Sunteți pe pagina 1din 12

A Guide to Successful Backreaming:

Real-Time Case Histories


G. Yarim, SPE, G.M. Ritchie, SPE, and R.B. May, SPE, Schlumberger

Summary
Backreaming is the practice of pumping and rotating the drillstring
while simultaneously pulling out of the hole. When reliable topdrive drilling systems (TDSs) on conventional drilling rigs were
introduced more than 25 years ago, the practice of backreaming
became a popular technique in the drillers toolbox for tripping out
of hole initially in deviated wells.
In general, backreaming operations have become a popular
solution to poor hole conditions while pulling out of hole, but
they are also notorious for causing the very same problems they
are supposed to prevent, such as stuck pipe. If backreaming is not
performed properly, it may complicate the operations, cause wellbore-stability issues, cause higher equivalent circulating densities
(ECDs), and cause stuck-pipe incidents caused by packoffs.
As part of the companys stuck-pipe prevention initiative, it
became clear that when backreaming is carried out in a wellbore
that has a large amount of cuttings and/or cavings, it can cause
problems rather than solve them if it is not done with sufficient
care. Also, backreaming and tripping operations were usually occasions when the rig-based team went to a low-vigilance level. On
the basis of historical cases, it was concluded that in the majority of instances, there were no clear guidelines on when to start,
how to do it, when to slow down, and when to stop backreaming
operations. A review of industry literature also indicated a lack of
procedures generally for backreaming.
As a result of the analysis of the real-time data from several
case histories, a plan was put in place to improve backreaming
operations, define the situations that require backreaming, and
focus on tripping practices to prevent stuck-pipe incidents and
tool failures.
This paper focuses on one of the industrys most controversial subjects, reviews the implications of backreaming by using
real-time data and case histories, and suggests proven procedures
to trouble-free backreaming. It recommends the conditions that
require backreaming and also suggests wellbore conditions that are
not recommended for backreaming. More importantly, it proposes
key drilling parameters that need to be monitored when backreaming. These include pump pressure, torque, hookload, cuttings rate,
and downhole measurements (if available) to detect and prevent
backreaming-induced operational problems. In addition, this paper
provides guidelines for successful backreaming operations and
defines conditions that may be resolved without needing to backream. Backreaming guidelines have been developed on the basis of
the companys worldwide operations, supported by real-time case
histories and an extensive stuck-pipe prevention program.
Introduction
Backreaming can be thought of as drilling backwards to trip out
of the hole when there is a problem pulling the pipe out of the hole
without rotation and circulation.
In the early 1970s, Brown Oil Tool and Bowen developed the
first electric power swivel; then, in 1983, a Varco electric power
swivel was designed and placed on two jackup rigs. This swivel
was called a TDS. It had a 1,000-hp motor and pipe-handling

Copyright 2010 Society of Petroleum Engineers


This paper (SPE 116555) was accepted for presentation at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Denver, 2124 September 2008, and revised for publication.
Original manuscript received for review 6 July 2008. Revised paper received for review 27
March 2009. Paper peer approved 26 May 2009.

March 2010 SPE Drilling & Completion

system (Eustes 2007). In the past, all hole problems were handled
with a Kelly, and trying to backream with a Kelly was not a very
efficient operation because of excessive time required and limitations of these systems. The development of the TDSs provided a
new opportunity to trip out of hole using widescale backreaming.
Backreaming operations have since been widely adopted to resolve
wellbore-related issues. In general, backreaming is performed
When there is a problem to trip out of the hole normally
without circulation and rotation
To prepare the wellbore to run logs
To prepare the wellbore to run casing
To eliminate tight-hole conditions
To clean the hole to eliminate cuttings beds and hole cavings
However, the requirement for backreaming is often not well
defined, and the criteria to backream safely are not well communicated to the driller. In general, when there is a backreaming
or tripping operation, the rig-team vigilance level may be lower
than usual, even though these operations require special attention
because of the risks involved in tripping and backreaming operations. Another problem is that most of the drillstring components,
especially bottomhole-assembly (BHA) components, are designed
to work in compression while drilling with weight on bit, and
backreaming exerts some additional loads and forces that can lead
to tool failures.
It has been reported in the industry that focusing on training
helped reduce stuck-pipe incidents by 70%, and a majority of the
incidents are because of hole cleaning and solids-induced packoffs.
Also, some operators have reported that the worldwide stuck-pipe
cost was approximately USD 250 million/yr in the early 1990s
(Hopkins and Leicksenring 1995). Currently, the exact cost of
industry stuck-pipe events is unknown but is estimated at more than
USD 1 billion/yr. Currently, there are no industry statistics available on stuck-pipe incidents that have occurred while backreaming.
In fact, a literature search revealed a lack of information generally
on backreaming. However, the impact of backreaming on stuckpipe incidents can be estimated on the basis of solids-induced
packoffs that during 200406 accounted for approximately 65% of
stuck-pipe incidents (Yarim et al. 2007). Reviewing the companys
own stuck-pipe statistics, it was evident that the majority of these
solids-induced packoff incidents occurred while tripping out of the
hole and backreaming.
The company decided to prepare an in-house course to train
project teams and rig crews in stuck-pipe prevention fundamentals that focused on how to clean the hole, how to safely trip out
of the hole, and which defined conditions require backreaming.
Backreaming is always treated as a last resort after all other efforts
are exhausted to trip out of the hole. A stuck-pipe prevention and
mitigation plan was prepared, and resources were put in place,
which was described in a previous paper (Yarim et al. 2007). The
plan focused on improving the drilling teams skills through training and detailed incident investigations, along with active interaction and coaching to the project teams, which had some success
in reducing stuck-pipe frequency and impact.
The stuck-pipe prevention initiative also involved developing
specific tripping and backreaming procedures, and it includes
treating any tight spot as a hole-cleaning problem first and not
connecting the topdrive to backream immediately, limiting overpull values based on field knowledge and normal drag values, and
monitoring drilling parameters constantly to adjust backreaming
speed to detect problems early and to prevent adverse effects
caused by backreaming. In addition, a strategy of implementing
27

