SPE/IADC 114484

Highly Advanced Multitechnical MPD Concept Extends Achievable HPHT Targets

in the North Sea
Svein Sylty, Svein Erik Eide, Steinar Torvund, and Per Cato Berg, StatoilHydro; Tore Larsen, SPE, and Helge Fjeldberg,
KCAD Norway; Knut Steinar Bjrkevoll, SPE, SINTEF; John McCaskill, SPE, Expro Power Chokes; Ole Iacob Prebensen,
SPE, M-I Swaco; and Eric Low, SPE, Think-Well

Copyright 2008, SPE/IADC Managed Pressure Drilling and Underbalanced Operations Conference and Exhibition
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2008 SPE/IADC Managed Pressure Drilling and Underbalanced Operations Conference and Exhibition held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 2829 January 2008.
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 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 does not necessarily reflect any position of
the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper 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 SPE/IADC copyright.

Abstract
Drilling wells in high-pressure, high-temperature (HPHT) reservoirs is often characterized by a narrow operating window between
formation pore pressure and fracture pressure. Depletion further reduces this window. Managed Pressure Drilling (MPD) provides
methods for operating within safe limits in the narrow HPHT windows. Exceptional control over downhole pressures can be achieved
with advanced MPD technologies that are uniquely suited for the HPHT environment. Such control can extend achievable HPHT
targets, yet still have the flexibility to deal with the troubles that so often arise in these difficult environments.
The advanced MPD system developed for StatoilHydros Kvitebjrn HPHT field are presented along with experiences from their
use in the field. This includes:
Management
Running a real-time, online, advanced dynamic flow model
Automatic dual redundant choke system with continuously updated pressure set-point from the flow model
Continuous Circulation System (CCS)
Pressure Control While Drilling (PCWD)
Caesium Formate mud system A designer mud containing formation strengthening particles.
Balanced Mud Pill (BMP) An innovative fluid technology developed for performing a precision top kill, producing
minimal pressure surge when pulling the drillstring and running liner.
Introduction
Kvitebjrn is located in the Northern North Sea on the Norwegian Continental Shelf, southeast of the Gullfaks Field (Fig. 1). It is
classified as a HPHT gas condensate field. The reservoir consists of sandstones in the Mid-Jurassic Brent group and lower Jurassic
(Cook Sst). The top reservoir is at approximately 4,070 m TVD. Early production during development drilling has induced pressure
depletion, creating a convergence between pore pressure and fracture pressure in the reservoir. The initial pore pressure was 775 bar
(1.93 SG) and fracture pressure was 875 bar (2.19 SG). The reservoir temperature is 155C and the water depth is 190 m.
Nine wells had been drilled into the reservoir prior to introducing the MPD technique. The gas/condensate production started in
September 2004 after the second well had been drilled and completed. On the last conventionally drilled well, 34/11-A-2, 140-170 bar
of depletion was encountered and massive losses were experienced. Drilling was suspended before reaching TD due to the wellcontrol situation created by these mud losses.
The A-2 incident marked the end of the traditional drilling programme as no further drilling on Kvitebjrn would be possible,
unless a method could be found to safely operate within Kvitebjrns reduced Drilling Window. Prior to drilling the A-2 well, the
Kvitebjrn platform produced at maximum capacity, 20.7 MMsm gas and 8 Msm condensate. After the A-2 incident, the Kvitebjrn
production was reduced in an attempt to limit the rate of depletion to complete the primary drilling programme. Production from the
field was reduced by 50% in December 2006 and then completely shut down by May 2007 when depletion approached 200 bar.
A toolbox, consisting of several different techniques was developed to mitigate the problem, among which was Managed Pressure
Drilling (MPD). MPD offered a solution for the remaining wells, but had little precedence in the HPHT environment. If bottom hole
Pressure (BHP) could be precisely controlled and held just above the highest pore pressure, a safe operating environment could be
created to allow drilling to continue. MPD is a technique that uses a reduced mud weight and surface controlled back-pressure to
manipulate the downhole pressure profile. The HPHT environment requires accurate automated choke control to compensate for BHP

