Faculty of Science and Technology

BACHELOR’S THESIS

Study program/Specialization:

Petroleum Engineering - Drilling Spring semester, 2014

Open

Writer:

Ørjan Røstøen Bergum …………………………………………

(Writer’s signature)

Faculty supervisor: Runar Bøe, University of Stavanger

External supervisor: Erik Skaugen, University of Stavanger

Thesis title:

Load limitations on long reach drilling

Credits (ECTS): 15

Key words:

Long reach drilling Pages: 49

Deviation drilling + enclosure: 0

Drill string Load

Limitations on string well length Stavanger, 15.05.2014

Date/year

1
Abstract

As long reach drilling becomes more and more common in the oil industry, it is important to
be able to calculate and understand what limitations there is to this type of drilling. The
objective of this study has been to find out which forces plays a role on the drilling of long
reach deviation wells, find the limitations this might have, and ultimately find how far it is
possible to drill for specific drill strings.

In this study several long reach wells have been simulated by the use of calculations in
Microsoft Excel. The dataset for every well was then examined to see how the different forces
acting on the drill string, affects the limitation of the length.

The different loads that could limit the maximum distance possible to drill were a
combination of axial force, string inside mud pressure, torque load on drill pipe connections
and buckling of drill pipe. The actual limiting force and load turned out to differ for different
drill pipes.

The results of the study showed that the simulated long reach well could drill up to 9357
meters at an 74,1 degree angle, and even as long as 13028 meters if the friction coefficient
could be lowered to 0,15. It also revealed that the friction force, exceeding the safety factor
for make-up torque of the tool joints, is the main limitation to long reach drilling.

2
Table of contents
Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 2

Table of contents....................................................................................................................... 3

Nomenclature ............................................................................................................................ 6

1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 9

2. Theory ................................................................................................................................. 11

2.1 Offshore rigs .................................................................................................................. 11

2.1.1 Fixed rig .................................................................................................................. 11

2.1.2 Mobile floating rigs ................................................................................................ 11

2.2 Well paths ...................................................................................................................... 12

2.2.1 Vertical well ............................................................................................................ 12

2.2.2 Horizontal well (J-shaped) .................................................................................... 13

2.2.3 Long reach well (S-shaped) ................................................................................... 13

2.3 Drill Pipe ........................................................................................................................ 13

2.3.1 Size ........................................................................................................................... 14

2.3.2 Grade ....................................................................................................................... 14

2.3.3 Wear ........................................................................................................................ 14

2.3.4 Tool Joint ................................................................................................................ 15

2.3.5 Weight ..................................................................................................................... 16

2.4 Heavy weight drill pipe ................................................................................................ 16

2.5 Drill collar ..................................................................................................................... 16

2.5.1 Size ........................................................................................................................... 17

2.5.2 Weight ..................................................................................................................... 17

2.5.3 Joints ....................................................................................................................... 17

2.6 Drill bit........................................................................................................................... 18

2.7 Friction force ................................................................................................................. 18

2.7.1 Without rotation ..................................................................................................... 18

3
 2.7.2 With rotation .......................................................................................................... 19

2.7.3 Friction coefficient ................................................................................................. 20

2.8 Axial Force .................................................................................................................... 20

2.8.1 Real axial force ....................................................................................................... 20

2.8.2 Effective axial force ................................................................................................ 21

2.9 Torque ........................................................................................................................... 21

2.10 Pressure ....................................................................................................................... 22

2.11 Buckling ....................................................................................................................... 24

2.11.1 Sinusoidal .............................................................................................................. 24

2.11.2 Helical.................................................................................................................... 25

2.12 Safety factor ................................................................................................................ 26

3. Method................................................................................................................................. 28

3.1 Well simulation ............................................................................................................. 28

3.2 Calculations ................................................................................................................... 29

3.3 Chart .............................................................................................................................. 30

3.4 Drilling Data Handbook (DDH) .................................................................................. 30

3.4.1 Drill pipe ................................................................................................................. 31

3.4.2 Tool joint ................................................................................................................. 31

3.4.3 Drill collar ............................................................................................................... 31

3.5 Constants ....................................................................................................................... 32

3.6 Variables ........................................................................................................................ 33

4. Results ................................................................................................................................. 34

4.1 Drill pipes ...................................................................................................................... 35

4.2 Deviation angle .............................................................................................................. 39

4.3 Safety factors ................................................................................................................. 40

4.4 Contact friction coefficient .......................................................................................... 42

4.5 Maximum length ........................................................................................................... 43

4
 4.6 Buckling ......................................................................................................................... 44

5. Discussion of the results ..................................................................................................... 45

5.1 Drill pipe dimension ..................................................................................................... 45

5.2 Deviation angle .............................................................................................................. 45

5.3 Safety factors ................................................................................................................. 45

5.3.1 Combined safety factor .......................................................................................... 46

5.3.2 Axial force when tripping the string .................................................................... 46

5.3.3 Make-up torque ...................................................................................................... 46

5.4 Friction .......................................................................................................................... 47

5.5 Wall thickness ............................................................................................................... 47

5.6 Buckling ......................................................................................................................... 47

6. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 48

7. References ........................................................................................................................... 49

5
Nomenclature

Horizontal projection drill pipe, m

Horizontal projection drill collar, m

Total friction force without rotation, N

Axial friction force with rotation, N

g = Gravitational constant = 9,81 m/

6
k = buoyancy factor, dimensionless

Weight of drill pipe, kg/m

Weight of drill collar, kg/m

Axial friction coefficient for rotation = 0.1, dimensionless

, dimensionless

, dimensionless

7
 , bar

Density mud,

Density steel = 7850

μ = Contact friction coefficient, dimensionless

α = Deviation angle

8
1. Introduction

There are several reasons to why further development of long reach wells has become more
and more applicable. Drilling longer wells enables stationary platforms to reach reservoirs
that earlier was located too far away. This means the petroleum operators can connect
additional production wells to fewer platforms, thus save money on rig cost. It also means that
some remote reservoirs, that earlier was not economical viable to produce due to the
requirement of its own production platform, can be accessed. Areas where the reservoir is
located underneath cities or challenging terrain may, by long reach horizontal drilling, be
accessed without disturbing the surface. This also accounts for locations where environmental
factors demands minimum surface encroachments. For large reservoirs with low permeability,
long reach wells may decrease the required amount of wells needed to produce the reservoir.
New technology for drilling longer wells may also enable operators to reach reservoirs that at
the moment are physically out of reach for present equipment. By understanding what limits
the length of long reach wells, new equipment may be developed to increase drilling length.