real-time surveillance of critical drilling operations from operations-support centers since 2007 is also having a positive impact
on stuck-pipe-incident frequency.
The Application of the Backreaming Technique
There are several wellbore conditions that may require backreaming, but there are also conditions where backreaming should be
avoided. As a first action, the well always should be treated for
hole cleaning first.
Conditions That May Require Backreaming.
When tripping out of the hole cannot be carried out on the
elevators without excessive overpull and the risk of stuck pipe
If there are concerns about swabbing, especially with balled-up
bit/BHA (although pumping out of hole could be an alternative)
Where there is insufficient mud weight to hold back plastic
formations (e.g., salt, mobile shales) to allow normal tripping
procedures
If there are known wellbore mechanical issues (e.g., tight-hole
conditions that cannot be resolved by circulating)
Conditions Where Backreaming Should Be Avoided (If
Possible).
When tripping out of the hole is possible without circulation
and rotation (i.e., backreaming should not be automatic especially
in wells with < 30 inclination)
When backreaming may destabilize the formation (e.g., where
there is pre-existing fractured/failed rock)
Where cuttings beds exist in high-angle wells and the risk
of packoff is high
Where rig pumps have insufficient capacity for adequate
hole cleaning
On the basis of a review of stuck-pipe case histories, it became
clear that each well needs to be treated separately, and operational
conditions and procedures need to be identified for each hole section. There is no single solution that will work for all well types.
However, there are good practices that can be followed to minimize
the risk of getting stuck while backreaming. In general, vertical
wells are easier to clean because there is a lower risk related to
cuttings beds, avalanching, and flow distribution in the wellbore.
Problems With Backreaming
Backreaming requires additional rig time compared to tripping
on the elevators. This may or may not be justified, depending on
the actual wellbore conditions as described in the preceding section. Some operators consider backreaming to be nonproductive
time. Additional problems and challenges with backreaming are
described in the next subsections.

Hole Cleaning and the Risk of Packoffs. If backreaming operations are conducted too fast, solids from washouts and cavings are
introduced into the circulating system at a rate faster than that at
which the hole is being cleaned. This can then result in a packoff.
It should not be assumed that any resistance is always at the bit;
stabilizer and drill-collar contact may be indicative of a buildup of
loose material in the hole and a potential packoff situation.
As the wellbore inclination increases, especially between 30
60, hole cleaning becomes more critical, and the well becomes
more prone to cutting beds and avalanches. Fig. 1 shows how
cuttings react in deviated wellbores on the basis of tests conducted
previously by M-I Drilling Fluids (Zamora et al. 1993).
It can also be seen in Fig. 2 that if the backreaming operations
are conducted in high-cuttings-bed environments, pump pressure,
torque, and overpull values all increase and have a tendency to
fluctuate as cuttings are moved in the well. There are cases when
a cuttings bed can even be encountered inside the casings in
high-angle wells (Zamora et al. 1993). In this case, backreaming
becomes even more challenging because of additional casing-wear
considerations.
It is important to note that the velocity of the backreaming shall
not exceed the upward movement of the cuttings in the wellbore.
The following is a classic scenario while backreaming out of the
hole in a high-angle well: The hole is circulated before initiating
the trip. Backreaming out of the hole starts; extra care is taken for
the first 10 stands; no overpulls occur; the driller gains confidence
and progressively increases the backreaming speed. After 30 or 50
stands of drillpipe have been pulled, the stand-pipe pressure suddenly increases, and string movement is no longer possible. The
string is now packed off and stuck in cuttings beds. This scenario
can be prevented by following the recommended approach to
backreaming described in this paper.
Another consideration is the cuttings generated while backreaming. In one case in Algeria, the 1338-in. casing had to be
set 16 m off-bottom because of cuttings settling on bottom after
backreaming in a vertical section. The mud properties while drilling the original hole had been reduced before the planned depth.
Consequently, the entire trip out of hole and the backreaming was
performed with low rheology properties and with a flow rate that
was only 50% of drilling flow rate. This significantly reduced
the capability of the mud to carry the cuttings out and suspend
the cuttings (gels). Some backreaming is common in this section
because of insufficient mud weight to hold back plastic formations
including salt, which prevents tripping normally. In this case, the
backreamed section while pulling out of hole was longer than
1000 m. If we consider that the backreaming affected 18 in. of wall
thickness, this generated 2 m3 of cuttings equivalent to 15.6 m in
length in a 16-in. hole.

