SPE 143676

Hole Cleaning Optimization in Horizontal Wells, a New Method to

Compensate Negative Hole Inclination Effects
N. Malekzadeh, M. Mohammadsalehi, Iranian Central Oilfields

Copyright 2011, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Brasil Offshore Conference and Exhibition held in Macaé, Brazil, 14–17 June 2011.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE 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 and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, 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 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 copyright.

Abstract
With increasing measured depths and horizontal displacements in extended-reach (ERD) wells, good hole cleaning and
cuttings removal remains a major challenge. Poor hole cleaning may result in lost circulation, hinder the casing or liner to be
run into its selected position, excessive over pull on trips, high rotary torque, excessive equivalent circulation density,
formation break down, slow rate of penetration, excessive bit wearing and pipe sticking. There are methods and models have
been introduced to find the minimum flow rate required to remove the cuttings from the well. Larsen’s model that can be used
to find this flow rate from 55 to 90 degrees of hole inclination. Another one is Moore’s correlation that is used to find the slip
velocity of the cuttings in vertical wells.

This paper represents a new approach to achieve both optimized hole cleaning and flow rate, as a result of precise
manipulations and redesigning of drilling mud rheological parameters, which have been elaborately explained in this paper.
Calculations performed by computerized iterations via simulation software, which is developed based on theoretical concepts.
Furthermore, Comparisons between calculated data and measured field data have been made. This method is valuable for
prediction and calculation of the optimum flow rate for cuttings removal for all range of inclination, namely from 0 to 90
degrees and for providing guidance in further evaluations of this problem as well.

Data form a horizontal well YS5 which is drilled in Yort-e-Sha field in Iran is used to demonstrate the application of this
method. As the significant outcomes, When the results of optimization applied, good hole cleaning condition achieved and
negative effects of excessive flow rate such as drilling mud loss and drag were minimized.

Introduction
Removal of the cuttings from the wellbore during drilling poses special problems. The cuttings can settle by their weight along
the bottom of the hole and form a solid “bed”.[1] Poor hole cleaning may in the end result in lost circulation, hinder the casing
or liner to be run into its selected position, excessive over pull on trips, high rotary torque, excessive equivalent circulation
density, formation break down, slow rate of penetration, excessive bit wearing and pipe sticking.[1,5] Therefore, it is important
to use the correct operational practice to ensure proper hole cleaning. The major factors influencing cuttings transport are; drill
pipe eccentricity, wellbore size and inclination, drilling fluid density, cuttings size, cuttings density, drill pipe rotation, drilling
rate, drilling fluid rheology and flow rate. Drilling fluid rheology and flow rate are the two main parameters which would
influence cuttings transport strongly while their control in the field is relatively easy. [5]

Based on this fact some methods and models have been introduced that can be used to find the minimum flow rate required to
remove the cuttings from the well for a specific drilling condition and drilling fluid rheological properties. One of these
models is Larsen’s model that can be used to find the minimum flow rate for cuttings removal from 55 to 90 degrees of
inclination. [7] Another one is Moore’s model that is used to find the slip velocity of cuttings in vertical wells. [2] In this study a
computer programming in MATLAB was written that combines these two methods and predicts the minimum flow rate for
cuttings transport from 0 to 90 degrees of inclination. Another computer program was written that calculates the optimum flow
rate for different drilling fluid rheological properties using both hydraulic horsepower and jet impact force criteria. Then these
two programs are combined to find that rheological properties of the drilling fluid that gives the optimized flow rate higher
2 SPE 143676

than the flow rate to remove the cuttings from a well called YS5 which is a horizontal well drilled in Yorte-E-Sha field in
Varamin in Iran.

Larsen’s model and Moore’s correlation combination: [2, 7]

One of the methods for estimating slip velocity and minimum velocity required for cuttings transport in deviated and
horizontal wells was introduced by T.I. Larsen, A.A. Pilehvari and J.J. Azar in their paper. Development of a New Cuttings
Transport Model for High-Angle Wellbores Including Horizontal Wells, June 1997 SPE No. 25872).[6] This paper discussed a
minimum rate (Vmin) for system with the inclination between 55° to 90° according to laboratory experiment and empirical
correlation. They showed that this minimum velocity is the summation of slip velocity and cuttings velocity which is the rate
of cuttings generation by the bit and depends on the rate of penetration, drill pipe outer diameter and hole diameter.
Vmin can be expressed as

