axis points to the north, and the z-axis is the upward vertical (see Figure 8-
40).
Z
upward vertical
y
north
Bit
X
east
Figure 8-40: Global coordinate system

Let (X, Y, Z) be the local coordinate system (i.e., the element coordinate system) linked to a beam of the
drillstring. This coordinate system is constructed from the principal axis of the beam (see Figure 8-41).
The X-axis is the beam axis. The Z-axis is constructed so that the plane (X, Z) is vertical and the Y-axis is
the cross product of the X-axis to the Z-axis.
Figure 8-41: Euler’s rotation angles
The transformation matrix from local coordinate system to global coordinate system is defined as the
following:
cos a cos b − sin a − cos a sin b

[Λ ] = sin a cos b cos a − sin a sin b ................................................................................................(8-18)
 sin b 0 cos b 
where a and b are the two Euler’s rotation angles.

By choosing the initial position of the drillstring as the centerline of the wellbore, the transformation
matrix can be calculated for each beam element. The stiffness matrix and applied force vectors for the
individual elements are transformed into the global coordinate system and assembled to form the stiffness
matrix and the applied force vector of the complete drillstring (see Figure 8-42).
Drillstring
Stiffness matrix
KS
Element
Stiffness
Figure 8-42: Assembly of element stiffness matrix.
The drillstring can then be modeled by the following relationship:
[K S ]{qS } = { f S } ................................................................................................................................................(8-19)
Thus, if applied forces are known, the calculation of the drillstring displacement(s) can be obtained by
inversion of the stiffness matrix.
EXTERNAL APPLIED FORCES ON DRILLSTRING

DrillSAFE assumes the applied forces on a drillstring result from pre-stress forces, gravity forces,
reaction forces, and frictional forces that result from the contact between the drillstring and the wellbore.
Pre-stress Forces
The initial position of the drillstring is set at the centerline of the wellbore. The pre-stress forces are
calculated by assembling the element bending forces that result from the wellbore curvature.

Gravity Forces
The total gravity forces can be obtained from assembling the gravity forces on each beam element. The
local coordinate system is defined so that the (X, Z) plane is vertical; therefore, the buoyed weight of a
beam element has only two components: WX, WZ. The gravity force on each beam element is then defined
by the following:
WX 
 2 
 
0 
W 
 Z 
 2 
0 
 
WZ L 
 12 
0 
{f gravity } = 
 

WX 
 2 
0 
 
WZ 
 2 
 
0 
−W L 
 Z

 12  ..........................................................................................................................................(8-20)
 0 
Contact Forces Between Beam Element and Wellbore

In its initial position, a beam is set at the centerline of the wellbore (with no contact point). Under the
effects of externally applied forces (pre-stress forces and gravity forces), some beam elements make
contact with the wellbore, while others do not make contact. Wellbore reaction forces are then generated
at contact beam elements. These contact forces are assumed to be proportional to the excess amount of
normal displacement above the annular spacing. (The “normal displacement” is the component of the
displacement vector perpendicular to the wellbore axis. The “annular spacing” is the difference between
the outside diameter of the pipe and the wellbore diameter, divided by two). The proportionality constant,
defined in DrillSAFE as the formation stiffness, depends on the elasticity of the wellbore (also related to
the mechanical properties of the formation).

The dependence between formation reaction force and normal displacement is shown in Figure 8-43.
0
Normal Displacement
Figure 8-43: Contact model.
Frictional Forces
The model used in DrillSAFE to model friction losses in a torque and drag problem is a “steady sliding
friction model.” In this model, the drillstring is assumed to slide or rotate steadily against the wellbore
(with no transient stick/slip motion). The friction resistance force is defined by the simplified Coulomb
law, as follows:
r
r V 
F f = − µ k N   ............................................................................................................................................(8-21)
V 
where µk is the kinetic coefficient of friction,

N is the normal force (contact force), and
r
V is the velocity vector.

Depending upon the drillstring motion, frictional forces may be one of the following (see Figure 8-44):
• only drag or axial friction (sliding mode)
• friction torque generated by circumferential friction (rotating mode)
• combination of both of the above (reaming mode)
Vc
Ffc
Figure 8-44: Frictional forces.
Consider the most general case where the drillstring is in reaming mode. Ffa is the axial friction force at a
point of the drillstring, and Ffc is the circumferential friction force at the same point. The resultant
frictional force at this point is the following:
F f = F fa + F fc
2 2
............................................................................................................................................(8-22)
where
D is the outer diameter of the drillstring at this point,

Va is the axial velocity (tripping speed or ROP), and
Vc = πD (rpm) is the circumferential velocity.

The total velocity of the drillstring at this point is as follows:
V = Va + Vc
2 2
..................................................................................................................................................(8-23)
If µk is the kinetic coefficient of friction, then the following is true:

r
r V 
F f = − µ k N  
 V  ..............................................................................................................................................(8-24)
This equation can also be rewritten in scalar form as the following:
  Va 
 F fa = − µ k  V  N
  
 .........................................................................................................................................(8-25)
 F = − µ  Vc  N
 fc k
V 
These equations define the axial friction coefficient as the following:
 Va 
µa = µk   ...................................................................................................................................................(8-26)
V 
The rotating friction coefficient as is defined as the following:
 Vc 
µr = µk   ....................................................................................................................................................(8-27)
V 
INITIAL BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

For a torque and drag problem, the drillstring is subjected the following boundary conditions:
• At the bit, the normal displacements (UY, UZ) are zero, the axial applied force (FX) is the
downhole weight on bit (DWOB), and the axial applied torque is the downhole torque on bit
(DTOR).
• At the surface (top of the drill string), a clamping condition of the drillstring to the rotary table is
used (all displacements and all transverse rotations are zero, and the axial rotation versus the
rotary table is zero).

ITERATIVE SOLUTION TECHNIQUE

The equilibrium equation of the drillstring
[K S ]{qS } = { f S } ................................................................................................................................................(8-28)
can be transformed into the following equation (after taking into account the boundary conditions):
[K ]{q } = { f } + {N }
*
S S 0 ................................................................................................................................(8-29)
where {N} and {ff} are the normal forces and the frictional forces, respectively. These forces are
dependent upon the drillstring displacements. {f0} represents the remaining forces that are independent to
the drillstring displacement.
The resolution of this equation requires two iterative schemes. First, the frictional force {ff} is set to zero
(frictionless contact problem). Second, the Raphson-Newton technique is used to solve the frictionless
problem as follows:
[ K s* ]{q s } = { f 0 } + { N } ..................................................................................................................................(8-30)
The normal force {N} is then known. Then, the new normal force {N} and the new displacements are
determined by solving the following equation:
[K ]{q } = { f }+ {N} + {f }
*
S S 0 f .......................................................................................................................(8-31)
with the updated { f 0 } .
The iteration stops when the variation of the friction force {ff} between the two last iterations is smaller
than a given tolerance which is 0.3%.

DRILLSAFE APPENDIX B
Meshing the Drillstring

Swab and Surge
INTRODUCTION TO MESHING
Meshing the drillstring BHA involves the following two basic procedures:
• pre-meshing – dividing (“cutting”) BHA components into subcomponents of the same
mechanical properties (ID, OD, and material)
• meshing – subdividing a subcomponent into 3-dimensional beam elements
PRE-MESHING THE BHA COMPONENTS

In the pre-meshing of a BHA, each BHA component is considered separately. The ID’s and OD’s of each
component are compared to determine the location of area changes. These component portions are then
broken down into subcomponents (see Figure 8-45).
MWD Tool Mud Motor Stabilizer Drill Bit
L3 L2 L1
Figure 8-45: BHA component elements lengths.

Swab and Surge
In the example component, the stabilizer is broken down into three subcomponents (see Figure 8-46).
Stabilizer end to Stabilizer blade Stabilizer end to

bottom connection length bottom connection
Figure 8-46: Stabilizer broken down into subcomponents.
MESHING THE BHA SUBCOMPONENTS

When meshing BHA subcomponents together, differences in subcomponent dimensions will create mesh
distortions. Mesh distortions can drastically amplify numerical rounding errors and can reduce the
accuracy of the converged solution. The DrillSAFE meshing process minimizes the following mesh
distortions:
• the mesh distortion in length represented by the discrepancy in the length of two adjacent
elements
• the mesh distortion in bending stiffness represented by the discrepancy in bending stiffness of two
adjacent elements
Because of these mesh distortions, element length and element stiffness must meet certain criteria for
DrillSAFE to perform a proper analysis.
Element Length
In a torque and drag analysis, the maximum allowable element length is 100 ft. In a BHA tendency
analysis, the maximum allowable element length is 5 ft. To reduce the mesh distortion, the ratio between
the lengths of two adjacent elements (“element spacing”) has been constrained to the following:
• between 0.71 to 1.4 in a torque and drag analysis
• between 0.83 to 1.2 in a BHA tendency or bit side force analysis

Swab and Surge
Element Stiffness
The bending stiffness distortion must also be considered when two components of substantially different
ID’s and OD’s are made up to one another. When a component of substantially smaller OD and/or ID is
made up above a component of greater OD and/or ID, the mesh must be refined in the range of the
stiffness discontinuity (see Figure 8-47).
l
L
Softer Stiffer
component component
Area for refinement in

length of soft element.
Figure 8-47: Bending stiffness in components of different ID’s and OD’s.
The refinement is made by adjusting the length of the “softer” element (L) as a ratio of the length of the
stiffer element (l). This ratio is defined by the following formula:
I soft
.................................................................................................................................................................(8-32)
I stiff
where Isoft is the bending stiffness of soft element and Istiff is the bending stiffness of the stiff element. The
bending stiffness is found using the following formula.
π (OD 4 − ID 4 )
64
For drillpipe meshing, DrillSAFE (by default) does not take into account the tooljoint OD (i.e. meshing
tooljoints as separated beam elements). Including the tooljoints will generate a high distortion mesh and
an unnecessary high number of beam elements in the drillstring. The user can still mesh the tooljoint in
some critical cases (short radius well or failure of tooljoint in high DLS section) by defining tooljoints as
separated components in the BHA Editor.

Swab and Surge
WELLBORE CURVATURE
Wellbore curvature and dogleg severity (DLS) are constraints that also must be considered when meshing
the BHA; however, these constraints only apply to the torque and drag and bit side force analyses, and not
to the BHA tendency analysis. In these constraints, each element, when laying in the wellbore, must not
exceed 1° dogleg angle (the angle between the two tangent vectors at the two nodes of the element should
not exceed 1°). Therefore, the maximum element length in a curve section of the wellbore can be
determined by dividing 100 by the DLS, where DLS is the dogleg severity of the wellbore section in
deg/100 ft.

References
Index
bend angle near-bit stabilizer ........................................................49, 50
in BHA tendency ......................................................... 47 overbalance.......................................................................20
bit side force..................................................................... 55 pendulum effect ................................................................47
inputs ........................................................................... 55 reaming .............................................................................16
outputs ......................................................................... 55 rotating..............................................................................16
purposes of analysis ..................................................... 55 side forces.........................................................................34
buoyancy ............................................................................ 6 single point torque and drag..............................................18
buoyancy factor.................................................................. 6 skin damage ......................................................................20
critical buckling load........................................................ 28 sliding ...............................................................................16
drag .................................................................................. 16 soft-string model.................................................................7
equilibrium stabilizer placement
in BHA tendency ......................................................... 46 and BHA tendency .......................................................48
finite element model (FEA).............................................. 59 stiffness...............................................................................7
formation stiffness stiff-string model ................................................................7
in BHA tendency ......................................................... 47 stress/strain equation
hole enlargement of beam element ...........................................................60
in BHA tendency ......................................................... 47 of drillstring..................................................................64
iterative resolution technique ........................................... 71 surface torque ...................................................................39
meshing torque................................................................................16
drillstring components ................................................. 73 torque loss.........................................................................39
multiple point torque and drag ......................................... 18 tortuosity.........................................................................5, 7
with multiple friction factors........................................ 18 tripping loads analysis ......................................................18
with single friction factors ........................................... 18

References
1
Devereux, Steve. Practical Well Planning and Drilling Manual. Tulsa: PennWell Publishing Company, 1998.
2
Rezmer-Cooper, Iain, et al.: Field Data Supports the Use of Stiffness and Tortuosity in Solving Complex Well
Design Problems. SPE paper 52819 presented at the 1999 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam,
Holland.
3
Belaskie, J.P., D.P. McCann, and J.F. Leshikar. A Practical Method to Minimize Stuck Pipe Integrating Surface
and MWD Measurements. SPE paper 27494 presented at the 1994 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Dallas,
Texas.
4
Payne, M.L., et al. Advanced Torque and Drag Considerations in Extended-Reach Wells. SPE paper 35102
presented at the 1996 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, New Orleans, LA.
5
The Right Mud Mix Critical for Directional Drilling. Arby Construction, Inc. Horizontal Directional Drilling. 1
January 1999. <http://www.arby-tech.com/WWWBORE/mud.htm>
6
Dawson, R. and P. R. Paslay, “Drillpipe Buckling in Inclined Holes.” Journal Petroleum Technology, October
1984, p1734-p1738
7
Chen, Lin and J. B.Cheatham. “An Analysis of Tubing and Casing Buckling in Horizontal Wells,” OTC paper
6037, 21st Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas.
8
R.F. Mitchell. “Buckling Analysis in Deviated Wells: A Practical Method,” SPE Drilling & Completion, March
1999, volume 14, no. 1.
9
Lesso, W.G., et al. Quantifying Bottomhole Assembly Tendency Using Field Directional Drilling Data and a Finite
Element Model. SPE paper 52835 presented at the 1999 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, Holland.

