SPE-176506-MS

Drilling-with-Casing Technology Pilot Testing Results

K. A. Aleksandrov, E. V. Kiselev, and S. N. Ovchinnikov, (Rospan International CJSC);
M. Tan, M. Ya. Gelfgat, S. S. Kulikov, P. S. Shilkin, and D. A. Priymachenko, (Weatherford LLC);
D. A. Fedoseev, and V. N. Gnibidin, (SamaraNIPIneft LLC)

Copyright 2015, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Russian Petroleum Technology Conference held in Moscow, Russia, 26 28 October 2015.

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
Well construction at Urengoyskoye field is associated with definite hazards confined to the formation
section formed by relict permafrost rock (PFR). Combined thermal, physical, chemical and erosion effects
on the wellbore walls result in collapse of ice consolidated sand clay sediments and easy washout by
drilling mud flow. This leads to intensive caving and, thus, associated rock breakout and sloughing.
In addition, there are increased risks of the following problems:
y During construction in case of PFR thawing: lost circulation during drilling and cementing, low
cement top;
y During further operation in case of PFR thawing and refreezing: subsidence, thaw sink formation,
casing collapse.
Long PFR sections drilling time and high circulation rates also contribute to development of such
undesirable processes.
To study risk mitigation options during surface casing section drilling, Rospan International CJSC
decided to perform pilot testing (PT) of drilling-with-casing technology with a non-retrievable assembly
(PDC drill bit, float valve). Such choice was conditioned by relative assembly simplicity and section
geology enabling casing running section drilling in a single trip. In contrast to conventional drilling, in this
case casing experiences increased stresses as it is the component that transfers mechanical and hydraulic
power to the drill bit. Based on the above, it was decided to use casing with improved connections
(metal-to-metal seals).
To improve reliability of pilot testing results, the tests were performed on three wells of the same pad.
Wells drilled within the same license area using conventional drilling methods were taken as the basis for
comparison. All process parameters were monitored and recorded both while normal drilling and in case
of any drilling hazards.
Pilot testing results demonstrated that as compared to conventional drilling, no additional reaming of
drilling tool drag or overpull sections was required. The potential of surface casing section construction
time reduction was defined for Rospan International CJSC locations by improvement of the drilling-with-
2 SPE-176506-MS

casing technology, in particular selection of optimal drill bit designs, use of casing with metal-to-metal
seals (or with torque rings) with lower makeup torques, modification of the wellhead connection diagram.
Besides, comparative analysis of two drilling methods once again proved the plastering effect that has
a positive effect during lost circulation control, which can further enable forecasting during drilling-with-
casing at this field.
In general, PT results enable recommending the drilling-with-casing method with a non-retrievable
assembly as a promising method for industrial implementation at fields with top sections represented by
permafrost rocks. The expected surface casing section drilling time can be reduced by 1.5 or 2.0 times.

Introduction
Well construction at Urengoyskoye field is associated with definite hazards confined to the formation
section formed by relict permafrost rock (PFR). Combined thermal, physical, chemical and erosion effects
on the wellbore walls result in collapse of ice consolidated sand clay sediments and easy washout by
drilling mud flow. This leads to intensive caving and, thus, associated rock breakout and sloughing. In
addition, drilling of the top interval at Urengoyskoye field presents high risks of lost circulation while
drilling and cementing resulting in low cement top. It cannot but be taken into account that PFR thawing
and refreezing can cause subsidence, thaw sink formation, casing collapse.
Long PFR sections drilling time and high circulation rates also contribute to development of such
undesirable processes.
To study hazard mitigation options while surface casing section drilling, Rospan International CJSC,
the operator of Urengoyskoye field decided to perform pilot testing (PT) of the drilling-with-casing
technology jointly with Weatherford as the service provider. PT conditions are summarized in Table 1.
SPE-176506-MS 3

Table 1General Data

Field (area) Novo-Urengoyskiy license area (NULA)