Vmin =Vcut +V (1)

slip

They showed that cuttings velocity can be expressed by

(2)
And slip velocity can be expressed as
_
Vslip = 0.00516 µa + 3.006 µa <53cp (3)
_
Vslip =0.002554 × (µa - 53) + 3.82 µa >53cp (4)
In which apparent viscosity is calculated by

(5)
Equations for slip velocity were correlated for mud density, angle of inclination, and cuttings average size.
Mud density correlation factor is

Cmwt = 1-0.0333 × (ρm - 8.7) ρm >8.7 (6)

Cmwt = 1 ρm <8.7 (7)

Angle of inclination correlation factor is

Cang = 0.0342θang - 0.000233θ2ang - 0.213 (8)

And cuttings average size correction factor is expressed as

Csize = − 1.04D50 cut +1.286 (9)

Therefore slip velocity is given by

_
Vslip =Vslip. (Cang )(Csize )(Cmwt ) (10)
Moore’s correlation is used to find the slip velocity of the cuttings in vertical wells.

(11)

In which f is the particle friction factor and is calculated by using particle Reynolds number which is as follow
SPE 143676 3

(12)
and by using Fig 1. The viscosity in particle Reynolds number formula is calculated by using the following equation.

(13)

For finding Vmin for vertical wells, 0 degree of inclination, Vslip is calculated by using Moore’s correlation and it is supposed
that Vcut can be calculated by using equation 2. Now an example is given to see how these two methods are combined and used
to predict and calculate the Vmin from 0 to 90 degrees of inclination. The data used in this example is presented in table 1. The
result is plotted in Fig 2. As it can bee seen Fig 2 contains two more points which are not in the range of 55 to 90 degrees of
inclination. One for 30o and the other one for 40o degrees of inclination. The data for these two points are obtained form
[6]
Larsen’s data which has been used to drive the equations for calculation of Vmin for cuttings transport . In Larsen’s data, Vmin
for 65° divided by Vmin for 30° of inclination was 0.76 and Vmin for 65° divide by Vmin for 40° was 0.8. In the same way it was
supposed that in Fig 2, Vmin for 30° is 0.76 of Vmin for 65°. And Vmin for 40° is 0.8 of Vmin for 65°.

In fact these two points are used to get a better and more accurate interpolation of the points in Fig 2. Without using these two
points the change in Vmin for 0° to 55° will be linear which seems not to be correct. The ways to change Vmin is by changing
mud rheological properties or by changing rate of penetration. Again the data in table 1 is used but PV and YP are changed to
see how Vmin changes. The result is shown is Fig 3. From Fig 3 it is observed that increasing both PV and YP decreases Vmin
for cuttings transport for 0 angle of inclination. Also the effect of YP was much larger than the effect of PV. So it confirms the
fact that for increasing the carrying capacity of drilling fluid in drilling vertical wells, PV and YP of the drilling fluid should be
increased or in the other way the ratio YP/PV should be high. [5] For high angles of inclination for example 70o, increasing both
PV and YP increases Vmin for hole cleaning which means reducing the carrying capacity of the drilling fluid.

It also confirms the fact that for high angles of inclinations less viscosified drilling fluids perform better in hole cleaning point
of view-they require lower velocity and flow rate to transport the cuttings.[4] Another factor that can be modified and change to
reduce Vmin required for hole cleaning is the rate of penetration. The higher the rate of penetration the more cuttings generated
[3]
by the bit, the higher Vmin and therefore flow rate is required to transport the cuttings to the surface. Fig 4 shows how
reduction of ROP from 50 ft/hr to 10 ft/hr reduces Vmin for hole cleaning for an angle of inclination for example 0o.

Drilling Hydraulic optimization [2]

The ability of the drilling fluid to effectively transport cuttings from the bottom of the hole depends upon the hydraulics of the
system and the properties of the drilling fluid. The essence of a good hydraulic system is to provide adequate impingement to
hydraulic power at the formation. Insufficient hydraulic power will lead to regrinding the cuttings in the bottomhole by the bit,
instead of transporting them to the surface. This hole cleaning deficiency can cause accumulation of cuttings in the bottomhole
and consequently impede the rate of penetration.
One of the criteria for optimizing drilling hydraulic is to maximize hydraulic horsepower at the bit. The hydraulic horsepower
at the bit can be determined by

(14)
In which ∆Pb is the pressure loss at the bit nozzles and q is the flow rate. This criteria says hydraulic horsepower at the bit is
maximized when the summation of the pressure losses is equal to

(15)
In which ∆pd is the summation of the pressure losses in the surface equipment ∆ps , pressure loss in the drill pipe ∆pdp,
pressure loss in the drillcollar ∆pdc , pressure loss in the drillcollar annulus ∆pdca, pressure loss in the drillpipe annulus ∆pdpa.
4 SPE 143676

∆Pd = ∆Ps + ∆Pdp + ∆Pdc + ∆Pdca +∆Pdpa (16)

Pp is pump pressure and m is calculated by using the following equation.

