Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
2
Section
OBJECTIVES
On completion of this lesson, you will be able to:
Explain how water depth and RKB elevation impact fracture gradient and pore
pressure.
Be able to adjust mud weights, LOTs, etc. of an offset well to a different water depth
and RKB elevation.
Calculate fracture gradients for wells drilled with floating drilling rigs.
List the factors which impact equivalent circulating density and know which factors
are manageable.
Describe the factors which must be considered when selecting a mud type for a well
drilled with a floating rig.
Describe how natural gas hydrates affect the mud selection process.
2-1
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
CONTENTS Page
2-2
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2.1 OVERVIEW
As water depth increases beyond the point where bottom founded rigs can drill, floating
rigs and techniques are used while drilling exploration and most appraisal and
development wells. The special equipment used when floating rigs drill has an impact on
well designs. As water depth increases many floating rig drilling techniques become
critical to well planning and efficient operations. It is important that the issues associated
with floating rig operations be included in well planning.
Pore pressure and fracture gradient predictions are the most important factors that affect
well planning in deeper water depths (Figure 2.1). As water depth increases, the margin
between pore pressure and fracture gradient typically reduces as well. The well design
and cost are therefore heavily impacted by these predictions.
Every drilling engineer should be familiar with methods and procedures to develop pore
pressure and fracture gradient predictions. While ExxonMobil has specialists who
develop pore pressure and fracture gradients, it is necessary for the drilling engineer to
understand the basis and the uncertainties in their estimates as well as to compare their
estimates with offset wells.
2-3
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
This equation defines the fracture pressure as a variable dependent on the overburden
pressure, the formation pore pressure and the horizontal to vertical effective stress ratio
(K). This general method is used in many methods to predict fracture pressures. The
difference in most predictive methods is how to estimate pore pressure, overburden
pressure and the vertical effective stress ratio K.
2-4
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2.2.1 OVERBURDEN
The overburden pressure at a given depth is the weight of everything above it. e.g.,
seawater, density of soil from the mud line to the depth of interest. All well depth
references are from the rotary Kelly bushing (RKB). The air gap can have a significant
impact on overburden (especially shallow overburden) and should be included in all
overburden calculations. The air gap on floating rigs can range from about 40 ft to as
much as 125 ft.
The gradient of a seawater column does change slightly with water depth. However, this
change is usually insignificant, and generally a seawater hydrostatic pressure of 8.55
ppg (roughly 3.5 WT% salt) is a good estimate (4).
To estimate overburden below the mud line, the well depth from the mud line to the
depth of interest is usually broken down into numerous intervals. The bulk density of
each interval is then estimated and the overburden pressure of that interval calculated. A
sum of the overburden pressure from the seawater and all intervals below the mud line
will result in the total overburden pressure at the depth of interest.
2.4
2.3
2.2
Bulk Density, gm/cc
2.1
2
Best Curve F it
1.9
1.8
Soil Boring Data
1.7 Density Log Data
1.6
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Su b s e a De p th ft
2-5
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
For deeper wells, bulk densities from density logs can be integrated to the depth of
interest and will result in a good estimate of overburden pressure. Unfortunately, density
logs are seldom run in shallow hole sections of a well and getting an estimate of shallow
below mud line overburden pressure can be difficult. Soil boring data is available in
almost all areas of the world, and typically, soil borings will penetrate from a few feet to
as much as 2000 ft below the mud line. The submerged unit weight of soil can be
integrated to develop an overburden pressure for shallow formations. Figure 2.2 is an
example of a bulk density vs. depth below sea level plot for a GOM shelf well.
Overburden pressure is expressed in psi. An overburden gradient is measured in psi/ft
and is the normal method used in the industry to express overburden. The overburden
gradient for a well typically increases asymptotically with depth and should near a 1.0
psi/ft (19.2 ppg or a 2.3 SG) with depth. Figure 2.3 shows typical overburden gradient
curves from around the world.