Number of jobs: 3
Drilling with 324mm casing (vertical section)
Managed 324mm casing running (vertical section)
Total vertical depth, m 700(650)
surface casing (324mm casing)
Field location (region, district, territory) Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District
Location (onshore, offshore) onshore
Wells purpose: production
Geology (stratigraphy, lithology, formation fluid saturation, etc.) Based on materials of previously drilled appraisal and exploration wells
at VULA, NULA
Top drive yes
Drilling rig drive diesel-electric
Cleaning system 4-stage
Drilling rig type HR 5000 BENTEC Cantitever
Drilling method Rotary (top drive)
Casing 324mm casing, 11mm WT, L-80 pipe material grade, CWB thread
for drilling connection, 45 kNm make-up torque
Well design: 0-230 at NULA m
426mm conductor 0-700(650) m
324mm surface casing 0-2100 (MD 2,306) m
245mm intermediate casing 0-3,580 (MD 4,008) m
178mm production casing 3,430-3,700 (MD 3,857-4,128) m
114mm liner
Mud Type clay
426mm conductor polymer-clay
324mm surface casing polymer-inhibited
245mm intermediate casing polymer-inhibited
178mm production casing weighted polymer-inhibited
114mm liner
Drilling mud - polymer-clay for surface casing 1.16-1.18
weight, g/cm3 80-120 / 45-60*
funnel viscosity, s 10
3
water loss, cm /30min 2
grease, % 12
solids 15-25*
plastic viscosity, mPas 25-35*
yield point, pound/100ft
2
1
sand, %
filter cake, mm

Note: * below the PFR section.

The following project success criteria were set during PT program development:
Improve drilling performance;
Mitigate wellbore construction issues;
Reduce Non-Productive Time.

Technology and Equipment

When selecting a drilling method being the most adequate for the set tasks, the following main options
of the drilling-with-casing technology used in well construction practice were considered:
Non-retrievable assembly option (casing is rotated by the rotary or top drive (TD) and is equipped
with a drill bit and a float valve);
Retrievable assembly (casing is equipped with replaceable bit rotated by PDM and a reamer).
4 SPE-176506-MS

Selection of drilling method choice was primarily governed by the need to drill the section and run
casing in a single trip. Similar operations experience in other regions proved the possibility to attain
positive PT results using a non-retrievable assembly. The choice was also determined by relative
simplicity of the assembly and drilling section geology enabling casing drilling to TD in a single trip using
respective tools.
One of the key issues associated with this technology is selection of competent casing connection as
it is exposed to the following types of stresses while drilling:
Tensile stress resulting from string stretching under own weight;
Compressing stress acting in axial direction in the compressed part of the string while drill bit
loading, and acting in radial direction in case of caving and overload pressure in the string;
Torsion stress when torque is transmitted to the drill bit;
Bending stress while drilling of complex profile wells.

Available calculations and experience suggest that casing connections with metal-to-metal seals satisfy
the above operating conditions. Such connections include Premium connections and the so-called
semi-premium connections represented by modified Buttress threads. Such connections feature consistent
make-up torque and uniform distribution of stresses in the threaded section. Casing with Buttress
connections and internal retaining rings can be also used for drilling-with-casing. In addition, torque and
bending loads acting on the casing string during drilling should be taken into account when selecting wall
thickness and casing grades based on static load calculations.
Premium connection casings of one manufacturer were selected for pilot testing. Pipe specifications are
provided in Table 2, and pipe thread connections are shown in Fig. 1.

Table 2Pipe geometry and strength properties

SPE-176506-MS 5

Figure 1Threaded connection

6 SPE-176506-MS

In addition to casing, drilling also requires special equipment shown in Fig. 2.

Figure 2Set of special drilling-with-casing tools

Casing drive (modified spear) is connected to the top drive mandrel through a short drill pipe pup joint
(~ 3m). The Modified DwC Spear engages the casing ID by simple operation of inserting the spear and
rotating a quarter turn to the right and pick up to activate the engagement mechanism. The spear is equally
easily released by slacking off all tensile force, rotate a quarter turn to the left until the Stop Ring turned,
and pick up to release the tool from casing. The tool cannot be released unless the entire string weight is
completely transferred to the rotary slips. The tool can be simultaneously used to rotate and circulate
casing which makes it an ideal tool for such drilling or reaming through restrictions. In many occasions
the Modified DwC spear is used as a casing running and fill-up tool.
The drilling-with-casing system features a fully PDC drillable casing bit. There is no need to retrieve
the bit through the casing upon reaching the target depth. As the float collar is already installed in the
casing, cementing can be started upon reaching TD. The next conventional BHA can be run, drill out the
drillable casing bit exactly as during normal operation, and continue drilling to the next section TD.
Structurally the drill bit consists of three parts:
Steel threaded body complete with long tungsten carbide enhanced gage pad, threaded with
required connection;
Aluminum alloy nose and blade mounted with thin steel strip where the PDC cutters are brazed
on. The design reduced the volume of steel to be drilled up to 80%.
SPE-176506-MS 7

Figure 3Applied BHA

The nose and body are thread-locked to become an integral part (Fig. 4). Strategically oriented
interchangeable nozzles on the drill bit face are programmed to clean and cool the cutting edge and
8 SPE-176506-MS

remove drill cuttings via the face volume and junk slot area. The central aluminum part is completely
drillable with PDC or roller cone bits.