10. Pore Pressure Window
150 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land TX 77478
(281) 285-8000
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................................4
OBJECTIVE ..................................................................................................................................................4
FEEDBACK...................................................................................................................................................4
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................4
Summary of Pore Pressure Window (PPW) ..........................................................................................4
FORMATION BULK DENSITY CALCULATION MODELS .........................................................................6
PORE PRESSURE PREDICTION MODELS................................................................................................6
FRACTURE GRADIENT CALCULATION MODELS ...................................................................................6
INPUT/OUTPUT ............................................................................................................................................7
INTRODUCTION OVERBURDEN GRADIENT CALCULATION ...............................................................10
DENSITY EXTRAPOLATION .....................................................................................................................11
TRAUGOTT’S GOM EQUATION ...............................................................................................................12
GARDNER’S EQUATION ...........................................................................................................................12
PORE PRESSURE ESTIMATION ..............................................................................................................14
FORMATION PORE PRESSURE CONCEPTS .........................................................................................14
COMPACTION TRENDS ............................................................................................................................15
METHODS USING LOGS FOR ESTIMATING PORE PRESSURE...........................................................16
EATON METHOD .......................................................................................................................................16
EQUIVALENT DEPTH METHOD ...............................................................................................................17
DIRECT METHOD.......................................................................................................................................18
HAMOUZ & MUELLER METHOD ..............................................................................................................20
BELLOTTI & GIACCA METHOD ...............................................................................................................20
SEMI-LOG METHOD ..................................................................................................................................20
FRACTURE GRADIENT CALCULATION..................................................................................................22
EATON METHOD .......................................................................................................................................22
MATTHEWS & KELLY METHOD...............................................................................................................24
CALIBRATION............................................................................................................................................26

Pore Pressure Window (PPW)
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual provides a summary of the PowerPlan
application Pore Pressure Window.

Introduction to Pore Pressure Window
INTRODUCTION
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual is intended to serve as a technical resource for Pore
Pressure Window (PPW) users. It is not a guide on how to operate PPW, but rather a tool for
understanding the capabilities and limitations of the program, together with the technology behind the
program design.
Objective
• Describes the mathematical models implemented within PPW

• Illustrates the concepts used by PPW
• Highlights the necessary input and output used by PPW
• Defines the PPW terminology in precise terms
• Discusses the processes and assumptions used in PPW
• Explains the meaning or application of PPW output and reports
Feedback
We welcome user feedback and comments. Please write to us at:
Schlumberger Beijing Geoscience Center

C301, Xueyan Building, Dongmenwai, Tsinghua University
Beijing 1000084, People’s Republic of China
Beijing: 00-86-10-62791241
Email: liuch@beijing.oilfield.slb.com
Houston: Walt Aldred, (SPC)
Tel: 1 281-285-8067
Email: waldred@sugar-land.spc.slb.com
Additional Resources
Additional information on PPW can be found from the following sources:
PPW On-line Help, PPW Tutorial, PPW Demo, and the Release Notes.
Summary of Pore Pressure Window (PPW)
Pore Pressure Window provides the user with the tools to predict and evaluate the pore pressure gradient
and fracture gradient both ahead of, and behind, the drill bit. There are many options combined in PPW.
The following map of the workflow can help you navigate your way to successful pore pressure gradient
and fracture gradient calculations:

Real-time data through GF-PC Database Array Loader, Data

Wits Server or IWW
View/export
Set-up
Create Borehole with Data Browser Select Channels
Create Survey using Survey Editor QC splice & preview
Work Page
Discriminate shale , draw shale discrimination lines
Input data and draw normal compaction trend lines

on Track 2 & Track3
Calculate overburden gradients
Calculate pore pressure gradients

User-defined Function
Calculate fracture gradients
Cross-plot
Use interactive graphics
Input calibration data to calibrate results
Save result logs to GF-PC database
Figure 10-1: Workflow

Included in the application are the following features:
Formation Bulk Density Calculation Models

The available techniques in computing the overburden gradient differ only in the way formation bulk
density ( ρ b ) is estimated. It is possible to use different techniques on different zones. There are five main
methods to calculate formation densities:
• Integrated Density Method

• Extrapolated Density Method
• Traugott’s GOM Method
• Gardner’s Equation
• Input Constant Values
The density profiles given by all the methods can be seen in the preview window to enable selection of
the most suitable one.
Pore Pressure Prediction Models

Various pore pressure calculation methods are available, which differ essentially in the way the effective
vertical stress is derived from data sets such as logs and seismic. They include the following:
• Eaton Method (resistivity, and sonic/seismic)

• Equivalent Depth Method (resistivity, and sonic/seismic)
• Direct (empirical) Method (Modified Bower, Hamouz & Mueller, Belotti & Giacca, Semi-Log)
(sonic/seismic)
Fracture Gradient Calculation Models

All fracture gradient calculations share the same generic formula with the only difference being the
computation of the stress ratio (the horizontal effective matrix stress over the effective vertical stress).
• Eaton’s Correlation (Gulf Coast and Deep Water correlations, User’s Correlation)
• Stress Ratio Method (Mathews & Kelly Method, User’s Correlation)
The comparison of different input/output is illustrated in the figures in Chapter 4.

Input/Output
INPUT
General well information is needed:

Borehole name and well trajectory (it is assumed TVD=MD if without survey)
Overburden gradients can be calculated using the following:
30> Well information (air gap, water depth and water density for offshore)
31> Density values from the start to the true vertical depth or estimated densities.
The following input is required to predict the pore pressure gradient:
1. Normal pore pressure gradient (user’s input based on knowledge base) and the calculated
overburden gradient above
32> A selected pore pressure prediction method and its related parameters (shale discriminated logs
reflecting formation porosity and its corresponding shale normal compaction trend lines for Eaton
Method or Equivalent Depth Method).
To obtain the fracture gradient, the user must have the following information:
2. The pore pressure gradient calculated from the above models

3. Poisson’s ratio or effective stress ratio
OUTPUT
The results of three linked modules are displayed on the plots listed below:
• Overburden Gradient and its Composite Density
• Pore Pressure Gradient
• Fracture Gradient

Figure 10-2: Results of Three Linked Modules

Overburden Gradient Calculation
Section Summary
• density extrapolation
• Traugott’s GOM Equation
• Gardner’s Equation

INTRODUCTION OVERBURDEN GRADIENT CALCULATION
The vertical stress that is applied to the top of the elementary cube of rock is equal to the weight
of the vertical rock column above it, and for that reason is called the Overburden. The
overburden weight per unit area is the Overburden Stress, Sv. The overburden stress at a given
depth is the pressure exerted by the weight of the overlying sediments. We can easily evaluate
this stress if we know the density ρb of the overlying sediments:
TVD
σ V = g ∫ ρ b ( z )dz
0
Where,
g is the gravitational constant, ρb is the bulk density ...........................................................................................(10-1)
A convenient parameter to use is the overburden gradient, λV, obtained by dividing the overburden stress
by the vertical depth.
g TVD
TVD ∫0
λV = ρb ( z )dz ......................................................................................................................................(10-2)
Due to sediment compaction and the consequent increase in density with depth, the overburden gradient
increases rapidly below the surface to reach values, which eventually stabilize below a certain depth. The
value of this overburden gradient, λV, in most practical cases is close to 1 psi/ft (2.31 g/cm3).
In shallow sediment formations, bulk densities increase steeply in contrast to those at depth. This
phenomenon is all the more marked in offshore situations, where the superficial interval consists of water
(Mouchet and Mitchell, 1989).
When a bulk density log is available for a section of the well, an extrapolated density log can be
constructed either up to the sea floor or down to the true vertical depth. In Traugott’s GOM method, the
average bulk density below the sea floor is estimated by an empirical equation obtained from statistical
data from the Gulf of Mexico. When a seismic interval velocity can be obtained in the planned well
location, the bulk density below the sea floor can be predicted using Gardner’s equation, which includes
three empirical parameters.
Densities can be obtained using wire-line logs, LWD data, cuttings density, or seismic data (estimated
using seismic interval velocities). If the densities for every foot are known, simply add up all the density
values and multiply the total by 0.433 to give the vertical stress in psi.
Integrating the density to estimate the vertical stress value is a common practice under normal conditions.
However, the actual vertical stress can be different from the integrated density, as for example, formation
arching can induce lower vertical stress. Furthermore, vertical stress is not always a principal stress
component - especially along side anticline flanks or close to faults. This consideration helps explain

some of the discrepancies between the models within PPW and local observations, especially in complex
structures.
Density Extrapolation
When a density log is only available over part of the well trajectory, an extrapolated density log
can be constructed as per the following exponential equation:
ρb = ρsur + A 0 ⋅ (TVD − WTD − AGD)α

Where,
ρ sur , A0, and α are three fitting parameters, (TVD) is the true vertical depth, (WTD) is the water depth and (AGD) is
the air gap ..............................................................................................................................................................(10-3)
The user inputs three densities at different depths from the sea floor, from a shallow to deep, where
formation densities are known either from the density log or from direct field measurements, as shown
below:
Figure 10-3: Overburdent Gradient Calculation

A reasonable sea floor value for a "young" basin (e.g. GOM, one that is still in its initial subsidence phase
and has not yet been inverted) is between 1.7 and 2 g/cc. For an inverted basin (e.g. S. North Sea, where
the rocks at sea floor have been buried and then uplifted) values could be up to 2.3 or 2.4 g/cc.
Care must be taken to ensure that the geology is consistent between the point from which the density data
is measured to the point you extrapolate it to (i.e. do not extrapolate from a limestone into a sand/shale, or
visa versa, or across a major unconformity).
Traugott’s GOM Equation
The overburden pressure gradient exerted by the combined weight of the sediments plus the weight of the
sea water can be expressed by the following equation in English units:
λV = [( ρ sea )(WD) + ( ρ b avg )(TVD − WD − AG )] / TVD
Where,
avg
ρb is average density of the sediment in lbm/gal, and ρsea is sea water density................................................(10-4)
When direct measurements are not available, use a compaction relationship based on regional density
data. For example, the emperical equation proposed by Traugott (1997) for the Gulf of Mexico is:
ρ b avg = 16.3 + [(TVD − WD − AD) / 3125]0.6

Where,
avg
ρb is average bulk density in lbm/gal below the sea floor.................................................................................(10-5)
Gardner’s Equation
PPW allows the user to estimate the bulk density below the sea floor from Gardner’s empirical equation
(1974), which uses the seismic velocity V:
ρb = a × Vβ
Where,
a and β are two fitting parameters, V is sonic or seismic formation velocity in ft/s, and ρb is bulk density in g/cm3 ........
...............................................................................................................................................................................(10-6)
In Gardner’s original equation, the velocity factor, a, is equal to 0.23 and the velocity exponent β=0.25.

Pore Pressure Estimation
Section Summary
• formation pore pressure concepts
• compaction trends
• methods using logs for estimating pore pressure

PORE PRESSURE ESTIMATION

Formation Pore Pressure Concepts
Formation pore pressure is the pressure of the fluid contained in the pore spaces of sediments or other
rocks. It is also called pore pressure (Pp).
Hydrostatic pressure is the pressure exerted by the weight of a static column of fluid. In normal
hydrostatic conditions, formation pore pressure is equal to hydrostatic pressure, which depends upon
the weight of the column of water saturating the pores of the sediments between the measurement
point and the atmosphere.
Subnormal pressure is a pore pressure below hydrostatic pressure.
Overpressure or abnormally high pore pressure is the pore pressure in excess of hydrostatic
pressure and is usually limited by the overburden pressure, weight of the sediments and
seawater combined.
Fracture pressure is the borehole pressure required to initiate fracturing and lost circulation.
In the oilfield glossary (http://glossary.connect.slb.com/index.html), Overburden Gradient, Pressure

Gradient, and Fracture Gradient are defined as the respective pressures divided by the true vertical
depth (TVD) referenced to the derrick floor (i.e. referenced to the top of the mud column). These pressure
gradients are therefore equivalent to the mud density required in the wellbore to balance formation pore
pressure. A normal gradient can range from 8.4 lbm/gal [0.436 psi/ft/1.008 g/cm3] to 9.1 lbm/gal [0.473
psi/ft/1.092 g/cm3] or higher.
PPG is the abbreviation for density, pounds-per-gallon, more correctly written as lbm/gal. 1 psi/ft = 19.25
ppg = 2.31 g/cm3. For example, the density of water is 8.33 ppg at 60°F [16°C] = 0.433 psi/ft = 1.0
g/cm3.
The hydrostatic pressure can be expressed in the metric system as:
Pp = ρ b * TVD
10
Where,
3 3
Pp is in kg/cm , TVD in meter, and density in g/cm ...............................................................................................(10-7)

Compaction Trends
Abnormal pore pressures are found in at least a portion of the majority of the world’s sedimentary basins.
While the origin of abnormal pore pressure is not completely understood, several mechanisms that tend to
cause abnormal pore pressure are identified in sedimentary basins. These are under-compaction, aqua
thermal expansion, clay Diagenesis, and tectonic, etc. They are all hydrodynamic phenomena governed
by the continued existence of the reason for the overpressure and by the effectiveness of the seal. The
detail analysis can be found in John Cook’s paper (Cook, 1998).
The predominant methods for estimating abnormal pore pressure are based on the under-
compaction of argillaceous sediments. Normal clay compaction is the result of an overall balance
between the variables of clay permeability, drainage efficiency, sedimentation and burial rate.
Shales start their life at the surface as clay-rich muds; water is expelled from them as they are
buried and subjected to increase load from the overburden above them. If the burial is very rapid
or the water cannot escape, the increasing overburden load is supported by the increasing pore
pressure; the stress in the solid parts of the rock remains constant so the shale is not normally
compacted, its pore pressure being above hydrostatic at such a depth. As a consequence, the
shale is over-pressured because of under-compaction, which has been accepted for many years as
the most significant source of overpressure, due perhaps to its prevalence in the U.S. Gulf Coast.
In reality, overpressure in itself does not necessarily cause elevated porosities. There are mechanisms that
cause overpressure but do not significantly affect porosities or the properties that depend upon it. The
methods used in this software will not detect overpressures from sources such as the following:
• Generation of hydrocarbons
• Thermal expansion of pore fluids
• High lateral compressive stresses
• Dehydration of minerals
• Gas chimney effects
Under-compaction leads to both overpressure and abnormal high porosities. If a measurement reveals an
elevated porosity in shale, that shale is likely to be over-pressured. Thus, any measurement that reflects
changes in formation porosity can be used to detect abnormal pressure. If formation pressures are normal,
the porosity-dependent parameter should have an easily recognized trend: an increase of depths due to
reduced porosity caused by progressive depth of burial and compaction. A departure from the normal
pressure trend signals a probable transition into abnormal pressure. That is the mechanism used in this
software.