1.0 psi/ft
2000
4000
6000
Depth Below Mudline - ft
8000
Offshoe California
12000
Gulf Coast - Fertl &
Timko
14000 MW Shelf, Australia
20000
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Overburden pressure Gradient- lbs/gal
2-6
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2-7
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2-8
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
Overburden Gradient
Pore Pressure
9000 Eaton
Daines
Christman
Brennan & Annis
11000 Simmons & Rau
Barker & Woods
13000
Depth RKB, ft TVD
15000
17000
19000
21000
23000
25000
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Stress Gradients, ppge
Figure 2.4 - Comparison of Different Fracture Gradient Prediction Methods
2-9
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
By far the most common method to estimate fracture gradients is the Eaton Technique
(8)
. This method relates the effective stress ratio to Poissons ratio. Poissons ratio is
then correlated with overburden gradient. Both Poissons ratio and overburden are
variable with depth. Table 2.1 summarizes many of the fracture gradient prediction
methods. The impact of tectonic effects on formation stress states is not directly
incorporated in these predictive techniques.
Eaton (1968) f(Poisson's, OB) yes yes Gulf Coast, Land, Shelf
Daines (1980 & 1982) f(Poisson's) yes yes f(first PIT) All, international
Beekels & Van Eekelan (1982) f(depth) no mo Offset PIT Land, worldwide
Brennan & Annis (1984) f(effective stress) yes yes GOM shelf
Simmons & Rau (1988) f(Poisson's) yes yes Deepwater, modified Eaton
Rocha & Bourgoyne (1984) f(depth, compaction) no yes Need computer & Brazil, deepwater worldwide
offset well info
2 - 10
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
In shallow water and on land, the pore pressure can have a significant impact on the
calculated fracture gradient. In deeper water, the pore pressure has a lesser impact on
the fracture gradient prediction. Figure 2.5 illustrates the sensitivity of calculated fracture
gradients to pore pressure with a fixed overburden gradient for a well in 7400 ft. water
depth.
2 - 11
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
Figure 2.6 illustrates that as water depth increases, the need for accurate predictions of
fracture gradient, overburden gradient and pore pressure increases. Many times
deepwater wells have a very small margin between fracture gradient and pore pressure
gradient. Small errors in either fracture gradient or pore pressure predictions can result
in a well not achieving its geologic objectives, or the achievable well depth being
constrained. In these cases, accurate prediction of casing setting depths is also very
difficult, and the well plan has a high degree of uncertainty. The very high cost of
deepwater operations further heightens the critical need for accurate predictions.
Shelf
Increasing
Water
Depth
Deepwater
2 - 12
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2 - 13
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
1000
WD 1 = 2000 ft
2000 WD 2 = 3500 ft
3000
Mudline
4000
3500 ft
5000
RKB 1 = 5548 ft PIT 1 = 13.2 ppg
6000
7000 PIT 2 = ?
RKB 2 = 7102 ft
8000
9000
10000
PIT2 = 12.1 ppg (Adjusted to proposed well water depth and RKB)
Figure 2.7 - Method to Correct Offset Well for Water Depth and RKB Elevation
2 - 14
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
Figures 2.8 and 2.9 illustrate how adjusting offset well PITs to a common reference
water depth and RKB elevation will help improve the mud weight prediction for a
new well.
13 305, 7073'
429-2, 6134'
Mud weight (ppg)
12
476, 6626'
11.5
520, 6738'
11
522, 6929'
10.5
606, 6294'
10
607, 6588'
9.5 657, 7520'
9 348, 7209'
8.5 Block WD
8
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
11000
12000
13000
14000
Depth below mud line, ft
2 - 15
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
12.0 429-2
11.5 476
11.0 520
10.5 522
10.0 606
607
9.5
657
9.0
348
8.5
8.0
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
11000
12000
13000
14000
Depth belowmud line, ft
Figure 2.9 - Offset Well Mud Weight Adjusted to a Common WD and RKB
2 - 16
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
For most shelf and normal pressured wells, ECD is usually not a design issue. Common
casing sizes and low to moderate mud weights result in ECDs, which are relatively
small, typically 0.5 ppg or less. Also, for most of these wells, there is a large margin
between the pore pressure gradient and the fracture gradient, and a small ECD does not
have a significant effect on initial well design or operational procedures. In cases where
a large margin exists, ECD is less important. However there is an increasing number of
shelf wells and shallow water wells being drilled where ECD is a much higher concern
and constraint.
