SPE 58972

System for the Hydraulics Analysis of Underbalanced Drilling Projects in Offshore and
Onshore Scenarios
Valter Silva Jr., Petrobras S.A., Sara Shayegi, SPE, Petrobras S.A., Edson Y. Nakagawa,SPE,Petrobras S.A.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2000 SPE International Petroleum Conference
and Exhibition in Mexico held in Villahermosa, Mexico, 13 February 2000.
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, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes 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 where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
As a reservoir is depleted, both pressure and production rates
decline and lost circulation or differential sticking problems
can hamper or prevent drilling operations undertaken to
enhance production, such as in-fill drilling, drilling horizontal
sections through the reservoir or re-entry operations.
Underbalanced drilling is a workable method to drill in such
depleted or low-pressure fields.
Another benefit of
underbalanced drilling is that it can potentially prevent or
reduce near wellbore permeability damage (skin), thus
enhancing production, reducing stimulation requirements and
delaying water or gas break-through time due to the lower
pressure drop required for the same flow rates.
In order to design and realize a successful underbalanced
drilling project many important elements must be considered
conjointly. This is especially important for UBD operations
offshore from floating vessels, where the number of critical
issues increases significantly. An integrated analysis method
has been developed which incorporates these elements,
including multiphase flow calculations, gas and liquid
injection rate optimization, hydrostatic gradient and frictional
pressure loss calculations, cuttings transport, reservoir fluid
influx (gas, oil, or water), and operational procedures such as
tripping and liquid unloading.
Software has been developed based on this method so that
an engineer can quickly and easily consider and compare the
use of different light-weight fluids or to see the effect when
varying diverse parameters. The software can model gasified
liquid, foam, mist air or non-Newtonian single phase mud for
upward or downward vertical and inclined flow as well as
horizontal flow. A cuttings transport model resulting from

full-scale experimental work is incorporated to delineate the

limits of adequate hole cleaning and the effect of operational
procedures can be studied.
Different field cases have been modeled with the software
and the results have compared well with actual data. A
gasified fluid example is included to illustrate the potential of
the software.
Introduction
At the close of the 20th century the oil industry continues its
search for reserves in increasingly complex environments. An
area that has proved potential in adding hydrocarbon reserves
to the world supply is deep water. Already many fields are
slated for development in water depths up to 2000 m. A goal
of Petrobras is to be able to economically develop fields in
water depths up to 3000 m by the year 2005. New solutions
and technology are needed to meet this goal.1
Drilling with light weight fluids near balance or under
balance is one of the potential methods to overcome some of
the barriers to drilling in such water depths. The technique not
only allows drilling through low-pressure or depleted
reservoirs, but also the minimization of formation damage
while in underbalanced conditions. Higher penetration rates
and reduced loss of circulation problems, are just a few
examples of the other advantages.
In this paper the term "light-weight fluid" describes a
drilling fluid that has a gas phase as part of its composition. It
therefore includes air, mist, foam or gasified fluid.
The primary characteristic of light-weight fluids is their
low density. In Figure 1 the density ranges of specific lightweight fluids are compared with the densities of conventional
drilling fluids. 2
Drilling Fluid Type

Copyright 2000, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

Water Base
Oil Base
Aerated
Stable Foam
Air/Mist
0

10

15

Mud Weight (lbm/gal)

Figure 1 Density ranges of drilling fluids.