SPE/IADC 114484

variations that arise from downhole temperature changes, drill pipe rotation, swab/surge and several other phenomena which are
known to create significant BHP variations in HPHT wells. To allow drilling operations on Kvitebjrn to resume, MPD had to be
adapted for HPHT operations. To create a robust overall system, other synergistic technologies were selected to support MPD, which
was at the core of this solution.
Kvitebjrn development wells 34/11-A-13 T2 and 34/11 A-12 were successfully drilled during 2007 using the enhanced MPD
system developed.
Combining Technologies
A combination of technologies was introduced that helped reduce dependency on any one technology. These included; MPD upgraded
and enhanced for HPHT application, continuous circulation during connections, and a drilling fluid designed to improve the fracture
gradient. The operating strategies, practices, controls and responses are very different from conventional operations. The development
of the new methods and techniques were carried out during the planning, testing and commissioning phase of the project. The
following details the key components of the technologies:
Professional Management is vital to a successful MPD operation. The complexity of MPD operations and the coordination of
services, equipment and personnel require a high level of supervision and management. Even the most sophisticated equipment has
limitations which need to be considered in planning and execution. The equipment package requires an optimal set up to perform to its
full potential. This set up must be based on the planned operations, but it cannot be optimized for every possible situation. The final
set up will be a trade off, eg., response time vs accuracy. The MPD crew must be aware of the systems strengths and weaknesses and
it must be reflected in operational plans, contingency procedures and operational execution. Hydraulic modelling simulations are
important during MPD preparations, and represent the foundation of all plans, procedures, contingencies and equipment setup.
Unfortunately, experience proves discrepancies between real data and computer simulation. Throughout the MPD operation constant
judgement calls are required, which are all based on human interpretation of real-time parameters. During MPD operations in general,
and especially in HPHT wells, relatively small failures can ultimately cause loss of the well. Hence, it is of utmost importance that
everyone has the skills and motivation to do their work properly. This is a management responsibility. MPD must not commence until
all personnel are competent for the upcoming tasks. This includes working as a team as well as performing their individual
responsibilities. On Kvitebjrn there were two aspects that made this challenging. Within the drilling and MPD organization there
were people from 8 or more countries that had to communicate with each other. Second, it is hard to find personnel with MPD
experience. Trainees have to be integrated into the operation, and they must be allowed to operate the equipment. Kvitebjrn had the
luxury of top-of-the-line equipment, which will be described later in this paper. But it is important to recognize that this sophisticated
equipment will only perform as well as the people that operate it. Management is necessary to provide quality, efficiency,
competency, and redundancy within the team and equipment package.
Managed Pressure Drilling (MPD) centres on the use of a Rotating Control Head (RCH) to provide a dynamic annulus seal that
diverts the return mud flow through a surface choke. It is this choke that controls the back-pressure in the annulus and permits the
manipulation of the downhole pressure profile. The mud weight is selected to be lower than the wells initial pore pressure. The
annulus friction plus annulus back-pressure brings the downhole pressure profile back to balance, or slightly above balance. In this
way the well is kept in balance at all times preventing influx and hole collapse.
The Hydraulic Flow Model is vital to the adaptation of MPD technology for HPHT applications. HPHT wells have
characteristically high BHP variations and not just from the high Equivalent Circulating Densities (ECD). Downhole temperature
changes affect mud weight and viscosity, pipe movements, rotation, torque, cuttings load, etc., all of which produce continuous and
significant variations in downhole pressure. Only by compensating for these can constant BHP be achieved. Compensation is
performed by manipulating the choke and adjusting the annulus back-pressure. To do this in the HPHT environment an advanced
dynamic flow model running in real time is required. Computing power can become a limitation as can the accuracy and speed of
input data from rig sensors. Calibration of the model with measured downhole pressure data is important to ensure accuracy.
Automatic Choke Control is an essential requirement. Accurate input to the choke controller from the flow model is one aspect; the
accurate and timely control of choke movements is another. Both are required for the system to react fast enough and work well.
Routine drilling operations were characterised by continuous small choke movements to meet the continuous small pressure changes
required. However, occasional very rapid accurate choke movements are needed to respond to all too frequent unwanted events; a
packoff, a pump failure, power failure, a drillstring washout, etc. This challenges even the most advanced control systems and often
requires manual intervention.
Flowmeter technology for use with drilling muds has greatly advanced and is well suited for the MPD system. Mass flowmeters are
highly accurate, and with the appropriate software, can provide exceptional kick detection and fingerprinting system.
Continuous Circulation System (CCS) permits full circulation during drillpipe connections. In HPHT wells it is only by maintaining
full circulation at all times that we can control the impact of downhole temperature changes. By maintaining the downhole
temperature profile with minimum variations we can achieve something close to hydraulic stability in the well. This is a great benefit