2 - 17
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
With increasing water depth and well depth, the number of casing strings required to
reach total depth often increases. These wells usually have a low margin between pore
pressure and fracture gradient, several tight clearance liner strings, small hole sizes,
higher mud weights and much higher ECDs. For example, a recent well drilled with a
floating rig in the GOM required nine casing strings to reach 23,000 ft total depth. Also, a
GOM well in 9687 ft. water depth required six casing strings to reach 20,500 ft rkb with a
final mud weight of only 11.1 ppg.
In many ultra-deep wells, ECDs of as much as 1.5 ppg are often encountered (17). Active
management of several drilling parameters, special well planning issues and special
procedures are required for these wells to ensure they reach their geologic objectives.
When drilling a well with a small margin between pore pressure and fracture gradient,
it is often difficult to maintain enough mud weight to overbalance pore pressure when
not circulating and keep ECD low enough to prevent lost returns when circulating
and drilling.
When the pore pressure to fracture gradient margin is small, determining where to set a
casing string can be very difficult. In some cases, increased formation integrity from
setting a casing string can be more than offset by the increased ECD resulting from
subsequent smaller casing, drill pipe and hole size. The wells achievable depth may be
limited, and setting several additional casing strings may not significantly improve the
likelihood of achieving deeper well depths. Drilling with underbalanced mud weight is not
an option with many wells drilled with floating rigs as the formation lacks enough
strength and the wellbore becomes unstable. A large volume kick can result very quickly
when drilling into a high permeability, thick sand (high KH) when mud weight is even
slightly underbalanced. As a result there is a tendency to experience large volume
and/or large intensity formation influxes when drilling with large ECDs.
2 - 18
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
Figure 2.11 illustrates that, as well depth increases, ECD typically increases, and the
degree of underbalance can rapidly increase when the ECD is removed.
14000
16000
Min.
18000
Well Depth ft
20000
ECD = 1.5 ppg
Typ ic a l Ra ng e
22000
24000
ECD = 0.5 ppg Max.
26000
28000
ECD = 1.0 ppg
30000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
BHP Change Due to ECD psi
ECDs can be managed by optimizing mud rheology, well geometry, mud circulation
rates, well angle and rate of penetration while drilling (18). Figure 2.12 illustrates how
ECD can be managed (reduced) by optimizing these factors.
2 - 19
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2 - 20
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2 - 21
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2 - 22
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2 - 23
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2 - 24
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
1.2
A c tual W ells
1 M inim um
Margin PIT-MW, ppg
A verage
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
25 20 15 10 5
Hole S iz e in.
2 - 25
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
After the optimum setting depth of the conductor casing is planned, selection of
subsequent casing string setting depths is straightforward. With the expected fracture
gradient and mud weight schedule known, the margin between ECD and the mud
weight below that string will determine the string setting depth. This process is shown
in Figure 2.14 for a generic deepwater well in 7400 ft. water depth.
7000
13000
Setting Depth 16" @ 12000'
15000
17000
19000
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Mud Weight, PPG
2 - 26
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
This process is continued downhole until reaching the desired well depth or until there
are no longer any casing strings available. The final casing setting depths for the generic
well are shown in Figure 2.15.
7000
Barker FG
0.3 ppg Predicted Mud Weight.
9000
20" conductor @ 10,000'
PIT = 10.2 ppg
11000
16" @ 12000'
TVD Depth, rkb-ft
13-3/8" @ 14500'
PIT = 12.8 ppg
15000
0.4 ppg
9-5/8" @ 17200'
17000
PIT = 12.2 ppg
19000
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Mud Weight, PPG
Figure 2.15 - Final Generic Well Casing Strings Setting Depth Design
2 - 27
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2 - 28
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2 - 29
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2 - 30
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2 - 31
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
36-in. 36-in.
Top of Cement
20-in. 20-in.
Top of Cement
Void
Mud
Cement
13 3/8-in. 13 3/8-in.