To obtain the knowledge needed to conduct this study, a fair amount of literature was
gathered and explored. The basis of this came from the course “Boring” lectured at the
University of Stavanger. The theory written in this paper is therefore influenced by this
literature [1, 4], in addition to personal conversations with the author of the majority of these,
Professor Erik Skaugen [7].

Large portions of this study required simulating forces acting on a drill string and calculating
the effects this had on the length of the string. This was done by using the mathematical
program Microsoft Excel, as it would be to time-consuming to do all the calculations by hand.
All values used in the calculations were obtained from the Drilling Data Handbook (DDH)
[8], or from personal conversations with Professor Erik Skaugen [7].

Initiated by a brief introduction to the importance of long reach drilling in chapter 1, relevant
theory to the study is presented in chapter 2. The basic theory of subjects like well path, drill
pipe, drill collar, friction force, axial force, torque, pressure drop, safety factors and buckling
are reviewed here. The procedure used to conduct the calculations is explained in chapter 3,
while the actual spreadsheet, done in Microsoft Excel, are not included in this paper. In

9
chapter 4, the final results of the study are shown, and later discussed in chapter 5. Chapter 6
concludes the results found in this study.

10
2. Theory
The drilling of a well is a fairly complicated process with numerous aspects playing a role. In
this chapter the basics is described, and only relevant information to the study has been
included.

2.1 Offshore rigs [4]

Whilst drilling offshore, mainly two different types of platforms are being used, fixed rigs and
mobile rigs. Within these two categories there are several different versions/types, but I will
not go into more details on those.

Figure 2.1: Fixed platform to the left and mobile platform to the right. [4]

2.1.1 Fixed rig

A fixed rig is a platform permanently mounted on the seabed helped by long concrete or steel
legs. Due to the stability and weight ability of a fixed rig, it is largely used for drilling
production wells, and for production of oil and gas. In addition to being equipped to receive,
separate, prepare and transport the oil and gas, it is also equipped for other tasks production
may require, like mud pumps, mud treatment systems, derrick, storage tanks and often
accommodations.

2.1.2 Mobile floating rigs

Mobile platforms is a category of floating rigs held in place by chains, wire ropes or polyester
ropes anchored to the sea bottom. Due to its mobility, this type of rig if often moved around to

11
drill, and briefly produce, exploration wells, satellite wells, as well as drill new additional
production wells for fixed platforms. On smaller oil fields with short production time, fixed
platforms are sometimes not economical. In these cases mobile platforms may also be used
for production.

2.2 Well paths [1, 4, 7]

In the earlier years of drilling the wells were always drilled vertically, at least that was the
intention. The reality was that whilst drilling through alternating angled layers and different
density material the drill bit had a tendency to deviate from the planned vertical trajectory.
Whilst it presented a problem that made the wells longer and less accurate at that time, it
opened the doors to non-vertical wells, or what is known today as deviation wells.

Figure 2.2: Different types of well paths. [4]

2.2.1 Vertical well

As the vertical wells not always went in a straight line as planned, but sometimes deviated to
either side, a solution to correct the angle of trajectory was invented in the form of a
whipstock. The whipstock is an angled wedge designed to be placed in the bottom of the well
to force the drill bit back in the right direction. This whipstock could often be used several
times in a single well, and as a result, the well would end up with several bends around a
vertical axis, called doglegs.

12
 Figure 2.3: Showing how a whipstock works. [4]

2.2.2 Horizontal well (J-shaped)

The J-shaped well path starts out as a vertical well, gradually deviates towards the acquired
depth and direction, before finally penetrating the reservoir horizontally along its whole
length, or parts of it. This is may be beneficial if the reservoir is long and thin, and with low
horizontal permeability. In such a case, a long reach well can be more costly than a vertical
well, but at the same time fewer horizontal wells may be needed to cover the same area. This
may, in the long run, become considerably more economical for an oil company.

2.2.3 Long reach well (S-shaped)

Whilst the J-shaped wells penetrate the reservoir horizontally, the S-shaped wells are long
reaching horizontal wells targeting to penetrate from a more vertical angle. It starts out
vertical in the beginning before angling towards the reservoir and straightening out again. The
aim is to reach the reservoir just overhead, before directing the well more vertically to
penetrate the reservoir from above. This allows the platform to reach multiple distant
reservoirs that may be beneficial to penetrate more vertically instead of horizontally.

2.3 Drill Pipe [1, 4, 7, 8]

A drill string is built up of several different components. The drill bit is located at the bottom
end of the string, and is connected to the drill collars. The drill collars are then connected to
the drill pipes that make up the rest of the drill string, all the way up through the blow out
preventer and up to the drill floor. The longest section of a drill string consists of drill pipes.
These are connected together with conical threaded joints.

13
 Figure 2.4: Sketch of the drill string to the left and the BHA to the right with all its components. [4]

2.3.1 Size
The drill pipe is approximately 30 foot long, but is usually pre mounted to form 90 feet long
sections to save rig time and expenses. Outer diameter of the pipe varies from 2 3/8” to 6 5/8”
whilst inner diameter is 1.995” - 5.901”. In the North Sea, outer diameters ranging from 4
1/2” to 6 5/8” are most commonly used.

2.3.2 Grade
At present-day it is primarily operated with 4 different grades of steel in the pipes, categorized
by its yield limit. As technology gradually improves and allows for better and stronger steel,
so does the yield limit. The four types are E(75), X95, G105 and S135. The numbers show the
pipe’s yield limit in 1000 pounds per square inch (psi).

2.3.3 Wear
Even though the pipes are made of high quality steel, over time they will get some scratches,
bruises and other damages, and get worn. This will gradually affect the pipe strength and
thereby its yield limit. On the background of this, the pipes are frequently inspected for wear
every time the drill string is tripped out of the well. To guarantee that the pipes always meet
the demanded yield limit, they are classified by the amount of wear and sorted into four
classes. New and undamaged drill pipes are classified as class I, or “new”. Once the pipes has

14
been used, and picked up a few dents and bruises, it is downgraded to “Premium class”. In
this class it is assumed that the wall thickness and thus yield limit has decreased by 20 percent
of original value. If a pipes walls is found to be less than 80 percent of the original wall
thickness, or has other more severe damages like cuts longer than 10 percent of its
circumference or deformations larger than 3 percent of outer diameter, the pipe it downgraded
to “class II”. Any pipe with walls reduced to less than 70 percent, is classified as “class III”,
discarded and is found not fit for use in the North Sea. Any pipe with signs of material fatigue
is instantly categorized “class III”.