SPE/IADC 114484

to choke control and improves the sensitivity for detecting trends in other parameters. Once installed and commissioned, the CCS
requires aligning and tuning to the rig systems. However, once this has been completed, the system can perform reliably for extended
periods of operation.
Designer Mud was introduced which was based on Caesium / Potassium (Cs/K) Formate mud. A controlled particle size distribution
and blend of calcium carbonate, graphite and nut plug were added. This combination was verified in the laboratory to provide Fracture
Gradient Enhancement (FGE) properties in the Kvitebjrn reservoir sandstones. The reduced fracture gradient in the reservoir sands as
a result of pore pressure depletion is the root cause of Kvitebjrns challenges. By drilling with this mud, the existing fracture gradient
would be supported and possibly enhanced. This was an important element of the combined technology concept providing support to
the other technologies in the event of any under-performance or failure. Particle drop-out was a major drawback that caused severe
difficulties, but only as a result of extended unplanned periods of non-circulation. An adjustment of the particle concentration and a
greater attention to fluid suspension properties has resolved this issue.
Balanced Mud Pill (BMP). A crosslinked isolation mud pill in Cs/K Formate base fluid was developed to support weighted mud
placed above lighter mud. Minimising the mud interface and preventing the heavy mud sliding downhole was a critical requirement
when the well was brought into pressure balance to perform trips. Tripping all the way out of the hole with a live HPHT well, relying
entirely on mechanical sealing elements for pressure control, was not considered the best option. After tripping approximately two
thirds of the way out of the hole under MPD control, the well could then be brought into static overbalance using the BMP and
weighted mud. The trip could then be completed conventionally. Taking the time to bring the well into static overbalance, although
time consuming, was considered to be a more satisfactory practice. The newly developed BMP allowed this to be done. Extensive
laboratory and rig testing were performed during the development of the pill. This isolation pill proved to be very stable, even when
non-optimal placement was required following a twist-off as experienced during the drilling phase of the A-13 well. The pill fully
transmitted hydrostatic pressure providing direct pressure control over the BHP.
The alternative of bringing the well into hydrostatic balance at TD would have produced much higher over-pressures on the
reservoir. Surge pressure from tripping would also have been higher and without any MPD compensation.
Preparation and Planning
Preparation and planning for this operation took almost two years. Several technologies were examined and advanced engineering
studies performed during the feasibility stages of the project. The strategic philosophy that later defined the actual approach taken was
refined during this process.
An extensive series of hazard identifications (HAZIDs), hazard and operability studies (HAZOPs), peer reviews and workshops
were conducted covering every aspect of the proposed operation. These consultations refined the methods, configurations and
procedures that were employed and proved a very important contributor to the success of the project.
Project control and organisation required special consideration. An organisation of competent members was assembled for the
early preparation and planning stage. A separate and much larger organisational structure was needed to perform the operation. The
integration of several new companies, personnel, equipment and practices required careful consideration and planning. The
importance of project control, organisational structure, reporting lines and operational support roles should not be under-estimated.
The offshore organisational structure used during MPD operations is shown in Fig. 2 to illustrate this point.
Regulatory support from the Norwegian Petroleum Safety Authority (PSA) was an important factor. Early notification and
frequent briefings created a consultative environment which was of enormous benefit. The two-way communication aided the early
direction of the project, resulting in a clear path forward. The Norwegian PSA was very supportive of the project as we openly shared
both the progress of the project and our concerns with them.
Equipment Layout
The equipment layout schematic is shown in Fig. 3. Key to the adaptation of MPD for HPHT applications is the retention of the High
Pressure (HP) blowout preventer (BOP) system below the MPD control stack. This met all the well control requirements for HPHT
wells. At any time the HPBOP system could be engaged and the established HPHT well-control procedures applied. In this case the
HPBOP was an 18-in. 15-K BOP with four rams and one 10K annular. The rams were dressed for the drillpipe with a blind/shear in
the upper middle ram cavity. It was this strategy that permitted the use of the available 5-kpsi (345-bar) MPD control stack for
operational control. The MPD control stack consisted of an 11-in. 5-K rotating control head, a 13-in. 5-K stripper ram and a 13-in.
5-K stripping annular. There is scope for the use of the MPD control stack for low-pressure well control incidents (by far the most
common even on HPHT wells), but in this instance a demarcation was made between well control and operational control.
At the heart of the MPD control system is a Pressure Control While Drilling (PCWD) rotating control head. This item has a long
history of successful field use and benefits from an active sealing element ideally suited for stripping drillpipe. The remainder of the
MPD stack was configured to provide component redundancy, flexibility and to facilitate efficient PCWD element changeout.
The dual redundant automatic chokes were specifically selected to avoid choke erosion. This is a common concern on well cleanup
operations, but less so during MPD operations. The problem has more or less been eliminated through choke design. Some testing was
needed to optimise the size of the choke trim. A junk catcher immediately upstream of the choke manifold was considered, but
discounted as being of little practical benefit. There was one documented case where this was an issue a line plug upstream of the
chokes occurred caused by an accumulation of lost-circulation material.