Figure 2.16 - Casing Annulus Options, Wells Drilled With a Floating Rig
BURST LOADING
The following guidelines are recommended for calculating annulus pressures for burst
design of casing strings when the strings are landed in a SSWH. The guidelines depend
on whether the casing annuli is sealed with cement at the last casing shoe.
The typical case found with casing strings set in wells with floating rigs is not to seal the
annulus with cement. This is also the preferred method of preventing excessive pressure
buildup in casing annuli. Figure 2.17 illustrates this design condition. Typically it is
possible to place casing strings so that primary cement will not seal the casing annulus
at the previous casing shoe.
2 - 32
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
With this case, fluids and pressures in the casing annulus change with time. Pressure at
the casing annulus seal assembly is assumed to balance the local formation pore
pressure below the last casing shoe. Depending on water depth, casing setting depth,
mud weight and exposed formation pore pressure, the mud left in the casing annulus
may or may not drop as shown in Figure 2.17.
36-in. 36-in.
Mud Drop
20-in. 20-in.
Void
Mud
Cement
13 3/8-in. 13 3/8-in.
Figure 2.17 - Casing Burst Design, Annulus Not Sealed With Cement
The recommended pressures to use in burst design when designing casing for floating
operations when the annulus is not sealed with cement are:
1. Assume that the mud in the casing annulus will drop below the seal assembly to
a depth that the setting mud weight will balance the local pore pressure at the
shoe, then use zero backup from the seal assembly to the top of the mud
column.
2. Next use setting mud weight gradient from the top of the mud to the previous
casing shoe.
3. Then use the local pore pressure gradient from the last casing shoe to the design
string setting depth.
Appendix 2 includes an example showing how this recommended method can be used
when designing for burst conditions.
2 - 33
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
The presence of shallow hydrocarbons can complicate the goal of leaving casing annuli
non-sealed. It is common practice to cover all hydrocarbon intervals with primary
cement, and this is a regulatory requirement in many areas such as the GOM.
When a hydrocarbon zone is near a previous casing shoe, it can be difficult to cover the
hydrocarbon interval with cement and still leave the shoe at the previous annulus open,
not sealed with cement. It may be necessary to use less than optimum casing setting
depths to leave casing annuli open after hydrocarbon zones are properly cemented.
In a few cases, it may be necessary to seal a casing annulus with cement creating a
trapped volume. When this condition exists, the hydrostatic pressure trapped below the
seal assembly cannot bleed-off to the formation. For this case, the recommended
pressures for use in burst design are:
1. Use zero psi burst backup pressure at the seal assembly.
2. Use setting mud weight from the seal assembly to the top of cement.
3. Use a 9.0 ppg gradient for the cement column (from top of cement to the outer
casing shoe depth).
4. Use local formation pressure gradient from the outer casing shoe depth to the
casing setting depth.
COLLAPSE DESIGN
For collapse design of strings landed in a subsea wellhead, it is recommended that the
external pressure be assumed to be the casing setting mud weight. Credit is not taken
for possible pressure reduction due to fluid loss to exposed formations below the outer
casing string (even if the annulus is not sealed with cement). The worst case assumption
is that permeable formations do not exist below the outer casing shoe.
2 - 34
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2 - 35
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
R e c o rd e d a t M is s . C a n y o n B lo c k 2 1 1
T EM P . D EG . F
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
0
DEPTH BELOW SEALEVEL feet
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
Most wells drilled with floating rigs will drill at least some very geologically young
formations. Typically, very young formations are very sensitive to water. When drilling
these intervals with non-inhibitive muds it is common to experience so called gumbo
problems. Gumbo can be a significant drilling problem and can limit drilling rates, plug
flowlines and result in oversize hole and formation evaluation problems. As a result,
many operators use inhibitive muds to drill shallow reactive formations. It is common to
drill with high sodium chloride muds, calcium chloride muds and even SBM to prevent
gumbo problems when drilling shallow formations.
2 - 36
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2 - 37
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
2 - 38
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
The hydrate formation conditions can be altered by the addition of inhibitors and
promoters. Hydrate inhibitors include salts, alcohols and glycols that lower the threshold
temperature at which hydrates form. Alcohols such as methanol are the most effective
hydrate inhibitors, however addition of alcohols to the mud system has many detrimental
effects, and are generally not used by the industry. Salts including sodium chloride and
calcium chloride are the most often used hydrate inhibitor in drilling mud systems.