2.3.4 Tool Joint

Tool joints are used to connect two pipes together. The tool joints are fitted with conical
threads, to allow for a minimum amount of turns to make up a connection. To ensure that the
otherwise vulnerable threads does not become the weakest point of the string, the tool joints
are also a fair bit larger, and with thicker walls, than the drill pipe, and is welded in place. As
the outer diameters of the joints are larger than those of the pipes, and with thicker walls, the
joints protect the weaker pipes from a great deal of wear from the surrounding formation or
casing. All the tool joints are made of the same grade with a yield limit of 120 000 psi, with
the result that, for any pipe diameter, stronger joints results in larger outer diameters, thicker
walls and accordingly are heavier.

Figure 2.5: Sketch of a conical threaded connection of the tool joint on a drill pipe to the left, and a
drill collar to the right. [4]

15
2.3.5 Weight
The weight of the drill pipe is measured in mass per length, more specific in lb/ft or kg/m.
Due to the wide range of inner and outer diameters in different combinations available, the
nominal weight of the pipes varies. The steel density is more or less the same for every steel
grade and wear. Accordingly, the nominal weight of the pipes reflects the volume of steel in
the pipes. Although the weight of the pipes themselves are available, it is the weight of the
pipe and tool joint combined that is used for calculations.

2.4 Heavy weight drill pipe [2, 8]

Heavy weight drill pipe (HWDP) is an intermediate between a drill pipe and a drill collar.
Being heavier and stronger than equally sized drill pipes, and the opposite to drill collars, it is
often used as a transition between these two parts of the drill string. As the lower section of
the drill pipes, connected to the BHA, is more exposed to wear, and occasionally sees fatigue
failures, the HWDP provides improved strength to this section, in addition to larger WOB if
needed.

2.5 Drill collar [1, 4, 7, 8]

Together with the drill bit the drill collar is located at the bottom part of the drill string, also
called the bottom hole assembly (BHA). The function of the drill collar is many.

First and foremost it houses the many different measuring tools run while drilling the well, as
well as carrying stabilizers, reamers etc.

Secondly it provides in many cases a necessary weight on bit (WOB) recommended to be

around 30 – 600kN depending on the drill bit. As with a regular drill, the drill bit is not
capable of “cutting” through the formation without some amount of applied pressure or
downward force, a required WOB. The weight of the string and BHA provides a natural
downward force to the formation in angled or vertical wells, allowing the drill bit to drill its
way through the formation. By attaching heavy drill collars to the bottom section of the
string, the WOB can be matched to the acquired force. Whilst drilling horizontally this force
may have to be applied by pushing the string from the rig due to the lesser gravitational help.

Third are the compression forces. A normal drill pipe may not manage to withstand the
compression forces that occur when applying the wanted WOB. The thinner walls of the drill
pipe could risk buckling under the compressional forces produced by the acquired WOB. As a
safety margin to prevent possible buckling, it is standard to drill with a collar long enough for

16
the compressional force to reach no longer than 2/3 up the drill collar, leaving 1/3 of the
collar, and the complete length of the string, in axial tension.

2.5.1 Size
With lengths of approximately 30 feet, the outer diameter (OD) of drill collars ranges from 2
7/8” - 14”, with inner diameters (ID) of 1” to 4”. For every outer dimension, 3 to 13 different
IDs, in increments of ¼”, are available. In the North Sea it is however more common to use
collars with a minimum of 6” OD. When choosing drill collars, mud flow has to be taken into
account. With commonly used flow rate, collars with ID less than 3” should be avoided
because it causes too much flow resistance inside the pipe. Also outside the pipe, a minimum
of 2” difference in well diameter and collar is preferable to allow for optimal mud flow back
to the rig. Lengthwise it is commonly used a 50 to 200 meters long collar on a string, though
its absolute limit is in the range of 41 to 495 meters due to internal equipment.

2.5.2 Weight
As with the drill pipes, the drill collars are measured in either lb/ft or kg/m depending.
Ranging from 24 - 750 kg/m, the weight proportionally reflects the thickness of the wall and
can be found in a table as a function of outer and inner diameter.

2.5.3 Joints
The drill collars also have conical treaded joints as is the case with the drill pipes. However
whereas the joints on the drill pipes have larger OD than the pipes and is welded on, the
threads in the collars is machined directly into the pipe, giving the joints the same OD as the
collars. Another reason for the joints and collars to have the same OD is the narrow spacing
between well diameter and OD of the collar. As mentioned earlier, this difference can be as
low as two inches. Wider joints on already wide collars could potentially cause serious mud
flow restrictions in annulus. The drill pipe joints are made in a dimension that makes them
able to handle more axial tension and pressure, than the pipes. This is not the case with the
collar joints. Even though the collar joints are the weakest part of the collars, they are not as
vulnerable to axial tension, torque and pressure loading, because these forces are considerably
larger at the top of the string, whereas the collars are located at the bottom. Dynamic loads are
a far bigger problem for the collar joints. Shocks and vibrations at the bottom of the string
making the collar joints break, has often been a source of string failures, but has recently been
easier to handle due to down hole monitoring technology, allowing for optimal settings of
parameters to reduce these dynamic forces.

17
2.6 Drill bit [1, 4, 7]
There are several different types of drill bits used for petroleum drilling these days. The three
most commonly used bit types are: roller cone bit, diamond bit and PDC (Polycrystalline
Diamond Compact) bit. The roller cone bit has three conical rollers, with steel or hard metal
teethes that crushes the formation under the pressure provided by the WOB. The diamond bit
on the other hand has no moving parts. This is a bit made of hard metal, often tungsten
carbide, with industrial grade diamonds integrated or impregnated in the metal. This enables
the bit to grind or scrape off the formation, instead of crushing it. As with the diamond bit, the
PDC bit also has no movable part. The bit is, also here, made of hard metal but with several
polycrystalline diamond edges that cuts or slices the formation. In high deviation drilling,
PCD drill bits are most commonly used as it cuts through the formation instead of crushing it,
requiring less WOB than the other drill bits.

Figure 2.6: Demonstration of how a roller cone bit to the left and a PDC bit to the right have two
different ways of drilling through the formation. [4]

2.7 Friction force [1, 3, 4, 7]

When drilling deviated wells, the bending of the string will make the string touch the
surrounding formation or casing from the point it first starts to deviate ,creating a contact
friction force acting opposite of the axial force of the string. As contact friction forces are
solely dependent on the normal force of the string, and the friction factor of the two
contacting materials, this force is essentially dependent on the strings weight component
normal to the wall of the well.