SPE/IADC 114484

Pressure relief valves were included in the return flowline to protect equipment and the well. The primary relief valve immediately
upstream of the choke manifold was automatically controlled by the choke control software. This valve was set to activate between 5
and 10 bar above the choke set-point pressure depending on the operation being performed. When the choke set-point pressure was
adjusted by the flow model, the relief valves set-point would also automatically change. Once triggered, this automatic relief valve
would re-set itself when the pressure had dropped below the set-point. This provided exceptional protection of the well from overpressure and the re-set feature helped prevent underbalanced conditions. This device proved its worth on several occasions and
performed exactly as intended.
The mass flowmeter was configured with a bypass to allow for cleaning or unplugging if required. Once configured and calibrated
the meter provided exceptionally high quality data. Potential exists for this data to be used for online analysis, event determination and
automatic system response to unwanted events. On this operation the mass flowmeter was used only for monitoring with no direct
control of the system. Further automation and the reduction of manual intervention is an achievable future goal for MPD control
systems.
The auxiliary pump continuously circulated clean mud from the active system across the wellhead, keeping the annulus full and
providing a continuous mud flow to allow the choke to maintain the desired back-pressure in all cases. This ensures full pressure
control over the annulus regardless of the main mud pumps function. The concept and function of this additional pump was proven;
however, pump reliability, pump pressure fluctuations and pump rate optimisation were among the issues that require more attention.
It became clear that the auxiliary pump is a very important and necessary component of the system, having much more significance
than first thought. The auxiliary pump would benefit from an uninterruptible power supply or diesel power, speed control and
improved specification.
Installation, Commissioning, Testing and Training
Prior to the offshore startup, the Ullrig rig test facilities in Stavanger were used for CCS and BMP trials. Extensive tests of the
BMP were carried out at the University of Stavanger, prior to a full-scale test at Ullrig.
The installation of all this new equipment onto a fully automated, small footprint North Sea platform rig required extensive
planning. Considerable time was spent commissioning, testing and training. Much of this time was spent integrating the MPD systems
with the rigs automated systems. Interface issues dominated this phase of the operation which included equipment placement, pipe
work, integration with rig systems, etc. The other main factor, which was imposed by project time constraints, was that much of the
final development work on the new systems, tuning, balancing and aligning systems, had to take place offshore. Troubleshooting and
fine tuning complex systems is a time-consuming process and more testing could preferably have been done prior to going offshore.
However, advantage was taken of this opportunity for extended training and familiarisation with the new equipment. From the
beginning the operator was committed to taking the time necessary during this phase to ensure all equipment and technologies
functioned within specification and all training and acceptance testing was complete.
Some experimentation, modification and development was needed during commissioning and testing of the choke control system.
An early discovery was just how incompressible the Cs/K formate mud system was. Annulus back-pressure fluctuations were
transmitted instantaneously without attenuation downhole. This fact meant that choke control, precision and accuracy were a far
greater challenge than anticipated. However, with some patience and expert contribution, the choke control logic was tuned to provide
fast, accurate response while limiting oscillation responses. Some manual intervention of the choke control was still needed to deal
with certain unwanted events. However, further testing and development of both the choke controller and flow model is expected to
reduce the need for manual intervention. It is unlikely that manual intervention will ever be fully eliminated and the need for
experienced, attentive operators will remain.
For example rig power failure, a contingency event, proved particularly troublesome. A power failure would result in complete
loss of all pumps; the control systems response speed to contain the well became a real challenge. The improvements in the choke
control system, in particular the automatic detection and response to changes in key parameters allowed the acceptance criteria to be
met. Manual override was therefore able to be reduced to a minimum.
The flow model underwent a continuous process of development, troubleshooting and fine tuning during this period. It was only
once the model had been fully integrated into the real well situation that its capabilities and limitations could be finally determined.
Bench testing had been performed, but this could only take the real-time computer model to a certain level. Data input accuracy and
speed proved a surprising limitation. For example; using pump stroke counters was found to be inadequate at slow pump rates. By
changing to RPM sensors on the pump crank shafts, reliability and accuracy were greatly improved. It has only been with the
experience from actual operations that the bottlenecks and limitations inherent within existing systems could be identified. With this
knowledge we are able to continue to push the boundaries and approach constant BHP.
The testing of the system was extensive and included the use of fixed downhole pressure gauges to provide direct comparison with
Annulus Pressure While Drilling (APWD) results and surface control parameters. A liner was run and retrieved to verify the effects of
liner running on downhole pressures. These extensive and rigorous trials probed the limits of the systems capability, promoted
confidence in what could be achieved, and determined which events are the most critical.
Only after commissioning, testing and training had been fully completed did the MPD operations phase begin. Operating
procedures were also revised, documented and approved.

