Well Integrity Technical Section

Dear Respected Community, Greetings. 
appreciate to provide any feedback for the well integrity experience of "casing while drilling" technology. 
Particular points of concern: 

• casing integrity due to stresses
• increased chance for losses during or prior to cementing due to higher friction pressures due to smaller clearance comparing to drill pipe.  
• cement bond log impact
• any issues with casing coating

Feel free to post here or message me directly to ayugay@adnoc.ae (please don't send zip files) 
thanks
rgds

Andrey,
There are a few good SPE papers on the topic already you may want to consult, at least one (SPE-207565-MS) written by your colleagues at ADNOC. 
I think you'd need to weigh the pros and cons of casing drilling compared to conventional operations. Also, casing drilling isn't for every application but rather specific sets of circumstances. What section at what depth are you looking at drilling? Are you interested in a Tesco-like system to drill directional or simply drill with a dumb drill-shoe 100 m through a loss zone? Are you worried about stresses from rotating through high doglegs causing fatigue failure or compression of seals areas and box-belling? What are your concerns with losses while cementing? The hole size would be the same as with conventional drilling, hence the same annular clearance. The greater worry during cementing are the installation of float valves.
What casing coating are you referring to? The best cement bond is with slghtly rusty casing rather than slick oiled and greased surfaces; better adherence on rough surface. I know that drillpipe is plastic-lined but have not seen that in casing.
Cheers,
Matthias

Thanks, Mathias. 
yes, I am aware about the project reported in this SPE paper. Unfortunately, situation is not crystal clear hear. That's why I put this post. in terms of difference in friction pressures - I mean friction the annulus. Our DP is 5 or 5.5", so if instead we drill with 9-5/8" or 13-3/8" casing we induce more losses...
For the stresses - it is both cases you mentioned. 
For the CBL - I assume some improvement for the fluid displacement due to plastering effect but need more feedback from the people who uses it now. if. 
thanks
rgds

Original Message:
Sent: 10-21-2022 07:58 AM
From: Matthias Kirchhoff
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Andrey,
There are a few good SPE papers on the topic already you may want to consult, at least one (SPE-207565-MS) written by your colleagues at ADNOC.
I think you'd need to weigh the pros and cons of casing drilling compared to conventional operations. Also, casing drilling isn't for every application but rather specific sets of circumstances. What section at what depth are you looking at drilling? Are you interested in a Tesco-like system to drill directional or simply drill with a dumb drill-shoe 100 m through a loss zone? Are you worried about stresses from rotating through high doglegs causing fatigue failure or compression of seals areas and box-belling? What are your concerns with losses while cementing? The hole size would be the same as with conventional drilling, hence the same annular clearance. The greater worry during cementing are the installation of float valves.
What casing coating are you referring to? The best cement bond is with slghtly rusty casing rather than slick oiled and greased surfaces; better adherence on rough surface. I know that drillpipe is plastic-lined but have not seen that in casing.
Cheers,
Matthias

I would start studying this article:
https://www.drillingcontractor.org/directional-casing-while-drilling-applied-to-improve-high-angle-top-hole-drilling-from-producing-platform-6383 <https: www.drillingcontractor.org/directional-casing-while-drilling-applied-to-improve-high-angle-top-hole-drilling-from-producing-platform-6383="">


Original Message:
Sent: 10/23/2022 10:41:00 AM
From: Andrey Yugay
Subject: RE: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Thanks, Mathias. 
yes, I am aware about the project reported in this SPE paper. Unfortunately, situation is not crystal clear hear. That's why I put this post. in terms of difference in friction pressures - I mean friction the annulus. Our DP is 5 or 5.5", so if instead we drill with 9-5/8" or 13-3/8" casing we induce more losses...
For the stresses - it is both cases you mentioned. 
For the CBL - I assume some improvement for the fluid displacement due to plastering effect but need more feedback from the people who uses it now. if. 
thanks
rgds

Thanks Robert, useful article. I found confirmation of my concerns. rgds
Original Message:
Sent: 10-24-2022 02:01 AM
From: Robert Ziegler
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

I would start studying this article:
https://www.drillingcontractor.org/directional-casing-while-drilling-applied-to-improve-high-angle-top-hole-drilling-from-producing-platform-6383 <https: ">www.drillingcontractor.org/directional-casing-while-drilling-applied-to-improve-high-angle-top-hole-drilling-from-producing-platform-6383="">



Original Message:
Sent: 10/23/2022 10:41:00 AM
From: Andrey Yugay
Subject: RE: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Thanks, Mathias.
yes, I am aware about the project reported in this SPE paper. Unfortunately, situation is not crystal clear hear. That's why I put this post. in terms of difference in friction pressures - I mean friction the annulus. Our DP is 5 or 5.5", so if instead we drill with 9-5/8" or 13-3/8" casing we induce more losses...
For the stresses - it is both cases you mentioned.
For the CBL - I assume some improvement for the fluid displacement due to plastering effect but need more feedback from the people who uses it now. if.
thanks
rgds