2.7.1 Without rotation

Without rotating the drill string, the friction force is as mentioned acting opposite of the axial
trajectory of the string. While the friction force acts as a positive effect on the effective axial
18
force when the string is lowered, it can, on highly deviating wells, give a massive increase in
axial force when the string is pulled out of the well. Also too much friction force may in
deviation wells prevent getting the acquired WOB, thus the string has to be pushed from the
top. Normally, the only situation where the string is not rotated is when the string is pulled
back up after drilling, meaning stationary friction force will not apply when actually drilling.

( ) (2.1)

(2.2)

Total friction force without rotation, N

Horizontal projection drill pipe, m

Horizontal projection drill collar, m

Weight of drill pipe, kg/m

Weight of drill collar, kg/m

g = Gravitational constant = 9,81 m/

k = buoyancy factor, dimensionless

μ = Contact friction coefficient, dimensionless

Density mud,

Density steel = 7850

2.7.2 With rotation

While drilling, it’s customary to rotate the drill string at around 60-120 RPM. Rotating the
string is a way of decreasing the friction forces axially to the string. Without making the string
lighter there is no way of physically lower the magnitude, but it’s possible to change its
direction. By rotating the string, almost all of the force changes from being axial to become
tangential. Calculations show that around 100 percent of the total friction force acting on the
string, will with rotation, act in a torsional direction, whilst only about 1 percent acts axially.
In reality it’s not quite so simple. This equation assumes a straight and smooth well path,
which is rarely the case when drilling. There will always be “bumps” and irregularities in the

19
well that acts as edges or obstacles that the drill collar and tool joint has to get over,
increasing the axial contribution to an estimated 5-10 percent.

(2.3)

Axial friction force with rotation, N

Axial friction coefficient for rotation = 0.1, dimensionless

2.7.3 Friction coefficient

In this paper it is operated with two different friction coefficients, contact friction coefficient,
and axial friction coefficient for rotation. The contact friction coefficient is as mentioned a
factor of forces acting between two materials in contact. The axial friction coefficient
represents the ratio of total contact friction force acting in the axial direction.

2.8 Axial Force [1, 4, 5, 7]

2.8.1 Real axial force

The axial component of the string weight is known as the axial force. This is usually
calculated at the top of the string, because the uppermost part has to carry the whole weight of
the string, thus this is where it is largest. In a general well, the whole section of drill pipes is
basically hanging from the top drive, whilst around 2/3 of the collar is aimed to rest on the
bottom of the well. This lets the drill string, which can withstand a lot of downward force
(tension) but less upward force (compression), hang in tension, whilst parts of the collar,
which can withstand more compression, is in compression. By letting part of the string rest on
the drill bit one can achieve not only the desired WOB, but also lower the axial force as the
WOB acts as an negative (opposite) force. This is also the case in deviated wells, except that
some of the axial force changes to friction force due to the string resting on the inside of the
well. As one can see from the formula, it is not the length of the string, but true vertical depth
that is the foundation for the axial force.

( ) (2.4)

20
2.8.2 Effective axial force
The downwards axial force defined as positive, is not the only vertical force acting while
drilling a well. Effective axial force is the sum of vertical forces acting at a specified point in
the string, usually at the top, meaning that all tensile and compressional forces have to be
taken into account. If the effective axial force becomes larger than what the pipes tolerate, the
string might tear off. Defining the axial force as positive, the opposing negative forces are
WOB, nozzle force and friction force, all of whom helps pushing the string upwards, resulting
in lower axial force. According to Newton’s third law of motion, the weight on bit acting on
the formation creates an equal but opposing force on the string. The friction force always acts
opposite of the axial force as mentioned earlier, while the nozzle force is created by the
velocity of mud flowing through nozzles at the bottom of the drill bit. The nozzle force is
mainly used for other purposes than to reduce effective axial force. In addition to clean the
well floor and drill bit for cuttings, and transporting it to the surface, it cools the drill bit and
helps reduce friction.

(2.5)

(2.6)

2.9 Torque [1, 4, 6, 7, 8]

Torque or moment of force, is the rotating force of an object at a distance from its center.
Friction force times distance from centerline. This force is usually calculated at the top of the

21
string where the sum of all torsional components is largest. If the sum of torque at the top
exceeds that of the pipes or tool joints limit, it might result in the string twisting off. When the
drill string is rotated, torque is created as the string is in contact with the surrounding
formation. This usually happens in the drill bit, BHA and tool joints, because this is the
sections with the largest outer diameters. As mentioned before, 100 percent of the total
friction force acts in a tangential direction when the string is rotated. It is therefore common to
use the full friction force when calculating torque. On a drill string, this has to be calculated
separately for the drill pipe section and drill collar, as the outer diameter of the tool joints and
collar rarely are the same, thus affects the torque. The torque from the drill bit much more
complicated to calculate but is usually given for every type of drill bit. This formula assumes
that the only parts of the string in contact with the surroundings is the drill bit, collar and tool
joint, which is not always the case. Depending on the angle of deviation, parts of the thinner
drill pipe mays also come in contact with the formation, resulting in somewhat less torque.

(2.7)

( ) (2.8)

2.10 Pressure [1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8]

When drilling there are several different important pressures and pressure drops to take into
account. In this subject, only the total pressure drop in the well is considered as the static
pressure inside the string created by the mud column, equals the static pressure of mud in
annulus. The total pressure drop is an indication of what the mud pump, used to circulate the
mud, has to deliver, and what the pipes has to withstand without bursting. When fluid flows
through a change in diameter, pressure is either created of lost depending on the change. Both
inside the drill string and outside in the annulus, friction between the mud and its surrounding
22
material produces a pressure loss in the flow direction referred to as pressure friction drop.
This pressure drop due to friction is highly dependent of the space of which the fluid can flow
freely. The narrower the space, the larger the friction drop. Because the string has different ID
through the pipe, collar and drill bit, these sections has to be calculated separately. The
pressure friction drop in the drill bit is due to the increase in mud velocity when diameter
changes from the larger ID of the collar to the smaller nozzle diameter.

(2.9)

, bar

( )
(2.10)

( )
(2.11)

( )
(2.12)

23
2.11 Buckling [7, 8, 9]
Buckling of the drill string may occur when compression forces on the drill pipe becomes too
high. In case of buckling there are two areas of the string where buckling is more likely to
occur, just below the connection between section (L2-L3) and just above (L3-L4) as seen on
figure 3.1.

Figure 2.7: Drawing of Sinusoidal and helical buckling in drill pipe. [9]

2.11.1 Sinusoidal
Sinusoidal buckling makes the pipe buckle in a two-dimensional sinusoidal pattern. This
occurs when the effective axial force, at a point in the string, becomes highly negative
(compression) and exceeds the critical limit of what the pipe can handle. Even though this
type of buckling can be tolerated in a well, it can cause some problems with weight transfer to
the bit.

