WOCD-0306-02 Rotary Drilling with Casing A field proven method of reducing wellbore construction cost

Greg Galloway Weatherford International

Copyright 2003 World Oil Casing Drilling Technical Conference This paper was prepared for presentation at the World Oil 2003 Casing Drilling Technical Conference, held at the Westchase Hilton, Houston, Texas, March 6 - 7, 2003. The information presented in this paper does not reflect any position, claim or endorsement made or implied by Gulf Publishing Company, its publications, their officers, editors, or employees. Questions concerning the content of this paper should be directed to the individuals listed as author/s of this work.

CASING DRILLING TECHNICAL CONFERENCE

Abstract As an industry segment, drilling with casing is still very much in its infancy. However, a few "early adopters" have been successfully extending the operational envelope and discovering new applications. The fundamental value of drilling with casing lies in improving drilling efficiency by eliminating flat spots in the drilling curve. It also has the capability of extending open hole sections to reach deeper casing points with smaller diameters, thus eliminating contingency intermediate strings. The implications for the offshore exploration and production industry are significant and especially poignant for deepwater. Currently, there are two basic methods of drilling with casing divided as follows: Rotating the casing at surface to transmit torque to the drilling BHA, or having a retrievable BHA latched inside the casing that incorporates a motor that drives a conventional bit and underreamer. Both systems, though operational and technically sound, still have many technical issues to overcome concerning all aspects of well planning to operations on the rig floor. This paper will focus on drilling with casing by rotating the casing. With over 300 jobs and 250,000 feet of casing drilled in place, in sizes from 5.5 to 20, the method has overcome the initial hurdle of concept to operational. The paper will highlight the significant lessons learned from these experiences. This emerging technology is considered '"game-changing" and is seen as complementing the expandable and underbalanced technologies which promise to revolutionize well construction. Introduction Operators have drilled with casing in a number of areas for many years.1, 2 The recent resurgence of the technology and significant developments in technology have resulted in a renewed industry interest in the technology of drilling with casing. One of the key factors leading operators to this technology is the removal of time from the drilling curve.3,4,5,6 An industry term, nonproductive time, currently is used to describe problem time, and time associated with tool failures and

inefficiencies. When drilling with casing, non-productive time can be referred to as any time spent not making hole or securing the well for further drilling or production. The procedures for rotary drilling with casing are relatively simple, and involve little extra equipment that is not normally present on a typical rig. Compared to a traditional drilling BHA, a casing BHA is -- and has to be -- simple, since of course, it is left in the ground (Fig.1). Both the DrillShoe tool and the float collar normally would be made-up to a casing joint prior to shipping offshore. When TD is reached and circulating bottoms-up, cementing can begin immediately, since a float collar is present in the string throughout the drilling operation. To allow drilling with casing, a number of technologies had to be developed to enable safe and efficient and problem free operations. Initial work revolved around a drillable drill bit referred to as the DrillShoe tool (Fig. 2). DrillShoe Tools Conventional drill bits are constructed from non-drillable materials. Eliminating the requirement to retrieve the bit and/or drilling assembly required the development of a drillable drill bit or a casing shoe with a cutting structure sufficient to drill the stratagraphic formations. Initially a tungsten carbide cutting structure was developed that could be attached to an aluminum faced drill bit. This technology was first used in January 2000. These tools were immediately successful but were limited to very soft formations and relatively short intervals. It was apparent that to address harder formations and longer intervals, a more durable cutting structure would be required. The challenge was to develop a cutting structure capable of drilling formation while retaining the drillability feature. Thermally Stable Diamond (TSD) disks were selected as the most ideal cutting element to retain both features. When engaging the formation, the cutting forces are directed through the diamond and to the supporting blades. Conversely when the tool is being drilled out after the casing is set in place, the cutting action of the subsequent drill bit or drill shoe, acts on the diamond elements from the unsupported direction, easily fracturing and dislodging the diamond cutting elements. The small diamond elements are easily flushed out with

GALLOWAY, G.