Figure 4 Drill bit

A separate float collar installed in the casing enables immediate cementing upon reaching the target
depth. The next drill bit will be run upon waiting on cement and it will drill out the cement column and
the drill bit before penetration into a new formation.
Casing float collar (Fig. 5) is a critical component of used cementing equipment. At the first cementing
stage, the collar performs the whole range of functions:

Figure 5Float collar

It is the main valve above the guide shoe or back-up valve for the float collar;
It is a seat for wiper plugs for cement displacement;
It holds pressure;
Wiper plug bumping indicates displacement completion.
Basic float collar specifications are provided in Table 3.

Table 3Float collar specifications

Rated back Rated down
Connection pressure, MPa pressure (via the
Casing size, mm thread OD, mm Length, mm Weight, kg (psi) plug), MPa (psi)

324 Premium 351 800 110 24,82(3 600) 31,03(4 500)

connection
SPE-176506-MS 9

Centralizers are another component of casing accessories used for this drilling method. Centralizers
used for drilling-with-casing should be quite durable and withstand casing rotation loads for a long time.
Cuttings removal efficiency during drilling and cementing quality depends on normal operation of
centralizers. During pilot testing, the casing was equipped with non-rotating centralizers (Fig. 6) placed
between the previous casing shoe and wellhead.

Figure 6 Centralizer

Centralizer specifications are provided in Table 4.

Table 4 Centralizer Specifications

Casing size, mm OD, mm ID, mm Length, mm Weight, kg Number of blades

324 388 327 300 19 7

10 SPE-176506-MS

Drilling-with-casing process schematic and conditions are provided in Fig. 7.

Figure 7Drilling-with-casing process schematic

Risk analysis
Prior to pilot testing, drilling-with-casing process risks and hazards for the surface casing section at
Urengoyskoye field were identified and analyzed. Process risks during drilling-with-casing included the
following events:
y Premature drill bit wear.
y Plugging of drill bit holes.
y Breakage of drill bit elements and their presence in the well (blades, cutting structure elements,
etc.).
y Damage of casing threads.
y Float collar washout or failure.
y Breakage and falling of casing drive components into the well.
y Vertical wellbore deviation.
y Lost circulation.
y Excessive cuttings in the annulus, packing.
y Caving, string sticking.
Process risks analysis included expert and statistical assessment of event probability, extent of damages
and controllability. Damages due to adverse events were expressed in non-productive time (NPT), days
spent to eliminate event consequences and recovery of the normal well construction process (Fig. 8).
Controllability of adverse events was assessed for two process stages:
SPE-176506-MS 11

Figure 8 Risk matrix

y Prior to drilling (preparation stage), see Fig. 8a;

y While drilling (the tool is run in hole, drilling is in progress), see Fig. 8b.
As a result of analysis, the risk magnitude was recognized as acceptable.
Pilot testing results
To improve reliability of pilot testing results, the tests were performed on three wells of the same pad.
Well drilled within the same license area using conventional drilling method was taken as the benchmark
for comparison. All drilling parameters were monitored and recorded both while normal drilling and in
the event of any drilling hazards.
Comparative data on well drilling with different drilling methods are shown in Fig. 9.

Figure 9 Comparison of surface casing section results from conventional and DwC methods
12 SPE-176506-MS

According to Fig. 9 and 10, the project success criteria defined prior to PT have been fully met. In
particular, the surface casing section total construction time was reduced by 5.7%. Duration of non-
productive time (circulation, reaming, etc.) was reduced by 10.7%. The fact that any additional reaming
of drilling tool drag or overpull sections during PT were avoided definitely indicates achievement of the
third PT goal, namely the mitigation of wellbore construction problems.

Figure 10 Cumulative diagram of operations at pad No.01-24

Nevertheless it is observed that drilling-with-casing results in significantly lower rates of penetration

(ROP) as compared to conventional drilling in similar geological conditions (Table 5).