20

VALTER SILVA JR., SARA SHAYEGI, EDSON Y. NAKAGAWA

When designing an underbalanced drilling project many

factors must be considered, from hole cleaning and cuttings
transport to operational safety issues, such as fluid level during
tripping/connections and unloading. An integrated design
system that incorporates the key aspects that need to be
considered when undertaking drilling with compressible lightweight fluids is presented in this paper.
The elements integrated into this comprehensive project
analysis system include:
multiphase flow calculations,
injection flow rate optimization, hydrostatic pressure gradient
and frictional pressure loss calculations in the drillstring and
annulus, cuttings transport, downhole motor flow
requirements, injection system capacity, reservoir fluid influx
(gas, oil, water), operational procedures such as tripping and
liquid unloading. The method can be used to study the use of
gasified liquids, foam, single-phase liquid, mist or air in
vertical, inclined or horizontal configurations.
To facilitate the use of this design method a simulator has
been developed that incorporates these principal elements.
The software, entitled Simulator for Integrated Drilling
Hydraulics Analysis (SIDHAN), was developed as part of a
Joint Industry Project with the aim of aiding in both the design
and post-analysis of projects using light-weight fluids. A
variety of correlations and models for gasified fluids and foam
are included in the software to enable an engineer to quickly
and easily compare multiphase flow models.
The results of the simulator in predicting field data have
been compared with other commercially available simulators
with good accuracy. 3 A design example is described to
illustrate the use of this integrated analysis tool.
System Overview
The algorithms included in the software are based on
laboratory tests conducted at Petrobras' research center in Rio,
CENPES4, full scale experiments performed at PETROBRAS
Research and Training Test Well Facility, in Taquipe-BA5,
field measurements and analysis of data from the literature.
Gasified Fluid. Many correlations6 have been developed for
predicting two-phase flow pressure gradients, differing in the
manner used to calculate each one of the three components
that compose the total pressure gradient. The correlations
implemented in SIDHAN are the following:
Poettmann & Carpenter
Baxendell & Thomas
Fancher & Brown
Hagedorn & Brown
Duns & Ros
Orkiszewski
Dukler & Flanigan
Dukler, Eaton & Flanigan
Dukler, Minami & Flanigan
Beggs & Brill
Beggs, Brill & Palmer

SPE 58972

Mukherjee & Brill

Aziz, Govier & Fogarasi
Mechanistic Model 1: -Sylvester & Yao7
Mechanistic Model 2: Hasan & Kabir8
Mechanistic Model 3: Ansari et al.9 / Wallis10
It was found that Mukherjee & Brill 11correlation is the
most appropriate model for deals with large annular geometry.
Thus, if the hydraulic diameter is greater than 12, the routine
automatically selects the code (12) as the current theoretical
model. This model is the best flow model for the riser.
It is necessary to emphasize that most of these correlations
were developed for flows of gas with Newtonian liquid in
tubular flow loops. The correlation due to Hasan & Kabir,
presents a particularity in that it is a mechanistic model that
was developed to consider both pipe and annular geometries.
In the other models an equivalent diameter concept is used.
Instead of the conventional formula for equivalent hydraulic
diameter (Deh), given by the well known relation four times the
quotient between the flowing area and the wetted perimeter,
the following expression was used to represent the casingtubing annulus for varying cross-sectional area:
5
8

Deh = ( Do Di ) ( Do + Di )

3
8

where Do is the casing inner diameter, and Di represents the

drill-string outer diameter.
Foam. Foam has proven to be another option that can be
used for drilling underbalanced. It has proven to have
adequate solids removal capabilities under wellbore
conditions. By using a recycle process on the foam, economics
are greatly improved. An extensive experimental program for
foam has been carried out by Petrobras.12 Both foam rheology
and stability have been analyzed experimentally for different
conditions, evaluating the effect of concentration and type of
foaming agent, salt concentration in the liquid phase, and oil
concentration. After these lab tests, the feasibility of operating
a closed-loop system with no liquid discard (recyclable foam),
was tested and proven feasible during field tests in TaquipeBA.13 Models based on the data obtained have been
incorporated into SIDHAN.
Three rheological models were implemented in SIDHAM:
Bingham Plastic, Power-Law (Ostwald de Waele) and
Herschel-Bulkley, which combines the previous two and is
also referred as yield-pseudoplastic.14 The relationship
between foam quality and Power-Law parameters was
obtained through experiments performed at CENPES, as well
as the empirical correlations for the turbulent region.
Air/Mist. The model for air drilling is based on R. Angel's15
work which is widely used in the industry. This model is
based on several assumptions including: steady-state flow, no
slippage between the drilled cuttings and the gas in the
annulus, a minimum air velocity of 3000 ft/min (vertical well)
to carry the cuttings out, Weymouths friction factor for flow

SPE 58972 SYSTEM FOR THE HYDRAULICS ANALYSIS OF UNDERBALANCED DRILLING PROJECTS IN OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE
SCENARIOS

