SPE/IADC 79812

Real Time Monitoring of Hole Cleaning on a Deepwater Extend Well

A.L. Martins, SPE, PETROBRAS, M.B. Villas-Boas, H.S. Taira, A. F. Arago, R.A.F. Amorim, Y.D. Galeano,
A. Bove and A.T.A. Waldmann, PETROBRAS
Copyright 2003, SPE/IADC Drilling Conference
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference held in
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1921 February 2003.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE/IADC Program Committee following
review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the
paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the
International Association of Drilling Contractors and are subject to correction by the author(s).
The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the SPE, IADC, their
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or
the International Association of Drilling Contractors is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in
print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied.
The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was
presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A.,
fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
This paper details the first utilization of a cuttings flow meter
device on a floating platform. This device was installed at
platform PETROBRAS X during the drilling of an extended
horizontal well (5211 m total depth) at 1212 m water depth.
Since hydraulics and cuttings removal were major issues
during drilling, the CFM concept proved to be an important
tool to evaluate hole conditions. A discussion on the adequacy
of hole cleaning operational procedures and on the uncertainty
in results evaluation is also included.
Introduction
Deepwater drilling of high angle wells, due to the high costs
involved, requires careful planning and execution. An
integrated team approach is a must for the success of the
operation. Extended reach well technology, due to similar
reasons, face similar constraints. Extended wells in deep
waters constitute a further step in the implementation of both
technologies. In the initial stage of such implementation, all
the efforts in planning, defining operational procedures and
execution have to be made to reduce the operational risk.
Drilling fluid design for such situation should consider all the
relevant factors which are affected by its properties such as
wellbore stability, drilling hydraulics, cuttings transport, rock
fluid interaction, well path, drillstring composition, tripping
schedules and other operational procedures. Besides, real time
monitoring of the operational parameters play a major role in
reducing the uncertainties involved in the operation and
keeping the well in satisfactory conditions.
This article focus on the use of real time monitoring devices
for hole cleaning conditions while drilling an extended well in
Marlim Sul Field, Campos Basin, offshore Brazil at 1212 m
water depth. Such monitoring devices included the first use of
a CFM Cuttings Flow Meter concept on a semisubmersible platform besides APWD measurements. Main

focus is on the CFM results for the 16 in build-up section and

on the 12 in slant section.
Real Time Monitoring - The CFM Concept
A CFM Cuttings Flow Meter - device, as described by
Thonhauser et al.1 , was installed in 3 of the four shale shakers
at platform PETROBRAS X. The device consists on a
cylinder with two collecting baskets. This cylinder stands by
two load cells which constantly evaluate the system weight.
When the weight reaches a pre-established value (or a
maximum time gap), the cylinder turns 180 degrees and the
empty basket now starts to collect solids, as illustrated in Fig.
1. A data acquisition system stores the measured weights at
different time steps. Mud logging and directional drilling data
are connected to allow data interpretation. Fig. 2 illustrates the
data flux system installed in Platform PETROBRAS-X. Fig. 3
shows a photo of the CFM installation at the rigsite. Naegel et
al.2 present a successful experience utilizing a similar device at
an onshore rig.
General Well Data
Almeida et al.3 present a detailed discussion on design criteria
and execution steps for well 7-MLS-42H-RJS. In the next
paragraphs some details on well trajectory and drilling fluid
design are highlighted.
Trajectory. Fig. 4 represents schematically the well path. The
well head location was defined based on the well flow analysis
( distance from the production unit ) and the limit imposed by
the maximum water depth operation of the drilling unit
assigned for the job, in this case the semi-submersible
platform P-X ( 1220 m ). The azimuth for the horizontal
section of the well was defined considering major reservoir
premises and some constrains from the water injection project
for the Marlim Sul field. Casing design program considered
the formations to be drilled, potential drilling problems and the
directional design.
The well design consists of a 30 casing jetted down to 1278
m, which means 39 m into the seabed. In general, it is
common practice in the field to jet 35 to 45 m ( 3 to 4 pipes ),
but in order to assure that the 30 casing would support the
load of the next casing ( 20 ), it was established to set 4 pipes
resulting in a higher load support.
Immediately after jetting the 30, next step was to drill with a
26 bit down to 1715 m and to orient the well to an inclination
of 19 ( build up of 1/15 m ). Early starts of inclination with a
careful selection of appropriate build up rate is important to