>60

>30 and <60

Cuttings
transportation

Dune
transport

Moving bed

Stationary
bed

Rapid settling of individual particles onto the existing bed


Fig. 1 Cuttings-bed formation and stable /unstable cuttings bed.
28

March 2010 SPE Drilling & Completion

Restricted
cted annulus or high amount of cuttings:
gh/fluctuating pump pressure
High/fluctuating
gh/fluctuating torque
High/fluctuating
gh/fluctuating over pull
High/fluctuating
Fig. 2 Backreaming in high-cuttings-bed environments.

Wellbore Instability. When the BHA is off-bottom, it loses a


point of contact. Therefore, the room for vibrations and associated
energy increases. Backreaming unstable formations that are sensitive to mechanical agitation, such as fractured shales, can have a
negative effect on wellbore integrity. Altered clay material can end
up falling from the wellbore sides or can be removed mechanically
or dragged by the BHA. This material and the solids removed
from washout zones can result in a sudden packoff situation.
The mechanical action of the drillstring while backreaming will
cause agitation to the already weakened rock, causing an enlarged
annulus and more solids to remove from the wellbore. This can be
a challenging situation because it may not be possible to provide
fit for purpose hole cleaning without pipe rotation, which then
causes more problems. The solution in this case may be to pump
at the maximum rate without rotation and pull out of hole very
slowly. An additional problem occurs when the BHA moves from
a failing rock to a competent rock (overgauge to gauge hole). In
this case, a significant concentration of cavings ahead of the BHA
can cause stuck pipe at the interface between the overgauge and
gauge hole.
In one case in tectonically stressed areas with fractured shales,
data from cavings monitoring and ultrasonic-borehole-imager wireline-log images convinced the drilling team that drilling practices
contributed to destabilizing the wellbore. Mechanical disturbance
of yielded rock caused by backreaming, excessive drillstring vibrations, and excessive pressure fluctuations mobilized large volumes
of cavings that resulted in stuck pipe if they were not transported
out of the well.
The cavings-rate data were used to identify drilling practices
such as backreaming that tended to destabilize the wellbore and
as an indicator of the volume of solids in the wellbore. When
the caving rate changed abruptly or the rate became dangerously
high, drilling was stopped and cavings were circulated out of the
well. Fewer stuck-pipe incidents have been reported since the
cavings-rate monitoring has been in use and the general practice
of backreaming out of hole was stopped.
Drillstring Limitations. While backreaming, the pipe tension is
lower than when pulling out of the hole with excessive drag, but
torsional stress is introduced. For example, rather than pulling on
the elevators with a 400,000-lbf hookload, it is possible to backream using the topdrive with only 270,000 lbf and 20,000 lbf-ft
of torque. However, it is important to recognize the limitations
imposed by the drillpipe being under combined tension and torsion,
which can in some circumstances be very harmful for the wellbore
and the drillstring, resulting in a failure condition.
The drillstring is subjected to different forces classified into
two groups:
1. Related to the contact of the drillstring body with the wellbore (side forces).
March 2010 SPE Drilling & Completion

2. Related to the weight of the string, the geometry of the wellbore, and the rotation of the string (axial, bending, and torsional
forces = Von Mises stress).
During backreaming, all drillstring stresses are taking place:
axial stress caused by tension, bending stress caused by the curvature of the string according to the wellbore tortuosity, and torsional
stress caused by rotation.
The contact of the drillpipe and BHA components with the
wellbore under this stressed condition will increase the friction
caused by the tension and rotation, and thus will increase the side
forces.
The excess side forces induced while backreaming along with
incorrect practices can lead to accelerated casing and BHA wear
and undesirable situations such as twistoffs. If casing wear is suspected (e.g., because of high doglegs near surface leading to high
side forces), then rotation off-bottom should be minimized.
Backreaming can reduce the fatigue life of the drillpipe
significantly because of the reversal stress of the drillstring under
tension in a dogleg, especially if the doglegs are shallow and severe
and the pipe is under high tension.
The minimum torsional yield strength of the pipe under tension
can be determined from API RP 7G, Appendix 9.2 (1998):
QT =

P2
0.096167 J
Ym 2 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1)
D
A

BHA Limitations. Bits and stabilizers are typically not designed


to drill in reverse during backreaming, although some bits are
now available that have cutters at the top of the gauge to facilitate
the cutting action. It is important that all stabilizers are tapered
at the top and the bottom to avoid problems while pulling and
backreaming.
It is well known by measurement-while-drilling (MWD) personnel that backreaming out of hole with a bend in the BHA can
lead to high shocks that can result in premature tool failures. Some
of the reasons might be that the BHA is not in compression but
in tension and is less constrained because there is no fixed end.
Fig. 3 shows a single peak shock of +/ 175 G measured in the
MWD tool while backreaming with less than 60 surface rev/min
with a rotary-steerable assembly in 12-in. hole in a 73 tangent
section following a continuous 2-to-3 2D build from vertical. The
company defines the risk inherent in peak shocks in terms of 50-G
steps for continuous shocks (i.e., < 50 G; low 50 to 100, medium;
100 to 150 high; and >150 severe).
Real-Time Backreaming Case Histories
Well P-21, Mexico. Stuck pipe while backreaming with 12-in.
bit at 3,938 m measured depth (MD), resulting in 291 hours of
nonproductive time.
29