SPE/IADC 114484

Pressure-Control Strategy
A pressure-control strategy was adopted based on the formation pressure forecast for 34/11-A-13 T2. This strategy is illustrated in Fig.
4. The initial reservoir pressure, prior to any depletion, is known from earlier Kvitebjrn wells. This profile is described by a constant
gradient from 1.92 SG at top reservoir to 1.86 SG at the base. The risk of encountering an undepleted zone in the reservoir was
considered to be high as was the uncertainty in the depleted fracture gradient. A target downhole pressure gradient was set at top
reservoir of 1.94 SG (0.02 SG above anticipated maximum pore pressure). This target pressure was incrementally reduced as drilling
proceeded. This reduction in target pressure was based on the following:
1. Always remaining 0.02 SG above the anticipated maximum pressure for reservoir still to be drilled.
2. Always remaining 0.02 SG above the measured pore pressure of the reservoir drilled. A Formation-Pressure-While-Drilling
(FPWD) tool was included in the Bottom Hole Assembly (BHA).
The use of the FPWD was key to this strategy and formation pressure tests could be taken at any time without tripping or stopping
circulation. The FPWD pressure tests recorded are shown in Fig. 4.
This strategy makes the most of the available drilling window without risking underbalance. The incremental adjustments to
downhole pressures can be simply and quickly performed with choke pressure manipulation. The MPD system as installed and
operated had been proven to work comfortably within a 5-bar range during normal drilling operations.
Operations Summary
The 9-in. casing was set at 6,101 m MD (4,093 m TVD). The well was displaced to 1.84 SG @ 50C Caesium/Potassium Formate.
After drilling out the 9-in. casing and 23 m of new formation, a formation integrity test was performed to 2.05-SG Equivalent Mud
Weight (EMW). The MPD system was installed, commissioned, tested and accepted for MPD operations. Personnel training,
familiarization and procedure rehearsals were completed.
The drilling BHA incorporated a comprehensive Logging-While-Drilling (LWD) suite that included FPWD tool (for taking
formation pressure points) and an annulus pressure and temperature sensor. Three tested drillstring float valves (517-bar working
pressure) and a Multi-Function Circulation Sub (MFCS) were also included. A tapered drillstring was used consisting of 4- and 5-in.
drillpipe to handle the predicted 55 KNm of drilling torque.
Drilling proceeded in MPD mode in 8-in. hole to 6,197 m MD. The mud weight was reduced from 1.84 to 1.81 SG @ 50C due
to the Equivalent Circulation Density (ECD) being 8 to 10 bar higher than forecast. This improved the operational range of the choke.
A washout in the drillstring was detected and verified. The trip out had just begun when the drillstring parted at 1,900 m and the
well was shut-in on the HPBOP with an applied Shut-In Casing Pressure (SICP) of 42 bar to compensate for the loss of ECD and
back-pressure. Prompt manual intervention by the operators helped minimize the inevitable underbalance which was of short duration.
No detectable net influx volume was observed. The BMP was employed to bring the well into hydrostatic balance using 2.12-SG
heavy mud. With no float valves in the remaining drillpipe the CCS proved a valuable asset in maintaining pressure on the drillstring
when pulling back during fluid placement. The chokes were able to hold back pressure and maintain control of the well. The
flexibility of the inherent design of the combined MPD system proved itself during fishing operations. Several fishing trips were
required, including wireline operations before the fish was recovered. The recovery of the fish was hampered by FGE particle dropout
from the mud. The drillstring and annulus at the top of the fish were plugged with particles preventing circulation. Large quantities of
particles also settled downhole and had to be cleaned out before drilling could resume. The prolonged period without circulation
contributed to this problem, but the suspension properties and capacity of the mud system requires further attention. The well
configuration at this time is illustrated in Fig. 5.
Drilling continued in MPD mode through the remainder of the reservoir to TD at 6351 m MD. Average drilling parameters were
10 m/hr, 1,000 L/min (mud pumps), 580 L/min (auxiliary pump), 100 rpm and 45-58 KNm. The downhole pressure was maintained at
1.92-SG EMW with a choke pressure of 14-16 bar. Formation pressure points were recorded indicating considerable variation in
depletion through the reservoir. The highest depletion recorded was 124 bar in the Lower Ness Fm.
At TD and after assessment of the formation data acquired, the well was successfully brought into overbalance for the remainder
of the well operations.
Experiences
The well was successfully drilled to meet the objectives under full MPD control despite serious unwanted events. Experiences from
this operation are discussed and hopefully will benefit a wider audience.
Routine Drilling. During periods of stable drilling and circulating, the MPD system controlled the downhole pressure to within 0.4bar increments. The accuracy and precision of this control demonstrates the capability of automated MPD systems in HPHT
environments.
Connections. Once the Continuous Circulation System (CCS) was properly tuned to the drilling rig, connections were reliably made
without any interruption to downhole circulating rate. Standpipe pressure fluctuations during a connection were around 6 bar, which
indicated less than 2 bar downhole. The make and break of the 5-in. drillpipe tool joints to 63 KNm of torque with the CCS was
routinely performed without difficulty.