(17)
The other criterion for optimizing drilling hydraulic is to maximize the jet impact force at the bit rather than maximizing
hydraulic horsepower. Jet impact force at the bit is calculated by using the following equation.

Fj = 0.01823Cd · q · (18)

This criteria says the jet impact force at the bit is maximum when the summation of the pressure losses calculated by using
equation (15) is equal to

(19)

In which Pp is pump pressure and m is calculated by using equation (17).

A computer program was written in MATLAB programming that calculates the optimum flow rate using Bingham plastic
model. An example is given to see how the optimum flow rate changes as rheological properties of the drilling fluid changes.
The data used in the example is provided in table 2. The result is shown in Fig 5. The plastic viscosity of the drilling fluid was
considered to be three times larger than its yield point.

The program for combination of Larsen’s model and Moore’s correlation and the program for drilling hydraulic optimization
were combined to optimize hole cleaning of a horizontal well called YS5 which is located in Yort-e-Sha field in Varamin in
Iran. The casing design of the well is shown in figure 6. Figure 7 shows the actual and proposed paths of the well. This well is
drilled to reach Qum formation located at depth of 723m down to depth of 948m that is used as a gas storage reservoir.

We optimized hole cleaning in three parts of the well,

1) TVD=400m, 0 degree of inclination

2) TVD=683m, 46 degrees of inclination

3) TVD=736m, 90 degrees of inclination

The results are shown in figure 8, figure 9 and figure 10 respectively. In these figures the blue (solid) curves show the
optimized flow rate and the red curves show the minimum flow rate required for cuttings transportation. By using that parts of
the blue curves that lie above the red curves, we not only have the drilling hydraulic optimized but also a good hole cleaning is
achieved.

Conclusions
1: The new method for finding the minimum flow rate for cuttings transport is resulted from the combination of Moore’s
correlation and Larsen’s model and it can be used to find the minimum flow rate for all range of inclination form 0° to 90°.

2: For inclinations from 0° to 55° this method generates a continuous increase in the flow rate required for hole cleaning which
seems to be reasonable.

3: By plotting the flow rate needed for cuttings transport and optimized flow rate versus plastic viscosity, yield point or
apparent viscosity, one can determine the drilling fluid rheological properties at which the optimized flow rate becomes higher
than the flow rate needed for cuttings transport. So by using that flow rate both hydraulic optimization and good hole cleaning
are achieved.
SPE 143676 5

Recommendations
1: Hole cleaning is not the only thing that should be considered. For example reducing the rheological properties of
the drilling fluid till the optimum flow rate becomes higher than the flow rate for hole cleaning may be detrimental
to the borehole stability and it may increase formation damage by increasing drilling fluid invasion into the
formation. Therefore before applying this model it is recommended to study its effect on borehole stability and
formation damage.

2: The flow rate for hole cleaning that has been discussed and calculated here, is the flow rate that provides 100
percent cleaning of the well from the cuttings. It means that all the cuttings will be transported to the surface.
Although it is favorable to have so but sometimes it may be unnecessary to remove all the cuttings from the well. It
means that cuttings concentration in the annulus up to a certain value may not induce any risk on the drilling
operation and drillpipe sticking. So before applying this model we should determine the importance and the
influence of the hole cleaning on the drilling operation.