WOCD-0306-02

the fluid flow. When supported by the blade structure, the cutters would retain toughness and wear resistance. While drilling in soft formations, the TSD cutters experience very little or no wear. However, the supporting materials are worn away and loss of the cutting elements occurs. The TSD cutters are mounted along the entire face of the blade; as cutters are lost, new cutters are exposed much like the renewable cutting structure of diamond impregnated drill bits or diamond grinding wheels (Fig. 3). In more than 100 runs with this design, only two have not reached the proposed objective. All have been drilled out without damage to the subsequent drill bit. Outside the drift diameter of the casing and on the gage portion of the DrillShoe II, non-drillable PDC cutting elements are used. This is out of the path and poses no drillability issues for the subsequent bit. This more durable cutting structure aids in extending bit life. The OD radius of the bit is where the higher cutting speeds and work rates occur. Therefore, non-drillable cutting structure is incorporated in the outer diameter (Fig. 4). It is well known that hydraulic energy enhances bit face cleaning and penetration rates.7,8 To optimize hydraulic energy at the bit, drillable nozzle development was required. A number of materials and geometries were evaluated to provide maximum erosion resistance without effecting drillability. Further enhancements are ongoing to continue to improve erosion resistance of the drillable nozzles (Fig 5). Drillable nozzles have been tested with mud weights up to 14 ppg and pressure drops of over 1000 psi. As hydraulic energy increased, the effect of fluid erosion also increased. It was determined the tungsten carbide coating used on the blades could also be used as hardfacing on the face of the bit to reduce erosion. Thus in the applications which are suitable for this product, all of the standard features of conventional drill bits have been emulated successfully in a drillable package. Note that cementing through nozzles of the bit presents an inherent risk of hydrating the cement slurry potentially causing the cement to flash set. Understanding this is critical to designing the cementing program and cement slurry to mitigate this risk and ensure a successful cement operation. Understanding the limited durability of a drillable cutting structure required innovative engineering efforts to combine the durability of conventional PDC cutting structures while maintaining drillability of the casing drill bit. The issues were resolved by developing a method of displacing the cutting structure to the annulus. After reaching TD, the cutting structure is displaced to the

annulus by forcing an inner piston outward, forcing the cutting blades to the annulus. The inner pistons core is made from easily drillable materials (Fig. 6). Development and testing of the displaceable DrillShoe tool will be discussed in detail in a second paper presented later in this conference.9 For drilling with production casing and liners, the need for drillability is eliminated or reduced when there is no requirement to drill out of the casing. For these cases a non-drillable DrillShoe tool was developed. The basis of this design is conventional PDC cutting elements mounted on a machined steel profile. A normal casing connection is placed on the bit. Casing Drive Systems The requirements for turning the casing are identical to those for conventional drilling. The hoisting equipment must hold the weight, apply rotational torque and contain pressure.5 Rotary drilling with casing required a method of connecting the top drive to the casing, to drive the casing string. Initially a water bushing or crossover sub from the top drive to the casing was used to hold and turn the casing. This simple tool was effective but time consuming to make connection as two make-ups and one breakout of casing threads is required for each connection. Making up casing threads takes longer than making up API drill pipe threads. Long connection times were a result. It was obvious that water bushing is not an efficient drive mechanism for any but short casing drilling intervals. Further efforts revolved around modifying a conventional fishing spear to grip the casing internally. This tool proved to be effective in over 100 applications. The spear is stabbed into the top joint, rotated a quarter turn and picked up. Connection times achieved are similar to that of drill pipe. The pump pressure energizes the packer. While the spear was effective, it was limited in the depth in which the casing could be driven. Due to the small load area of the fishing spear, the radial forces exerted on the casing could deform or damage the casing. Extending the depth range required the development of both a fit-for-purpose internal and external grip casing drive system. To maintain acceptable load forces for extended lengths of casing, the slip area of the internal grapples was significantly increased to spread the forces over a larger area. The new tool is designed for quickly connecting in the casing to minimize connection time. A stop ring is positioned near the top of the spear to ensure the grapples are engaged in the proper location inside the casing. A simple quarter turn to the right engages the spear to hold the casing string and apply rotational torque. A quarter turn to the left, without axial