Methods based on under-compaction include the following, but may differ in how the steps are
implemented:
• Measuring a property that is sensitive to porosity, e.g. sonic travel time or resistivity
• Determining the normal compaction trend so that the expected values of the property can be
predicted
• Determining the actual values of the property and relating them to overpressure
The normal compaction trend is a key component of pore pressure prediction for the Eaton or Equivalent
Depth methods. This trend is the line upon which the sediments in question would lie if they were
normally pressured. The Eaton method assumes that DT and resistivities for normally pressured
sediments plot a straight line on a semi-log plot against depth (with depth on the linear axis and DT or
Resistvity on the log axis). However, normal compaction trend lines are generally not easy to define from
the examining data, and usually require data of observed pore pressure over the formation zone concerned
for calibration.
Methods Using Logs for Estimating Pore Pressure
Although advanced information on formation pore pressure is needed as early as possible, direct
measurement of pore pressure is very expensive and is possible only after the formation has been drilled.
Such pressure tests are generally only made to evaluate potential producing layers, and are available for
only a limited number of drilled wells in an area. Thus, drilling engineers generally have to depend on
indirect estimates of pore pressures.
Terzaghi’s effective stress principal ( λ p = λV − λ ′ ) gives the theoretical basis for almost all pore
pressure calculation methods. Most pore pressure calculation methods consist of three steps:
1 Effective vertical stress (λ ' ) is estimated from a pore pressure indicator measurement;
2 Overburden stress is determined from measured or estimated bulk density data;
3 Pore fluid pressure is obtained from the difference of the above two stresses.
All new pore pressure methods since the late 1960’s have been effective stress approaches, and differ
only in the way the effective vertical stress (λ ' ) is derived from logs.
Eaton Method
The Eaton (1972,1975) method is an improvement upon the original Hottman and Johnson (1965)
method. This method is based upon the same premise that when acoustic or electrical values of clean
shales are read directly from logs and plotted as a function of depth on semi-log paper, there exists a
normal trend line through the normally pressured section. A deviation of the log-derived values from this
normal trend line is indicative of abnormal pore pressure.

The Hottman and Johnson method uses empirical data to relate pore pressure to the magnitude (acoustic
logs) or ratio (resistivity logs) of deviation. The Eaton method uses a much larger data base to develop a
series of equations which directly relate pore pressure to the ratio of deviation between observed log
values and values from the normal trend line.
The calculation is based on the generic Terzaghi equation for shale:
λ p = λV − λ ′
The vertical effective stress is:
M x
λ' = (λ V − λ Pn )( )
Mn
where,
(λPn) is the normal pore-pressure gradient, (M) refers to a measured log value, (Mn) refers to what that log values
would read in the absence of over-pressure (referred to in the industry as “normal trends”), and (x) is Eaton’s
Exponent ................................................................................................................................................................(10-8)
The various log measurements (M) used by the Eaton Method are resistivity, sonic or seismic interval
velocity. The associated default Eaton exponents are respectively 1.2 and 3.0.
Equivalent Depth Method
The equivalent depth method (Foster and Whalen, 1966) computes the effective stress from normal trend
data at the same pore pressure indicator value as the depth of interest. It is based on the assumption that
normally pressured and over-pressured formations follow the same and unique relations for compaction
as a function of effective stress.
Porosity indictor
TVD
Figure 10-4: Effective Stress From Normal Trend Data

The pore pressure gradient at the depth A (λAP) is derived from:

B
λ A P = λ AV − λ A ' = λ AV − (λ BV − λPn )(TVD )
TVD A
where,
A B
(λPn) is the normal pore-pressure gradient, λ P and λ V are the vertical effective stress at the depth A and depth B.
...............................................................................................................................................................................(10-9)
The following normal trend fits will be used depending on the selected horizontal scale in the work page
of the pore pressure calculation:
− (TVD −WD − AG )
Mn = M0 ⋅e D
in the logarithmic horizontal scale......................................................................(10-10)
or,
M n = M 0 + C (TVD − WD − AG ) in the linear horizontal scale
where,
(Mn) refers to what that log values (density and porosity) would read in the absence of over-pressure (referred to in
the industry as “normal trends”). (M0) and (D) or ( C ) are correlation coefficients ...............................................(10-11)
The Equivalent Depth refers to the depth at which a pre-defined log measurement reads the same thing.
M0
Equivalent Depth = E ⋅ log e ( ) in the logarithmic horizontal scale .................................................(10-12)
Mn
or
Equivalent Depth = F ( M n − M 0 ) in the linear horizontal scale
where,
(E) and (F) are correlation coefficients .................................................................................................................(10-13)
Direct Method
Bower’s method was developed by G.L. Bowers of Exxon Production Research Co. (Bower, 1993 and
1994) to remedy the limitation of the Eaton’s technique, by assuming two different empirical relations
between the measured compression velocity and effective stress. This method accounts for overpressure
generated by both under compaction, and pore-fluid expansion (which may be caused by temperature
changes, hydrocarbon maturation, and/or clay Diagenesis).

Bower (1994) has proposed the following relationship between the measured compression velocity and
effective stress in a normal compacted zone (also referred to as the virgin curve):
V = V 0 + Aσ ' B
Where,
V0 is the velocity at the beginning of the normal compaction zone; and both A and B are the empirical parameters
obtained from velocity-effective stress data in a nearby offset well ......................................................................(10-14)
The velocity-effective stress in a velocity-reversal zone attributable to fluid-expansion effects and an

associated hysteretic response, is defined by the empirical relation (also referred as the unloading curve):
B
 1

  σ ' 
 
U
V = V0 + A σ max ' 
  σ max '  
 
Where,
U is a parameter to be determined from the measured data in a nearby offset well, and
1
 V − V0  B
σ max ' =  max 
 A 
Where,
σmax and Vmax are estimates of the effective stress and velocity at the onset of unloading...................................(10-15)
In the absence of major lithology changes, Vmax is usually set equal to the velocity at the start of the
velocity reversal. This assumes that all formations within the reversal at one time passed through the same
maximum stress state.
The vertical effective stress transform used in the computation algorithm is simplified as following Direct
Method:
β
 V − Vmin 
λ ' = λ '0  
Vmax − Vmin 
Where,
(λ’0) (Vmax) (Vmin) and (β) are adjustable parameters ...........................................................................................(10-16)

Hamouz & Mueller Method
The vertical effective stress transform used is:
 ∆Tmax − ∆Tmin 
λ ' = λ ' 0 × log  
 ∆T − ∆Tmin 
Where,
(λ'0) (∆Tmax) (∆Tmin) are adjustable parameters, and (∆T) is the sonic transit time...............................................(10-17)
Bellotti & Giacca Method
The vertical effective stress transform introduced by Bellotti & Giacca (1978) is:
(V − Vmin )
λ ' = λ '0
Vmax − A(V − Vmin )
Where,
(A) (λ'0) are adjustable parameters, (Vmax) is the sonic velocity of the rock matrix, and (Vmin) is the minimum soil
velocity .................................................................................................................................................................(10-18)
Semi-Log Method
The vertical effective stress transform used is:
λ ' = λ ' 0 log(∆Tmax ∆T )
where,
(λ’0) and (∆Tmax) are adjustable parameters ........................................................................................................ (10-19)

Fraction Gradient Calculation
Section Summary
• formation pore pressure concepts
• compaction trends
• methods using logs for estimating pore pressure

FRACTURE GRADIENT CALCULATION
The literature search (Bowers, 1999) has found that different methods for estimating fracture gradients
can be grouped into four categories based on their underlying solution approach:
• Minimum Stress Methods (including Matthews & Kelly and Eaton Methods)
• Hoop Stress Methods
• Fracture Mechanics Methods
• Direct Methods
Hoop stress methods are based on analytical solutions for stresses around a wellbore. The mud losses
occur when the wellbore pressure causes the minimum hoop stress along the borehole wall greater than
the rock’s tensile strength. It focus on when a small crack at the wellbore will open, but it lacks of
whether crack growth will be stable or unstable.
Minimum stress methods assume significant mud losses will occur when the wellbore pressure equals the
minimum in-situ stress. Minimum stress methods assume near wellbore effects are negligible. The
methods are more appropriate for wellbores with longer pre-existing cracks, where leak-off can occur
without breakdown.
All minimum stress methods considered in fracture gradient calculations share the following generic
formula, attributed to Hubbert & Willis (1957):
λ f = λ P + K.(λ V − λ P ) ..............................................................................................................................(10-20)
The different techniques differ in the way the effective stress ratio or matrix stress coefficient (K) is
estimated.
Eaton Method
An effective Poisson’s ratio in shale ( υ ) is introduced in Eaton Method by the following equation:
υ
K= ..........................................................................................................................................................(10-21)
1− υ
In using this approach, it should be realized that the above equation cannot be applied too literally. Since
sediments deform plastically when they are compacted, the amount of horizontal compression generated
during burial is greater than elasticity theory would predict. Consequently, using “true” elastic Poisson’s
ratios in the above equation can cause Eaton’s method to significantly underestimate fracture gradients.

In the absence of a leak-off test data, Eaton & Eaton (1997) published two analytical relations for an
effective Poisson’s ratio in shale ( υ ) as a function of depth below mud line:
Gulf Coast Curve:
(above 4,999.9 ft)

v = −7.5 * 10 −9 × TVDRe f .GL + 8.0214286 × 10 −5 × TVDRe f .GL + 0.2007142857 ............................... (10-22)
2
(below 5,000 ft)

v = 1.77258 *10 −10 × TVDRe f .GL − 9.4748424 × 10 −6 × TVDRe f .GL + 0.3724340861 ....................... (10-23)
2
Deep water Gulf of Mexico:
(above 4,999.9 ft)

v = −6.089286 * 10 −9 × TVDRe f .GL + 5.7875 × 10 −5 × TVDRe f .GL + 0.3124642857 .......................... (10-24)
2
(below 5,000ft )
v = −1.882 * 10 −10 × TVDRe f .GL + 7.2947129 × 10 −6 × TVDRe f .GL + 0.4260341387
2
Where,
TVDRe f .GL = TVD − WD − AG . (TVD) is the true vertical depth, (WD) is the water depth and (AG) is the air gap
.............................................................................................................................................................................(10-25)

Matthews & Kelly Method
Matthews & Kelly (1967) assume the matrix stress coefficient K to be a function of the vertical effective
stress.
The stress ratio used in Mathews & Kelly Method can be obtained from the following equation:
K = −3.0 × 10 −9 × TVDRe f .GL + 8.0 × 10 −5 × TVDRe f .GL + 0.2347

2
Where,
TVDRe f .GL = TVD − WD − AG . (TVD) is the true vertical depth, (WD) is the water depth and (AG) is the air gap
.............................................................................................................................................................................(10-26)

Calibration
Section Summary
This section of the PowerPlan Technical Manual provides a summary of the Calibration.

Calibration
CALIBRATION
A key feature in pore pressure prediction/analysis is interactive calibration of the output derived from
known values or based on regional experience. Calibration enables the user to adjust normal compaction
trend lines or model parameters, and see immediately the resulting change in all pore pressures and
fracture pressures based on that new trend line position or new parameters, without repeating steps. Such
calibration points include drilling indicators (mud weight, ECD, kicks, LOT, MDT, FIT, faults, etc.).
Drilling indicators of pore pressure - Direct pore pressure measurements are rarely performed in the
overburden, and are generally restricted to the reservoir. Pore pressure monitoring provides necessary
references for calibration of pore pressure prediction or analysis of the formation in the absence of actual
pressure measurements. Pore pressure monitoring involves observing the well for indictors of pressure
(higher connection gas, fast rate of penetration, observed gain in mud pits and large amount of
narrow/sharp cavings). These indicate of pore pressure relative to the mud weight/ECD being used, so
rather than absolute indicators, they are actually indications of drilling too close to formation pore
pressure or drilling under-balanced. The traditional indicators of drilling under balanced are kicks,
increasing gas level, and splintered casings, etc. (Refer to the Schlumberger’s and Transocean Sedco
Forex’s Well Control Manual
http://www.oilfield.slb.com/Rm/IPM/headquarters/WCManual/WC_Manual.pdf)
Leak-off test (LOT) or leak-off pressure (LOP) (Postle, 1997) – Although the LOP is not a direct
measurement of the minimum stress magnitude, it is generally taken as being a practical measure of the
fracture gradient. Eaton’s Poisson’s Ratio for the GOM is used to predict the fracture gradient. On the
whole this provides a reasonably accurate estimate of the observed LOPs.
MDT (Modular Dynamics Tester) – This offers a number of features that enhance pressure measurement
accuracy, fluid sampling capacity, etc. Advanced pressure transducer technology allows high-precision
quartz crystal measurements with response speeds as fast as that of a strain gauge. Surface control over
protest rate, volume and drawdown speeds the production of pressure profiles and extends the
measurement range. Multiple probes produce direct measurement of formation anisotropy. If the zone of
interest is thick enough, the pressure gradient through a section of the zone may be established. Under
static conditions this is directly convertible to the density of the continuous fluid phase in the rock, and
can be used to define fluid contacts through extrapolation. Pressure gradients for typical fluid densities are
given in the table below:
Fluid Pressure Gradient (lbm/gal or g/cm3)

Gas 1.54 or 0.185
Oil 5.39 or 0.647
Water 8.28 or 1.0
Table 10-1: Pressure Gradients
Method of calibration –The user begins by collecting all of the relevant data for the well to be drilled.
Relevant data can include seismic velocities, logs and drilling data from offset wells, such as RFT, LOT,
MWD/LWD data. Manual adjustments of the input parameters of the models and of the trend lines based
on the calibration data need to be done until producing a satisfactory result.

Calibration
In the real-time mode, the computation becomes data-driven by using the input stream of MWD/LWD
data. As each half foot is drilled and a new data reading is obtained, any or all of the computation of pore
pressure gradients and fracture gradients can be done automatically.
Real-time calibration of pore pressure analysis - To conduct real-time pore pressure analysis, drilling
engineers collect LWD/MWD data transmitted in real-time. The data is decoded to a computer containing
the GFPC database, via a WITS L0 link. Thus, the acquisition and analysis takes place in a single location
on the rig.
Once a pore pressure transitional zone is encountered, those pore pressure indicators will generally show
subsequent increases with depths. This may not be the case if the transition to higher pressure occurs over
a short depth interval, such as across some faults. It is always possible that the calibrated transform, which
applies in one part of the well, may not apply in the whole well. For this reason, continuous monitoring
and comparison with the analysis is required.

