CT Extended Reach: Can We Reach Farther?

Newman, Ken; Kelleher, Patrick; Smalley, Ed

doi:10.2118/168235-ms

Cited by 21 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The percentage of additional force applied to the BHA to the change in surface force is defined (Newman et al 2014) as the Force Transfer Factor (FTF).…”

Section: Friction Lock Up Wall Contact Force and Force Transfer Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To reduce this constraint, an automated CT design computer program was created in conjunction with this study to perform design optimizations systematically. The algorithm implemented was based on an enhanced version of those described by Newman et al (2014) as well as Zheng (2000). The program optimizes available tubing parameters by performing dozens or sometimes hundreds of TFM simulations in a mater of seconds.…”

Section: Ct String Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of Well Features on CT Reach

Kelleher¹,

Newman²,

Galvan³

et al. 2015

Day 2 Wed, March 25, 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coiled tubing (CT) is frequently used in horizontal wells to mill out hydraulic fracturing plugs before bringing new completions online. However, the maximum depth CT may reach while milling plugs can be a major limiting factor for final completion depths. CT reach limits are normally attributed to friction lockup during these milling operations and can reduce effective pay zone penetration if not considered during the well design. In these cases, several common well features typically contribute to the majority of the low force transfer factors leading to insufficient set-down force and helical lockup. This paper will discuss key parameter variations found from a case study of several horizontal well designs, and analyze their impacts on typical coiled tubing reach capabilities using a tubing forces model. Features analyzed include: kick-off build rate, vertical sections and simple deviations down to the heel, trajectory changes in the horizontal section, well completion geometry, and required weight on bit (WOB).• Quantitatively identify well features and possible variations that significantly impact CT reach • Identify limiting factors for these features such as flow requirements during fracturing or production, wellsite location, lease boundaries, TVD of the payzone, etc.

show abstract

“…The percentage of additional force applied to the BHA to the change in surface force is defined (Newman et al 2014) as the Force Transfer Factor (FTF).…”

Section: Friction Lock Up Wall Contact Force and Force Transfer Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ct String Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Well Features on CT Reach

Kelleher¹,

Newman²,

Galvan³

et al. 2015

Day 2 Wed, March 25, 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Huang et al built the extended-reach limit model considering constraint and operation conditions [33], and studied the piecewise optimal design method of drilling strings [34]. Zhang et al [35] and Newman et al [36] studied the mechanical limit of the coiled tubing drilling method.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study on the Mechanical Extended-Reach Limit Prediction Model of Horizontal Drilling with Dual-Channel Drillpipes

Tan

Zhang

2021

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extended-reach horizontal wells are critical for the development of unconventional reservoirs. Dual-channel drill pipe drilling has a great advantage in improving the horizontal section length, while the research on its mechanical extended-reach limit prediction model is insufficient. In this paper, the torque and drag model is built considering the additional axial force of the sliding piston on the dual-channel drillpipe. Based on the torque and drag model, the mechanical extended-reach limit model for dual-channel drilling is established. A case study including a comparison to the conventional drilling method and sensitivity analysis is conducted. The result shows that under the same conditions, the mechanical extended-reach limit of the dual-channel drilling method is 10,592.2 m, while it is 9030.6 m of the conventional drilling method. The dual-channel drilling method achieves a further mechanical extended-reach limit than the conventional drilling method. To improve the mechanical extended-reach limit of dual-channel drilling, a higher back pressure on the sliding piston, a deeper measured depth of the sliding piston, a higher density of the passive drilling fluid, a smaller outer diameter of the outer pipe, a lower weight on bit and rate of penetration should be adopted. The work in this paper completes the extended-reach limit theory of dual-channel drilling, providing a guide for better use in unconventional reservoir development.

show abstract

“…Vestavik et al [21] presented a potential application of Reelwell Drilling Method (RDM) to widen the envelope of ERD through reductions of torque and drag and Equivalent Circulating Density (ECD) gradient, and optimization of hydraulic weight on bit. Newman et al [22] explained that for ERD with coiled tubing (CT) where a limitation on the horizontal displacement occurs due to frictional forces, the friction can cause helical buckling and lead to lockup of the CT strings, thus limiting reach. Gupta et al [23] discussed several key challenges in ERD, including high torque and drag due to high friction forces.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Analytical Model for Axial Force Transfer and the Maximum Compression Point of Work Strings in Extend Reach Drilling

Shaibu

2020

IMST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Complex work string dynamics are often observed when one is investigating the limit of Extended Reach Drilling (ERD), yet the underlying physical causes of anomalous problems are often not fully understood and is thus a topic of ongoing research interest. Theoretical models capturing tubular dynamics have been previously proposed to analyze force transfer in work strings, yet there is significant confusion regarding these models because their published versions are not entirely consistent and, in many cases, do not meet engineering requirement. Further confusion is introduced through variations in pin-pointing locations where axial compression in the work strings should be checked for mechanical integrity. A simple and yet rigorous mathematical model is essential for adequate prediction of axial compression profiles in work strings for ERD. This article presents a simplified tubular mechanics model for describing axial force transfer under ERD conditions. We discuss the model in finding the point of peak compression in casing strings. This point is predicted to be in the arc section near the heel of a horizontal wellbore, under borehole drilling, and casing running conditions. The exact location of the peak axial compression changes with pipe-wall friction coefficient. For the friction coefficient in the range of 0.15 to 0.35, this point occurs in the range of inclination angle between 70.7 o and 81.5 o , averaging 76.1 o . The model can also be used for other purposes, including prediction of depth limit, bottom hole assembly (BHA) design, and locking up analysis of coiled tubing (CT) strings.

show abstract

CT Extended Reach: Can We Reach Farther?

Cited by 21 publications

References 6 publications

Impact of Well Features on CT Reach

Impact of Well Features on CT Reach

Study on the Mechanical Extended-Reach Limit Prediction Model of Horizontal Drilling with Dual-Channel Drillpipes

An Analytical Model for Axial Force Transfer and the Maximum Compression Point of Work Strings in Extend Reach Drilling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About