WOCD 0306-02ROTARY DRILLING WITH CASING A FIELD PROVEN METHOD FOR REDUCING WELLBORE CONSTRUCTION COSTS

load, releases the tool. Pumping energizes the packer element. A mud saver valve can be incorporated to minimize spillage on connections. (Fig 7) Tubulars and Connections The basics of casing design for conventional wells are well understood. When designing the casing string for a drilling with casing application, the additional stresses applied to the casing during the drilling operation must be considered. Warren et.al. described the mechanics of buckling and fatigue in a casing drilling operation.10 The effect of buckling, wear and fatigue must be addressed to ensure the integrity of the casing string is not compromised either while drilling or for the expected life of the well. A casing failure during the drilling operation would be disastrous; however, limiting the life of the well due to wear or fatigue on the casing string while drilling would be equally catastrophic even though not immediately apparent. Calculations show, as expected, buckling loads are much higher with large diameter casings. To date most work done with this system has been at shallow depths where casing size is generally larger. To date the majority of shallow casing strings have used standard buttress connections without incident. Some API standard casing threads have been tested to destruction, showing these connections would withstand three times normal make-up torque prior to being damaged.5 For longer casing strings, high torque connections are required. Part of the engineering process prior to drilling with casing requires a careful analysis of the torque requirements. Based on the results of the torque analysis, an appropriate connection should be selected. A number of proprietary connections available "off-the-shelf" that are suitable for most applications with higher torque requirements. Centralization In the surface and conductor casing intervals when drilling with casing, the use of centralizers is not common. While there are numerous commercially available centralizers, most are not suitable to stand up to the rigors of drilling when rotating the casing. Rigid alloy centralizers wear too quickly for most applications and become ineffective or can be lost in the hole. Steel non-rotating centralizers can be effective for applications with low total revolutions and where high rotational speeds are not required. The best technical solution from a centralization and stabilization standpoint is rigid centralizer subs with hardfacing applied to the gage portion. These tools add cost to the system and in some cases increase the torque required to turn the casing string. Skinazi et.al., reported running bow-spring centralizers successfully on a vertical well.6 This system used a positive

displacement motor to drive the drilling assembly and required minimum rotation of the casing string. Time Reduction A key benefit of drilling with casing, regardless of the system used, is time reduction. With a cement in place system, there is nothing to remove from the hole and no requirements to place hardware in the casing prior to cementing. The float valve is in place during the drilling operations. Once the hole is suitably clear of cuttings, the cementing operations can begin as normal. The time associated with tripping pipe and running casing, including much of the circulation time involved, is removed. This results in very small "flat spots" in most operations. Typical timesavings are in the range of 30% of the time from section "spud" to LOT. Timesavings of over 80% have been achieved in one case; however, not all of the timesavings are directly attributable to the drilling with casing operation. Problem Reduction Many typical drilling problems are eliminated or reduced when drilling with casing. Problems associated with formations and well bore conditions that deteriorate due to time exposed to drilling fluids are reduced simply because the exposure time is reduced. Instances of lost circulation and stuck pipe have been very limited. In over 300 field runs, not a single case of lost circulation has been reported outside of severely depleted zones where losses are inevitable. In the same 300 wells, the only case of stuck pipe was due to rig operation problems that resulted in the pipe remaining stationary without circulation for an extended period of time. Clearly the casing-drilled wellbore is in better condition than with most conventionally drilled wells. There are a number of factors at work here. Shepherd et.al., reported that the process of casing drilling may mechanically aid in building and maintaining an impermeable "filter cake" on the wellbore wall.3 A plastering effect on the borehole wall seals against permeable zones, reducing lost circulation and helping to prevent differential sticking. In addition, the inherent stiffness of the casing string in the wellbore produces a less tortuous hole, providing a smoother wellbore and reducing the risk of key-seating and mechanical sticking. The stiff assembly also is less prone to vibrations, reducing the mechanical impact damage on the borehole wall. Drillstring vibrations have been attributed to borehole stability problems.11 Tripping of the drillstring itself has been attributed to may problems such as lost circulation, borehole stability problems and well control incidents. Elimination of pipe tripping eliminates many of these problems. Running casing into a pre-drilled wellbore is sometimes problematic resulting in lost time "fighting" the casing

GALLOWAY, G.

WOCD-0306-02

string to bottom, setting the casing string off bottom, or tripping the casing string and making a wiper trip with a rotary assembly. In areas where these problems are prevalent, drilling with casing or simply reaming with casing can be an attractive alternative to conventional casing running operations. Using a system designed to drill with casing as a tool to get the casing to bottom either by drilling it down or simply reaming it through the problem zones can be a viable alternative in many cases. This operation has proven successful in cases utilizing both liners and long strings. Rig Requirements The traditional "cement in place" drilling with casing system requires no modifications to the conventional drilling rig. The only optional equipment required for this operation is a top drive system. As nothing is removed from the casing, there are no requirements for wireline or special pipe handling equipment for these operations. To date, no drilling with casing operations have used a kelly drive rig. However, with range 2 casing, this could be an option to consider. Fluid Requirements Compared to conventional drilling operations, experience has shown flow rates can be reduced substantially in casing drilling. As annular volume is reduced dramatically, hole cleaning is improved due to the higher annular velocities achieved, even with reduced flow rates. Cleaning the hole more efficiently and removing cuttings faster aids in ECD reduction. However, higher annular velocities and the resultant friction losses in the annulus increase the ECD. Each application must be evaluated to determine the balance that must be struck between flow rates to clean the bit face and clear the annulus of cuttings, and ECD management. Once all factors have been considered, the proper flow rate and nozzle configuration can be selected. An inherent benefit of drilling with casing is the monobore annulus. Conventional drilling assemblies result in different annular velocities around each drill string component. This can lead to wellbore erosion around drill collars and inefficient cutting transport around the smaller diameter drill pipe. With casing as the drillstring, the annular space along the entire wellbore is virtually equal allowing the optimum hydraulics to be dialed in based on the fluid properties, cuttings concentration and flow rate. Hole cleaning ECD management and hole cleaning are much easier. Hole cleaning has not been an issue on previous wells. While no caliper log data is available, lag time and cement returns do not indicate borehole enlargement to be an issue.