Glycols are essentially low-grade alcohols and include ethylene glycol and glycerol, and
they are commonly used in mud systems as hydrate inhibitors.
Other inhibitors function by slowing down rather than preventing the formation of gas
hydrate crystals. The development of kinetic inhibitors has occurred recently, but they
have not been used in drilling fluid systems to date. A primary advantage of kinetic
inhibitors is they apparently function at very low concentrations. However, they are quite
expensive. Hydrate promoters include nitrogen, hydrogen sulfide, oxygen, carbon
dioxide and some other compounds such as lecithin (glyceryl esters).
The pressure at the BOPs is due to the hydrostatic head of the fluid in the well or choke
line plus any surface pressure. Figure 2.20 illustrates an example of subsea conditions
that could be expected with mud weights from 9 to 16 ppg mud with 1000 psi casing
pressure and temperatures at the mud line for the GOM.
16 ppg
1000' WD
9 ppg
500' WD
1000
30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Seafloor Temperature Deg. F
Experience has shown natural gas hydrates can form when water in the drilling mud
interfaces with natural gas in a wellbore (21). Natural gas in a wellbore can occur due to
formation influxes (kicks) and the process of circulating out a kick. Water in the wellbore
can also be a result of formation water that entered the wellbore during the kick.
2 - 39
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
The pressure and temperature conditions where hydrates begin to form is called the
equilibrium condition. The equilibrium hydrate formation conditions for several common
drilling muds are shown in Figure 2.21. The addition of inhibitors (salts or alcohols) to
the liquid phase of a water based mud will depress the P-T conditions where hydrates
can occur.
9 ppg 500' WD
Hydrates
Seawater M ud
23 wt%NaCl + 10%Glycol
Equilibrium charts such as Figure 2.21 do not take into account the kinetics of hydrate
formation. Laboratory testing has shown that the speed a hydrate requires to form
depends on many factors including the magnitude the actual P-T conditions are below
equilibrium condition (supercooling). Figure 2.22 illustrates a typical P-T curve as
hydrate forms and the equilibrium condition.
2 - 40
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
4000
Hydrates Forming
Cooling
3500
Hydrate
Pressure, psi
Formed
Equilibrium
3000 Condition
Hydrates Decomposing
2500 Heating
65 70 75 80 85 90 95
Temperature, Degrees F
Figure 2.23 is based on laboratory testing with 24-WT% sodium chloride mud and
illustrates that the risk of forming a hydrate increases with time when the P-T conditions
are less than the hydrate forming equilibrium conditions.
6.1%C2
9 ppg 500' WD
High Risk
No Hydrat es in 24 hrs
No Risk of Hydrates
Low Risk
24-wt% NaCl M ud
Equilibrium
1000
30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
Seafloor Temperature Deg. F
2 - 41
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
Use of a mud in the High Risk area of the equilibrium chart is a risked decision.
Figure 2.24 is an example illustrating a risk analysis of a hydrate inhibitive mud.
(22)
Figure 2.14 - Example Risk Analysis of a Hydrate Inhibitive Mud
2 - 42
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
Beginning in the mid-1980s, synthetic based drilling muds began to be used with floating
rig operations by some operators. These muds use refined base oil rather than diesel or
mineral oil to reduce the toxicity of the mud and permit cuttings discharges in some
areas. Hydrates can form in a synthetic base mud system. The hydrate inhibition
characteristic of an SBM is primarily a function of the inhibitor concentration in the
dispersed water. The base oil in an SBM can be thought of as an inert ingredient as far
as hydrate formation is concerned. Water in an SBM is generally dispersed in the oil
phase, and it typically has a very high inhibitor concentration (calcium chloride). Testing
of an SBM found that an SBM with 30% CaCl2 in the internal phase did not form
hydrates under extreme subcooling. However, hydrates did form when the concentration
of CaCl2 was reduced to 15-WT% (22). Unlike water based muds, gas is soluble in a
synthetic oil based mud system which can permit gas and the water (which is dispersed
in the oil phase) to come in contact. Research has found that an SBM without salt in the
water phase formed more hydrates faster than are formed in a partially hydrate inhibitive
water based mud system (22). Also, any formation water that occurs with a gas influx can
provide the free water required to form a hydrate in an SBM system.