in smooth pipe, that there is no influx from the formation and

zero back pressure at the surface on annulus.
Since Angel's model does not consider slippage, if there is
slippage between the cuttings and the gas, the mixture density
will be higher by an amount proportional to the rate of
increase of slippage. This will mean that Angels model will
predict lower downhole pressures than the actual values and
that the difference will increase as the air flow rate is
decreased and choking commences. The effect will be
negligible if gas velocity downhole is sufficient to give
reasonable cuttings transport (i.e. there is limited slippage).
Several of Angels assumptions lead to under prediction of
the bottomhole air pressure. He did not include or assumed
negligible several factors such as hole roughness, hole
enlargement, hole inclination, cuttings shape and size and
other aspects. Some of these assumptions were overcome by
Guo, Miska and Lee16. They used Nikuradses friction factor
for flow through a rough walled borehole and also considered
varying hole inclinations. Their modified equations are used in
SIDHAN's Air/Mist Drilling model.
Mist is used for drilling instead of pure air, when there is a
small amount of water influx from the formation. The
hydraulics calculations in SIDHAN for mist drilling are based
on Angels model where air is the continuous phase, while
water appears as discontinuous droplets. In mist drilling, a
small amount of water, containing a foaming agent, is injected
into the gas to produce a saturated mixture at the bottom of the
well to help in the removal of the water influx from the
formation. Thus, two additional parameters need to be
evaluated in the design of the drilling operation. The required
water flow rate to be injected into the air flow, at surface
conditions that would saturate the air at bottom hole, such that
no water condenses. Additionally, the amount of water influx
that can be handled by the mist needs to be quantified.
For air drilling SIDHAN calculates the minimum gas flow
rate for cuttings removal and associated standpipe pressure, bit
selection, horsepower of compressors/booster while if mist
drilling formation water carrying capacity (surface injected
water and removed formation water) are also calculated.
Incompressible mud. SIDHAN also includes an option for
calculations for non-Newtonian fluid so that comparisons with
conventional drilling muds are possible in the same software.
Three rheological models are available: Bingham Plastic,
Power-Law (Ostwald de Waele), Herschel-Bulkley (yieldpseudoplastic).
Drilling Steady-State Analysis
In steady state analysis, inflow equals outflow with no
accumulation occurring in the system. In the present case, the
"system" is the physical volume represented by the drill string
and casing-tubing annulus (wellbore configuration). SIDHAN
solves the partial differential equations of momentum through
algebraic approximations applied to a finite number of discrete
mesh points.

The multiphase flow is assumed to be one-dimensional,

meaning that all the variables depend uniquely on their
position in the flow network. The main assumptions for
drilling steady-state analysis are:

Constant injection flow rates for both liquid and gas

drilling fluid phases;
No accumulation of mass within the control volume, since
the total incoming and outgoing rates of mass are equal;
The mass flow rates crossing the boundary and the rates
of energy transfer by heat (interaction with surrounding)
and shaft work (rotary drilling) are constant with time;
Constant reservoir production and surface back pressure;
No significant drill-string movement;
Quasi-equilibrium (or quasi-static) process while drilling.

The basis for fluid flow calculation is an energy balance

for the flowing fluid between two points in a given system.
Assuming no external work is done on or by the fluid, a
steady-state mechanical energy balance equation in differential
form may be written as:

dp p
p
p
=
+
+

dZ Z hydrostatic Z acceleration Z friction

The total pressure drop is the superposition of three effects:

potential energy change, kinetic energy change and friction
loss. The pressure terms are defined below:

g
p
=
[ . g + (1 ). l ] sin

Z hydrostatic g c
tp .v m .v sg dp
p
=

gc.p
dZ
Z acceleration
f tp . ns v m2
p
=

2.g c d
Z friction
Integrated Drilling Hydraulics Analysis
The aim of Integrated Drilling Hydraulics Analysis is to
consider key elements conjointly. As can be seen in Figure 2
the following parameters are plotted together allowing
optimized decision making. The equivalent circulating density
(ECD) is plotted on the y-axis versus the gas flow rate on the
x-axis. A set of curves representing different liquid flow rates
are shown. These curves represent the bottom hole ECD
obtained for different liquid and gas flow rate combinations.
The other curves represented by dashed lines consider
requirements for cuttings removal (hole cleaning); and the

VALTER SILVA JR., SARA SHAYEGI, EDSON Y. NAKAGAWA

minimum and maximum flow rates to satisfy downhole motor

(PDM) operational requirements. If there is reservoir influx
for this system, the effect is incorporated into the liquid-gas
flow rate curves.

SPE 58972

The data regarding the well is summarized in Table 1. It

can be seen from the pore pressure that the reservoir is
depleted. Several scenarios for drilling this well can be
envisioned. The well can be drilled with light weight fluid
either slightly overbalanced to preclude having to handle
production at the surface while avoiding problems of
drillstring sticking and/or lost circulation. On the other hand it
could be drilled underbalanced which would have the added
benefit of reduced formation damage but the reservoir
effluents would be produced which would need to be handled
at the surface.
Table 1 Well M Wellbore geometry and drill-string composition.
Well Inclination

Measured Depth MD
(m)

Figure 2 Integrated hydraulics analysis.