24
 √
(2.13)

( ) (2.14)

(2.15)

(2.16)

2.11.2 Helical
Helical buckling creates a more spiral shaped pattern. This occurs when the compressive
forces exceeds the pipes limit for sinusoidal limit by a helical factor of 1.83. Helical buckling
is not tolerated because it can lead to helical lockup which inhibits surface forces to be
transferred to the bit.

(2.17)

25
2.12 Safety factor [1, 2, 4, 7, 9]
Safety factors are a way for the oil companies to make sure they do not exceed the yield limits
of the equipment used. This is done by combining the ratio of yield limit to actual force for
components exerting forces on the string, like pressure, tension and torsion. When this
combined ratio equals 1 it means the strings yielding limit has been reached. To have some
tolerance, the ratio should never become lower than 1.5, giving a 50 percent tolerance for
errors. Even though the combined safety factor is met, failure can still happen due to other
parameters exceeding their limit. These parameters are: axial force when tripping the string,
string inside mud pressure, torque load on the drill pipe connections and helical buckling of
the drill pipe.

(2.18)
| |
√( ) ( ) ( )

(2.19)

(2.20)

(2.21)

(2.22)

26
 | |
(2.23)

(2.24)

, dimensionless

, dimensionless

Figure 2.8: Drawing of Tensional and Torsional yielding in drill pipe. [9]

27
3. Method [7]

3.1 Well simulation

When doing calculations on a deviation well, the drill pipe has to be divided into sections for
more precise calculations. On this particularly well example used, the drill pipe has been
divided into three sections (L1, L2, L3) while the collar is the fourth section (L4). It was also
important to obtain the vertical and horizontal projections for all 4 sections, here represented
by the letter (h) for the vertical projection of all four sections, and the letter (a) for the
horizontal projection. As the section L1 always remains vertical, this has no horizontal
projection. To simplify the calculations somewhat, the length of section (L1) and (L2) has
been held constant, while section (L2) has varied as a function of deviation angle and arc
radius where the latter has been kept constant. The horizontal and vertical lengths have varied
with deviation angle.

Figure 3.1: Sketch showing how the drill string is sectioned.

28
Horizontal projection:

- (3.1)
- (3.2)
- (3.3)
- (3.4)

Vertical Projection:

- (3.5)
- (3.6)
- (3.7)
- (3.8)
- (3.9)

Axial projection:

- (3.10)
- (3.11)

α = Deviation angle

R = Arc radius

3.2 Calculations
For obvious reasons this would take too long to do for hand, and a calculation program was
needed. Both Matlab and Mathematica were considered, but in the end, the choice fell on
Excel. This was because excel is fairly easy to use and learn, while it also provides a simple
and orderly overview. In excel I started off by making an input section where all variables and
constants were added, before all the formulas was written and linked to the respective values
in the input section. An output section could then be created with all of the different yield
limits. This made it possible to adjust every single variable and immediately se the effect it
had on the drill string. The bigger problem was to effectively calculate how long the well
could be before the any of the yield limits was reached. This proved to be a massively
complicated backwards calculation from the safety factor equations (2.18, 2.22 – 2.24), also it
would be difficult to know which of the four limitations would yield first, thus define the

29
maximum string length. The solution to this was to vary the input length of section L3 until I
manually could see at which length, angle and limitation the string yielded.

Figure 3.2: Picture showing how Excel was used to calculate data.

3.3 Chart
With several hundred different values produced from the Excel calculations, charts were
chosen to best visualize and present the results. After data points were produced for every
research question, they were plotted into combined charts in excel, making the data much
more organized and easier to read.

3.4 Drilling Data Handbook (DDH) [8]

The eight edition of Gilles Gabolde and Jean-Paul Nguyen’s Drilling Data Handbook was
used to gather data on the drill strings different components. All of the data listed below was
written down in a table in excel to simplify the process of changing from on drill pipe to
another while calculating.

30
3.4.1 Drill pipe
For every size, only new pipes with the best steel grade were considered in this paper.

Data obtained from DDH for the different drill pipes:

- Outer diameter
- Inner diameter
- Nominal weight
- Weight including tool joint
- Torsional yield strength
- Tensional yield strength
- Burst pressure
- Class
- Steel grade

3.4.2 Tool joint

For every size, only the strongest tool joint were considered in this paper.

Data obtained from DDH for the different tool joints:

- Outer diameter
- Inner diameter
- Type of tool joint
- Upset and grade
- Make-up torque

3.4.3 Drill collar

As For every size, only one drill collar was considered in this paper.

Data obtained from DDH for the drill collar:

- Outer diameter
- Inner diameter
- Weight

31
3.5 Constants [7, 8]
To make calculations easier, some constants had to be set.

- Well diameter:
In the North Sea it is common to drill 8” to 12 ¼” wells. Here a 12 ¼” well has been
chosen as constant.
- Collar:
When drilling with different pipe and bit dimensions, collars with outer diameter of 6”
or 8” is most common in the North Sea depending on what monitoring equipment is
needed. Here an 8” drill collar with inner diameter of 4” and a weight of 190,83
was chosen as constant.
- Section lengths:
The lengths of section (L1) and (L4) could be varied, but was kept constant to simplify
the results. The vertical section (L1) was set to 400 meters whilst the drill collar (L4)
was set to a near minimum 80 meters. As 80 meters of drill collar in some angles is
not enough to produce wanted WOB, it is assumed the string is pushed downwards by
the weight of more vertical section of the drill string.
- Weight on bit:
Weight on bit is highly depending of the type and size of the drill bit but is usually in
the interval of 30-600 kN. After communication with Erik Skaugen, WOB was set to
be 30 kN.
- Volume flow of mud:
The volume flow of mud is always calculated for every combination of pipe, collar
and bit to minimize friction pressure drop while maintaining high enough nozzle
velocity. Volume flow of mud is therefore set to 2000 l/min.
- Nozzle velocity:
To sufficiently clean the well floor and drill bit as well as transport cuttings, Statoil
recommends a velocity no less than 100 m/s. This is therefore chosen as constant.
- Mud density:
Which mud density used when drilling varies from 1100 to 1500
depending on the pressure it has to suppress. Here 1300 was chosen as
constant.
- Mud viscosity:

32
 Mud viscosity has a large effect on the friction pressure drop and is optimal to keep as
low as possible while still being high enough to transport cuttings. This value is
normally obtained in the lab when optimizing mud for every specific well, and was
therefore set to 15cP.
- Bit torque:
Bit torque is dependent on formation, WOB, and type and size of drill bit, amongst
some factors. For these calculations, bit torque was set to be 10kNm.