It is possible to depress the hydrate formation conditions to about 30oF if water based
mud is nearly saturated with sodium chloride. Unfortunately, the minimum density of a
near saturation sodium chloride water based mud is near 10.4 ppg. In many cases, the
formation integrity at the conductor casing will not permit use of a mud with a density
over about 10 ppg. This could be a problem if a shallow gas sand were expected when
the maximum mud weight cannot allow adding sodium chloride to a high saturation in
the mud.
In this situation, either higher risk of hydrate formation must be accepted, or additional
alternate inhibitors must be used. For water based muds, it is typical to run the sodium
chloride concentration at 20 to 24-WT%. As the sodium chloride concentration
approaches saturation, the hydrate inhibition ability of a mud increases faster. As a
result a mud with 20-WT% sodium chloride will have much less hydrate inhibitive
capability than a mud with 24-WT% sodium chloride. Over about 26-WT% sodium
chloride, additional sodium chloride actually is detrimental to hydrate inhibition efforts.
Mixing salts, i.e., NaCl and CaCl2 in a mud system can have solubility problems and salt
precipitation can result. Table 2.2 can be used to convert the chloride ion concentration
of a mud to the WT%.
2 - 43
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
Additional hydrate depression with a water based mud (below what can be achieved with
salts) must be achieved with the addition of different inhibitors, usually low-grade
alcohols. Low-grade alcohols include glycerol and glycols. With the addition of these
inhibitors, a water based mud can be formulated to achieve a maximum of about 40oF
hydrate depression. Some operators use significantly under saturated water based
muds and rely on using pills with inhibitors such as ethylene glycol as a mitigator when a
potential hydrate condition exists.
Sodium Chloride is the most effective hydrate inhibitor (on a weight basis). Calcium
chloride is a very effective hydrate inhibitor, however calcium chloride muds can be toxic
to marine life and difficult to handle. The use of calcium chloride muds should be
carefully considered. Potassium chloride water based muds are fairly poor hydrate
inhibited systems.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the industry performed a great deal of testing on
various hydrate inhibitive mud systems (23). A consulting engineering company, Westport
Technology developed a computer program to calculate the hydrate equilibrium
conditions for many mud systems used by floating rigs. The computer program called
Whyp is used by many in the industry. The computer program only calculates equilibrium
conditions (pressure and temperature) and does not give any qualitative information on
the kinetics of hydrate formation in drilling muds.
2 - 44
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
Hydrates can also be encountered with floating rigs outside the wellbore. It is common to
observe gas bubbles outside the structural casing and even between the structural and
conductor casing strings. The gas bubbles often accumulate and form a hydrate on the
outside of the BOP stack, wellhead connector and the subsea wellhead. The wellhead
manufacturers have designed into their equipment precautions to prevent hydrates from
forming in critical locations.
For example most wellhead connectors have a seal to keep gas and hydrates out of the
gap between the wellhead connector and the subsea wellhead. Also newer wellhead
connectors usually have the ability for an ROV to inject chemicals into areas of the
connector that could become plugged with hydrates. It is also common to install a seal
between the subsea wellhead housing and the mud mat to help prevent gas migration.
The formation of natural gas hydrates has occurred many times during deepwater
operations, sometimes when not expected. For example, one operator was using a
water based mud system during P&A operations and allowed the sodium chloride
concentration of the mud to drop significantly (to lower mud density). The mud hydrate
equilibrium conditions were significantly under the conditions where hydrates are
calculated to occur. Unfortunately, natural gas was in a casing annulus below a wellhead
seal assembly. When the seal assembly was unset, the gas quickly formed a hydrate
plug with the drilling mud and plugged both choke and kill lines and the BOPs. Several
days were required to resolve this problem and complete abandonment operations on
the well.
2 - 45
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
REFERENCES:
1. Hubbert, M. K., and Willis, C.G.: Mechanics of Hydraulic Fracturing, Trans. AIME
(1957) 210.