SPE/IADC 114484

When required, multiple connections were also made without downhole circulation by utilising a pump ramping process with
associated automatic choke modulation to increase choke back pressure as ECD reduced to zero, thus maintaining the desired BHP.
Such occasions can arise during contingency procedures and while tripping in the upper hole section.
LWD Surveys and Pressure Points. Taking a survey or activating the FPWD for a pressure point involved cycling the pump rate
from around 1,000 to 600 L/min to downlink to the tools. Compensating for these changes in flow rate using the automated system
proved to be unstable. Manual control was found to produce repeatable results although with larger pressure fluctuations than
preferred. Communicating with the downhole tools in this way resulted in a 4-bar fluctuation downhole. This was still within the 5bar target that was set. In later operations automatic choke control produced better results.
Drilled Gas in Returns. No connection gas or influx gas was observed during the drilling of the reservoir. Drilled gas, which is not
dependant on the magnitude of overbalance in the well, was recorded at levels up to 3% gas in mud. This gas produced a 400- to 500L pit gain with the gain beginning up to 1 hr before the gas reached surface. The corresponding response in the return flow rate, as
measured with the mass flowmeter, was typically up to 300 L/min.
Identifying gas events, monitoring parameters and relating them to detailed fingerprinting was found to be the best method to
handle these incidents. Once the drilled gas was out of the well, the pit level and flow rate returned to normal with no compromise in
safety and minimal influence on BHP. When necessary, drilling was stopped but circulation continued until the gas was removed.
Shutting-in the well with the BOP on these events de-stabilised the hydraulic regime and created much larger downhole fluctuations.
Making a clear distinction between gas events and potential well influxes avoided numerous shut-ins. Real-time monitoring and
interpretation of this data can be performed onshore in future operations.
Designer Mud. The designer mud formulation was based on detailed lab testing for optimum performance as a low ECD fluid, where
particle suspension was, to some extent, sacrificed for ECD optimisation. The initial formulation included nut plug which caused some
plugging of surface equipment. The nut plug was screened out of the system and no further additions were made.
The large quantities of calcium carbonate did not give any problems when circulation was maintained. As expected, excessive
settlement occurred in the 57-degree hole inclination during the prolonged period without circulation while fishing. This was a serious
detriment to the recovery of the fish. An evaluation with regard to particle suspension properties and the amount of particles needed in
future operations, as a compromise between ECD management and particle addition, must be established and set, to deal with
unexpected events.
Flow Model vs. APWD Readings. The downhole annulus pressure was measured in real time with an Annulus-Pressure-WhileDrilling (APWD) sub. The readings from this sensor were used to calibrate the flow model for optimum performance. It was observed
during the testing phase that the APWD readings drifted by 12 bar. After careful calibration and attention to the drift correction of
these tools, the readings appeared to be more stable.
Throughout the operation, an offset of around 8 to 10 bar existed between the flow model results and the APWD readings. This
shows the importance of calibration or at least comparison between the flow model and APWD. In subsequent operations, a correction
to mud rheology inputs, improved this offset to around 2 bar for extended periods.
The calibration and especially the drift of the APWD is an important consideration when operating at high levels of accuracy.
Flow models will always have limitations although we continually see marked improvements in their accuracy. We were able to
compare readings from the APWD with the FPWD tool and thereby had two independent measurements of the BHP that we could
compare to the flow model. However, accuracy and drift remains a concern for these tools.
Selecting Static Mud Weight. The original strategy was to minimize the potential under-balance by selecting a static mud weight
that allowed for a minimum practical back-pressure. This resulted in the static mud weight having to be reduced during drilling
operations. The ECD proved to be higher than anticipated. Static mud weight reduction took a great deal of rig time, incrementally
stepping down the mud weight with appropriate checks before proceeding to the next step. After further consideration and an
increased confidence in the performance of the MPD system, the better approach would be to start with a lower mud weight.
Experience showed that choke performance and auxiliary pump function are more stable at higher choke pressures.
Drillstring Failure. A shallow drillstring failure is one of the more serious failures that can occur during MPD operations. Control
over the bottomhole pressure is threatened. Fortunately when this occurred, prompt action from the operators limited the subsequent
fluctuation in BHP and control was quickly re-established. An initial washout was detected and the failure occurred when steps were
being taken to recover the drillstring.
Establishing the depth of the failure was achieved with the imaginative use of various markers, including rice, sponges, carbide
and heavy mud pills. Carbide proved quite accurate but had to be activated in water before pumping. The heavy mud pill was also
accurate and could be precisely identified by the mass flowmeter in the flowline. The mud weight needed to bring the well into
balance depended on the accuracy of this determination.
The well was switched back and forth several times from MPD mode to conventional balanced mode using the BMP before fishing
operations were successfully completed. Wireline work was safely performed under MPD using wireline pressure-control equipment.