minimize the impacts on casing wear and drilling torque and

drag. From the 20 casing seat, the 16 phase was drilled
down to 2505m measured depth, initially gaining angle ( build
up of 1/15 m ) from 19 to 73 and from this point drilling a
slant hole with 73 inclination ( 2,230 m ). This long slant
section demanded a deeper shoe for the 20 casing seat
allowing the 19 inclination to be built leading to a smooth
transition to the slant section. This strategy aimed the
reduction in the bending forces acting on the pipes and
connectors, the reduction of dog leg severity, torque and drags
in the well, besides reaching more competent formations with
higher fracture pressure gradients to drill safely the 16 phase.
The 12 phase was drilled with 73 slant down to 4583 m
and then drilled with a build up of 2/30 m until reach the
inclination of 81,7 about 20 m inside the zone of interest. The
20 m is the minimum length needed to characterize the
sandstone using the resistivity and gamma ray logs from
LWD. The 9 5/8 casing shoe was set to 4694 m.
The last phase ( 8 ) started with 81,7 from the 9 5/8 casing
shoe and was drilled down to 5211 m reaching an inclination
of 88,7.
Drilling Fluids Selection, Stability and
Hydraulics Design
Drilling fluid selection criteria was based on the successful
experiences gained in several decades of activity in Campos
Basin. Synthetic fluids proved to be the best technical and
economical alternative to drill build up and highly inclined
phases in development wells. Reservoir sections are normally
drilled with drill-in fluids, which can guarantee minimum
damage and compatibility with completion and sand control
operations. Table 1 shows details on casing and types of fluids
selected in the well design phase. Keeping the hole stable is a
critical issue for deepwater high angle wells. All the efforts
were made to gather information for the well stability analysis.
Good correlation wells, micro fracturing of shale, sandstone
frac-pack data and latest generation numerical models are part
of the process of defining drilling fluid weight for each phase
and the risks associated to each choice. Table 2 shows major
fluid properties designed for the well.
Hydraulics design was also a major issue due to ECD
restrictions and critical hole cleaning conditions. Fluid
rheology, pumping criteria, maximum ROP and operational
procedures were defined both on local experience an on the
results provided by an in house developed solid liquid flow
computer simulator (Santana et al.4 )
As an example, Table 3 summarizes simulation results for the
16 hole cleaning conditions obtained when using the
maximum rate of penetration prescribed. Results, expressed in
terms of bed heights, transport ratios and solids concentration
in the annulus indicate that it is not possible to drill the 16 in
phase without the deposition of a cuttings bed. Consequently,
special attention to hole cleaning procedures, such as
circulating prior to pipe connections , pumping tandem pills
and performing wiper trips should be considered.
16 Phase Execution and CFM Results
This was the critical phase concerning hydraulics and hole
cleaning, due to the large diameter of the well, high angles,
large cuttings generated by the bit and preserved by the

SPE/IADC 79812

synthetic oil based system. Fluid losses and total annular

obstruction with solids were reported in other wells drilled in
the area. A leak off test at the 13 3/8 casing shoe limited to
the maximum allowed ECD for the next phase ( 10 ppg ) was
carried out.
The drilling strategy adopted for the 16 phase was as follows:

Flow rate of 1100 gpm down the string and 300/400 gpm
through the booster line;

Maximum rate of penetration limited to 25 m/h;

Back reaming after each stand drilled, using string

rotation of 100 rpm ;

Circulate and wiper trip ( 100 bbl of washing pill + 150

bbl of tandem pill )

Pump tandem pills each 150 m drilled or at any

indication of ECD increase.