Description: Time Log Format: TimeLogFormat Index Scale: 1 in per 600 s Index Type: Time Creation Date: 18-Jun-2008 16:01:32
Surface_rpm
(RPM)
0
Block_position
(BPOS)
0

ft

Hookload (HKLD)
0
klbf
500

150

Rop*5 (ROP5)
500
ft/ h
00

klbf

100

3.15
MWD_ShkPk
(SHKPK_RT)

Surface_wob
(SWOB)
0

G's

c/min

Surface_torque
(STOR)

200 0

kft.lbf

Stand_pipe_pressure
(SPPA)

300

MWD_CRPM
(CRPM_RT)
0
c/min 300

Shock_Risk
(SHKRSK_RT)

2500

psi

4500

Bit_on_bottom
(BONB)
Total_pump_flow
-10
1
(FLWI)

StickSlip
(STICK_RT)
c/min 300 0
25 0

gal/mi n 1000

Sep.03-2006
12:00

Sep.03-2006
12:20

Fig. 3 Example of peak shocks while backreaming with rotary-steerable BHA.

Event Summary. Well P-21 was planned as an S-shaped well with


kickoff at 1550 m and 12-in. hole from 3050 to 5100 m MD.
Ran 1338-in. casing. Circulated and conditioned mud. Cemented
13380-in.-casing shoe at 3050 m MD. Raised mud weight from 1.64
to 1.80 g/cm3. Drilled to 3110 m. Pulled out of hole (POOH) to
surface. Changed BHA to rotary steerable with 12-in. polycrystalline-diamond bit.
Run in hole (RIH) to 3110 m, reaming and cleaning to 3,136
m. Attempted to pick up. Pump pressure increased indicating stuck
pipe (packoff). Worked pipe free. Circulated and conditioned well.
Mud weight was 1.87 g/cm3. Reamed from 3136 to 3141 m.
Drilled ahead to 4260 m; POOH one stand to 4247 m because
of wash-pipe failure not able to POOH another stand: 50-ton drag.
Circulated with auxiliary line rotating with rotary Kelly bushing.
Repaired wash pipe. Drilled ahead to 4304 m, pumped viscous
pill [5 to 12-tons weight on bit (WOB), 150 rev/min, 520 gal/min,
4,000 psi, 14.6 m/hr, 1.90 g/cm3 mud weight]
Continued circulating bottoms-up (520 gal/min, 4,000 psi).
POOH 5 stands to 4189 m. Not able to pump heavy pill because
of wash-pipe failure. Continued POOH to 4062 m (35-to-45-ton
drag), laid down one joint, circulated with auxiliary line (200 gal/
min, 3,000 psi). Repaired wash pipe. Connected total depth, POOH
to 4043 m, (30-to-40-ton drag), worked string free. Backreaming to
3984 m. Observed pressure increase to 4,200 psi, stopped rotation,
hole packed off. Continued working the pipe in tension/compression while waiting for pipe-severance services.
Fig. 4 shows a post-drilling analysis of the real-time data at the
time the pipe was stuck while backreaming.
30

Investigation Findings.
Stuck-pipe event was because of solids-induced packoff while
backreaming.
Drilled last 996 m with an average rate of penetration (ROP)
of 21 m/hr before the event.
There were multiple problems with the wash pipe preventing
continuous flow rate to clean the hole sufficiently.
Hole circulated 1.6 times bottoms up before POOH.
Only 253 gal/min while backreaming in 12-in. hole with
150 rev/min and 3,900-psi standpipe pressure. This compares to
550 gal/min while drilling, which is an indication that the hole
was not clean.
The flow rate was constrained by the high pump pressure
using 5-in. drillpipe.
Geomechanics post-drilling analysis indicates mechanical
hole instability (cavings) because of geological stress-convergence
area (see Fig. 5).
Caliper log shows 40 m of 19-to-20-in. washout below the 1338in.-casing shoe, which aggravated the hole-cleaning problem.
The driller did not follow best practices (exceeded overpull
limits and went straight to backreaming after overpull instead of
running back down to circulate and clean the well).
Case-Study Conclusions. This event was entirely preventable
because there were clear indications of hole-cleaning problems
before the stuck pipe.
Tripping and backreaming practices were not followed:
Backreaming was the first action to resolve tight-hole
conditions.
March 2010 SPE Drilling & Completion

P/U String
30 Tons overpull

Break Connection

Flow Rate 253 gpm


Pressure 3873 psi

P/U String, W/O


Pumps and Rotation
50 tons Overpull

Back Reaming

Loss Circulation
Pack Off

(MFOA 0%)
Pressure Increase f/
3900 psi to 4200 psi

Working String
Trapped Pressure
1600 psi

Fig. 4 Analysis of real-time data for Well P-21 packoff event.

Possible
unstable
fault

Fig. 5 Well P-21 wellbore-instability analysis and cavings.


March 2010 SPE Drilling & Completion

31

Insufficient flow rate while backreaming.