References
1
Adam T. Bourgoyne Jr., Martin E. Chenevert, Kelth K. Millheim and F.S. Young Jr., “Applied Drilling
Engineering.” SPE Textbook Series, Vol. 2, 1986
2
Bellotti, P. and Giacca, D., “Seismic data can detect overpressures in deep drilling”, Oil and Gas Journal, Aug. 21,
1978
3
J. G. Berner, A. J. Martin, R. G. Mitchell, P. E. Pilkington, R. N. Rossetti, P. R. Schuh, S. F. Stine, “Detection of
Abnormal Subsurface Pressure with Drilling and Log Parameters.” Conoco Inc., April 1985.
4
Bowers, G. L., “Pore Pressure Estimation from Velocity Data; Accounting for Overpressure Mechanisms besides
Under-compaction”, SPE Drilling & Completions, June, 1995
5
Bowers, G.L. “Pore Pressure Estimation from Velocity Data: Accounting for Overpressure Mechanisms Besides
Undercompaction.” IADC/SPE 27488 (1994).
6
Bowers, G.L. “State of the Art in Fracture Gradient Estimation” DEA Project 119 Report No.3, 1999
7
J. M. Cook, “Pore Pressure Prediction and Evaluation: Status Report 1998, Internal Report.” 1998
8
Nader C. Dutta, William H. Borland, W. Scott Leaney, Richard Meehan and W. Les Nutt, “Pore Pressure Ahead of
the Bit: An Integrated Approach.” 1998.
9
Matthews, W.R. and Kelly, J. “How to Predict Formation Pressure and Fracture Gradient”, Oil And Gas Journal,
Feb.20, 1967, pp.92-106
10
Eaton, B.A., “The Effect of Overburden Stress on Geopressure Prediction from Well Logs”, Journal of Petroleum
Technology, August, 1972
11
Eaton, B.A., “The Equation for Geopressure Prediction from Well Logs”, SPE 5544, 1975
12
Foster, J. B. and Whalent, J. E., “Estimation of Formation Pressures from Electrical Surveys – Offshore
Louisiana”, Journal of Petroleum Technology, Feb., 1966
13
Gardner, G.H.F., Gardner, L.W., and Gregory, A.R., “Formation Velocity and Density – The diagnostic basis for
stratigraphic traps”, Geophysics, Vol.39, Num.6, pp.2085 – 2095, 1974
14
Hamouz, M.A., and Mueller, S.L., “Some New Ideas for Well Log Pore-Pressure Prediction”, SPE 13204, 1984.
15
C.E. Hottmann and R.K. Johnson, “Estimation of Formation Pressures from Log-Derived Shale Properties.” 1965.
16
R.J. Meehan, L. Nutt, N. Dutta and J. Menzies, “Drill Bit Seismic: A Drilling Optimization Tool.” IADC/SPE
39312 (1998).
17
Mouchet, J. P. and Mitchell, A., “Abnormal Pressures While Drilling” Manuals Techniques 2, 1989
18
Postle, D.P., “Pressure Integrity Test Interpretation”, SPE/IADC 37589, 1997
19
J.C. Rasmus and D.M.R.G. Stephens, “Real-Time Pore Pressure Evaluation Utilizing MWD/LWD Measurements
and Drilling-Derived Formation Strength.” SPE 20443 (1990).
20
Traugott, M. “Pore/fracture Pressure Determinations in Deep Water”, Deepwater Technology, Supplement to
August, 1997 World Oil.

References
21
Terzaghi, K., and Peck, “Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice”, John Wiley and sons, New York, N.Y. 1968

Nomenclature
a = Coefficient
a' = Formation factor constant
A = Parameters calibrated with offset velocity-effective stress data
b = Coefficient
B = Parameters calibrated with offset velocity-effective stress data
D = Depthcconstant
e = Void ratio
pp = Pore pressure, psi
∆t = Transit time, microsec/ft
tm = Sonic transit time measurement
U = Parameter measuring how low plastic the sediment is
VMAX = Estimates of the velocity at the onset of unloading
Vmin = Compressional velocity when stiffness near zero, µs/ft.
z = Depth, ft.
σ' = Effective stress, psi
σv = Vertical overburden stress, psi
σ max ' = Estimates of the effective stress at the onset of unloading
ρb = Average bulk density of sediments, g/cc
λh = Hydrostatic gradient, psi/ft.
λv = Overburden pressure gradient, psi/ft.
λv ' = Matrix stress gradient, psi/ft.
φ = Formation porosity
φ0 = Porosity at the surface
φe = Effective porosity

11. Glossary

150 Gillingham Lane
Sugar Land TX 77478
(281) 285-8000
CONTENTS
GLOSSARY....................................................................................................................................... 4

Glossary

Term Definition
GLOSSARY
10-minute gel strength The measured 10-minute gel strength of a fluid (deflection) taken from a direct-reading
viscometer, after a fluid has been inactive for 10 minutes.
3D least distance A proximity calculation method where the proximity distance is computed as the distance
between the intersections of the planned well and the offset well, with a plane normal to the offset
well. This method essentially computes the radius of a sphere centered on the planned well and
tangent to the offset well. Mathematically this method provides the shortest distance.
abnormal pressures Pressures which deviate from those encountered in a normal compaction trend.
accelerator (jar booster) Downhole tool used to increase the impact force exerted by mechanical or hydraulic jars due to
velocity increases. Accelerators consist of a slip joint that, as extension of the tool occurs, cause
further compression of a very compressible inert gas in a chamber. When the tool is released, the
gas (under pressure) forces the tool back to its original length, thereby increasing the velocity of
the assembly below the jar booster. An accelerator may be placed in the string above the BHA
and jar.
activity A folder in PowerPlan where data is stored (e.g., surveys, plans, and BHA’s). Each borehole
contains three activities: Plan, Execute, and Evaluate.
aggregation The formation of aggregates. In drilling fluids, aggregation results in the stacking of the clay
platelets face to face. The viscosity and gel strength decrease in consequence.
air cutting The inadvertent mechanical incorporation and dispersion of air into a drilling fluid system
compare aeration.
alert radii The radii of the major and minor alert cones and the drilling buffer at a measured depth (MD) or
true vertical depth (TVD).
Andergauge (stabilizer) A downhole adjustable stabilizer with two positions: open (full gauge) or closed (under gauge). It
is expanded to full gauge downhole by slacking off a small amount of weight on bit and is then
locked in place by a hydraulic latch.
aniline point The lowest temperature at which equal volumes of freshly distilled aniline and an oil are
completely miscible.
annular pressure loss The pressure loss caused by circulation of fluid up the annulus.
annular velocity The velocity of a fluid moving in the annulus.
annulus The space between the drillstring and the wall of the hole or casing.
API The American Petroleum Institute. API is the primary United States national trade association
serving all branches of the petroleum industry. API provides technical services and related public
policy development and advocacy research to government and other industry organizations.
API gravity The gravity (weight per unit volume) of crude oil or other related fluids as measured by a system
recommended by the American Petroleum Institute.
apparent viscosity The viscosity a fluid appears to have on a given instrument at a stated rate of shear. Apparent
viscosity is a function of the plastic viscosity and the yield point.
argillaceous Sediment containing clay or clay-like sediment.
Array Resistivity A 4.7-in. diameter borehole compensated array resistivity tool for resistivity logging while
Compensated (ARC-5) drilling slim holes in the 5.75 to 6.75 in. range. The tool response characteristics and number of
outputs are similar to those of wireline resistivity tools. The tool can be operated in memory mode
or in real-time using an inductive coupling to SLIM-1.
attitude The orientation in space of a point in the borehole, defined by the inclination and the azimuth at
that point.
azimuth The direction of one object from another, usually expressed as an angle in degrees relative to true
north. Azimuths are usually measured in the clockwise direction; thus an azimuth of 90 degrees
indicates that the second object is due east of the first.

Term Definition
Azimuthal Density Tool that provides a compensated neutron, a lithodensity, and an ultrasonic caliper measurement.
Neutron (ADN) The measurements are separated into four quadrants: up, left, down and right. The down
measurement provides an accurate density in conditions where the hole diameter is larger than the
tool diameter. The tool can be run stand-alone or in real-time.
azimuthal projection A projection that accurately preserves the azimuth between certain objects
azimuthal step The frequency interval of the azimuth radial axes drawn on a traveling cylinder map.
barite Natural barium sulfate used for increasing the density of drilling fluids. If required, it is usually
upgraded to a specific gravity of 4.20. The barite mineral occurs in white, grayish, greenish, and
reddish ores or crystalline masses.
barrel A volumetric unit of measure used in the petroleum industry consisting of 42 gal. (US).
barrel equivalent A laboratory unit used for evaluating or testing drilling fluids. One gram of material in 350 ml of
fluid is equivalent to 1 lb. of material in barrel of fluid.
bearing A direction measurement based upon the nautical quadrant format where direction is given from 0
to 90° to the west or east of north or south.
bearing flowrate The portion of the pump flowrate passing through the bearing spacing lubricating the motor
bearings.
bearing spacing The radial bearing clearance (i.e., the size of the gap through which the flow lubricating the
bearings passes). The bearing spacing is used to determine the bearing flowrate.
bent orienting sub A sub that combines the features of a bent sub and a universal bottom hole orientation sub. The
offset pin is compatible with the positive displacement motor and is bored out for incorporation of
a mule-shoe sleeve.
bent sub A sub used directly above a positive displacement motor or turbine. It forces the bit to follow a
certain arc of curvature as it drills. The pin end is machined at a certain offset angle to the axis of
the body of the sub, usually from 1 to 3° in increments of ½°. A scribed line on the body of the
sub, directly in line with the center of the pin offset is used as the master reference for toolface
position.
bentonite A plastic, colloidal clay, used in drilling fluids. The generic term bentonite is neither an exact
mineralogical name, nor is the clay of definite mineralogical composition.
bevel diameter The outer diameter of the contact face of the rotary shouldered connection.
BHA (bottom hole Generally composed of the bit, stabilizers, reamers, drill collars, and subs; however, the
assembly) PowerPlan definition differs slightly from other definitions in that it assumes that the drillstring
extended to surface also forms part of the BHA.
BHA data A data item or file containing a full description of the components in the drillstring, including
drillpipe, heavyweight drillpipe, drill collars, MWD/LWD tools, motors, miscellaneous subs, jars,
bits, etc. This file will have been produced by the ‘BHA Editor’ application.
BHR A BHA record report.
big-eyed bit A drill bit, used for jet deflection, with one large jet nozzle.
Bingham rheological A non-Newtonian rheological model, a Bingham fluid will not flow until the applied shear
model exceeds a yield point (YP). After the yield point has been exceeded, changes in the shear stress
are proportional to changes in the shear rate.
bit depth The measured depth at which the bottom of the bit is placed for calculations.
bit flowrate The portion of the pump flowrate that passes through the bit nozzles. The bit flowrate = (pump
flowrate - bearing box flowrate)
bit geometry The geometric construction of the bit (i.e., 3-cone, 4-cone, 2-cone, flat-face, configuration of the
teeth).

Term Definition
bit nozzles A reduced orifice in conventional drill bits through which the drilling fluid is forced at a high
velocity.
bit sub A box x box sub that is run directly above the bit when near-bit stabilizer is not used. The bit sub
is typically bored-out for a float valve.
blowout An uncontrolled escape of: drilling fluid, gas, oil, or water from the well caused by the formation
pressure being greater than the hydrostatic head of the fluid in the hole.
borehole A path defined by a set of surveys extending from surface to TD.
bottom hole location The furthest extent of a wellbore. Also called the total depth (TD).
bottom hole orientation A sub in which a free-floating ball rolls to the low side and opens a port, indicating an orientation
sub position.
boundary survey A survey for establishing/reestablishing a boundary line on the ground or for obtaining data to
construct a map to show a boundary line.
box connection A threaded connection on Oil Country Tubular Goods (OCTG) that has internal (female) threads.
break circulation To start movement of the drilling fluid after it has been inactive in the hole.
bridge An obstruction in a well formed by the intrusion of sub-surface formations.
brine Water saturated with or containing a high concentration of common salt (sodium chloride.
BRR A bit record report.
build rate (BR) The rate of change of a wellbore segment in the vertical plane, measured by the rate of change of
the inclination angle and expressed as the degrees of change per a user specified interval of
measured depth. Also called buildup rate.
bullnose Downhole tool used to guide a hole opener or underreamer, particularly in deviated pilot holes.
The bullnose can be either hollow or solid, with or without nozzles.
bumper sub A simple type of drilling jar with a jarring action caused by a sliding sleeve hitting a mechanical
stop.
cake thickness A measurement of the thickness of the filter cake deposited by a drilling fluid against a porous
medium, most often following the standard API filtration test.
calcium-treated muds Drilling fluids to which quantities of soluble calcium compounds have been added or allowed to
remain from the formation drilled.
cartography The science and art of making maps and charts.
casing A steel tubular placed in the hole to isolate particular formations. A series of casing strings is
necessary to complete a well and produce the desired fluids successfully.
casing seat The lowest point in the well at which casing is set.
cement A mixture of calcium aluminates and silicates made by combining lime and clay while heating.
Slaked cement contains about 62.5 percent calcium hydroxide, which is the major source of
trouble when cement contaminates mud.
centipoise (cp) A unit of viscosity measurement equal to 0.01 poise. A poise equals 1 g per meter-second, and a
centipoise is 1 g per centimeter-second.
central meridian The longitude of the horizontal center of a coordinate system, often the longitude origin of the
coordinate system.
centrifuge A device for the mechanical separation of high specific gravity solids from a drilling fluid.
chemical barrel A container in which various chemicals are mixed prior to addition to the drilling fluid.