2. Christman, S.A.: Offshore Fracture Gradients, SPE 4133, JPT (Aug. 1973).
3. Matthews, W.R. and Kelly, John,: How to Predict Formation Pressure and Fracture
Gradient from Electric Logs, Oil and Gas Journal ( Feb. 20, 1967) 92-116.
4. Smith, R.C. and Calvert, D.G.: The use of Sea Water in Well Cementing, JPT,
(June 1975) 759-764.
5. Eaton, B.A.: The Equation for Geopressure Prediction from Well Logs, Society of
Petroleum Engineers of AIME, SPE 5544.
6. Bowers, G.L.: Pore Pressure Estimation From Velocity Data: Accounting for
Overpressure Mechanisms Besides Undercompaction, SPE 27489 presented to the
1984 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference in Dallas, Texas.
7. Warpinski, N.R. and Smith, Michael Berry: Rock mechanics and Fracture
Geometry, Recent Advances in Hydraulic Fracturing, SPE Monograph (1989), vol.
12, pp57-80.
8. Eaton, B.A.: Fracture Gradient Prediction and its Application in Oilfield Operations,
JPT (Oct. 1969) 1353-1360.
9. Brennan , R.M. and Annis, M.R.: A New Fracture Gradient Prediction Technique
that Shows Good Results in the Gulf of Mexico, SPE 13210, 1984.
10. Daines, S.R.: Prediction of Fracture Pressures for Wildcat Wells, SPE 9254, 1980.
11. Constant, D.W. and Bourgoyne, A.T.: Fracture-Gradient Prediction for Offshore
Wells, SPE Drilling Engineering (June 1988) 136-140.
12. Simmons, E.L. and Rau, W.E.: Predicting Deepwater Fracture Pressures: A
Proposal, SPE 18025, presented at the 1988 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Houston, Oct. 2-5, 1988.
13. Rocha, L.A. and Bourgoyne, A.T.: A New Simple Method of Estimate Fracture
Pressure Gradient, SPE 28710, 1994.
14. Barker, J.W.: Estimating Shallow Below Mud line Deepwater GOM Fracture
Gradients, presented at the 1997 Houston AADE Chapter Annual Technical Forum.
15. Eaton, B.A. and Eaton, T.L.: Fracture Gradient Prediction for the New Generation,
World Oil (Oct. 1997), 93-100.
16. Aadnoy, Bernt S.: Geomechanical Analysis for Deepwater Drilling, IADC/SPE
39339, 1998.
2 - 46
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
17. Furlow, W.: Is EEXs Llano the Next Deepwater Giant? Offshore, November 1998,
pp. 36-37.
18. Barker, J.W.: Equivalent Circulation Density Management in Ultra-deep Deepwater
GOM Wells, Deepwater Technology, August 1999, pg 29-33.
19. Barker, J.W.: Wellbore Design With Reduced Clearance Between Casing Strings,
SPE 37615, 1997.
20. Bradford, D.W., et. al, Marlin Failure Analysis and Redesign-Part 1, Description of
Failure, SPE/IADC 74528, 2002.
21. Barker, J.W. and Gomez, R.K.: Formation of Hydrates During Deepwater Drilling
Operations, SPE/IADC 16130, 1987.
22. Davalath, J. and Elward-Berry, J.: Hydrate Prevention in Subsea Well Control,
EPR.27PR.91, June 1991.
23. Ebeltoft, Hege, Yousif, M., and Soergaard, E.: Hydrate Control During Deepwater
Drilling: Overview and New Drilling Formulations, paper SPE 38567 presented at
the 1997 Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition in San Antonio (5-8 October,
1997).