Several of these elements are illustrated using an offshore

field example.
Illustrative Example
A candidate for using light-weight fluids drilling is Well M
located in 510 m of water depth, Campos Basin, Brazil. The
well configuration is shown in Figure 3. The rotating table on
the rig deck is the reference level for depth (air gap equals 25
m). The gasified fluid is to be composed of nitrogen as the gas
phase and sea water as the liquid phase (8.345 ppg). The pore
pressure for the target reservoir is 5.81 ppg.

SS - 39

True Vertical Depth TVD

(m)

1500

1500

2051
2816

2014
2627

2895

2700

3125

2875
Casing

Inner Diameter (in.)

Length (m)

8.755

535 < MD 2816

Open-Hole

Inner Diameter (in.)

Length (m)
2816 < MD 3125

8.5
Riser
Inner Diameter (in.)

Length (m)

17.6

0 < TVD 535

Drill-String Composition

Sea Level
Water depth = 510 m

Item

Total
Leng
th
(m)

Inner Diameter (in.)

External
Diameter (in.)

Drill-Quip SS10 (18 3/4 - 10 kpsi)

Sea Floor
569 m

Drill Pipe

2935

3.0

5.0

Heavy Weight

140

3.0

5.0

Drill Collar

50

3.0

8.0

30

875 m

20

Drill Bit
1315 m
13 3/8
KOP

2610 m

eq = 5,81

2750 m
2875 m

lb/gal
K = 1000 / 1500 mDarcy
Porosity
= 20%

Nozzles Diameter (in.)

12/32

1500 m

Reservoir
P original = 281 kgf /cm 2 (at 2700 m)

Number of Bit Nozzles

Inclination = 36,7
9 5/8 - 2816 m

Liner 7 - 3125 m
8 1/2 - 3125 m

Figure 3 Vertical profile of the Well M, Campos Basin.

In this case since a semi-submersible is to be used to drill

the well, limiting the surface handling equipment/storage for
handling the reservoir production while drilling if the well is
drilled underbalanced.
The first option of slightly
overbalanced is a more viable choice under these conditions.
Pressure Profile
In drilling operations, the determination of the pressure profile
along the well plays a fundamental role, since the production
flow rates of a well are dependent on the balance between the

SPE 58972 SYSTEM FOR THE HYDRAULICS ANALYSIS OF UNDERBALANCED DRILLING PROJECTS IN OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE
SCENARIOS

hydrodynamic pressure due to the circulating medium and the

reservoir pore pressure. The pressure, P, at a certain well
depth is calculated from the expression below:

Injection Pressure Curve

1000
Start-Up

800
Pressure (psi)

P = Psurface + Phydrostatic + Pfriction + Pacceleration

Where:

Steady-State
Maximum

600
400
200
0
0

Psurface surface back pressure exerted via choke valve

opening or operational regime of the separator vessel,
restriction to the efflux;

Phydrostatic component due to the potential energy

(hydrostatic column of liquid);

Pfriction refers to the pressure drop in the direction of

the flow, due to of the shear stress between the phases and
friction with the walls of the annulus (irreversible friction
losses);

Pacceleration results from the local fluid acceleration,

significant during intermittent flow patterns. (Generally
not more than 10% of the total pressure

The flow models to predict two-phase hydrodynamic

pressures differ in the manner in which the density of the twophase mixture is calculated (based on void fraction) as well as
how the two-phase velocities are calculated.
These
calculations depend on whether fluid flow is upwards or
downwards, vertical, inclined or horizontal flow.
The total pressure in terms of equivalent circulating
density (ECD) is shown in Figure 4 for the annulus.
ECD (ppg)
4

Mesured Depth (m)

580
1160
1740
2320
2900

Figure 4 Equivalent circulating density profile for Well M.

In addition to the pressure profiles inside the well,

SIDHAN also gives the key injection pressures for the
injection equipment both for drillstring injection as well as
injection via a parasite string. The profile for pump injection
pressure is shown in Figure 5. The three key points that are
given by SIDHAN are marked.

20

40

60

80

100

120

Time (min)

Figure 5 Typical injection pressure curve versus time.