Term Definition
circulation The movement of drilling fluid from the suction pit through the pump, drillpipe, bit, annular
space in the hole, and back to the suction pit. The time involved is usually referred to as
circulation time or circulation rate and is expressed in gallons or barrels per minute.
clabbered A slang term commonly used to describe moderate to severe flocculation of mud due to various
contaminants; also called gelled up.
clamp-on stabilizer Stablizer that allows more flexibility in BHA design and can be positioned on nonmagnetic drill
collars, MWD, and positive displacement motors at the required pacing to maintain directional
control.
Class 2 An API (American Petroleum Institute) service classification for used drillpipe and tubing work
strings. A Class 2 drillstring allows drill pipe with a minimum wall thickness of 70% of that of
new pipe.
clay A plastic, soft, variously colored earth (commonly hydrous silicates of alumina) formed by the
decomposition of feldspar and other aluminum silicates.
Compensated Density Provides compensated neutron and lithodensity measurements adaptable for either stand-alone or
Neutron (CDN) real-time use.
Compensated Dual Measurement provided by the resistivity gamma ray sub, adaptable for either stand-alone use or
Resistivity (CDR) in real-time combination with MWD.
conductor pipe The first and shortest casing string, used to protect shallow sands from being contaminated by
drilling fluids. Also helps prevent washouts, protects the subsequent casing strings from
corrosion, and may support a portion of the wellhead load.
conformal projection A projection that can accurately preserve the shape of mapped entities with the drawback of
scalar and area distortion. A conformal projection preserves the proper angles between connected
line segments and, therefore, tends to preserve the shape of geographic objects better than other
types of projections.
conic projection A projection based on the geometry of the cone, similar to placing a cone on the earth.
Mathematically, the cone is often recessed into the earth to reduce the aggregate distance between
the earth and the cone over the specific geographic area of interest.
convergence angle The angle between the y-axis and true north on a map, often used as a measure of azimuthal
distortion on a map.
coordinate system A system of mathematics and geodetic constants that defines how a specific geographic location
is converted to a set of two or three numbers, such as an x- and y-value (and possibly a z-value).
coordinates The linear and/or angular quantities that designate the position of a point in relation to a given
reference frame.
coring bit A bit used to extract a core sample from a formation.
course length (delta MD) The difference in measured depth or actual hole length between two specified borehole stations.
crackers A bottom hole assembly in which single joints of drillstring can be run between collars.
crippled bit A drill bit with one cone removed that is made to act erratically.
critical inclination Local inclination of the section in the wellbore where the buildup of cuttings is likely to be most
critical.
critical measured depth A measured depth in the wellbore at which the build-up of cuttings is likely to be most critical for
the given pump flowrate.
critical transport rate The pump flowrate necessary to completely suspend cuttings in the annular flow (for a particular
well section).
critical velocity The velocity at the transitional point between laminar and turbulent types of fluid flow.

Term Definition
crossover An intermediate sub used for changing connection sizes/threads between two components.
curve - curve profile Two wellbore profile curves with no tangent section in between.
curved segment A portion of the borehole that is curved.
cuttings Small pieces of formation that are the result of the chipping and/or crushing action of the bit.
cylindrical projection A map projection based on the geometry of a cylinder where the spherical earth is mathematically
projected onto a cylinder that surrounds the globe at a specific point.
datum A datum is the combination of an ellipsoid, which specifies the size and shape of the earth, and a
base point from which the latitude and longitude of all other points are referenced. The two
principal types of datums are vertical and horizontal.
dedendum The distance between the pitch line and the root of a thread.
definitive survey A survey that defines the geometry of the borehole.
delta P The difference between the on- and off-bottom pressure losses in the mud motor (the differential
operating pressure).
density Matter measured as mass per unit volume, expressed in pounds per gallon, grams per cubic
centimeter, and pounds per cubic foot. Mud density is commonly referred to as mud weight.
diagenesis The chemical alteration of rock minerals by a geological process.
differential pressure The difference in pressure between the hydrostatic head of the drilling fluid column and the
formation pressure at any given depth in the hole.
differential sticking The action of differential pressure holding the drill stem against the borehole wall. Differential
sticking occurs when part of the drillstring (usually the drill collars) becomes embedded in the
filter cake, resulting in a non-uniform distribution of pressure around the circumference of the
drillstring.
diffusion The spreading, scattering, or mixing of material (gas, liquid, or solid).
dilatant fluid A fluid is dilatant if its apparent viscosity increases with an increasing shear rate (see Figure 7-
10).
dip The measurement of the angle between the target plane and the horizontal plane.
displacement The lateral distance from the surface location to the primary target.
dog leg severity (DLS) The measure of the rate of change in the attitude of a wellbore segment, expressed as the degrees
of change per a user specified interval of measured depth (the DLS course length).
dogleg The change in wellbore curvature between any two points, expressed in degrees.
downhole motor A power source located just above the drill bit for rotating the bit.
downhole torque (DTOR) Downhole torque generated by the positive displacement motor. Typically the torque is
proportional to the differential operating pressure.
drag bit A drill bit that consists of fixed cutter blades that are integral with the body of the bit and rotate as
a unit with the drillstring. Drag bits drill by physically plowing cuttings from the bottom of the
borehole. This type of bit includes bits with steel cutters, diamond bits, and polycrystalline
diamond bits.
drill collar Heavy, stiff, steel tubulars used at the bottom of the BHA to provide weight on bit and rigidity.
drill stem The entire drilling assembly from the swivel to the bit, composed of the kelly, drillpipe, subs, drill
collars, stabilizers, shock absorbers, and reamers. The drill stem (also called drillstring) is used to
rotate the bit and transport drilling fluid to the bit.
drill Stem The entire drilling assembly from the swivel to the bit, composed of the kelly, drillpipe with tool
joints, subs, drill collars, stabilizers, shock absorbers and reamers. Used to rotate the bit and
transport drilling fluid to the bit.

Term Definition
drilling buffer The zone (collection of cone sections) around the planned well in which it is preferable that offset
wells do not enter. Each cone has a different expansion rate.
drilling in The operation during the drilling procedure at the point of drilling into the pay zone or formation.
drilling jars A downhole tool (either mechanical, hydraulic, or hydro-mechanical) designed to deliver an
impact either upwards or downwards. (Jars are run in deviated wells so that the string can be
jarred free in case of tight hole or stuck pipe.)
drilling map A map that combines a plan view and a vertical section view on one page (usually 36 in. wide by
an defined length). Used by the directional driller and others to track the progress of a drilling
project.
drilling mud (or drilling A circulating fluid used during rotary drilling to perform any or all of various functions required
fluid) in the drilling operation.
drilling out The operation during the drilling procedure when the cement is drilled out of the casing before
further formation is drilled or a completion attempted.
drilling/intermediate liner A liner set primarily to case off and isolate zones of lost circulation, highly overpressured zones,
sloughing shales, or plastic formations, so that drilling may be continued.
drillpipe The part of the BHA tubulars (extended to surface) that does not include the MWD/LWD tools,
motor, and bit nozzles.
drillstem test (dst) A test to determine whether oil and/or gas in commercial quantities has been encountered in the
well bore.
drillstring The drillpipe with tool joints attached.
drop rate (DR) The rate of change of a wellbore segment in the vertical plane, measured by the rate of change of
the inclination angle, and expressed as the degrees of change per a user specified interval of
measured depth. Also called drop off rate (DOR).
Dyna-drill A Moyno pump used in reverse as a downhole source of power to rotate the bit. Used with a bent
sub for bit deflection.
Dyna-flex A commercial name for a hydraulically operated bent sub.
easting The east/west coordinate value of a point (east is positive; west is negative).
ED equivalent depth
effective stress Matrix stress; The overburden pressure less that portion of the overburden pressure that is
supported by the pressure in the rock pore space (pore pressure).
effective viscosity The viscosity of the fluid defined by the average wall shear rate in the annulus.
efficiency The ratio of the current motor mechanical horsepower to the optimum mechanical horsepower.
(Note that this definition is not the conventional definition of motor efficiency, which is the ratio
of the mechanical horsepower to the hydraulic horsepower.)
elevation The vertical distance of a point above or below a surface or datum.
ellipse of uncertainty The ellipse of uncertainty due to survey tool error(s). The ellipse is computed at a given survey
(EOU) station that has a user-selected certainty (sigma) of containing the actual wellbore station at that
survey.
ellipsoid The mathematical shape that best describes the shape of the earth, yet is relatively simple
mathematically. Ellipsoids are defined with the equatorial radius and one of three numbers: the
polar radius, the eccentricity, or the flattening.
ellipsoid height The height of an object above the reference ellipsoid in use. Nowadays, this term is generally
used to qualify an elevation as being measured from the ellipsoid as opposed to the geoid. GPS
systems calculate ellipsoidal height. The geoid height at that location must be subtracted to obtain
what is commonly referred to as the elevation.
end of curve (EOC) The end of a wellbore segment that had a change in inclination and/or direction.

Term Definition
end point Indicates the end of some operation or when a clear and definite change is observed. In titration
this change is frequently a change in color of an indicator which has been added to the solution or
the disappearance of a colored reactant.
equivalent circulating The equivalent circulating density (ECD) is the effective mud density at any depth created by the
density (ECD) sum of the total hydrostatic pressure and the annular pressure losses from that depth to the
surface.
evaluate activity The folder for storing all well planning data that relates to post-drilling operations.
execute activity The folder for storing all current drilling operational data (i.e., surveys and BHA's).
extension sub A short sub used to "fine tune" a BHA.
extra-weight drillpipe A commercial name for a particular manufacturer’s heavy-weight drill pipe.
false easting A value assigned to the origin of eastings in a grid coordinate system to avoid the inconvenience
of using negative coordinates.
false northing A value assigned to the origin of northings in a grid coordinate system to avoid the inconvenience
of using negative coordinates.
Fann values The shear stress values obtained from a Fann rotational viscometer (or equivalent), used to
determine mud rheological properties.
FG fracture gradient
field An entire area that covers a given reservoir.

field reference point The coordinate reference data assigned at the field level. Can be used to position features within
the field.
fill-up line The line through which fluid is added to the hole.
filter cake Suspended solids that are deposited on a porous medium during the process of filtration.
filter-cake texture The physical properties of a filter cake as measured by toughness, slickness, and brittleness.
filter-cake thickness A measurement of the solids deposited on filter paper in thirty-seconds of an inch during a
standard 30-minute API filter test.
filtrate The liquid that is forced through a porous medium during the filtration process.
filtration The process of separating suspended solids from their liquid by forcing the liquid through a
porous medium. Two types of fluid filtration occur in a well: dynamic filtration while circulating
and static filtration at rest.
fishing Operations on the rig for the purpose of retrieving sections of pipe, collars, junk, and other
obstructions from the wellbore.
flex joints Subs placed immediately above a motor to maximize the effective build rates and/or minimize the
effect of bending moments from the BHA (above the motor) on the build up rate.
flex-weight drillpipe A commercial name for a particular manufacturer’s heavy-wall drillpipe.
float sub A pin x box sub that is bored out for a float valve, and is often run above a mud motor.
flow regime The laminar, transitional, or turbulent nature of fluid motion.
fluid Any substance that readily assumes the shape of the container in which it is placed. The term
includes both liquids and gases. It is a substance in which the application of every system of
stresses (other than hydrostatic pressure) produces a continuously increasing deformation without
any relation between time rate of deformation (at any instant) and the magnitude of stresses at the
instant.
fluid flow The state of a fluid in motion, determined by the type of fluid (e.g., Newtonian plastic,
pseudoplastic, dilatant), the properties of the fluid (e.g., viscosity and density), the geometry of
the system, and the velocity.

Term Definition
fluid loss Measure of the relative amount of fluid lost (filtrate) through permeable formations or membranes
when the drilling fluid is subjected to a pressure differential.
fluidity The reciprocal of viscosity, fluidity is the measure of rate with which a fluid is continuously
deformed by a shearing stress.
formation damage Damage to the borehole formation by mud particles or mud filtrates.
formation sensitivity The tendency of certain producing formations to adversely react with invading mud filtrates.
fracture pressure The maximum hydrostatic pressure a formation can support without parting and taking in fluid.
gauge reamers A sub with a set of cutting edges or rollers with an outer diameter equal to the bit.
Gaussian distribution A normal distribution.
gel (noun) Highly colloidal, high-yielding, viscosity-building commercial clays, such as bentonite and
attapulgite clays.
gel (verb) A state of a colloidal suspension in which shearing stresses below a certain finite value fail to
produce permanent deformation. The minimum shearing stress that produces permanent
deformation is known as the shear or gel strength of the gel.
gel cement Cement having a small to moderate percentage of bentonite added as a filler and/or to reduce the
slurry weight.
gel strength The ability or measure of the ability of a colloid to form gels, usually reported in lb/100 sq. ft.
geodesic The ellipsoidal equivalent of a big circle to the extent that the geodesic represents the shortest
path between two points on the ellipsoid.
geodesy The study of the size and shape of the earth and the mathematics involved in accurately modeling
the earth. Geodesy also studies variations in the shape of an imaginary ocean covering the entire
earth, caused by the non-uniform nature of the earth.
geodetic The study of the shape and size of the earth.
geodetic coordinate Spherical coordinate system used to define a global position in terms of latitude and longitude.
system
geodetic reference system The true technical name for a datum. The combination of an ellipsoid (which specifies the size
and shape of the earth) and a base point from which the latitude and longitude of all other points
are referenced.
geoid The exact shape of sea level, as opposed to the ellipsoid mathematical model. The ellipsoid model
is only an approximation required by the mathematical techniques of cartographers. The true
shape of the earth (that is, the shape of the sea-level surface) varies from the ellipsoid model by as
much as 80 meters above and 60 meters below the best fitting ellipsoid. This varying shape is
caused by the non-homogeneous nature of the earth. When dealing with elevations, it is important
to know if the elevation is referenced to the ellipsoid (a mathematical model of the size and shape
of the earth) or to the geoid (the true representation of the size and shape of the earth).
geoid The equipotential surface in the gravity field of the earth that approximates the undisturbed mean
sea level extended continuously through the continents. The direction of gravity is perpendicular
to the geoid at every point.
geoid height The height of the geoid above the ellipsoid in use.
global positioning system A system based on satellites and sophisticated receivers capable of accurately measuring the
geodetic location of a receiver at any place in the world.
global scan A scan of wellhead-to-wellhead distance that includes every well in a project.
graticule A network of lines representing parallels of latitude and meridians of longitude that form a map
projection.