3.6 Variables
- Length:
The length of section (L3) is the main variable for these calculations. As it became too
complicated to calculate backwards from the four safety factor equations to see how
long it was possible to drill, with a specific pipe, within its respective safety factor, the
length of section (L3) had to be varied instead until the one or more of the yield limits
was reached. It was then possible to record the maximum string length for the
variation of drill pipes tested.
- Deviation angle:
As the deviation angle greatly affects tensional and torsional forces, it was important
to test the different pipes at several angles between 60 and 90 degrees. By finding the
string length at which the different safety factor was exceeded, it was made possible to
see how axial force, torque and pressure contributed to the combined safety factor and
the maximum string length. An optimum deviation angle and length for a specific
string could also be found.
- Contact friction factor:
The friction coefficient were kept constant at 0,23 for most of the calculations, except
for when testing the friction factors contribution on string length in highly deviated
wells. At those calculations friction coefficients ranging from 0,15 to 0,30 with an
increment of 0,05 was tested.

33
4. Results
For these calculations five of the most commonly used drill pipes sizes in the North Sea was
selected and tested, (4”, 4 ½”, 5”, 5 ½”, 6 5/8”). Also only (New) pipes with the strongest tool
joint and best steel grade available was tested, as these evidently got the best potential for
longest possible drilling. The 5 1/2“ drill pipe used, has a nominal weight of 24,70 lb/ft not
25,20 lb/ft as written in the graphs.

Tensional yield refers to exceeding the tensional safety factor when the string is tripped
without rotation. Torsional yield refers to torsional yielding of the tool joints (make-up
torque).

The results are displayed as charts with explanations on the following pages.

34
4.1 Drill pipes
The 5 different pipe sizes were tested to see at which length it yielded on any of the critical
limits.

60 degree angle

Figure 4.1: Chart showing string length and safety factors at 60 degree deviation angle.
Tensional yield refers to exceeding the tensional safety factor when the string is tripped
without rotation. Torsional yield refers torsional yield in the tool joints (make-up torque).

The results reveal that the pipes first exceeded different safety factors (SF). The three smallest
pipes first exceeded the combined SF, while the two larger pipes exceeded the SF for
tensional yield when tripping the string.

- 5” 25,60 lb/ft S135 FH: 8045m Exceeds combined SF

- 5 1/2“ 24,70 lb/ft S135 FH: 7589m Exceeds tensional SF
- 4 1/2“ 20, 00 lb/ft S135 NC50(IF): 7212m Exceeds combined SF
- 6 5/8” 27,70 lb/ft S135 FH: 7094m Exceeds tensional SF
- 4” 14,00 lb/ft S135 NC46(IF): 5596m Exceeds combined SF

8045m – 5596m = 2449m

35
Results showing that the best pipe (5”) could drill a mere 2449 meters longer than the worst
pipe (4”) in a 60 degree deviation well.

70 degree angle

Figure 4.2: Chart showing string length and safety factors at 70 degree deviation angle.

For a 70 degree deviation we see that it is possible to drill 728 meters longer than for a 60
degree deviation. The restrictions are a mix of torsional, tensional and combined SF.

- 5 1/2“ 24,70 lb/ft S135 FH: 8773m Exceeds torsional SF

- 6 5/8” 27,70 lb/ft S135 FH: 8703m Exceeds tensional SF
- 5” 25,60 lb/ft S135 FH: 7933m Exceeds torsional SF
- 4 1/2“ 20, 00 lb/ft S135 NC50(IF): 7403m Exceeds torsional SF
- 4” 14,00 lb/ft S135 NC46(IF): 5779m Exceeds combined SF

8773m – 5779m = 2994m

Results showing that the best pipe (5 1/2”) could drill a mere 2994 meters longer than the
worst pipe (4”) in a 70 degree deviation well.

36
 80 degree angle

Figure 4.3: Chart showing string length and safety factors at 80 degree deviation angle.

For an 80 degree deviation we see that the maximum string length is 93 meters shorter than
for a 70 degree deviation. The restrictions are now totally dominated by the torsional yield
limit.

- 6 5/8” 27,70 lb/ft S135 FH: 8680m Exceeds torsional SF

- 5 1/2“ 24,70 lb/ft S135 FH: 8406m Exceeds torsional SF
- 5” 25,60 lb/ft S135 FH: 7604m Exceeds torsional SF
- 4 1/2“ 20, 00 lb/ft S135 NC50(IF): 7092m Exceeds torsional SF
- 4” 14,00 lb/ft S135 NC46(IF): 6000m Exceeds combined SF

8680m – 6000m = 2680m

Results showing that the best pipe (6 5/8”) could drill a mere 2680 meters longer than the
worst pipe (4”) in an 80 degree deviation well.

37
 90 degree angle

Figure 4.4: Chart showing string length and safety factors at 90 degree deviation angle.

For a 90 degree deviation we see that the maximum string length is 119 meters shorter than
for an 80 degree deviation. The restrictions are now totally dominated by the torsional yield
limit.

- 6 5/8” 27,70 lb/ft S135 FH: 8561m Exceeds torsional SF

- 5 1/2“ 24,70 lb/ft S135 FH: 8290m Exceeds torsional SF
- 5” 25,60 lb/ft S135 FH: 7501m Exceeds torsional SF
- 4 1/2“ 20, 00 lb/ft S135 NC50(IF): 6994m Exceeds torsional SF
- 4” 14,00 lb/ft S135 NC46(IF): 6124m Exceeds torsional SF

8561m – 6124m = 2473m

Results showing that the best pipe (6 5/8”) could drill a mere 2437 meters longer than the
worst pipe (4”) in a 90 degree deviation well.

38
4.2 Deviation angle
It is clear from the string lengths at the different angles that the maximum length for every
pipe increases with increasing deviation angle, until it at a certain angle starts decreasing. For
this well example, there should therefore exist an optimum deviation angle for every drill
pipe.

Figure 4.5: Maximum string length as a function of deviation angle.

When plotting string length against deviation angle one can see the drill pipes have got a
maximum length at an angle that is not revealed in the previous results.