Formation Influx
While drilling underbalanced, it is necessary to predict the
volume of fluid entering the wellbore to regulate the rates of
efflux, which must be handled so that the surface system
(separator/storage) handling capacity is not exceeded. This
can be achieved by controlling the injection and return flow
rates. Influx from the reservoir alters the annulus stream
composition and therefore the resulting downhole pressures.
An adequate design of the surface equipment is essential
for effective downhole pressure control. If their volumetric
capacity is exceeded (flooding caused by overloading), a
pressure increase will result upstream. For this reason, the
occurrence of slugs, which are propelled by the gas expanding
towards the surface causing a water hammer effect, is
undesirable. Consequently, the injection flow rates are also
subject to restrictions imposed by the mud-gas separator and
rig tanks (storage and treatment of effluents).
The injection flow rates and efflux restriction determine
the power of the gas supply equipment: compressors and
boosters. The gaseous phase is constituted by the own
atmospheric air, natural gas (if available in the wellsite), or
nitrogen.
A formation influx algorithm has been incorporated into
SIDHAN to model the reservoir response to a given pressure
status while drilling. The model assumes only monophasic
reservoir influx. In other words there can only be a water, oil
or gas influx not a combination for this model. This data is
supplied as input information along with data regarding the
reservoir formation and fluid properties. Another assumption
of the model is that the reservoir is homogeneous and behaves
as an infinite system. Since SIDHAN is a steady state
simulator and the reservoir equation considers a transient
system it was decided to integrate the two by modeling the
transient reservoir response as a succession of steady state
responses. Thereforr, the reservoir influx provided by the
reservoir flow equations is an average of the inflow rates
calculated during that period.
The model performs calculations in response to the bottom
hole pressure predicted by the two-phase flow correlation for
the given set of flow rate combinations and input data. The
system does not vary with time and the reservoir height is
assumed to be constant.
The reservoir model for vertical and inclined wells is based
on the diffusivity equation. It is valid for well inclinations up

VALTER SILVA JR., SARA SHAYEGI, EDSON Y. NAKAGAWA

to 70 from the vertical and for a reservoir height to well radius

ratio greater than 40 (i.e. if the well radius is 12" then the
minimum reservoir height would need to be 40 ft).
For horizontal wells, the model for inflow is based on
several flow regimes known to occur along the productive life
of a reservoir including "early radial flow", linear inflow and
finally "late radial flow "as illustrated in Figure 7.

Aiming to cuttings removal, practical values for effective

minimum liquid velocity are: 120 ft/min, in case of vertical
wells, and 150 ft/min, for horizontal wells. The actual or
effective liquid velocity (Vl) is calculated from:

Vl =

Riser Considerations
Several key factors that need to be considered in regards to the
riser include:
Collapse pressure;
Cuttings transport;
Emergency disconnect.

Cuttings Transport
SIDHAN incorprates a cuttings removal model based on flow
loop and real scale well tests. By adopting a conservative
approach, it is assumed that just the liquid phase constitutes
the medium for cuttings transport mechanistic model based
on the relative movement between solids and fluids: falling
velocity of the solid particles and ascendant velocity of the
liquid phase.
The cuttings transit time from bottom-hole to the surface is
calculated from the simulated annular velocity and flow
pattern (spatial distribution of the dispersed phase relative to
the liquid phase) at each computational cell.

Ql
(1 ) A

where Ql is the liquid injection flow rate, represents the

void fraction and A is the annulus cross-sectional area.
The velocity profiles for Well M are plotted in Figure 6.
While the profile for the void fraction (gas fraction) in the
annulus can be see in Figure 7. It can be seen that the average
liquid velocity is above 150 ft/min in the annulus throughout
the well except in the riser. The velocity declines sharply
when the fluid reaches the much larger riser. Due to this
decrease in velocity at the bottom of the riser, accumulation of
liquid can be seen in the void fraction graph. If no riser were
present (land operation) the void fraction (gas fraction) would
be a continuous increasing curve.

Effective Velocity (ft/min)

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

Liquid

Measured Depth (m)

Gas
580
1160
1740
2320
2900

Figure 6 Effective velocity versus depth for Well M.