Insufficient monitoring/reaction to backreaming parameters.
Driller pulled more than the overpull limit.
Since this event, the drillpipe size has been increased to 5 in.
to allow higher circulating rates. Project-specific tripping/backreaming procedures have been implemented, and compliance to
procedures is being enforced by real-time monitoring from an
operations-support center.
Well C-724, Colombia. Event Summary. Well C-724 was planned
with two casing strings to reach planned depth of 5,010 ft. The
958-in. casing was set at 450 ft without any problems. The 8-in.hole section was planned to reach target depth with a planned mud
weight of 11.7 lbm/gal.
The well was drilled without any major issues to 5,010 ft. Last
drilling parameters recorded as ROP = 30 ft/hr, 110 rev/min, 10,000to-12,000-lbm WOB, P = 1,700 psi, Q = 440 gal/min, torque = 2,000
lbf-ft. The formation was 80% sandstone and 20% shale.
Circulated well for a short trip for 1.5 hours and pumped 25
bbl of pill at 216 gal/min. High-viscous sweep brought many cuttings to surface, and then the shakers came clean.
Shut off pumps and rotary, worked the first stand with no
circulation or rotation, and recorded all parameters (including
drag while working up and down). Pulled first stand with normal
parameters without any overpull. Attempted to pull second stand
and drag came up to 10,000 lbf. Worked stand up and down, but
drag did not change.
At the third stand, drag increased to 30,000 lbs. Connected
TDS and started circulation at 400 gal/min and 1,400-psi standpipe pressure. Pumped out of hole with no rotation (Mud weight =
12.4 lbm/gal). Pulled the fourth stand normally, with no pump or
rotation. Drag increased from 10,000 to 20,000 lbf.
Pulled the fifth and sixth stands, and drag increased from
20,000 to 40,000 lbf. Connected TDS and circulated at 400 gal/min

and pumped high viscous sweep; small amount of cavings came


to shaker with sweep but no cuttings. At this point, backreamed
out of hole for two stands at 80 rev/min and 400 gal/min; drag
was still present.
RIH to 5,010 ft and circulated the active system to these properties, no problem going in the hole. (Decision to increase the
density of the drilling mud from 12.4 to 12.8 lbm/gal at this time,
interpreting the issue as wellbore instability).
Circulated 1 hours to achieve balanced mud density at 12.8
lbm/gal in and out.
POOH with no problems with only elevators (7 or 8 stands).
Overpull increased to 10,000 then to 20,000 then to 40,000 then
to 60,000 lbf. Connected TDS and circulated with 400 gal/min and
tried to POOH with pump only. The overpull would not decrease
so the decision was taken to backream at 80 rev/min and 400
gal/min; at this time, fine cuttings or cavings were coming to the
shakers in small amounts.
Stopped at 4,600 ft to discuss the situation. Decision was to
continue to backream out of hole for five stands and circulate bottoms up and do this every five stands backreamed.
Repeated this procedure to 3,200 ft, and then experienced pressure increase when the complete stand was almost all the way up.
The driller went down and, at the same time, slowed the pump
rate to 200 gal/min and tried to work the string, and the topdrive
stalled out with torque.
Drillstring was stuck at this point, with very little returns coming back. Worked pipe, but no success to move string up or down
or get back rotation.
The real-time log for the stuck-pipe incident while backreaming
can be seen in Fig. 6.
Case-Study Conclusions. This event was preventable had
tripping/backreaming best practices been followed. This was a
poor application of backreaming caused by wellbore-instability
issues.

Backreaming with
2000 psi
1500 ft-lbs
430 gpm
75125 RPM

Driller worked the


pipe to pass the
tight spot with up
to 20 klbf over pull
Torque increasing
from 1500 ft-lbs to
7500 ft-lbs

Pump pressure
increasing and
erratic (indication of
hole packing off)

String stuck without


rotation, circulation
and pipe movement

Figure 6 Analysis of real-time data for Well C-724 packoff event.


32

March 2010 SPE Drilling & Completion

In this case, the decision was to connect the topdrive immediately when the tight spots were detected. The best course of
action would have been to focus on hole cleaning and observing
backreaming parameters more closely to prevent the stuck-pipe
incident. When a large amount of cavings, increased pump pressure, and high torque and overpulls were observed, the driller
should have gone down instead of forcing the drillstring out of the
hole while backreaming.
As a result of this incident, project-specific tripping and backreaming procedures and project-specific training, including the rig
team, have been implemented.
Recommended Approach to Backreaming
Operations
On the basis of the findings of a number of backreaming case
histories, such as the examples included in this paper, operational
procedures for tight-hole conditions and backreaming have been
established. An example procedure to backream in 8-in.-hole section can be seen in Appendix A. The main focus of the procedure is

to listen to the well and establish if the backreaming is necessary.


When the conditions are established and confirmed that the well
does not show indications of poor hole cleaning, then backreaming
can be used as a last resort. In addition, a decision tree has been
developed to provide guidance on backreaming operations (see
Fig. 7).
The key parameters to monitor while backreaming have also
been defined:
Pump pressure, flow rate, rev/min
Backreaming speed
Torque and drag
Cuttings rate vs. time
Annular-pressure-while-drilling (APWD) data from MWD
tools
As a general guideline, backreaming should be a slow and
patient operation. If parameters deviate from normal, the string
should not be pulled faster than the cuttings are being transported
out of the hole. As a rule of thumb, backreaming speed should
not exceed 4 stands per hour. It is very important to establish

Trip out of
the hole

Drill to target depth


monitoring
Torque and Drag

Monitor the
hole drag

Circulate hole clean


and measure T&D
before and
after circulation
YES

Tight spot
Excess
O/P based
on limit

Record the depth


of the tight spot
Record the over pull

NO

Run back
2-3 stands

Run back
2-3 stands

Slowly rotate and


break circulation.
Circulate, reciprocate
and rotate to clean the hole

Slowly rotate and


break circulation.
Circulate, reciprocate
and rotate to clean
the hole (Pump a pill
if required)

Likely cause :
Well bore
geometry or
mechanical

NO

Continue to clean the


hole and modify the
MW if required.
POOH

POOH with
caution to the
previous
tight spot

NO

Overpull at
same depth

Likely cause:
Hole cleaning

YES

Well bore
instability?