2 - 47
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
APPENDICIES
SOLUTION
Eaton Technique for Deepwater (15):
Step 1: Using Figure 2.15, the overburden at the three desired well depths is:
Overburden Overburden
Depth, TVD-rkb-ft Gradient, psi/ft Pressure, psi/ppg
5100 0.58 2958/11.15
6700 0.68 4556/13.07
9050 0.75 6788/14.42
2 - 48
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
EATON EQUATIONS:
Poissons Ratio (v) for 0 to 4999.9 ft below the mud line:
CALCULATION RESULTS
Calc. Fracture Actual Fracture
Depth, TVD ft Poissons Ratio - v Gradient, psi/ft/ppg Pressure, psi/ft/ppg
5100 0.390 0.5380/10.35 0.5356/10.3
6700 0.440 0.6356/12.22 0.6344/12.2
9050 0.470 0.7393/14.21 0.7384/14.2
2 - 49
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
Figure 2.15 - Eatons Average Overburden Density Data For Various Water Depths
2 - 50
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
LOT,ppg = 2816/0.052/5100 ft
= 10.6 ppg
CALCULATION RESULTS
2 - 51
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
SOLUTION
Step 1, Calculate Annular Mud Drop
In this case there is no seal trapping a fixed volume outside the casing string. The mud
in the annulus can leak-off to the formation. Based on the surface casing setting depth of
3500 ft subsea, calculate the annular mud drop below the casing seal assembly to
balance the 12.5 ppg annular fluid with 9.0 ppg pore pressure (below the surface
casing).
This is the subsea depth to which the fluid level will drop. Therefore, plot zero backup
pressure from the seal assembly down to the top of the annular fluid at 980 ft. subsea.
Draw a straight line between this pressure and the zero pressure point at the top of the
annular fluid at 980 ft. subsea.
2 - 52
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
Step 2, Calculate the Formation Backup Pressure at the Protection Casing Shoe
While there is a transition from 9.0 to 12.5 ppg over the last 1000 ft of this hole section,
use 9.0 ppg for the hole section backup calculation.
Formation pressure at the protection casing shoe = 9.0 ppg x 0.052 x 8500 ft
= 3978 psi
Plot this pressure at the protective casing shoe at 8500 ft subsea and draw the 9.0 ppg
gradient line between this point and the pressure at the surface casing shoe.
234 psi
Pressure psi
3000 3000
Surface 1638 psi
4000 3500 ft subsea 4000
3000 ft BML
Depth 5000 12.5 ppg 5000 Depth
ft Subsea 12.5 ppg setting MW gradient ft Subsea
6000 6000
Top of Cement
7000 7000
2 - 53
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
EXAMPLE 2
Annular mud drop does not fall below the subsea wellhead seal assembly
Given: Water depth = 4000 ft, protection casing will be set at 12,000 ft subsea (8000 ft
bml), Surface casing is set at 7000 ft subsea (3000 ft bml) in normal 9.0 ppg pore
pressure. Pore pressure of 9.0 ppf exists from the mud line to 11,000 ft subsea and then
a transition to 12.0 ppg pore pressure at 12,000 ft subsea. Cement will be brought above
the top of abnormal pressure but below the surface casing shoe. The final mud weight
the protective casing is set in is 12.5 ppg. See Figure 2.17 for the wellbore sketch.
SOLUTION
Step 1: Calculate Annular Mud Drop
In this case there is no cement seal at the surface casing shoe in the casing annulus.
Based on the surface casing setting depth of 7000 ft subsea, calculate the annular drop
required to balance the 12.5 ppg annular fluid with 9.0 ppg pore pressure.
Formation pressure at the surface casing shoe = 7000 ft x 9.0 ppg x 0.052
= 3276 psi
Because this depth is still above the mud line, the fluid level will not fall below the seal
assembly in the casing annulus. Plot the formation pressure at the surface casing shoe
at 7000 ft subsea.
Net pressure at the SSWH = 3276 psi 1950 psi = 1326 psi
Plot this pressure at the SSWH at 4000 ft. subsea and draw the 12.5 ppg gradient line
between this point and the pressure at the surface casing shoe.
2 - 54
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION
WELL DESIGN ISSUES
Plot this pressure at the protective casing shoe and draw the 9.0 ppg gradient line
between this point and the pressure at the surface casing shoe.
Pressure psi
1000 1000
2000 2000
Figure 2.17 - Example Problem #2, Casing Burst Back-up Pressure Example
2 - 55
EXXONMOBIL FLOATING DRILLING SCHOOL 2002 EDITION