- 6 5/8” 27,70 lb/ft S135 FH: 8991m angle: 71,3 degrees

- 5 1/2“ 24,70 lb/ft S135 FH: 8851m angle: 68,5 degrees
- 5” 25,60 lb/ft S135 FH: 8257m angle: 64,1 degrees
- 4 1/2“ 20, 00 lb/ft S135 NC50(IF): 7504m angle: 67,8 degrees
- 4” 14,00 lb/ft S135 NC46(IF): 6132m angle: 93,1 degrees

8991m – 6132m = 2859m

39
4.3 Safety factors
In the previous results, optimum angle deviates for the different pipes. By plotting the
deviation angle and length at which a pipe exceeds its safety factor for torsional, tensional and
combined SF yield, one clearly sees the pipes limitation at a certain length and angle.

6 5/8” 27,70 lb/ft S135 FH

Figure 4.6: Safety factor limitations as a function of length and angle for a 6 5/8”
27,70 lb/ft S135 FH drill pipe.

For this 6 5/8 inch pipe, the combined safety factor does not play any part on the strings
maximum length, as its limitation is where the tensional and combined safety factor meets.
For this particular string, its limitation will always be either the tensional or torsional safety
factor, depending on the deviation angle.

- A deviation angle of 60 to 71,3 degrees, the length is restricted to the tensional safety
factor.

40
 - A deviation angle of 71,3 to 90 degrees, the length is restricted to the torsional safety
factor.

5 1/2“ 24,70 lb/ft S135 FH

Figure 4.7: Safety factor limitations as a function of length and angle for a 5 1/2“ 24,70 lb/ft
S135 FH drill pipe.

- A deviation angle of 60 to 64,1 degrees, the length is restricted to the combined safety
factor.
- A deviation angle of 64,1 to 90 degrees, the length is restricted to the torsional safety
factor.

41
4.4 Contact friction coefficient
From the previous results, the maximum string length in highly deviated wells is mainly
restricted by the torsional SF. From equation 2.8 it is clear that the constant friction
coefficient affects the torsional force.

Figure 4.8: The effect of constant friction coefficient on string length as a function of
deviation angle.

In the graph above it is evident that lower contact friction coefficients results in longer wells,
and that maximum string length is reached with lowest possible constant friction coefficient at
optimum deviation angle, shown by the peaks of the graphs.

- 13028m
- 10084m
- 8991m
- 8365m
- 7107m

42
4.5 Maximum length
On the basis of earlier results and equation 2.8, the limiting tensional force depends heavily
on the weight of the drill pipe. As all of the tested drill pipes come with the option of thinner
pipe walls and therefore less weight, this had to be tested also. Thinner walls gives lighter
pipes, and thus less torque, but weaker to bursting. As the pressure drop ratio has been no less
than 2 time the recommended safety factor for any of the pipes, this was thought to not be an
issue. The pipe tested was a 6 5/8” 25,20 lb/ft S135 FH.

Figure 4.9: Maximum string length and its safety factor limitations for a 6 5/8” 25,20 lb/ft
S135 FH drill pipe.

As can be seen from the graph, thinner walls resulted in an increased string length before
exceeding the safety factors.

- 6 5/8” 25,20 lb/ft S135 FH 9357m angle: 74,1 degrees

Values from earlier results:

- 6 5/8” 27,70 lb/ft S135 FH: 8991m angle: 71,3 degrees

- 5 1/2“ 24,70 lb/ft S135 FH: 8851m angle: 68,5 degrees
- 5” 25,60 lb/ft S135 FH: 8257m angle: 64,1 degrees

43
 - 4 1/2“ 20, 00 lb/ft S135 NC50(IF): 7504m angle: 67,8 degrees
- 4” 14,00 lb/ft S135 NC46(IF): 6132m angle: 93,1 degrees

4.6 Buckling
Because sinusoidal buckling is accepted while drilling, the strings have only been tested
against helical buckling. Throughout the testing all of the strings, helical buckling was never
an issue in either of the two critical places (just above drill collar (L3-L4) and just below the
deviation point (L2-L3), see figure 3.1.

Critical axial force calculated for a 6 5/8 inch drill pipe with a contact friction coefficient of
0,23.

- 90 degree angle: - 472 kN

- 70 degree angle: - 457 kN
- 50 degree angle: - 413 kN
- 30 degree angle: - 333 kN
- 10 degree angle: - 196 kN

Effective axial force calculated at maximum string length for a 6 5/8 inch drill pipe with a
contact friction coefficient of 0,23.

- 90 degree angle: - 102 kN

- 70 degree angle: 952 kN

Calculations show that the pipe can handle significantly less compressional force when
drilling at lower angles than at higher angles, but that the risk of getting compressional force
in the drill pipe is larger in high deviation drilling.

44
5. Discussion of the results

5.1 Drill pipe dimension [7, 8]

From the Driller Data Handbook (DDH) it is clear that larger sized drill pipes have higher
yielding limits. This could at first thought imply that larger sized drill pipes would make for
longer strings in any deviation angle. The results were therefore somewhat surprising, because
it showed that this was not always the case. For lower angles, it was neither the largest nor the
smallest of the tested sizes that drilled the furthest, but the ones in between. The reason for
this is many, but mostly a combination of several factor that I will discuss in specific later on.
When drilling at different angles with different pipes and lengths, there are different
limitations that come into play. As deviation angle increases, the main limitation of a pipe
changes from one force to another. In the case of the string that ultimately drilled the furthest
(6 5/8” 27,70 lb/ft S135 FH), the limiting factor between 60 and 71,3 degrees was tensional
yield, while it at 71,3 to 90 degrees became torsional yield.

For the higher angles, the larger sized drill pipes were the ones that drilled the furthest. This
comes down to its tensional yield vs pipe weight. Pipe weight has a higher effect on torque
than on axial force in higher deviations.

5.2 Deviation angle

The angle of deviation is highly important for optimizing string length. When drilling at lower
angles, the results show that the axial force, when tripping the string, and combined safety
factor is the major limitations, whilst torsional force is not an issue. At higher angles this is
entirely the other way around, making torsional yield due to make/up torque limitations is
completely dominant. When only looking at the combined safety factor, the maximum string
length will increases with the increasing angle, where a 90 degree angle equals maximum
string length. This is however unrealistic as the yield limit for burst pressure, make-up torque
and axial force when tripping the string also has to be taken into account. The first of these
limits reached, defines the maximum string length for the specific angle. On the basis of
figure 4.5 it is evident that every drill pipe has a maximum string length at an optimum angle.

5.3 Safety factors [1, 4, 7]

When calculation string lengths there is 4 main limiting factors to keep an eye on. If the safety
factor of either of these is exceeded, the maximum string length has been reached.