YES

YES
Backream
(away from the
tight spot)
with drilling flow
rate and RPM

Is there
still a tight
spot?

NO

Fig. 7Backreaming decision tree.


March 2010 SPE Drilling & Completion

33

what the normal torque and drag are and what the corresponding
pump pressure to the required flow rate is to establish references.
Increasing or erratic torque and/or pump pressure are good indicators of whether the backreaming speed is too fast and the annulus
is loading up with cuttings. Backreaming speed should be reduced
if pressure and torque trends are not stable.
Cuttings returns at surface, including the rate over time, should
be monitored continuously, and any sign of cavings should be
observed. The percentage, size, and any changes in the volume of
cavings should also be noted.
As backreaming takes place and generates a high amount of solids
in the annular space, it causes the ECD to increase. The ECD from
APWD measurements will give an indication of the changing concentration of cuttings in the annulus, although this will be less sensitive at
high-inclination sections of the well. Fig. 8 shows a real example where
monitoring ECD data from MWD tools was used to decide to circulate
bottoms to lower cuttings concentration in the annulus because of backreaming. In this example, backreaming resulted in the ECD increasing
from 1.67 to 2.03 g/cm3. As can be seen in Fig. 8, the application of
APWD technology has provided additional input to slow down the
backreaming speed and increase the circulating time to eliminate the
cuttings accumulation, thus lowering the risk of stuck pipe.
Real-Time Surveillance From Operations-Support Centers.
The company has implemented a strategy of real-time surveillance
of key drilling operations from operations-support centers.
In general, operations-support-center surveillance of tripping
can reduce stuck-pipe incidents through enforcement of good tripping practices such as circulating multiple bottoms up before tripping on directional wells, limiting maximum overpull, and using
good parameters while backreaming, as discussed earlier in the
paper. Stuck-pipe prevention awareness is increased, and reviewing
the real-time data from actual events also helps train the rig team.
Monitoring from an operations-support center provides additional
real-time support to field personnel for event detection and enables
engineers working in the center to monitor multiple wells simultaneously. However, for event detection and mitigation to be effective, it is critical that the project-specific roles and responsibilities
of wellsite and operations-support-center personnel be defined and
understood in advance. Real-time surveillance does not remove the
primary responsibility of the on-site wellsite supervisor.
In the following example from Algeria (see Fig. 9), the operations-support center observed backreaming operations in 16-in.

hole at 1,400 L/min (370 gal/min) compared with the drilling flow
rate of 3,200 L/min (845 gal/min). A recommendation was sent to
the wellsite supervisor to increase the flow rate to the drilling flow
rate, and he agreed to increase it from 44 to 80% of the drilling
flow rate for subsequent backreaming.
In the operations-support center, drilling data are assessed continuously in the real-time monitoring software and analyzed with
the help of the real-time torque-and-drag and hydraulics models,
which are vital aids in stuck-pipe prevention. This software has
been described in a previous paper (McLaren et al. 2007). Hookload and surface torque are calculated continuously and compared
to actual measurement values highlighting deviations such as
excess drag caused by poor hole cleaning rather than drag as a
result of hole tortuosity. However, the current torque-and-drag
model has limitations for backreaming because there is no component for the torque generated by the stabilizers and bit cutting
into the formation while backreaming (rotational friction effect
only is considered). This can be seen clearly in Fig. 10 where
the actual torque while backreaming significantly exceeds the
calculated torque.
The real-time software also includes automatic rig activity
detection known as rig states that has the ability to bin time
data into a series of rig states (e.g., slide drilling, backreaming)
by analysis of specific-time data channels. This is described in
detail by McLaren et al. (2007). This allows a rig-activity time
breakdown based on the real-time data (see Fig. 11). The percentage time or total hours backreaming can then be correlated with
the drilling practices in use, such as the mud weight and the BHA,
and compared to offset wells.
Today, we have intervention based on real-time monitoring, but
in the future, drilling automation may provide a better preventive
solution to stuck pipe by reducing reliance on rig personnel following procedures. This may help combat the difficulty in hiring
experienced rig personnel during a time of industry expansion. In
the industry, field testing is already being carried out in automated
tripping in and out of hole where the driller cannot exceed certain
limits based on models such as swab/surge updated in real time
(Iversen et al. 2008).
Results
A combination of stuck-pipe prevention and improved operations
have resulted in a reduction in company stuck-pipe incidents, especially while tripping and backreaming out of the hole.

Fig. 8 Monitoring ECD from MWD APWD measurements while backreaming.


34

March 2010 SPE Drilling & Completion

Fig. 9 Example operations-support-center real-time monitoring of backreaming parameters.