Term Definition
grid Network of uniformly spaced parallel lines intersecting at right angles. When superimposed on a
map, it usually carries the name of the projection used for the map (i.e., Lambert grid, transverse
Mercator grid, universal transverse Mercator grid.
grid convergence A measurement of the deviation from true north to grid north.
grid coordinates The northing and easting of the location of a point (e.g., field reference point) relative to a
geodetic datum.
grid north The direction defined by the positive ordinate axis of the selected grid coordinate system.
grid scale factor A measure of the scale distortion introduced by a projection at any given position on a map or in a
Cartesian coordinate system.
GST (Geosteering Tool) Tool based on a standard Anadrill mud-lubricated, steerable, downhole motor with the addition of
a 4-ft near-bit measurement sub. It also includes an instrumented fixed bent-housing integrated
between the motor bearing section and the surface adjustable bent housing.
gunk plug A slurry in crude or diesel oil that contains any of the following materials or combinations:
bentonite, cement, attapulgite, and guar gum (never with cement). Used primarily in combating
lost circulation, the gunk plug may or may not be squeezed.
hard target A geological target.
hard-banding A hard metal deposited on tool joints to resist abrasion from the contact of the tool joint to the
borehole wall.
heaving The partial or complete collapse of the walls of a hole, resulting from internal pressures due
primarily to swelling from hydration or formation gas pressures.
heavy wall drillpipe An intermediate-weight drillstring member with drillpipe dimensions for easier handling. The
(HWDP) heavy wall tube is attached to special, extra-length tool-joints. Also called Hevi-wate drillpipe.
Herschel-Bulkley A combination of the Bingham and Power Law models, it has a yield stress (i.e., a finite stress is
rheological model needed to initiate fluid flow) and an apparent viscosity that varies with shear rate.
Hevi -wate  drillpipe Commercial name for a particular manufacturer’s heavy weight drill pipe made with extra length
for tool joints. The pipe has a wear pad at the middle of the joint.
high side Opposite side of the hole from the side upon which a free length of pipe rests from the force of
gravity.
hold A wellbore segment that has no change in inclination or direction.
hold angle The borehole inclination for the hold segment.
hole opener Downhole tool used to open pilot holes.
horizontal plane Proximity calculation method where the proximity distance is computed as the distance between
proximity calculation the intersections of the planned well and the offset well, with a horizontal plane passing through
the stations on the planned well.
hydrate A substance containing water and hydrocarbons combined in molecular form (such as CaSO 4 and
2H2O).
hydration The act of a substance to take water by means of absorption and/or adsorption.
hydraulic jar A downhole drilling jar consisting of two reservoirs of hydraulic fluid separated by a valve. When
tension or compression is applied to the tool in the cocked position, fluid from one chamber is
compressed and passes through the valve at high flow resistance into the second chamber,
allowing the tool to extend or contract.
Hydromechanical Jars Drilling jars that are a hybrid of a mechanical jar and a hydraulic jar (usually hydraulic up and
mechanical down).
hydrometer A floating instrument for determining the specific gravity or density of liquids, solutions, and
slurries.
hydrostatic head The pressure exerted by a column of fluid, usually expressed in pounds per square inch.

Term Definition
hydrostatic pressure The pressure exerted by a column of fluid at rest.

IADC International Association of Drilling Contractors
IADC Bit Grading System International Association of Drilling Contractor’s dull grading system that can be applied to all
types of roller cone and fixed cutter bits. Bits with steel teeth, tungsten carbide inserts, and natural
or synthetic diamond cutters can be described with this system.
IADC Code The International Association of Drilling Contractor’s 3-digit code that is used to identify the
various types of roller cone bits. The first digit indicates the hardness of the formation and is
called the formation hardness series. The second digit is called the type and represents a further
classification of the formation hardness. The third digit is the feature classification (e.g., anti-
friction roller bearings, sealed friction bearings).
IDEAL Integrated Drilling Evaluation and Logging
IDEAL Sonic Tool Provides a measurement of the time required for a compressional sound wave to traverse on the
(ISONIC) foot of the formation. It can be used to generate a porosity log and interpret or update seismic
records.
IMPulse Measure while drilling tool that incorporates the resistivity measurements developed for the
Anadrill ARC5 tool. The telemetry system is similar to that of the Powerpulse MWD tools.
inclination The angle of the wellbore at a given point, measured in degrees from the vertical below the point.
indented drill collar A round drill collar with a series of indentations on one side to form an eccentrically weighted
collar.
indicator Substances in acid-base titrations which, in solution, change color or become colorless as the
hydrogen ion concentration reaches a definite value (these values vary with the indicator).
initial gel strength The maximum reading (deflection) from a direct-reading viscometer, after a fluid has been
inactive for 10 seconds.
inner diameter (ID) The diameter of the inside of a drillstring component (i.e., drillpipe, drill collar).
input parameters The parameters required to enable an analysis to be performed.
insert bit A roller cone bit with tungsten carbide insert cutters. These bits are manufactured by pressing a
tungsten carbide cylinder into accurately machined holes in the cone.
integral blade stabilizer Stabilizers made from one piece of material, machined to provide the blades. The leading edge
may be rounded off to reduce wall damage and to have a greater wall contact area in soft
formations.
intermediate casing Casing string that is often necessary to maintain the borehole integrity as greater drilling depths
are encountered. It is generally employed to seal off weak zones that might fracture with the high-
density mud usually needed when deepening a well.
interval The depth point(s) used in a proximity analysis, either measured depth or true vertical depth. If
the depth interval is 0 or negative, the actual stations are used.
J profile (2-D or 3-D) / Usually refers to a borehole that has a vertical section, a build segment (with or without turning),
slant well and a hold segment to TD.
jet bit A drill bit with nozzles through which the drilling fluid is directed in a high-velocity stream.
jet velocity The velocity of the fluid passing through jet nozzles.
jetting The process of periodically removing a portion or all of the water, mud, and/or solids, from the
pits, usually by mean of pumping through a jet nozzle arrangement
junk sub A sub made from a solid steel body with a “necked-down” midsection. A skirt is fitted around the
lower part of the body, around the necked-down portion, forming a basket for junk to settle in. It
is run directly above the bit, and catches pieces of junk that are too heavy to circulate out of the
hole. A bleed hole in the skirt allows the mud to return to the system.

Term Definition
kelly A component of the surface equipment that is the first section of pipe below the swivel, and
generally has a rectangular or hexagonal cross-section. The kelly allows the drillpipe to be
rotated.
kelly bushing (KB) / The device on the rig floor (through which the kelly is run) that can clamp the drillstring to
prevent vertical movement, while allowing horizontal rotation. Also called rotary kelly bushing
(RKB).
key seat Damage caused by the drillstring in tension. Normally drillpipe rubbing against the formation in
the dogleg is where key-seating occurs. If the lateral force at the contact point between the
drillstring in tension and the formation is larger than the formation strength, the body and tool
joints of drillpipe start wearing a groove into the formation about the same diameter as the tool
joints. The wear is confined to a narrow groove because the high tension in the drillstring
prevents sideways movement.
key seat wiper A piece of equipment that can be run between the top drill collar and the bottom joint of the
heavy-wall drillpipe that acts as a reamer to enlarge an area of key seating and allow free passage
of the drill collars.
kick-off point (KOP) The position in the wellbore that begins a new curve segment.
laminar flow A type of fluid motion in which there is a continuous steady motion of the fluid particles.
latitude Angular distance, in degrees, minutes, and seconds of a point north or south of the equator.
Least Astronomic Tide The minimum height reached by a falling tide. For a glossary of tide-related terms, refer
to the following web URL: http://www.co-ops.nos.noaa.gov/tideglos.html
ledge A protecting ridge or edge in the side of the wellbore. A ledge may be created with the bit by
rotating off bottom, or when consolidated formations are exposed by wall cavings in the softer
unconsolidated formations.
legal coordinate systems The combining of several positioning concepts into a unified coordinate system for a particular
geopolitical entity, such as a country or state. The U.S. State Plane Coordinate System (SPCS) of
1927 and 1983 are two common examples of a legal coordinate system.
length The length of an individual component as measured from the shoulder of the top connection to
the shoulder of the bottom connection.
linear weight The average weight per unit length of a drillstring component.
liner A string of standard casing that does not extend all the way to the surface, but is hung off inside
the previous casing string.
local Cartesian Coordinates used to define the location of a point in terms of north/south and east/west distances.
coordinates
local coordinate system A coordinate system whose origin is defined relative to another coordinate system.
local polar coordinates Coordinates used to define the location of a point in terms of azimuth and horizontal distance
from the origin of the coordinate system to the point.
locked-in Condition where the bottom hole assembly is held relatively fixed within the borehole because
the outer diameter of the assembly is nearly the same as the drill bit diameter.
longitude The east/west component of the spherical coordinate system most widely used to record geodetic
locations. Lines of longitude all proceed in a true north/south direction and pass through the north
and south pole and intersect the equator. Lines of longitude are assigned values that represent, in
degrees of arc, the distance of the line from the prime meridian.
lost circulation Result of whole drilling fluid escaping into the formation by way of crevices or porous media.
lost circulation material Fiber, flake, or granular material added to the drilling mud to gain control of or prevent lost
(LCM) circulation.
LOT leak-off test

Term Definition
low-yield clays Commercial clays, chiefly of the calcium montmorillonite type, having a yield of approximately
15 to 30 bbl/ton.
LWD Inductive Coupling A wireline-conveyed tool that augments MWD/LWD systems and has two objectives:
Tool (LINC)
• to proved safe, universal, and reliable method of extracting and retrieving the nuclear source
assembly from the CDN (Compensated Density Neutron) LWD tool or the ADN (Azimuthal
Density Neutron) tool while they are downhole
• to establish a full bi-directional communications link to interconnected LWD tools while
downhole.
M1/M3 A fully upgraded version of the Anadrill M1 MWD tool that measures borehole azimuth and
inclination, magnetometer temperature, turbine RPM and downhole shock, natural gamma ray
activity, weight-on-bit and torque, continuous direction and inclination, and pressure.
magnetic declination The angular difference between magnetic north and true (geographic) north at the point of
observation.
major alert zone The zone around the planned well in which major risks may occur if offset wells enter. The major
alert zone is defined as a collection of cone sections, each with a different expansion rate.
major grid The primary grid or grids on a map or chart.
make-up shoulder The sealing shoulder on a rotary-shouldered connection.
map Graphic representation of the physical features (natural, artificial, or both) of a part or the whole
of the earth’s surface, by means of signs and symbols or photographic imagery. This
representation is at an established scale, on a specified projection, and has the means of
orientation indicated.
map projection An orderly system of lines on a plane representing a corresponding system of imaginary lines on
an adopted terrestrial datum surface. A map projection may be derived by geometrical
construction or by mathematical analysis.
marker A station inserted into a wellbore survey set by the user to label a point. The marker does not
affect planning or position calculations. There are three types of markers available in the
WellDesign application: station marker, casing marker, and formation marker.
Marsh funnel An instrument used in determining the funnel viscosity of a fluid. The Marsh funnel is a container
with a fixed orifice at the bottom so that when filled with 1,500 cc fresh water, 946 ml will flow
out in approximately 26 seconds.
maximum pump pressure The maximum output pressure from the pumps set by the contractor. The default value is 4,000
psi, although some pumps can exceed this value. For example, some recent rigs have the
capability to operate at 7,500 psi.
mean high water Tidal datum that is the arithmetic mean of the high water heights observed over a specific 19-year
Metonic cycle.
mean high water line Intersection of the land with the water surface at the elevation of high water.
mean low water Tidal datum that is the arithmetic mean of the low water heights observed over a specific 19-year
Metonic cycle.
mean low water line Intersection of the land with the water surface at the elevation of low water.
mean sea level Tidal datum that is the arithmetic mean of the hourly water elevations observed over a specific
19-year Metonic cycle.
measured depth (MD) Actual length of the wellbore from its surface location to any specified station measured along the
borehole path.
measured depth interval A user-specified interval for interpolation of intermediate stations.
measurement while A system for transmitting downhole data to the surface while drilling. Current telemetry methods
drilling (MWD) include positive and negative mud pulse, continuous carrier wave, and electromagnetic.

Term Definition
mechanical hp The mechanical horsepower generated by the mud motor while drilling. The power section in the
motor converts the hydraulic energy from the drilling fluid into mechanical power to turn the bit
mechanical jar A drilling jar that operates using a series of spring, lock, and release mechanisms. It trips upward
at a pre-selected tensile force and trips down at a pre-selected compressional force, and trips only
at the set threshold (normally beyond the forces reached while drilling).
mercury A survey computation method (originally used in Mercury, Nevada at the United States nuclear
test site) that combines the tangential and balanced tangential calculation methods, but takes into
account the length of the survey tool. The survey tool length is computed as a hold. The rest of
the course is computed using the balanced tangential calculation method.
meridian A big circle on the surface of the earth passing through the geographical poles and any given
point on the earth’s surface. All points on a given meridian have the same longitude.
mesh A measure of fineness of a woven material screen (e.g., a 200-mesh sieve has 200 openings per
linear inch).
metes and bounds Method of describing land by the measure of length (metes) of the boundary lines (bounds).
milled-tooth Bit Roller cone bits that are manufactured by milling the teeth out of a steel cone. The milled-tooth
bits designed for soft formations are usually faced with a wear-resistant material, such as tungsten
carbide on one side of the tooth. Milled-tooth bits designed to drill harder formations and are
usually hardened by special processes.
minimum curvature A survey computation method that fits a 3-dimensional circular arc between two survey points.
The dogleg severity is constant through any section using this method; however, the build rate
and turn rate, in general, are not.
minor alert zone The zone around the planned well in which minor risks may occur if offset wells enter. The minor
alert zone is defined by a collection of cone sections, each with a different expansion rate.
mist drilling A method of rotary drilling whereby water and/or oil is dispersed in air and/or gas as the drilling
fluid.
monel (Kmond) A permanently non-magnetic alloy used in making downhole tools.
motor flowrate The portion of the pump flowrate used to power a downhole motor.
mud A water- or oil-base drilling fluid whose properties have been altered by solids, commercial
and/or native, dissolved and/or suspended. Used for circulating out cuttings, primary well control,
and many other functions while drilling a well.
mud balance A term-type balance used in determining mud density that consists primarily of a base, graduated
beam with constant-volume cup, lid, rider, knife edge, and counterweight.
mud line Sea bed.
mud logging A method of determining the presence or absence of oil or gas in the various formations
penetrated by the drill bit.
mud pit Earthen or steel storage facilities for the surface mud system. There are two types of mud pits:
circulating and reserve. Mud testing and conditioning is normally done in the circulating pit
system.
mud program A proposed or followed plan or procedure for the type(s) and properties of drilling fluid(s) used in
drilling a well with respect to depth.
mud pumps Pumps at the rig used to circulate drilling fluids.
mud rheology Broadly description of the properties of the drilling fluid.
muleshoe A shaped form used on the bottom of an orienting tool to position the tool. The shape resembles a
muleshoe or that of the end of a pipe cut both diagonally and concave. The shaped end forms a
wedge to rotate the tool when lowered into a mating seat for the mule shoe.