During the operation, the tandem pills were injected after

intervals drilled from 86 to 163 m and in almost every
case the necessity was dictated by the necessity of
keeping ECD below 10 ppg. Normally, 100 bbl of a thin
pill followed by 150 bbl of a viscous pill were pumped.
The purposed of the combined pills is to enhance
turbulence to re-suspend deposited cuttings (thin pill) and
transport the solids through the vertical sections (viscous
pill). A wiper trip was performed after drilling 388 m and
reaching 46 degrees of inclination.
While tripping out of the hole, at the end of the phase, the
ECD varied from 9,85 to 9,88 ppg. The drilling fluid at this
moment was 9,5 ppg. This was the maximum weight possible
to keep ECD below 10 ppg.
After reaching the final depth, the string was pulled out with
back reaming. It was necessary to circulate wiper pills after
taking out 275 m of drilling string, due to the constant
tendency of ECD increasing above the leak off pressure at
shoe, verified every 4 to 5 m while tripping. The phase was
drilled in 2,4 days and the well conditioned to run the 13 3/8
casing in 2 days Fig. 5 details solids recovery rate values for
the whole phase. Recovery rates are defined by the ratio of
solids weighted in the CFM devices and the theoretical
amount of solids generated by the bit. Values around 50%
indicate severe accumulation of solids, although calibration
can be questioned at this phase. These results must be
analyzed in a comparative way, indicating better or worst hole
cleaning conditions along the drilling operation.
Next comments deal with the efficiency of cleaning sweeps
pumped in the phase. 7 sets of sweeps were pumped while
drilling and four additional ones while conditioning the well to
run the 13 3/8 in casing. Fig. 6 shows the amount of cuttings
generated by the bit and the amount of cuttings recovered in
the shakers, highlighting the periods when the pills were being
pumped. Both the interruption of the solids generation and the
carrying capacity of the pills contribute to enhance recovery
rates. Fig. 7 illustrates the percent increase in recovery rates
due to the injection of each sweep. The red data corresponds to
the time between beginning of injection and end of
displacement while the blue data refers to the time of pill
displacement. The high values in the beginning reflect the
transient period while the well is being loaded with cuttings.

SPE/IADC 79812

12 1/4 Phase Execution and CFM Results

The 12 was planned to be drilled from the 13 3/8 casing
seat depth (2505 m) to reach 4720 m at 81,7 inclination. The
same hydraulic strategy used on previous phase was adopted
here. A 10.2 value of ECD was stated as the limit to drill the
phase. Every time the ECD measured value had reached the
limit established (10,2 ppg) or the drilled interval had reached
200 tandem pills were pumped every time this value was
reached or at each 200m drilled. Although this strategy
seemed conservative for the phase, excellent hole cleaning
conditions were kept during the entire phase. 950 gpm of fluid
was pumped through the string and 400 gpm through the
booster line. This level of flow rates guaranteed proper hole
cleaning, according to simulation. In this phase solids
ressuspension did not impact ECD in the same way it
happened in the 16 in phase (build up section) due to the
smaller increase in TVD in the high angle drilling.
Fig. 8 details solids recuperation rates for the whole phase. In
this case values around 83% were observed at the end of the
phase. During the phase, 19 cleaning sweeps were injected as
highlighted in Figs 9 and 10. Fig. 9 refers to the original 12
in phase while Fig. 10 refers to the sidetrack 12 phase. Fig
11 shows the percent increase in solids recovery due to each
sweep pumping. The impact seems to be less significant
than in the previous phase, indicating better hole
cleaning conditions.
Fig. 12 shows ECD and bottomhole solids concentration
(estimated by the difference of solids generated and CFM
results) as functions of time. The scales were manipulated in
order to enable the observation of the curves shape, which in
the first days of operation are very similar.
8 Phase Execution and CFM results
A leak off test at the 9 5/8 casing shoe limited to the
maximum expected value of ECD for the phase (11,5 ppg)
was performed. The values of torque and drag were below the
expected ones and the phase was drilled following the normal
hydraulic and mechanical parameters for standard wells in the
field. The rate of penetration was kept between 15 and 20 m/h
due to logging constrains. This fact, combined with the
smaller diameter of the well and the level of hydraulic,
allowed a perfect hole cleaning.
Despite of the good hole cleaning conditions observed, CFM
results indicated poor recovery, as illustrated in Fig. 13.
Unlike the other phases, drilled with synthetic fluids through
shales, this phase was drilled with water based fluid through
sandstones. Although a value of 30% porosity was assumed,
final recovery ratios close to 40% were reported by the
equipment. This low recovery rates were, when drilling the
well, attributed to calibration problems. A further analysis
with drilling fluid specialists lead to consider the hypothesis
that an expressive amount of the non-recovered solids
would possibly have been incorporated into the fluid. Since no
retort data were available, it was not possible to run a material
balance analysis to the problem.
CFM A Critical Sensibility Analysis on
Uncertain Parameters
The analysis presented in the previous items assumes that the