Nomenclature
Cang: Correction factor for hole inclination.
Cd: Correction factor for bit nozzle velocity.
Cmwt: Correction factor for mud weight.
Csize: Correction factor for average cuttings size.
ds : Cuttings diameter, in.
d1 : Annulus inner diameter, in.
d2 : Annulus outer diameter, in.
Dhole : Hole diameter, in.
Dpipe : Drillpipe outer diameter, in.
D50cut: Cuttings average size, in.
f: Friction factor, dimensionless.
Fj: Jet impact force, lbf.
n 2
K: Power law consistency index, dyne.s /cm .
m: Constant number, theoretically has a value near 1.75.
n: Power law flow behavior index, dimensionless
NRe : Reynolds number, dimensionless.
PHb: Bit hydraulic horsepower, hp.
Pp: Pump pressure, psi.
PV: plastic viscosity, cp.
q : Flow rate, gpm.
ROP: Rate of penetration, ft/hr.
TVD: True vertical depth, ft.
Vcut: Cuttings velocity, ft/s.
Vmin: Minimum velocity for cuttings transport, ft/s
Vsl: Cuttings slip velocity, ft/s.
Vslip: Cuttings slip velocity, ft/s.
Va: Annulus mean velocity, ft/s.
Vslip: Mean slip velocity, ft/s.
2
YP: Yield point, lbf/100ft .
θ: Well inclination, degree.
µ: Viscosity, cp.
µa : Apparent viscosity, cp.
ρf : Drilling fluid density, ppg.
ρm: Mud density, ppg.
Ρs: Cuttings density, ppg.
∆Pb: Pressure loss at the bit nozzle, psi.
∆Pd: Parasitic pressure loss, psi.
∆Pdp: Pressure loss in the drillpipe, psi.
∆Pdpa: Pressure loss in the drillpipe annulus, psi.
∆Pdc: Pressure loss in the drillcollar, psi.
∆Pdca: Pressure loss in the drillcollar annulus, psi
6 SPE 143676

References
1: A. Saasenl, Den noske stats oljeselskap a.s. (Statod) “Hole Cleaning During Deviated Drilling -The Effects of Pump Rate and Rheology”
SPE 50582, 1998.

2: A.T. Bourgoyne, et al.; “Applied Drilling Engineering” SPE Textbook Series. Vol. 3, Richardson, Texas (1986) chapter 4.

3: Azar, J.J and Sanchez, R.A “ Mud Cuttings Transport Study in Directional Well drilling.” SPE paper 39020, 1997. 4: 4: Patrick Kenny
and Egd Sunde. Staloil A/S. and Terry Hernphill. Baroid Drilling Fluids “Hole Cleaning Modelling: What’s ‘n’ Got To Do With It?” SPE
35099, 1998.

5: Rishi B. Adari, SPE, Stefan Miska, SPE. and Ergun Kuru, SPE, University of Tulsa, Peter Bern, SPE, BP-Amoco, and Arild Saasen, SPE,
Statoil. “Selecting Drilling Fluid Properties and Flow Rates For Effective Hole Cleaning in HighA ngle and Horizontal Wells” SPE 63050,
2000.

6: Rudi Rubiandini R S., SPE -1172519, Bandung Institute of Technology, Indonesia “Equation for Estimating Mud Minimum Rate for
Cuttings Transport in an Inclined-Until Horizontal Well” SPE/IADC 57541,1999.

7: T. I. Larsen, SPE. Unocal Cap. A.A. Pilehvari SPE. Texas A&M U. and J.J. Azar, SPE. U. of Tulsa “Development of a New Cuttings-
Transport Model for High-Angle Wellbores Including Horizontal Wells” SPE 25872, 1997.

Table 1: Data used as an example for plotting figures 2, 3 and 4. [7]

8.57 Mud weight, ppg
2
7 Yield Point, lbf/100ft
7 Plastic Viscosity, cp
5 Hole Diameter, in
2.375 Drillpipe Diameter, in
21.6 Cuttings Density, ppg
0.175 Cuttings Size, in
54 Rate of Penetration, ft/hr

Table 2: Data used for calculating optimum flow rate for different drilling fluid rheological properties. [2]
Pump pressure 3423 psi

Surface equipments Equivalent to 340 ft drillpipe

Drillpipe OD 4.5 in ID 3.826 in
Drillcollar 600 ft OD 7.5 in ID 2.75 in
Hole size 10.05 in
Hole depth 6000 ft
Drilling fluid density 9.5 ppg
SPE 143676 7

[2]
Fig. 1: Particle slip velocity correlation of Moore.

Fig. 2: Interpolation of Vmin from 0° to 55°.

8 SPE 143676

Fig. 3: The effect of change of mud rheological properties on Vmin.

Fig. 4: Reduction in Vmin because of reduction of ROP from 50 to 10.

SPE 143676 9

Fig. 5: Optimum flow rate for different drilling fluid rheological properties.

Fig. 6: Casing design of the well YS5.

10 SPE 143676

Fig. 7: Proposed (solid line) and actual paths of the well.

Fig. 8: Optimum flow rate and the flow rate for hole cleaning for the depth of 400m TVD.
SPE 143676 11

Fig. 9: Optimum flow rate and the flow rate for hole cleaning for the depth of 683m TVD.

Fig. 10: Optimum flow rate and the flow rate for hole cleaning for the depth of 736m