45
5.3.1 Combined safety factor
The combined safety factor (SF) was only an issue for the thinnest pipe in the test, or for
deviation angles lower than 70 degrees. As the pressure drop stays low at all angles and
lengths tested, this has a fairly low contribution. The main contribution to this limitation is
therefore tensional and torsional yield of the pipes. Both factors are highly dependent on
angle, but reacts opposite of each other. When the angle is increased, so is torsional force,
whilst the tensional force decreases. When decreasing the angle, the opposite happens. As
they in a way counteract each other, the combination does not contribute as much to the
strings limitation as the tensional or torsional limitation on its own.

5.3.2 Axial force when tripping the string

When drilling in high deviated wells the effective axial force stays way below the pipes
limits. When the drilling is stopped and the string is tripped out without rotation on the other
hand, as is normally practiced, the lack of weight on bit (WOB) and Nozzle force, in addition
to the acting friction force, results in a drastic increase in effective axial force. The results
indicate that on larger heavier pipes, the effective axial force when tripping the string, is the
main limitation to string length for deviation angles of 70 degrees to some below 60 degrees.
At specifically which lower angle the combined safety factor becomes the limitation was not
calculated, as this was outside the chosen 60 to 90 degree area of investigation. For thinner
smaller pipes, axial yield is seldom a limitation in high deviation wells. In cases where
effective axial force, when tripping, is the limitation, a solution could be to keep rotating the
string while pulling it up. This would lower the friction force acting axial to the string by
approximately 90 percent, thus allowing for the string to be obtained without exceeding the
safety factor for tensional yield while tripping.

5.3.3 Make-up torque

Though the pipes can handle a fair amount of torsional force before yielding, the tool joints
are limited to almost half of that. In high deviation wells the torsional force first exceeded the
safety factor for what the tool joints could handle, resulting in the string twisting off. This
clearly is the biggest limitation for long reach drilling. The results from figure 4.6 and figure
4.7 shows that except for the make-up torque, larger deviation angles and pipe dimensions
results in longer wells. As the tensional force increases with both angle and weight, this
massively restricts the length. By reducing the tensional force or increasing its limits, one can
drastically increase string length, and should thus be an important area for further research.

46
5.4 Friction
As would be expected, the effect of a lower friction coefficient, which from equation 2.8 is a
large contributor to the torsional force, allows for longer drilling. By lowering the friction
coefficient and thus the torsional force, which from earlier is stated to be the main limitation
for long reach drilling, the angle of deviation can be increased resulting in longer drilling
without exceeding the safety factor for tensional force. On the basis of figure 4.8, it is possible
to drill 13028 meters at an optimum angle of just above 81 degrees with a 6 5/8” 27,70 lb/ft
S135 FH string and a friction coefficient of 0.15. This makes an increase in length of 4037
meters when the friction coefficient is lowered from 0.23 to 0.15. Researching ways to lower
the contact friction coefficient could be extremely beneficial to long reach drilling.

5.5 Wall thickness [7]

After it became evident that torque is the main limitation to string length, a lighter version of
the 6 5/8 inch drill pipe was tested. The 6 5/8” 25,20 lb/ft S135 FH drill pipe has the same
outer diameter as the longest drilling pipe in the test, but it has got a larger inner diameter and
thinner wall, making it lighter. Though thinner walls make it weaker against bursting, the
pressure drop has never been a problem during the testing. The make-up torque of the 6 5/8”
25,20 pipe was surprisingly, the same as for the 6 5/8” 27,70. The result from figure 4.9
shows that the lighter 6 5/8” 25,20 lb/ft pipe could drill a surprisingly 366 meters longer than
the heavier 6 5/8” 27,70 pipe, making it the best pipe in the test for long reach drilling. As this
pipe’s limit was still the tool joints, it seems like one could drill even further by using a drill
pipe with the same 6 5/8” outside diameter but with even thinner walls, seen that the same
tool joints is used, and most importantly that the burst pressure, torsional yield and tensional
yield does not drop to significantly. This would be a delicate balance, but was not tested, due
to such a pipe not existing in the drilling data handbook.

5.6 Buckling [7, 8]

Helical buckling was never an issue with the strings tested. Because the critical limit for
helical buckling is a function of deviation angle (Eq. 2.15), it gets fairly large when drilling
with 60 to 90 degree deviations. Within this restriction area it is the lightest pipes with lowest
outer diameter that have the largest risk of buckling. At 90 degrees, the string does not slide
due to gravity, thus has little downward force.

47
6. Conclusion

The results from this study show that the drill pipes with the largest outer diameter, drills the
furthest. Depending on the type of tool joint used, a large sized pipe with the smallest possible
inner diameter was indicated to be the optimal choice for long reach drilling. In this study the
best drill pipe, 6 5/8” 25,20 lb/ft S135 FH, was able to reach an axial length of 9357 meters at
a deviation angle of 74,1 degrees, while the 4” 14,00 lb/ft S135 NC46(IF) pipe, drilling the
shortest, tapped out at 7504 meters at an angle of 67,8 degrees.

The pressure drop is a very small contribution to the combined safety factor when drilling
with a large inner diameter drill pipe and large diameter drill bit. The tensional and torsional
yield ratios vary opposite of each other as a function of deviation angle. The maximum string
lengths obtained in 60 to 90 degree drilling is limited by, the tensional force when tripping the
string, or by the torsional force, exceeding the safety factor for yielding of the pipe or threads.
The major limitation for long reach drilling was found to be torsional force exceeding the
safety factor for make-up torque. By finding a way of lowering the contact friction
coefficient, it would be possible to drill much further. With a friction coefficient of 0,15 it was
found possible to drill 13028 meters, which is 4037 meters longer than with a friction
coefficient of 0,23.

The final conclusion from the study is that decreasing the friction force acting on the string,
especially the contact friction coefficient, is the most effective solution for longer drilling.

48
7. References
1. Skaugen, E., Kompendium I boring. 1997, University of Stavanger.
2. Skaugen, E., Material Technology. 2010, University of Stavanger.
3. Skaugen, E., Mud friction versus contact friction. 2010, University of Stavanger.
4. Skaugen, E., Drilling introduction. 2010, University of Stavanger.
5. Skaugen, E., Liner drill appendix. 2009, University of Stavanger.
6. Skaugen, E., Advanced drilling technology, 2010, University of Stavanger.
7. Personal conversation with, Skaugen, E. 2014, University of Stavanger.
8. Gabolde, G. and J.-P. Nguyen, Drilling Data Handbook 8th ed. 2006: Institut Francais
du Pétrole Publications.
9. Pegasus vertex, Inc., “Torque and Drag – Nuts and Bolts”, 2011,
http://www.pvisoftware.com/blog/torque-and-drag-nuts-and-bolts/

49