Term Definition
multishot survey tool An instrument used to take a series of readings separated by a preset time interval to record the
magnetic direction of the course of an uncased wellbore and its inclination from the vertical
plane. It normally uses the same running gear and compass units as the single-shot tool.
National Geodetic Vertical Reference surface established by the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey in 1929 as the datum to
Datum of 1929 which relief features and elevation data are referenced in the conterminous United States.
natural diamond bit Special drill bit that will drill the hardest formations. The cutting actions are the same as for the
PDC and TSP bits, but the size of the diamonds dictate that very small amounts of rock be
removed by each diamond.
near-bit stabilizer A stabilizer placed just above the bit in the bottom hole assembly.
Newtonian fluid The basic and simplest fluids in which the shear force is directly proportional to the shear rate.
Newtonian rheological The most basic rheological model, in which the viscous forces are characterized by a constant
model fluid viscosity.
nonmagnetic drill collar Usually flush (non-spiral) drill collars manufactured from high-quality, corrosion-resistant,
(NMDC) austenitic stainless steel.
non-Newtonian A rheological model of fluids that do not exhibit a direct proportionality between shear stress and
rheological model shear rate.
non-rotating rubber sleeve Stabilizer that is used above the top conventional stabilizer in the BHA, especially in abrasive
stabilizer formations. The rubber sleeve does not rotate while drilling, minimizing blade wear and wall
damage.
normal plane A proximity calculation method in which the proximity distance is computed as the distance
between the intersections of the planned well and the offset well with a plane normal to the
planned well.
normal solution A solution of a concentration that contains a 1-gram equivalent of a substance for every liter of
the solution.
North American Datum A datum based on the Clarke ellipsoid of 1866, with a base station at Meades Ranch in Kansas.
Of 1927 (NAD27)
North American Datum An earth-centered datum based on the Geodetic Reference System of 1980. The datum is earth-
Of 1983 (NAD83) centered (or geocentric) because its reference point is the center of the earth, as opposed to a point
on the earth’s surface.
northing The north/south coordinate value of a point, where north is positive, south is negative.
OBG overburden gradient
off-bottom calculations Calculations made with the drill bit off the bottom of the well (i.e., not drilling).
offset well Wells (restricted or global) that are included in an anticollision analysis between a planned well
and each offset well, but not among the offset wells themselves.
oil content The amount of oil in any drilling fluid.
oil-based mud A special type of drilling fluid that contains blown asphalt and usually 1 to 5% water emulsified
into the system with caustic soda or quick lime and an organic acid. Silicate, salt and phosphat e
may also be present.
oil-in-water emulsion mud A conventional or special water-base mud to which oil has been added. The oil becomes the
dispersed phase and may be emulsified into the mud either mechanically or chemically. Also
known as oil-in-water emulsion mud.
on-bottom calculations Calculations made with the drill bit on bottom in certain drilling conditions (i.e., non-zero torque,
WOB).
on-bottom rpm The rate of rotation of the bit while drilling with a motor.
open hole Exposed formation that has not been cased or isolated from the wellbore fluids.

Term Definition
optimum hp For a given pump flowrate and mud properties, the optimum hp is the maximum mechanical
horsepower that can be produced by the motor.
orienting sub A straight sub bored out to accept a mule-show sleeve. After all intermediate connections have
been torqued up fully, the key of the mule-shoe sleeve is aligned directly above the scribe line of
the bent sub. This key is the landing point for the survey running gear. Commonly called a UBHO
(universal bottom hole orientation) sub.
outer diameter The mean outer diameter of a bottom hole assembly component.
overall pump efficiency The total efficiency of a mud circulating pump as a product of the mechanical efficiency and the
volumetric efficiency.
overburden The total weight of all material that lie above and therefore exert their weight upon a particular
depth of interest in the rock column.
parallel In a cartographic/geodetic context, a parallel is a specific line of latitude. Lines of latitude are
called parallels because they are parallel to all other lines of latitude.
parallel flow See laminar flow.
pay zone or pay formation The formation drilled into that contains oil and/or gas in commercial quantities.
permeability A measure of the ability of any rock formation to transmit a 1-phase fluid under conditions of
laminar flow.
Petrotechnical Open A nonprofit corporation dedicated to facilitating integrated business processes and computing
Software Corporation technology for the exploration and production segment of the international petroleum industry.
(POSC)
pin connection A threaded connection on tubular that has external (male) threads.
plan activity A folder for storing all data related to the planning phase of a well.
plan view A Cartesian (x,y) plot of survey stations projected onto a horizontal plane with one axis
north/south and the other east/west.
plan view A proposal size (A or A4) map that provides a Cartesian (x,y) horizontal plane projection of the
survey data with one axis as north/south and the other as east/west.
planned well The well profile (survey or proposal) selected for anticollision analysis against other wells. (The
traveling cylinder plot is centered on this profile.)
plastic fluid A complex, non-Newtonian fluid in which shear force is not proportional to shear rate.
plastic viscosity A measure of internal resistance to fluid flow, attributable to the amount, type, and size of solids
present in a given fluid.
plasticity The property possessed by some solids (particularly clays and clay slurries) of changing shape or
flowing under applied stress without developing shear planes or fractures.
plug flow The movement of material as a unit without shearing within the mass. Plug flow is the first type
of flow exhibited by a plastic fluid after overcoming the initial force required to produce flow.
polycrystalline diamond Remove formation from the rock face by shearing the rock in a similar manner to the way a
compact (PDC) bit machinist’s tool removes metal from a part being turned in a lathe. Preferable use is in soft, firm,
and medium-hard non-abrasive formations.
polymer A substance formed when two or more molecules of the same kind are linked end to end into
another compound, having the same elements in the same proportion, but higher molecular
weight and different physical properties (e.g., paraformaldehyde).
POOH Abbreviation for pulling out of the hole.
pore pressure The pressure of the fluids or gases occupying the pore space (voids or holes) in the rock at a
particular depth of interest.
porosity The amount of void space in a formation, usually expressed as percent voids per bulk volume.
Absolute porosity refers to the amount of connected pore spaces (i.e., the space available to fluid
penetration).

Term Definition
POSC/CAESAR An industry -driven research project initiated in 1993 by the Norwegian Research Council, Aker,
Kværner, Det Norske Veritas, Norsk Hydro, Saga Petroleum and Statoil. The project’s purpose
was to develop a product data model for lifecycle information of offshore production facilities.
Power Law rheological Rheological model that requires two parameters for fluid characterization: the consistency index
model of the fluid (K) and either the Power Law index, or the flow behavior Index (n).
PowerPak A positive displacement motor (PDM) powered by the circulating drilling fluid.
PowerPulse (M10) An MWD tool designed to increase reliability, maintenance costs, and increase data rate, while
providing a number of features and advantages over the M1 and M3 MWD tools. There are both
normal-flow (NF) and high-flow (HF) options (allowing flowrates of up to 1,600 gpm).
premium class Drillstring that is based on drillpipe having a minimum wall thickness of 80% of that of new pipe.
pressure drop The pressure lost in a pipeline or annulus due to the velocity of the liquid in the pipeline, the
properties of the fluid, the condition of the pipe wall, or the alignment of the pipe.
primary grid The major (principal) grid on a map or chart.
prime meridian The specific meridian (i.e., line of longitude) that is assigned the value of zero and to which all
other meridians are referenced. While Greenwich is almost universally accepted as the prime
meridian, several other meridians (such as the meridian of Paris) remain in use.
production casing String of casing that serves to isolate the reservoir from undesirable fluids in the producing
formation and from other zones penetrated by the wellbore. It is the protective housing for the
tubing and other equipment used in the well.
production liners Run from the last casing string to total depth, they replace production casing.
projection A mathematical development of one surface onto another.
proximity calculation The calculation of wellbore-to-wellbore distances between two wells.
pseudoplastic fluid The apparent viscosity or consistency decreases instantaneously with increasing rate of shear
until, at a given point, the viscosity becomes constant.
pump flowrate The circulation rate for the fluid supplied by t he mud pumps at the surface.
pump stroke volume The total volume displaced by the cylinders in the pump per complete pump cycle.
quadrangle Four-sided area, bounded by parallels of latitude and meridians of longitude and used as an area
unit in mapping (dimensions are not necessarily the same in both directions). Also, a geometric
figure of significance in geodetic surveying.
radius of curvature A survey computation method that computes the position of a second survey point from the
position of a first survey point by assuming constant build and turn rates.
rate of penetration (ROP) The rate, in feet per hour, at which the drill deepens the wellbore.
rate of shear The rate at which an action or effect, resulting from applied forces, causes or tends to cause two
adjacent parts of a body to slide relatively to each other in a direction parallel to their plane of
contact.
ream Enlargement of the wellbore to straighten the hole.
Rebel Tool that corrects lateral drift by counteracting the bit walk (most suitable in medium formations).
It can either slow down the bit walk or eliminate it completely. The rebel tool can be used at
inclinations above 12° in hole sizes from 8 ½ in. to 12 ¼ in.
Receiver Weight-on-Bit Used with the Geosteering Tool (GST), the RWOB provides sensor measurements and
(RWOB) electromagnetic reception for the GST and resistivity at the bit (RAB) tools.
replaceable wear-pad This stabilizer has four long blades 90° apart, composed of replaceable pads that contain pressed-
(RWP) stabilizer in tungsten carbide inserts.

Term Definition
Resistivity at the Bit An LWD tool that makes electrode resistivity measurements in wells drilled with water-base
(RAB) muds. It may be run in any of several configurations, providing up to five resistivity
measurements relevant to applications involving formation evaluation and wellbore positioning.
In addition the RAB employs a plateau-based, scintillating gamma ray detector to provide a total
gamma measurement. An azimuthal orientation system uses the earth’s magnetic field as a
reference to determine the angular position of the tool in the wellbore as the drillstring rotates.
This feature allows both azimuthal resistivity and gamma measurements. Auxiliary measurements
of radial and longitudinal shock and temperature are also made.
restricted scan A restricted scan of the wellhead-to-wellhead distance that includes only the wells selected in the
tree.
reverse circulate The method by which the normal flow of a drilling fluid is reversed by circulating down the
annulus then up and out of the drillstring.
Reynolds number A dimensionless number (Re) that occurs in the theory of fluid dynamics. The diameter, velocity,
density, and viscosity (consistent units) for a fluid flowing through a cylindrical conductor are
related as follows:
diameter × velocity × density
Re =
viscosity
or
Re =
( D ⋅V ⋅ ρ )
h
RFT repeat formation test
rheology The study of deformation and flow of water.
rheology The science that describes how a fluid flows and is deformed in response to applied stresses (i.e.,
how the shear stress relates to the shear rate).
rheology model A mathematical representation of fluid properties.
rhumb line A line or path on the ellipsoid with constant azimuth.
riser Tubing from the sea floor to the rig used as a circulation vessel for the drilling fluids and to
convey cuttings to the surface.
roller cone bit Drill bits with two or more cones containing the cutting elements that rotate about the axis of the
cone as the bit is rotated at the bottom of the hole.
roller reamer Downhole tool designed to maintain hole gauge, reduce torque, and stabilize the drillstring.
Particularly useful in abrasive formations.
rotary drilling The method of drilling wells that depends on the rotation of a column of drillpipe to the bottom of
which is attached a bit. A fluid is circulated to remove the cuttings.
rotary kelly bushing The device on the rig floor (through which the kelly is run) that can clamp the drillstring to
(RKB) prevent vertical movement, while allowing horizontal rotation. Also called kelly bushing.
rotary shouldered A connection used on drillstring elements that has coarse, tapered threads and seating shoulders.
connection
rotor nozzle A nozzle that bypasses part of the flow to extend the capacity and enhance flexibility in a
downhole motor.
sag Predominately an inclination error caused by gravitational force acting on the BHA that causes
misalignment in the vertical plane between the survey tool axis and the borehole axis.
scale Relationship between a distance on a map, chart, or photograph and the corresponding distance
on the earth.
scan radius The wellhead-to-wellhead distance used in the scanning process in Close Approach. All wells that
lie outside the radius around the planned well are excluded from the proximity calculation step.

Term Definition
sea level (water level) The height of the surface of the sea at any given time.
section mill A downhole tool used to mill a section of casing (usually prior to a cased-hole sidetrack), the
section mill uses cutters dressed with tungsten carbide and pump pressure to mill casing or
tubing.
shale Fine-grained, clay rock with slate-like cleavage, sometimes containing an organic oil-yielding
substance.
shale shaker Any of several mechanical devices for removing cuttings or other large solids from the mud. Two
common types are the vibrating screen and rotating cylindrical screen.
shear (shearing stress) An action resulting from applied forces that causes or tends to cause two contiguous parts of a
body to slide relatively to one another in a direction parallel to their plane of contact.
shear strength A measure of the shear value of a fluid. The minimum shearing stress that produces permanent
deformation.
Shell error model A survey tool error model consisting of expanding cone sections where the expansion rate is a
function of inclination.
shock sub A downhole tool that absorbs or reduces the bit-induced vibration.
short drill collar A shortened version of a steel drill collar. Also called a pony collar
short nonmagnetic drill A short version of the Nonmagnetic Drill Collar. It may be used between a mud motor and an
collar (SNMDC) MWD collar to counteract magnetic interference from below. It is also used in locked BHA’s,
particularly where the borehole inclination and direction give rise to high magnetic interference.
BHA’s for horizontal wells often use a SNMDC.
sidetrack An operation performed to redirect the wellbore or drill to a new total depth by starting a new
hole at a position above the bottom of the original hole.
simple cones A simple error model used when no tool error parameters are known. The simple cones error
model consists of expanding cone sections with some initial radius at the wellhead. Each cone
section can have a different expansion rate. The same cone is applied to all surveys in a Close
Approach analysis.
single-shot survey tool An instrument used to record the magnetic direction of the course of an uncased wellbore and its
inclination from the vertical plane. It is also used to determine the tool face of a deflection device
when deviating a well. The instrument consists of a power pack, timing device, camera, and a
compass/inclinometer (angle unit) inserted in a protective barrel (running gear).
sleeve -type stabilizer There are two main designs of sleeve-typ e stabilizer: the two-piece (mandrel and sleeve) and the
three-piece (mandrel, sleeve, and saver sub).
The two-piece has a sleeve that is screwed onto the course threads on the outside of the mandrel
and is torqued to the recommended value. Sleeve make-up torque is low. There is no pressure seal
at the sleeve.
The three-piece has a sleeve is screwed onto the mandrel by hand. The saver sub is then screwed
into the mandrel and this connection is torqued up to the recommended value. The three-piece has
a mud pressure seal at the mandrel/saver sub connection. Make-up torque of this connection is the
full value for that size of API connection.
Slim 1 A retrievable and resettable MWD tool used with 2 7/8 in. to 9 5/8 in. drill collars.
Slim Hole Adaptable Type of SLIM-1 MWD tool that provides directional, gamma ray, and ARC-5 resistivity
Retreivable Platform measurements in real-time and recorded modes.
(SHARP)
SLIM-1 A retrievable and re-settable MWD tool used in 2 7/8 in. to 9 5/8 in. drill collars. It can be run in a
MWD or electronic multishot (EMS) mode.
slip velocity The difference between the annular velocity of the fluid and the rate at which a cutting is removed
from the hole.
slot A surface position where the well starts. (The slot may or may not be part of a template.)