well drilled was totally in gage and that the rock perforated is
a block of solids. In reality, hole enlargement is frequent and
rocks normally present some porosity. The next paragraphs
describe the uncertainties associated to recovery rates and the
uncertainties on wellbore enlargement and rock porosity,
while drilling the 12 in phase of the well in study.
Porosity: the 83% recovery rate obtained at the end of 12 in
phase considered no porosity in the rock. If 5, 10 and 15 %
porosity are considered, recovery ratios of 89, 92 and 98 %
would be calculated. Fig. 14 shows a tendency in the
deviations of the recovery rate as a function of porosity.
Hole Enlargement: if the hole is enlarged in relation to the bit
size, more solids have been generated and, consequently, the
recovery rate would be reduced. If the final average hole
diameter was 14 in, the recovery rate would have been
reduced to 62%. Fig. 15 shows the effect of hole enlargement
on recovery rate.
Final Remarks
Well 7-MLS-42H-RJS, due to its unique characteristics,
was an excellent test site for the CFM concept. The
information generated by the monitor is relevant and of great
utility in drilling planning and execution activities.
The continuous data collection of CFM data is imperative
to enhance the knowledge in the use of this technology to
support the anticipation of hole cleaning problems. This same
equipment was operated in two other wells in Campos Basin
while two other wells have been monitored by the equipment
developed by Naegel et al.2 A detailed analysis on results is
ongoing and should be presented in a future SPE paper.
Some effort should be spent in enhancing data analysis
procedures, specially when water based muds are involved. A
proper planning of retort analysis, as well as improved
knowledge on rock properties are key factors for
refining results.
These results indicate that, in the present state of the
technology, searching for the 100% recovery rate should not
be the major goal in CFM analysis. Evaluating CFM recovery
rate trends, however may be an excellent tool for trouble
diagnosis and remediation.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank PETROBRAS for permission to
publish this paper. Special thanks are due to Mr Maurcio
Almeida, Jos Calvo and Larrey Cisne from the engineering
team of Marlim Sul field and to the entire operational team of
platform PETROBRAS-X, who made possible the installation
of the CFM device.
References
1 Tohnhauser, G.; Millheim, K.K.; Martins, A.L.: Cuttings Flux
Measurement and Analysis for Extended-Reach Wells SPE
paper 52793 presented at the 1999 SPE/IADC Drilling
Conference held in Amsterdam, Holland, 9-11 March 1999.
2 Naegel, M.; Pradie, E.; Delahaye, T.; Rossiaux,G.: Cuttings
Flow Meters Monitor Hole Cleaning in Extended Reach Wells
SPE paper 50677 presented at the 1998 SPE European Petroleum
Conference held in The Hague, The Netherlands, 20-22
October 1998.

SPE/IADC 79812

3 Almeida, M. A.; Calvo, J.C.B.; Cisne. L.; Cor. C.A.G.: Drilling

and Completion of an Extended Reach High Rate Deepwater
Producer Well in Campos Basin-Brazil presented at the 2002
XIV Deep Offshore Technology Conference and Exhibition, New
Orleans, LA, 13-15 November 2002.

4 Santana, M.; Martins, A.L.; Sales, A. Jr.: Advances in the

Modeling of the Stratified Flow of Drilled Cuttings in High
Horizontal Wells SPE paper 39890 presented at the 1998 SPE
International Petroleum Conference and Exhibition of Mexico
held in Villahermosa, Mexico, 3-5 March 1998.

Table 1: Casing and Drilling Fluid Program.

Maximum
Inclination

Drilling Fluid

1278

Sea Water

20

1705

19

Synthetic

16

13 3/8

2505

73

Synthetic

12

9 5/8

4713

82

Synthetic

5250

87

Phase

Casing

36

30

26

Depth (m)

DIF

Table 2: Drilling Fluid Properties for Each Well Phase.