Table 1 shows the stuck-pipe statistics for a project in Algeria and a project in Mexico where, in addition to the stuck-pipe
training of the drillers and the project team, real-time surveillance
from operations-support centers was implemented in Q3 and Q4
2007. As a result of significant focus on stuck-pipe prevention and
mitigation, stuck-pipe costs per operating day were reduced by 50
and 84%, respectively.
Conclusions
1. Since the advent of reliable TDSs, the practice of backreaming
became a popular technique in the drillers toolbox for tripping
out of hole. However, many stuck-pipe incidents occur while
tripping and backreaming out of hole, and it is clear that this is
a high-risk activity.
March 2010 SPE Drilling & Completion

2. There has been a lack of clear guidelines on when backreaming


should be applied and how it should be performed, including
the key parameters that need to be monitored.
3. Backreaming should not be practiced as a first action if there are
indications of a large amount of cuttings in the annular space or
if indications of wellbore instability exist. The first action should
be taken by going down with the drillstring and circulating to
clean the hole.
4. The company has implemented a systems approach to improve
backreaming operations and to prevent stuck-pipe incidents,
including
Stuck-pipe prevention and mitigation training, which includes
backreaming operations
Backreaming best practices and decision tree
35

Fig. 10 Real-time monitoring of torque and drag during backreaming.

Specific backreaming procedures


Real-time surveillance of tripping and backreaming operations
on critical projects
Improvements based on actual lessons learned
5. The following backreaming best practices have been developed:
Backream with optimum parameters
Monitor all parameters (pump pressure, torque, and hookload)
to determine optimum backreaming speed
Do not backream faster than cuttings being transported out
of the hole
Continue backreaming only if parameters are stable or
improving
Note the tight-spot locations, and treat restrictions with tighthole procedures
If hole conditions are not improving, be patient while backreaming at the tight spot
Never force drillstring out of the hole while backreaming
6. As a result of improved tripping and backreaming operations,
including limiting overpull values, the percentage of companys
stuck-pipe incidents caused by packoffs reduced from 65 to 33%.
36

7. Drilling automation may provide a better preventive solution to


stuck pipe while tripping and backreaming in the future.
Nomenclature
A = cross-sectional area, in.2
D = outside diameter, in.
d = inside diameter, in.
G = shock threshold (g)
J = polar moment of inertia; Pi/32 (D4d4) for tubes; 0.098175
(D4d4),
P = total load in tension, lbf
QT = minimum torsional yield strength under tension, lbf-ft
Ym = material minimum yield strength, psi
Acknowledgments
We wish to thank the following Schlumberger employees who
assisted in the writing and reviewing of this paper: Gerard Cuvillier, Jacques Bourque, Jose Alarcon, Eduardo Parra Garcia, Ember
Duran, and Randy Green.
March 2010 SPE Drilling & Completion

2.0%
2.6%
Data Gap Stationary
1.2% Pump

2.3%
Other*

7.1%
Rotate, Pump

In Slips 35.8%

18.1% Pull Up

2.9% Pull Up, Pump


Run In 1.1%

26.9% Back Ream


Fig. 11Automatic rig-states time breakdown.

TABLE 1STUCK-PIPE STATISTICS FOR PROJECTS WITH OPERATIONS-SUPPORT-CENTER


SURVEILLANCE
Algeria
SP Cost/Day
($)

Inc/K
(days)

Mexico
Inc/MM
(ft)

SP Cost/Day
($)

Inc/K
(days)

Inc/MM
(ft)

2007 Total Year End

2,789

10.62

6.19

5160

8.36

9.35

2008 Total Year End

1,385

10.58

5.88

821

4.42

3.98

References
API RP 7G, Drill Stem Design and Operating Limits, sixteenth edition.
1998. Washington, DC: API.
Eustes, A.W. III. 2007. The Evolution of Automation in Drilling. Paper
SPE 111125 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Anaheim, California, USA, 1114 November. doi:
10.2118/111125-MS.
Hopkins, C.J. and Leicksenring, R.A. 1995. Reducing the Risk of Stuck
Pipe in The Netherlands. Paper SPE 29422 presented at theSPE/
IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, 29 February2 March. doi:
10.2118/29422-MS.
Iversen, F.P., Cayeux, E., Dvergsnes, E.W., Ervik, R., Byrkjeland, M.,
Welmer, M., Torsvoll, A., Karimi Balov, M., Haugstad, E., and Merlo,
A. 2008. Offshore Field Test of a New Integrated System for Real-Time
Optimisation of the Drilling Process. Paper SPE 112744 presented
at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Orlando, Florida, USA, 46
March. doi: 10.2118/112744-MS.
McLaren, G., Hayes, M.J.S., Brown, N.M., Okafor, Z., and Megat, I. 2007.
Improving the Value of Real-Time Drilling Data To Aid Collaboration,
Drilling Optimization and Decision Making. Paper SPE 110563 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Anaheim, California, USA, 1114 November. doi: 10.2118/110563-MS.
Yarim, G., Uchytil, R., May, R., Trejo, A., and Church, P. 2007. Stuck
Pipe PreventionA Proactive Solution to an Old Problem. Paper
SPE 109914 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Anaheim, California, USA, 1114 November. doi:
10.2118/109914-MS.
Zamora, M., Jefferson, D.T., and Powell, J.W. 1993. Hole Cleaning Study
of Polymer-Based Drilling Fluids. Paper SPE 26329 presented at the
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, 36 October. doi: 10.2118/26329-PA.
March 2010 SPE Drilling & Completion