Table 5ROP for various drilling methods

Drilling section, m ROP for various drilling methods, m/hr

Conventional drilling Drilling-with-casing

235-400 (PFR section) 58,5 21,2

400-645 (lost circulation section) 42,8 19,6

The lower ROP was attributed to less energy supplied to the casing bit due to lower RPM, and also
possibly less aggressive cutting structure design. Conventional drill bit is illustrated in (Fig. 11).
SPE-176506-MS 13

Figure 11Rock cutting tools: A) drill bit; B) PDC bit

It should be also noted that the Approved PT program did not realize full scale of potential capabilities
offered by a new drilling method associated with favorable annular hydrodynamic changes. Drilling-
with-casing should significantly facilitate lost circulation zone drilling as the narrower annular area
translates to considerable lower mud flow rates required to remove cuttings efficiently. In accordance to
drill bit specifications, its normal operation calls for circulation rates from 25 to 45L/s, while the minimum
fluid flow rate during the PT was 32L/s.
Figure 12 shows the diagram of lost circulation events and hi-vis pills pumping while drilling at Pad
01-24 for comparison of conventional drilling with drilling-with-casing.

Figure 12Diagram of lost circulation events and hi-vis pills pumping, Pad No.01-24
14 SPE-176506-MS

Well 01-24-01 conventional drilling

Well 01-24-02 drilling-with-casing
Well 01-24-03 drilling-with-casing
Well 01-24-04 drilling-with-casing
Another key PT stage was determination of optimal drilling parameters in the surface casing section.
To that end, operations were performed with varying drilling parameters (tool rpm, circulation rate) and
drilling results were recorded for each made up casing section (Fig. 13).

Figure 13Drilling-with-casing parameter diagrams

PT determined that selection of an optimal set of drilling parameters is tightly bound to geological
features of drilled rocks. Thus, permafrost rocks (up to 400m) are prone to caving with intensive sludging.
The best results here were achieved at limited penetration feed combined with low casing rpm and
increased mud flow rate. On the other hand, active clay sections (below 400m) feature lost circulation and
packing risks. Such risks were eliminated by increasing the casing string rpm and decreasing the mud flow
rate. The results of drilling parameter optimization in each section are summarized in Table 6.

Table 6 Optimal drilling parameters

Drilling parameters

Drilling section, m Tool rotation speed, rpm Mud flow rate, L/s ROP increase as compared to average data, %

230. . .400 (PFR section) 70 40 28

400. . .700 (active clay section) 80 32 39

According to Table 6, drilling parameter optimization can considerably improve the efficiency of this
drilling method.
SPE-176506-MS 15

Result analysis, conclusions

To assess the drilling-with-casing potential, surface casing section drilling time was assessed excluding
NPT. Assessment results are shown in Fig. 14.

Figure 14 Potential well drilling schedule

Based on the summary analysis of drilling results, the potential of full scale implementation DwC for
surface casing section construction in order to reduce drilling time time at this particular field can be
achieved by improving design and selection of drill bit, use of casing with metal-to-metal seals or with
torque rings with lower makeup torques and modification of the wellhead connection diagram (? Dont
quite understand this).
16 SPE-176506-MS

In conclusion, the PT results lead to recommendation of non-retrievable drilling-with-casing technol-

ogy as a viable drilling method for industrial implementation at fields where top hole sections are covered
by permafrost rocks. The expected drilling time reduction in surface casing sections can be from 1.5 to
2.0 times.
In terms of economics, it should be noted that this method deliveres reduced tool operating times,
eliminates the need for conventional bits, reduced rig time and personnel requirements, as well as
improved time per drilled meter (hr/m) from 0.16 (and 0.31 with lost circulation control) to 0.13-0.14. If
above mentioned optimization recommendations for drilling-with-casing process based on PT results are
implemented in future wells, above benchmark can potentially be further reduced to 0.09 hr/m.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the management of ROSPAN INTERNATIONAL CJSC, SamaraNIP-
Ineft LLC, NK Rosneft and Weatherford LLC for the opportunity to publish the results of pilot testing at
Urengoyskoye field.

References
1. McKay, D.; Galloway, G.; Dalrymple, K. New Developments in the Technology of Drilling with
Casing: Utilizing a Displaceable DrillShoe Tool paper WOCD 0306-05, presented at World Oil
Casing Drilling Conference 6-7 March, 2003, Houston
2. Greg Galloway, Weatherford International. Rotary Drilling with Casing-A field proven
method of reducing wellbore construction cost. WOCD-0306-04 presented at the World Oil
2003
3. Michael Niedermayr, SPE, Jack Pearse, SPE, OMV; Ming Zo Tan, SPE, Budi Utama, SPE,
Weatherford First Australasian Batch Conductor Drilling - World Record Size - Ahead of Time
Estimate, paper IPTC IPTC-13627-PP presented at the International Petroleum Technology
Conference held in Doha, Qatar, 79 December 2009
4. Stanislav Kulikov, Gurban Veliyev, Andrey Bakhtin, Weatherford, Russian Federation Powering
through the permafrost Oilfield technology volume 07 issue 6-June-2014.