Drilling Fluid Properties
Phase

Mud Weight
(ppg)

Plastic
Viscosity

Yield Point

L3

HTHP

36

8.6 8.8

26

8.6 10.0

16

9.4 9.7

15 35

15 40

14 20

<5

12

9.7 10.0

15 35

15 40

12 18

<5

9.6 9.9

12 30

15 35

10 14

<5

Table 3: Flow Rate Influence on Cleaning Parameters; Phase 16 (ROP=20 m/h; 90 rpm).
Flow Rate (gpm)
Parameter
950

1000

1050

1150

Bed height (% OD)

23

19,5

17,5

15,5

Annulus Solids
Concentration (%vol)

6.2

5.7

5.3

4.9

Stationary

Movable

Flowing Pattern

Movable

Movable

SPE/IADC 79812

Fig. 1 The CFM Concept

Fig. 3: CFM Positioned at the Shale Shakers Exit.

TIME AND
DEPTH DATA

DATA
ACQUISITION

PENEI RA

bentec
1
2
3
4
5
6

PLC

AR

COMPRIMIDO

SHALE
SHAKER

Fig. 2 - The CFM and the Data Communication System at

Platform P-X

Fig. 4: Scheme Showing the ERW Trajectory

SPE/IADC 79812

% RECOVEREY
RATE

% RECOVERY
RATE

DATE

DATE

MASS OF
CUTTINGS

Fig. 5 - Recovery Rates 16 in Phase

Fig. 8 Recovery Rates 12 in Phase

8 TANDEM PILLS

2 TANDEM PILLS +
BACK REAMING

MASS OF
CUTTINGS

7 TANDEM PILLS

2 TAMDEM PILLS + BACK

REAMING

DEPTH (m)

Fig. 6: Tandem Pills Displacement and Recovery Rates 16

in phase.
DEPTH (m)

12 in Phase Sidetrack

21,44

20
15
10 TANDEM PILLS

10,28

10

8,08
6,39

5
2,94

0
1

4,09
1,86

1,03

2,98

5,60

3,83 3,96

4,79

MASS OF
CUTTINGS

INCREASE IN PERCENTUAL
RECOVERED MASS OF CUTTINGS

Fig. 9 Tandem Pills Displacement and Recovery Rates

25

3 TANDEM PILLS
+
BACK REAMING

1,89

0,22 0,76
0,26 0,47
0,24
3 BR
0,44 0,28 0,44
4 5
0,05 0,04
6 7
8 BR
9 10
TANDEM PILL
11

Fig. 7 Tandem Pills Efficiency 16 in Phase

DEPTH (m)

Fig. 10 Tandem Pills Displacement and Recovery Rates

12 in Phase

SPE/IADC 79812

20%

20
15
10
5,9 9

4,10 4,50

1,97

0
1

0,94 1,1 5

2 ,68 3,21

0,07 0,14

BR

3,39 3,13 3,4 3 4,65

4,13 4,4 8
1,22
2,88
0,18 0,19 0,6 8
0,37 0,53
0,16 0,6 8 0,33 0,63 0,81
0,07 0,10
6

T A N D E M P IL L

10 11
12 13
14 15

Deviation in Recovery Rate

28,46

25
MASS OF CUTTINGS

INCREASE IN PERCENTUAL RECOVERED

30

16%
12%
8%
4%
0%
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Deviation in Porosity

Fig. 11 - Tandem Pills Efficiency 12 in Phase

Fig. 14 Impact of Uncertainties in Rock Porosity on Recovery
Rates

Deviation in Recovery Rate

ECD (lb/gal)

SOLIDS
CONCENTRATION

30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
0%

DATE

5%

10%

15%

20%

Deviation in Hole Enlargm ent

Fig. 12 Correlation Between ECD and Solids Concentration

12 in Phase

%RECOVERED
THEORETICAL
MEASURED

DATE

Fig. 13 Recovery Rates 8 in Phase

Fig. 15 Impact of Uncertainties in Hole Enlargement on

Recovery Rates