Void Fraction (%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Measured Depth (m)

Well M is to be drilled in 510 m of water depth using a

riser with a total length of 535 m (25 m air gap). A
conventional riser has an internal diameter of 21 inches and is
generally rated at 500 psi internal differential pressure. This
riser can be used in water depths up to 489 m (1600 ft) due to
the riser collapse limitations. If the pressure inside the riser is
zero (empty riser), according to ABB a 21 diameter riser with
5/8 wall thickness the riser will collapse at about
approximately 700 psi which corresponds to a water depth of
1600 ft (488m), for a wall thickness collapse will occur at
a little less than 3000 ft . To extend the viability of this riser
to higher water depths, a riser fill-up valve or anti-collapse
valve needs to be installed or a high pressure riser should be
considered.
Due to the abrupt change in cross sectional area open to
flow when the effluent arrives at the riser the velocities
decrease abruptly. The velocity in a conventional riser (large
diameter) are lower than in the rest of the annulus. Due to this
there is the possibility of having cuttings settling at the bottom
of the riser. Currently no studies are available to give
guidance for this process. Experiments are planned to
investigate cuttings transport phenomenon for the riser which
will be incorporated in a later version of SIDHAN.
In regards to emergency disconnect, operating procedures
need to be in place that are coherent with rig operations.
However for this case there is minimal chance of the necessity
for an emergency disconnect.

SPE 58972

580
1160
1740
2320
2900

Figure 7 Void fraction profile in the annulus for Well M.

If the injection flow rates are not adequate, it is possible

that the drill-string will become stuck by cuttings packing
around the bottom-hole assembly.
The solids dispersed in the fluid stream have as effect to
increase the ECD. These solids tend to settle back downhole

SPE 58972 SYSTEM FOR THE HYDRAULICS ANALYSIS OF UNDERBALANCED DRILLING PROJECTS IN OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE
SCENARIOS

under the gravitational action, also subject to the buoyancy

and drag force, both acting upward and therefore opposing
gravity. The drag and buoyancy force acting upward on the
cuttings must overcome the combined effect of gravity and
friction which tend to settle the cuttings in the borehole.
The drag coefficient is dependent on the circulating fluids
physical properties (density and viscosity), shear stress on the
particles, shape and size of the cuttings (which vary according
drilling parameters and lithology). A certain viscosity is
desirable when the fluid is not circulating to retard settling of
cuttings.
The minimum velocity required for cuttings removal is
plotted in Figure 2. For adequate cleaning in this case 150
ft/min was required above the drill collars and about 60 ft/min
in the riser . Solids concentration in the annulus for Well M is
shown in Figure 8. It can be seen that there may be a problem
of solids removal in the riser due to settling. As yet adequate
experiments for cuttings transport in the riser are not available
.

PDM
Entrance
Downhole Motor
(PDM)

Bit

Figure 9 Representation of the PDM and drill bit at bottomhole.

The curve of performance of the motor, provided by the

manufacturer, defines the allowable range of flow rates, as
well as the associated pressure losses. This last parameter
varies from model to model, as a function of the respective
PDM internal architectures, bit size and type, and torque
developed when pumping with significant weight-on-bit.
By considering that the injected gas obeys the real gas law,
PV = znRT, the effective flow rate across the PDM is given
by:

Solids Concentration
0

Measured Depth (m)

500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
0.01

0.1

10

100

Solids Concentration (%)

14.696 Tdh
.
Q PDM = Ql +
.z dh .Q g (7.48052)
Pdh 288.75

Figure 8 Solids concentration along the Well M.

QPDM

total flow rate through PDM, gpm

Flow Rate Requirements for Downhole Motors

The positive displacement motor (PDM) acts as a hydraulic
turbine, where shaft work is converted into bit rotational
energy. The fluid flow rate driving the PDM must be such that
it:

Ql

liquid injection flow rate, gpm

Tdh

gas temperature in Kelvin (K = C + 273.15)

zdh

gas compressibility factor

Qg

gas flow rate at standard condition, scfm

Pdh

pressure, psia

Promotes appropriate torque on the bit;

Propitiates adequate cooling and lubrication of the roller
bearings;
Minimizes wear on mechanical components.

Due to the compressibility of the two-phase mixture, the

injection of gas via the drill-string requires the calculation of
the effective volumetric flow rate just above the PDM (Figure
9).

which represents the total (liquid plus gas) injection flow rate
at a particular temperature and pressure. The actual gas flow
rate is calculated from the input gas flow rate at standard
conditions (14.696 psia and 60F).
Figure 2 (IDHA) the minimum and maximum flow rate
requirements for the downhole motor (PDM) are plotted by the
"short" and "long" dashed lines. The gas and liquid injection
flow rate combination need to be between these two lines for
the PDM to function properly. Additionally, for adequate hole
cleaning (cuttings removal) the flow rate combination must

VALTER SILVA JR., SARA SHAYEGI, EDSON Y. NAKAGAWA

give a velocity on or above the velocity line (VL = 150 ft/min).