SPE/IADC 114484

Although it contributed little to the successful recovery of the fish, it proved that wireline interventions can be safely conducted with
this MPD arrangement.
Update
Following the success of 34/11-A-13 T2, the MPD technology was applied to the next development well 34/11-A-12. This well
reached TD in November 2007 under full MPD control. Pressures encountered through the reservoir varied from 130 bar of depletion
to full initial pore pressure (zero depletion). A production liner was successfully run and cemented under MPD control without losses.
By making full use of the experiences and lessons learned from the previous well, the rig up, commissioning and testing time were
greatly reduced. The reservoir section was drilled successfully without serious incident or mud loss.
StatoilHydro intend to continue to develop and use MPD for the remainder of the Kvitebjrn wells.
Conclusion
The MPD equipment arrangement, personnel and procedures proved satisfactory during the drilling operation on the
Kvitebjrn HPHT well 34/11-A-13 T2.
The MPD software, equipment and overall concept performed according to expectations. The technology is recommended for
use in later wells where excessive depletion is expected.
From the experience gained, with further development and updates to software, equipment, procedures and contingencies,
improvements in efficiency can be made.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to StatoilHydro for permission to publish this paper. Also for the support and contribution from Sintef, Expro
Power Chokes, M-I SWACO, NOV and KCAD Norway.
Nomenclature
BHA
BHP
BMP
BOP
CCS
Cs/K
ECD
EMW
FGE
FPWD
HAZID
HAZOP
HPBOP
HPHT
LWD
MFCS
MPD
PCWD
APWD
RCH
RPM
SICP
TD

Bottomhole Assembly
Bottomhole Pressure
Balanced Mud Pill
Blowout Preventer
Continuous Circulation System
Caesium/Potassium
Equivalent Circulating Density
Equivalent Mud Weight
Fracture Gradient Enhancement
Formation-Pressure-While-Drilling
Hazard Identification
Hazard and Operability Study
High-Pressure Blowout Preventer
High-Pressure, High-Temperature
Logging-While-Drilling
Multi-Function Circulation Sub
Managed Pressure Drilling
Pressure-Control-While-Drilling
Annulus-Pressure-While-Drilling
Rotating Control Head
Revolutions Per Minute
Shut-In Casing Pressure
Total Depth

SPE/IADC 114484

Conversions
bar
x 1*
E+05
bbl
x 1.589873 E-01
ft
x 3.048*
E-01
ft-lbf x 1.355818 E+00
ft3
x 2.831685 E-02

F
(oF32)/1.8
gal
x 3.785412 E-03
in
x 2.54*
E+01
ksi
x 6.894757 E+03
* Conversion factor is exact