Conclusion Rotary Drilling with Casing has proven to be a very effective method of reducing wellbore construction cost through the removal of flat time and problem elimination. The system utilized is very simple, requires no modification to the conventional drilling rig package, and is extremely reliable when proper applications engineering is carried out prior to the operation. Conventional oilfield tubulars and connections have been used successfully. Of over 300 sections drilled to date, only three have not achieved the targeted casing setting depth. Even in low cost operations, the combinations of new tools and streamlined operations have realized cost savings. Thus, utilizing drilling with casing technology to eliminate dangerous operations is a driving force for a number of operators. Acknowledgements I would like to express appreciation to Weatherford International for allowing this paper to be published and to World Oil for hosting this conference to highlight the technology. References 1. Tarr, B., Sukup, R. Casing-While-Drilling The Next Step Change in Well Construction World Oil, October 1999 2. Sinor, A. Casing Drilling Recent Advances for Drilling Challenges Presentation to SPE Gulf Coast Section, 10 January, 2001 3. Shepard, S.F., Reiley, R.H., Warren, T.M. Casing Drilling: An Emerging Technology paper SPE 67731, presented at SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, 27 February 1 March 2001 4. Fontenot, K., Warren, T.M., Houtchens, Casing Drilling Proves Successful in South Texas presented at IADC World Drilling 2002 Madrid, Spain, 5-6 June, 2002 5. Wardley, M., Priadi, A. Dalrymple, K., Drilling with Casing Practical, Cost Effective & Here to Stay paper presented at Indonesian Petroleum Association Twenty Eighth Annual Convention and Exhibition October, 2001 6. Skinazi, E., Deady, R., Robson, D., Konschuh, C. Development of a Casing/Drilling system Improves the Drilling Process paper IADC/SPE 62780 presented IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology, Kuala Lumpur 11-13 September 2000 7. Fear, M., Pessier, R., Wells, M. Different Shales Dictate fundamentally Different Strategies in Hydraulics, Bit Selection and Operating Practices Paper SPE 28322 presented Annual technical conferenc and exhibition New Orleans 25-28 Sept., 1994 8. King, I., Wells, M., Pessier, R., Besson, A., A Methodology Using Laboratory Experiments and

WOCD 0306-02ROTARY DRILLING WITH CASING A FIELD PROVEN METHOD FOR REDUCING WELLBORE CONSTRUCTION COSTS

Numerical Modeling to Optimize roller cone Bit Hydraulics, paper SPE 28315 presented Annual technical conferenc and exhibition New Orleans 2528 Sept., 1994 9. McKay, D. Galloway, G. Dalrymple, K. New Developments in the Technology of Drilling with Casing: Utilizing a Displaceable DrillShoe Tool paper WODC 0306-05, presented World Oil Casing Drilling Conference 6-7 March, 2003 10. Warren, T.M., Angman, P. Houtchens, B., Casing Drilling Application Design Considerations paper IADC/SPE 59179, presented IADC/SPE Drilling conference New Orleans 23-25 February 2000. 11. Santos, H., Placido, J.C.R., and Wolter, C. Consequences and relevance of Drillstring Vibrations on Wellbore Stability paper IADC/SPE 52820 presented IADC/SPE Drilling conference Amsterdam 9-11 March 1999.

GALLOWAY, G.

WOCD-0306-02

Figure 1 Simple drilling with casing BHA

Figure 2 Early DrillShoe Design

Figure 3 TSD Cutting elements on Blades

Figure 4 PDC cutters outside drill out area

WOCD 0306-02ROTARY DRILLING WITH CASING A FIELD PROVEN METHOD FOR REDUCING WELLBORE CONSTRUCTION COSTS

Figure 5 Nozzle design testing

Figure 6 Drillshoe III above as ready to Drill

Figure 6a DrillShoe III after displacement

Figure 7 Quick Connect Casing Drive System