It can be seen in this case that to use gasified fluid, a very
large amount of gas would be required to go underbalanced
(below 5.81 ppg ECD). For example at 1000 scfm of gas flow
and a liquid velocity of 150 ft/min (265 gpm of liquid flow)
the resulting ECD at bottom hole would only be 7.4ppg. This
study would indicate that if sufficiently large volumes of gas
are not available to obtain the desired ECD other options and
configurations should be studied for this field.
Tripping
The use of jointed pipe requires a disruption in the flow during
connections and tripping. Furthermore, it is necessary to stop
circulation to change bits and bottom-hole assemblies, even
when coiled tubing is utilized.
While tripping in or out of the well, the level of liquid
varies within the well and, as a consequence, the pressure
exerted on the formation. Therefore, gas or liquid must be
injected into the well, not simultaneously, according to the
following conditions: 1) partial removal of the liquid content,
reducing the hydrostatic head and avoiding rupture of the
casing shoe; 2) injection of liquid to prevent influx from the
reservoir, without fracturing the reservoir.
The liquid level within the well during operational
maneuvers is predicted by the volume of liquid accumulated
when stopping circulation assuming complete segregation of
the gas-liquid mixture.
SIDHAN can be used for pre-planning the tripping
procedure as well as verifying conditions during tripping
operations. From the input data, and bottom hole pressure and
void fractions at the point when circulation is stopped the
number of tubulars that can be tripped out before fill-up is
required based on the minimum and maximum liquid levels.
The fracture pressure determines the maximum liquid level
while the minimum liquid level is based on considering the
pore pressure, formation collapse, and the minimum liquid
level in the riser. If a PWD (pressure while drilling) tool is in
the drill string as part of the MWD tool, the pressure reading
can be used to verify and to correct the pre-planned tripping
operation while on site.
During operational maneuvers (e.g., jointed pipe
operations), when the circulation is interrupted and it is
intended to preclude influxes from the reservoir, the downhole
pressures neither can exceed the fracture pressure of the
exposed formation nor can be below of the wellbore collapse
pressure. In such a situation, the pressure, P, is calculated from
the following formula:
P = Psurface + Phydrostatic
The assumptions made for the Tripping model include: a
float valve is installed just above the drill bit preventing liquid
flow up the drill string; the well is assumed to be in an
overbalanced or at balance condition (snubbing is not
modeled); complete segregation of the dispersed gas phase

SPE 58972

(except for the dissolved gas) which means that the hydrostatic
pressure is dictated by the liquid hold-up.
Conclusions
A system has been developed that allows the integrated
analysis of diverse light-weight fluids analysis. In comparison
with other commercial hydraulic simulators, SIDHAN
presents the following differentiating aspects:
Hydraulics in the riser when drilling from floating vessels;
Estimation of the liquid level inside the well while
tripping in/out;
Start-up and maximum injection pressures during the
liquid unloading;
Requirements for cuttings removal;
Effect of the drilled solids on the hydrodynamic pressures;
Gas solubility in liquids;
PDM requirements;
Air/Mist drilling in directional wells, where the process of
cuttings transport is complicated by friction between the
particles and the borehole wall;
16 (sixteen) correlations for two-phase flow pressure loss
prediction to choose from, including 3 (three) mechanistic
models, one of them specifically developed for annular
geometry;
Flow rate matrix for a given scenario, allowing to define
the operational envelope;
Non-Newtonian single phase flow;
Hydraulics of stable foam, including 03 (three) methods
of prediction.
Acknowledgements
SIDHAN is being developed jointly by Petrobras/Cenpes and
PUC-Rio/GTEP, Petrobras and JIP participants. The authors
are thankful to JIP participants on Offshore Drilling with
Light-Weight Fluids namely, Petrobras, British Petroleum,
Mobil, Air Drilling Services, Amerada Hess, Williams Tool
for allowing the publication of this paper.

SPE 58972 SYSTEM FOR THE HYDRAULICS ANALYSIS OF UNDERBALANCED DRILLING PROJECTS IN OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE
SCENARIOS

Nomenclature
A = cross sectional area
d = diameter of tubular
Deh = equivalent hydraulic diameter
Di = drill string outer diameter
Do = casing inner diameter
ECD = Equivalent Circulating Density, ML-3, lbm/gal
g = gravity
L = conduit length
P = pressure, psi
P = pressure difference between the conduit extremes
Ql = liquid flow rate, gpm
Qg = gas flow rate, scfm
T = Temperature
z = gas compressibility factor
= void fraction
f = Fanning friction factor
= foam density
= well inclination
v = velocity

5.