Appendix A: Example Backreaming Best


Practice for 8-in.-Hole Section
Backreaming Best Practices.
A. Backreaming is a critical operation that must be supervised
personally by the wellsite supervisor and tool pusher.
B. If tight-hole conditions are encountered, follow tight-hole
procedures. Do not start backreaming immediately.
C. If backreaming is performed in tight-hole/high-cuttings-bed
conditions at fast speeds, it may cause higher ECDs, possible lost
circulation, and lost circulation caused by restricted annular sections. Backreaming also can cause packoffs and wellbore-stability
problems.
D. The more attention paid to the rate of movement up while
backreaming, the safer it is.
E. The casing wear needs to be constantly monitored by using
ditch magnets while backreaming out of the hole.
F. A reference table needs to be developed showing the combination of torque and tension effect on the drillstring based on
actual condition of the drillstring.
G. Whenever possible, backreaming operations should be monitored in real time.
While Drilling. Monitor torque and drag during the entire drilling
phase and establish a base line (pick up/slack off/rotating weight
and torque with pumps on and off).
Upon Reaching Target Depth.
1. Repeat torque and drag measurements (pick up/slack off/
rotating weight and torque with pumps on and off).
2. Circulate 2 to 3 bottoms or until well is clean with drilling
flow rate, sufficient rotation (80 to 100 rev/min), and full stand
37

length reciprocation. (Adjust rev/min depending on rig, well, and


BHA limitations.)
3. Pump weighted/viscous hole-cleaning pills with drilling flow
rate, sufficient rotation (80 to 100 rev/min), and full stand length
reciprocation. Remember: good pill + good gal/min + max rev/min +
max rate of pipe movement = a clean hole.
4. Take torque and drag measurements (pick up/slack off /rotating weight and torque with pumps on and off). Compare these
values with the torque and drag values taken in Step 1.
TrippingTight-Hole Procedures.
5. Perform pretrip risk assessment meeting with all rig personnel, highlighting potential problem spots (depths and overpull limitations), and review special tight-hole and backreaming
practices.
6. If torque and drag parameters are improved, begin trip normally (pull out of the hole by stands). Do not force the drillstring
out of the hole with excessive over pull. Note the location of the
tight spot.
7. If the torque and drag do not change or there is more than
20,000 lbm excess drag (over normal hole drag), return to bottom
if close to bottom. If off bottom, trip in hole 2 to 3 stands below
the tight spot.
8. Rotate the pipe at 30 to 40 rev/min to break the gels around
the pipe. Bring the pumps on with a low circulation rate until
returns are seen at surface. Increase the pump rate to the drilling
rate, and gradually increase rotation to 80 to 100 rev/min.
Backreaming.
9. Begin backreaming out of the hole with optimum backreaming parameters (80 to 100 rev/min and drilling flow rate), monitoring pump pressure, torque, and hookload. Determine backreaming
speed on the basis of these parameters. An increase in these parameters or erratic readings in these parameters can be an indication
of annulus loading up.
10. Do not backream faster than cuttings being transported out
of the hole. The faster you go, the more problems you will have

38

with backreaming. Backreaming parameters and practices need to


be adjusted for hole angle, condition, and diameter.
11. Continue backreaming only if parameters are stable or
improving. If parameters are not improving or they are worsening,
stop. NEVER force drillstring out of the hole while backreaming.
Note the tight-spot locations.
12. Go back down 2 to 3 stands, circulate the hole clean, and
repeat tight-hole procedures.
13. Start backreaming with caution, as per Step 9. When you
get to the same spot, pay more attention to the parameters.
14. If hole conditions are not improving, be patient while backreaming at the tight spot.
Gokhan Yarim holds a BS in petroleum engineering from
Istanbul Technical University and an ME degree from Colorado
School of Mines. He has over 12 years of experience working
in international operations covering a variety of well types
and countries. Yarim held positions as well engineer, senior well
engineer, and well engineering manager for Latin America in
various countries. Currently, he is working as the worldwide well
engineering manager for Integrated Project Management Well
Construction and Intervention, supporting engineering and
operations over 70 rigs primarily in Latin America, Russia, and
North Africa. Graham Ritchie is the worldwide drilling technical
manager for Schlumberger Drilling and Measurements based
at the Stonehouse Technology Center in the UK. He has over 24
years of oilfield experience with BP and Schlumberger including
various positions in drilling engineering, operations, and project
management. Ritchie holds a BE in mining engineering from
Nottingham University and an MBA from Aberdeen University.
He is a member of SPE. Richard B. May received his BBA in engineering management from Texas A&I University in 1974. He has
over 35 years of experience in international drilling operations,
engineering and project management in over 20 different
countries. May has held positions as derrickman, driller, directional driller, WSS, drilling engineer, drilling superintendent, and
drilling manager. He joined Schlumberger Integrated Project
Management (IPM) in 1996, working throughout South America.
Mays current assignment is as well operations manager for an
8 rig HTHP integrated drilling project in Villahermosa, Mexico.

March 2010 SPE Drilling & Completion

S-ar putea să vă placă și