= Pa
= m3
=m
= Nm
= m3
= oC
= m3
= mm
= kPa

References
1. Aston, M.S., Alberty, M.W., McLean, M.R., de Jong, H.J. and Armagost, K. Drilling Fluids for Wellbore Strengthening. SPE 87130,
SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Dallas, 2-4 March 2004.
2. Bjrkevoll, K.S. and Rommetveit, R. MPD Operation Solved Drilling Challenges in Severely Depleted HPHT Reservoir. SPE 112739,
SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Orlando, Florida, 4-6 March 2008.
3. Calderoni, A., Chiura, A., Valente, P., Soliman, F., Squintani, E., Vogel, R.E., and Jenner, J.W. Balanced Pressure Drilling with Continuous
Circulation Using Jointed Drillpipe Case History, Port Fouad Marine Deep 1, Exploration Well Offshore Egypt. SPE 102859, SPE Annual
Technical Conference, San Antonio, Texas, 24-27 September 2006.
4. Eck-Olsen, J., Pettersen, P.J., Ronneberg, A., Bjrkevoll, K.S. and Rommetveit, R. Managing Pressure During Underbalanced Cementing by
Choking the Return Flow; Innovative Design and Operational Modelling as well as Operational Lessons. SPE 92568, SPE/IADC Drilling
Conference, Amsterdam, 23-25 February 2005.
5. Iversen, F., Gravdal, J.E., Dvergsnes, E.W., Nygaard, G., Gjeraldstveit, H., Carlsen, L.A., Low, E., Munro, C. and Turvund, S. Feasibility
Study of ManagedPressure Drilling with Automatic Choke Control in Depleted HP/HT Field. SPE 102842, SPE Annual Technical
Conference, San Antonio, Texas, 24-27 September 2006.
6. McCaskill, J. MPD-Managing Wellbore Pressure while Drilling. Drilling Contractor Magazine (February 2006) .
7. Peterson, J., Bjrkevoll, K.S., Fryen, J. and Rommetveit, R.A. General Dynamic Model for Flow Related Operations During Drilling,
Completion, Well Control and Intervention. IBP 1373-06, Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference, Rio de Janerio, 11-14 September 2006.
8. Ronaes, E., Prebensen, O.I, Mikalsen, R., Taugbl, K., Sylty, S. and Torvund, S. An Innovative Fluid Transmission Pill Successfully Used
During Managed-Pressure Drilling Operations in an HPHT Environment. SPE 112528, SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Orlando, Florida, 4-6
March 2008.
9. Reitsma, D. and McCaskill, J. Full-Scale Automated Choke Manifold (Dynamic Annular Pressure Control). Presentation for SPE/IADC
Managed Pressure Drilling Conference, San Antonio, Texas, 20-21 April 2005.
10. Reitsma, D. and van Riet, E. Utilizing an Automated Pressure Control System for Managed Pressure Drilling in Mature Offshore Oilfields.
SPE 96646, SPE Offshore Europe Conference, Aberdeen, 6-9 September 2005.
11. Roes, V. Managed Pressure Drilling in Deep Water Brown Field Environment. Presentation for SPE/IADC Managed Pressure Drilling
Conference, San Antonio, Texas, 20-21 April 2005.
12. Roes, V. and May, J. Shell Applies Managed Pressure Drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Offshore (August 2005).
13. Santos, H. MPD Secure Drilling-Automatic Annular Pressure Control. Presentation for 2005 DEA Europe Conference, Bucharest, Romania,
1-2 December 2005.
14. Santos, H., Reid, P. Leuchtenberg, C., Jones, J., Lage, A. Nogueira, E. and Kozicz, J. Micro-Flux Control Method Combined with Surface
BOP Creates Enabling Opportunity for Deepwater and Offshore Drilling. OTC 17451, Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, 2-5 May
2005.
15. Santos, H., Reid, P., Jones, J., and McCaskill, J. Developing the Micro-Flux Control Method Part 1: System Development, Field Test
Preparation and Results. SPE/IADC 97025, SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling Technology Conference, Dubai, 12-14 September 2005.
16. Stone, C. Decision Process Affects Drilling Results. Harts E&P,(August 2005).
17. Van Riet, E., Reitsma, D. and Vandecraen, B. Development and Testing of a Fully Automated System to Accurately Control Downhole
Pressure During Drilling Operations. SPE 85310, SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling Technology Conference, Abu Dhabi, 20-22 October 2003.
18. Vogel, R. Continuous Circulation System Debuts with Commercial Successes Offshore Egypt and Norway. Drilling Contractor
(November/December 2006) 50.
19. Von Flatern, R. Handling the Pressure. Asian Oil & Gas (June 2005).

SPE/IADC 114484

Fig. 1 Kvitebjrn location.

Drilling Supv
D/N

Drilling Eng.
D

Toolpusher
D/N

Directional Driller

Driller

MPD - Supv.

D/N

D/N

D/N

Deck Foreman
D/N

MWD

Ast. Driller

D/N

D/N

MPD Service
Co-ordinator
D/N

MPD-BOP Leader

CCS Supv.

D/N

3 Deck Hands
D/N

Data Logger

Derrickman

Sr. Service Eng.

PCWD Operator

CCS Operator

D/N

D/N

D/N

D/N

4 Roughnecks

Service Eng.

CCS Techn

D/N

D/N

D/N

Technical Crew
Mud Engineer
D/N

Maint. Supv D
Mech D/N
Elect 2D/1N
Material 1D

Fig. 2 MPD operations - offshore organisation.

10

SPE/IADC 114484

Rig Floor

Pressure Relief Lines

MPD Chokes

MPD Control Stack

PCWD

Choke Controller

Flow Modeller

Flow meter

High Pressure BOP Stack

Auxiliary Pump

Rig Choke Manifold

Rig
MGS

High Pressure
Low Pressure

Fig. 3 Surface layout schematic.

General Lithology

Formation Pressures
Initial FG

Initial PP
Cromer
Knoll

Static Mud
Weight

Target
Pressure

Draupne

9-7/8"
Csg Shoe

Heather
Tarbert

Ness

Etive
Rannoch

Min PP Forecast

Min FG Forecast

Drake

FPWD Pressures
1.4

Fig. 4 Formation pressure illustration (A-13).

1.6

1.8

EMW (sg)

2.2

2.4

SPE/IADC 114484

11

MPD
BOP

-v
isc

Rig
BOP

2,
12

sg

Hi

2,12 sg Cs/K

1,

1780m: 52

81

sg

k
lin
X-

Twist-off: 1878 mMD

1880m: 41
1980m: 47

DP

1,
81

sg

Cs
/K
De
32
sig
37
m
ne
4
rm
57

ud
D
P

6101mMD / 4093 mTVD

6172mMD / 4149 mTVD
Tarbert
Ness

Fig. 5 Schematic of drillstring failure (A-13).

40

25 m

15 m

6188mMD / 4160 mTVD

TD: 6197mMD / 4169 mTVD