6.
7.
8.

9.

10.

11.

SI Metric Conversion Factors

ft x 3.048*
gal x 3.785412
in. x 2.54*
psi x 6.894757
lbm x 4.535924

E-01 = m
E-03 = m3
E+00 = cm
E+00 = kPa
E-01 = kg

* Conversion factor is exact

12.

13.

References
1.

2.

3.

4.

Planning of Deepwater Drilling Operations with Aerated

Fluids," E. Y. Nakagawa, H. Santos, J. C. Cunha, S. Shayegi,
SPE 54283, paper presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas
Conference and Exhibition, Jakarta, Indonesia, April 20-22,
1999.
Light-Weight Fluids Drilling Manual, Version 1, by
PETROBRAS Research and Development Center CENPES,
JIP Offshore Drilling with Light-Weight Fluids, Phase I,
February, 1999.
Comparison of Aerated Fluids/Foam Drilling Hydraulics
Simulators Against Field Data," E. Y. Nakagawa, Valter Silva
Jr., Mrio B.V. Boas, P.R.C. Silva, S. Shayegi, SPE 54319,
paper presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference
and Exhibition, Jakarta, Indonesia, April 20-22, 1999.
Technical Report on Cuttings Transport in the Drilling of
Vertical Wells with Light-Weight Fluids, by PETROBRAS

14.

15.
16.

Research and Development Center CENPES, JIP Offshore

Drilling with Light-Weight Fluids, Phase I, February, 1999.
Nakagawa, E.Y.; Andrade Jr., P.H.; Vidal, J.L.A.; Silva Jr., V.
and Silva, P.R.C.: Technical Report on Full Scale Light-Weight
Fluids Experiments in Taquipe-BA, by PETROBRAS Research
and Development Center CENPES, JIP Offshore Drilling with
Light-Weight Fluids, Phase I, October, 1998.
Brill, J.P. and Beggs, H.D.: Two-Phase Flow in Pipes, 3rd.
Edition, December, 1978.
Sylvester N.D. "A Mechanistic Model for Two-Phase Vertical
Slug Flow in Pipes," J. of Energy Resources Technology, Vol.
109, No. 4 pp. 206-213, (1987).
Hasan, A.R. and Kabir, C.S.: Predicting Multiphase Flow
Behavior in a Deviated Well, SPE Production Engineering,
474-482, 1988.
Ansari, A.M.; Sylvester, N.D.; Sarica, C.; Shoham, O. and. Brill,
J.P.: A Comprehensive Mechanistic Model for Upward TwoPhase Flow in Wellbores, SPE Production & Facilities, SPE
20630, May, 1994.
Barbuto, F. A de A. and C. J. Crowley, "On the Comparison
Between Two Mechanistic Models to Predict Pressure Gradients
in Vertical Two-Phse Flows," Elsevier Science Publishers, pp
307-322, 1991.
Mukherjee, H. and. Brill, J.P.: Pressure Drop Correlations for
Inclined Two-Phase Flow, Journal of Energy Resources
Technology, Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 107, pages 549 to
554, December, 1985
Loureno, A.M.F.; Martins, A.L.; S, C.H.M.; Brando, E.M.;
Shayegi, S. and Silva Jr., V.: Experimental Study and Modeling
of the Rheology and Drilling Hydraulics with Foam. III SEP
Seminar of Well Engineering, promoted by PETROBRAS,
November, 1999 (in Portuguese).
Loureno, A.M.F., Martins, A.L., and S, C.H.M.: Technical
Report on Foams and Aerated Fluids: Experimental Study on
Stability, Rheology and Cuttings Transport, JIP Offshore
Drilling with Light-Weight Fluids, Phase I, February, 1999.
Martins, A.L. and S, C.H.M.: Simulator CHiP-Reo: Drilling
Hydraulics Calculations by using Several Rheological Models,
PETROBRAS Private Technical Documentation (in
Portuguese), CENPES/SUPEP/SUPEF, August, 1993.
Angel, R.R.: Volume Requirements for Air and Gas Drilling,
Petroleum Transactions, AIME, 210, pages 325 to 330, 1957.
Gou, B; Miska, S.Z. and Lee, R.: Volume Requirements for
Directional Air Drilling, IADC/SPE 27510, 1994.