Term Definition
sloughing The partial or complete collapse of the walls of a hole resulting from incompetent or
unconsolidated formations, high angle, or repose and wetting along internal bedding planes.
solubility The degree to which a substance will dissolve in a particular solvent.
specific gravity The weight of a particular volume of any substance compared to the weight of an equal volume of
water at a reference temperature.
spheroid Mathematical figure closely approaching the geoid in form and size and used as a surface of
reference for geodetic surveys.
spud bit A special bit used in directional drilling to change the inclination and direction of the wellbore.
square drill collar A drill collar fabricated with the outer cross section in the form of a square; the corners are
normally rounded off.
squeeze A procedure whereby slurries (i.e., cement, mud, gunk plug) are forced into the formation by
pumping into the hole while maintaining a back pressure, usually by closing the rams.
stabilizer Downhole tool used to control hole deviation, reduce the risk of differential sticking, and ream
out doglegs and keyseats.
Standard Data Model Formerly the Schlumberger Data Model, the purpose of the SDM is to facilitate the integration of
(SDM) independently developed applications by using a single unifying data model that is based on
POSC Epicentre across the range of those applications.
standard profiles A group of segments commonly used in well planning, such as J (curve-hold), S (curve-hold-
curve) and curve-curve profiles.
standpipe A component of the surface equipment, the standpipe (and rotary hose) provide a flexible
connection that permits vertical movement of the drillstring.
state plane coordinate Coordinate system established by the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey for use in defining
system positions of points in terms of plane rectangular (x,y) coordinates.
steerable motor A positive displacement motor (PDM) that can be oriented or rotated as required, the steerable
motor allows deflection to occur in the wellbore.
straight-hole downhole A downhole motor designed to drill straight ahead. Usually a straight-hole motor is longer, larger,
motor and provides more torque than a directional downhole motor.
strike Horizontal orientation of the dip plane. The strike direction is always perpendicular to the dip
direction (steepest descent direction).
string reamer A downhole tool designed to increase the diameter of any keyseat through which it passes.
structure A drilling unit that is used to drill part or all of a field.

structure reference point The coordinate reference data assigned at the structure level. Can be used to position features
within the structure.
stuck pipe A condition whereby the drillpipe, casing, or any other device inadvertently becomes lodged in
the hole.
S -type profile (2-D or 3-D) A wellbore profile with two curve segments and a hold section in between.
surface casing The second string of casing in a wellbore that serves to case off unconsolidated formations and
aquifers found at relatively shallow depths. In addition to maintaining hole integrity, the surface
casing prevents the contamination of fresh groundwater by drilling fluids, subterranean brines,
oil, or gas.
surface equipment A combination of components in the circulatory system consisting of standpipe, hose, swivel
(washpipe and gooseneck), and kelly.
surge loss The flux of fluids and solids that occurs in the initial stages of any filtration before pore openings
are bridged and a filter cake is formed. Also called spurt loss.

Term Definition
survey Orderly process of determining data relating to any physical or chemical characteristics of the
earth.
survey data A data item or file containing the details of the well trajectory.
survey station A point in a wellbore defined by measurements obtained from a survey tool, generally measured
depth, inclination, and azimuth.
survey tool A device used to obtain survey values at a point in the wellbore.
swabbing A suction created when pipe is withdrawn from the hole in a viscous mud or if the bit is balled.
swivel A component of the surface equipment that contains roller bearings to support the rotating load of
the drillstring and a rotating pressure seal that allows fluid circulation through the swivel.
tandem squares Refers to the use of two or more stabilizers in one position in a bottom hole assembly.
tandem stabilizers Refers to the use of two or more stabilizers in one position in a bottom hole assembly.
tangential A survey computation method that computes the position of a second survey point from the
position of a first survey point by using only the inclination and azimuth of the second survey
point to determine the second survey point's position.
target A spatial region defined (planned) for wellbore intersection that consists of a centroidal location,
size, and shape.
target shape The 2-dimensional shape of the target.
thermally stable PDC A bit that has a similar cutting action to the standard PDC bit but is more tolerant to heat and cuts
(TSP) Bit much harder rock. The cutting element is smaller than a PDC bit, which results in smaller cuttings
and a slower rate of penetration.
thixotropy The ability of a fluid to develop gel strength with time. The property of a fluid that causes it to
build up a rigid or semi-rigid gel structure if allowed to stand at rest, yet can be returned to a fluid
state by mechanical agitation.
tieback stub liners A casing liner that extends from the top of an existing liner to a point uphole inside another
casing string. These liners are generally used to repair damaged, worn, corroded, or deliberately
perforated casing above the existing liner, and to provide additional protection against corrosion
or pressure.
tie-in point A station that defines the reference point for all subsequent stations.
tool face angle (TFA) The angle between the plane containing the bend angle of a bent housing mud motor and a
vertical plane through the lateral axis of the drillstring above the bend.
tool joint A drillpipe coupler consisting of a pin and box connection.
topographic error model A generic survey tool error model where inclination error is expressed as a function of inclination
(TERM) and azimuth error is expressed as a function of inclination and azimuth.
topography A configuration (relief) of the land surface with the graphic delineation or portrayal of the
configuration in map form.
torque The measure of force or effort applied to a shaft, causing it to rotate.
total depth (TD) The furthest extent of a wellbore. Also called the bottom hole location (BHL).
transitional flow A flow regime where the fluid motion is neither completely laminar or turbulent.
traveling cylinder plot A polar plot centered on the planned well that displays the intersections of the offset wells with
the selected projection plane (normal, horizontal, or 3-D) through a user-defined range of depth.
true vertical depth (TVD) The vertical depth of a point or feature measured from the same vertical reference point as that for
the measured depth (usually the kelly bushing).

Term Definition
turbodrill A downhole motor that uses a turbine for power to rotate the bit.
turbulent flow A type of fluid motion with unsteady motion of the fluid particles. The fluid moves in a random,
chaotic shearing motion.
turn rate (TR) The rate of change of a wellbore segment in the horizontal plane. It is measured by the rate of
change of the azimuth and is expressed as the degrees of change per a user-specified interval of
measured depth.
UBHO See Orienting Sub.
underreamer A downhole tool used for removing bridges and keyseats in the wellbore, opening directional
pilot holes, or opening the hole for casing below a BOP restriction.
Universal Transverse Military grid system based on the transverse Mercator projection. The UTM projection is applied
Mercator (UTM) grid to maps of the earth’s surface extending from the equator to 84° north and 80° south latitudes.
user catalog The customizable catalog of tools, drillstring components, and motors from which a PowerPlan
user builds a BHA.
velocity The time rate of motion in a given direction and sense that is used as a measure of the fluid flow
and may be expressed in terms of linear velocity, mass velocity, or volumetric velocity.
vertical datum The name given to the elevation of a reference point. All vertical distances relative to this
reference point are expressed as values above or below the vertical datum.
vertical section azimuth The orientation of the vertical plane upon which the vertical section view map is projected.
vertical section departure The distance of a survey point from the vertical section origin (as projected upon the vertical
plane) that is defined by the vertical section origin and the vertical section azimuth.
vertical section origin The local origin used to compute the vertical section departure.
VSP vertical seismic profile
vertical section view A Cartesian (x,y) plot of survey stations projected onto a vertical plane with one axis as true
vertical depth and the other as the vertical section departure.
VIPER A 2 7/8 in. wireline-steerable BHA for coiled tubing drilling and slimhole re-entry operations. It
incorporates an electrical disconnect, a telemetry tool, and an orienting tool. The measurements
provided by the telemetry tool are direction and inclination, gamma ray, external and internal
pressure, orienting tool position, casing joints detection, and motor stall indicator.
viscometer An apparatus used to determine the viscosity of a fluid or suspension.
void ratio The ratio of the void volume over the solid volume in the rock.
viscosity The internal resistance offered by a fluid to flow. This phenomenon is a measure of the combined
effects of adhesion and cohesion to the effects of suspended particles, and to the liquid
environment.
wall cake The solid material deposited along the wall of the hole resulting from filtration of the fluid part of
the mud into the formation.
water-base mud Common conventional drilling fluid that has water as the suspending medium for solids and is the
continuous phase, whether or not oil is present.
weight In mud terminology, this term refers to the density of a drilling fluid.
weight material Any of the higher specific gravity materials used to increase the density of drilling fluids.
weight on bit (WOB) The axi al force exerted by the bit.
welded-blade stabilizer Stabilizer with the blades welded to the body. The blades can be straight, straight-offset, or spiral.
Welded-blade stabilizers are not recommended in hard formations because of the risk of blade
fatigue, but are best suited to large hole sizes where the formation is softer because they allow the
use of maximum flowrates.
well A collection of all boreholes (wellbores) sharing the same surface position.

Term Definition
well geometry A data item or file containing the components that describe the geometry of the wellbore.
Well Information A funded project with the objective to develop standards to meet the requirements for efficient
Mapping to Epicentre electronic exchange and sharing of well operations and drilling information among business
(WIME) organizations and computer systems.
wellbore A path defined by a set of surveys extending from surface to TD. Also called a borehole.
wellhead The horizontal plane origin for all survey position calculations.
whipstock A device inserted in a wellbore used for deflecting or for directional drilling.
wildcat A well in unproven territory.
Wolff and deWardt Error Standard survey tool error model involving 6 parameters: relative depth error, misalignment,
Model inclination error, azimuth reference error, string magnetization, and gyro compass error. Each
type of survey tool has a set of these parameters for one sigma (standard deviation).
workover fluid Any type of fluid used during workover.
yield A term used to define the quality of a clay by describing the number of barrels of a given
viscosity (usually 15 cp) slurry that can be made from a ton of the clay.
yield point The shear stress at which a fluid starts to shear. Also called yield value.
YP-PV The yield point (YP) and plastic viscosity (PV) of the drilling fluid used in the Bingham
Rheological model.

Drilling - Dictionary en To en

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Drilling - Dictionary en To en

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

How to Use PowerPlan Schlumberger Schlumberger Schlumberger

Automatic Trajectory Design

Pore Pressure Window

How to Use This Manual

Schlumberger acknowledges the copyright ownership of the referenced materials within

Use of the following symbols indicates: *, Mark of Schlumberger; †, Mark of Halliburton;

Linked Table of Contents

Bookmarks and Hierarchies

Figure 1: Print dialog box.

Zooming in on Text and Graphics

Figure 2: Print dialog box.

Links to Internet URL’s

Schlumberger Oilfield Services

January 2002 Page 2 of 4 PowerPlan Technical Manual

January 2002 Page 3 of 4 PowerPlan Technical Manual

POWERPLAN TECHNICAL MANUAL

Objective of This Manual

Structure of This Manual

Feedback on This Manual

Sugar Land Product Center

January 2002 Page 4 of 4 PowerPlan Technical Manual

Schlumberger Oilfield Services

January 2002 Page 2 of 4 PowerPlan Technical Manual

January 2002 Page 3 of 4 PowerPlan Technical Manual

WELL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

! Dogleg limitations for tool capabilities?

January 2002 Page 4 of 4 PowerPlan Technical Manual

Schlumberger Oilfield Services

January 2002 Page 2 of 49 PowerPlan Technical Manual

DATA RELATIONSHIPS IN DATABROWSER LEVELS...........................................................................30

January 2002 Page 3 of 49 PowerPlan Technical Manual

What is the Standard Data Model (SDM)?

January 2002 Page 4 of 49 PowerPlan Technical Manual

Figure 3-1: Illustration of PowerPlan workflow.

January 2002 Page 5 of 49 PowerPlan Technical Manual

THE GEOFRAME DATABASE

DataBrowser can be used to perform the following functions:

INTRODUCTION TO DATA MODELING

What is a Data Model?

Data Modeling Standards

January 2002 Page 6 of 49 PowerPlan Technical Manual

What is the Standard Data Model?

PowerPlan implements the following entities:

January 2002 Page 7 of 49 PowerPlan Technical Manual

DATA MODEL HIERARCHY

Structure, Well, and Borehole Identification Data

Equipment Data Model

Casing Strings, Tubing, and Drill Pipe Strings

January 2002 Page 8 of 49 PowerPlan Technical Manual

Positioning and Coordinate Systems

January 2002 Page 9 of 49 PowerPlan Technical Manual

POSITIONING AND COORDINATE SYSTEMS OVERVIEW

A coordinate system in PowerPlan is defined by the following criteria:

January 2002 Page 10 of 49 PowerPlan Technical Manual

Latitude and Longitude / Parallels and Meridians

January 2002 Page 11 of 49 PowerPlan Technical Manual

Position point P is expressed in terms of

Figure 3-2: Standard geographic system of coordinates on the earth’s surface.

Points of Origin and the Prime Meridian

January 2002 Page 12 of 49 PowerPlan Technical Manual

Ellipsoids and Geodetic Datums

A geodetic datum usually consists of the following:

January 2002 Page 13 of 49 PowerPlan Technical Manual