Original Message:
Sent: 10-21-2022 07:58 AM
From: Matthias Kirchhoff
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Andrey,
There are a few good SPE papers on the topic already you may want to consult, at least one (SPE-207565-MS) written by your colleagues at ADNOC.
I think you'd need to weigh the pros and cons of casing drilling compared to conventional operations. Also, casing drilling isn't for every application but rather specific sets of circumstances. What section at what depth are you looking at drilling? Are you interested in a Tesco-like system to drill directional or simply drill with a dumb drill-shoe 100 m through a loss zone? Are you worried about stresses from rotating through high doglegs causing fatigue failure or compression of seals areas and box-belling? What are your concerns with losses while cementing? The hole size would be the same as with conventional drilling, hence the same annular clearance. The greater worry during cementing are the installation of float valves.
What casing coating are you referring to? The best cement bond is with slghtly rusty casing rather than slick oiled and greased surfaces; better adherence on rough surface. I know that drillpipe is plastic-lined but have not seen that in casing.
Cheers,
Matthias

Hi Andrey,
OK. I can only speak for myself, however, we don't have a lot of information on what you are trying to do with casing drilling. Right now you've told us that you are likely going to drilling with 13 3/8 and 9 5/8 in. casing. Good. There are greater friction losses and a resulting greater ECD, if, and only if you maintain the same flowrates. Evidently, we are only concerned about annular velocity for hole cleaning, hence, reduce the flowrate, reduces ECD, reduces your pressure losses. Those will still be greater than with drillpipe though. Perhaps, CWD is not the right application for the problem you have.
What is the problem you are trying to cure with CWD? Or, are you simply looking at how CWD could make an efficient operation better? Don't get me wrong, either is a valid reason but we have to be clear what you want as the engineering will be different.
The plastering effect comes from pipe rotation, hence, I assume that you are looking at rotating the entire string and will be using some sort of drillshoe. Plastering/smear effect reduces losses, if there were any, and does some stress caging, so to speak. The CBL won't be better than in any other well without losses.
Matthias
Original Message:
Sent: 10-23-2022 09:41 AM
From: Andrey Yugay
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Thanks, Mathias.
yes, I am aware about the project reported in this SPE paper. Unfortunately, situation is not crystal clear hear. That's why I put this post. in terms of difference in friction pressures - I mean friction the annulus. Our DP is 5 or 5.5", so if instead we drill with 9-5/8" or 13-3/8" casing we induce more losses...
For the stresses - it is both cases you mentioned.
For the CBL - I assume some improvement for the fluid displacement due to plastering effect but need more feedback from the people who uses it now. if.
thanks
rgds


Original Message:
Sent: 10-21-2022 07:58 AM
From: Matthias Kirchhoff
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Andrey,
There are a few good SPE papers on the topic already you may want to consult, at least one (SPE-207565-MS) written by your colleagues at ADNOC.
I think you'd need to weigh the pros and cons of casing drilling compared to conventional operations. Also, casing drilling isn't for every application but rather specific sets of circumstances. What section at what depth are you looking at drilling? Are you interested in a Tesco-like system to drill directional or simply drill with a dumb drill-shoe 100 m through a loss zone? Are you worried about stresses from rotating through high doglegs causing fatigue failure or compression of seals areas and box-belling? What are your concerns with losses while cementing? The hole size would be the same as with conventional drilling, hence the same annular clearance. The greater worry during cementing are the installation of float valves.
What casing coating are you referring to? The best cement bond is with slghtly rusty casing rather than slick oiled and greased surfaces; better adherence on rough surface. I know that drillpipe is plastic-lined but have not seen that in casing.
Cheers,
Matthias

Hi, Matthias. 
I don't want to solve any problem with this technology. Just some of my colleagues asked me to endorse this project from well integrity point of view, so I collect the feedback. From their side it is optimization of the drilling process. 
So far, I don't have anything except statements from service providers, publication posted by Robert here above (thanks a lot) and our trial. 
As per contractors, it is old and well-recommended technology which is being widely used all over the world. Therefore, I expect to get some feedback here mainly from operating companies.  
thanks
rgds

Original Message:
Sent: 10-24-2022 08:04 AM
From: Matthias Kirchhoff
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Hi Andrey,
OK. I can only speak for myself, however, we don't have a lot of information on what you are trying to do with casing drilling. Right now you've told us that you are likely going to drilling with 13 3/8 and 9 5/8 in. casing. Good. There are greater friction losses and a resulting greater ECD, if, and only if you maintain the same flowrates. Evidently, we are only concerned about annular velocity for hole cleaning, hence, reduce the flowrate, reduces ECD, reduces your pressure losses. Those will still be greater than with drillpipe though. Perhaps, CWD is not the right application for the problem you have.
What is the problem you are trying to cure with CWD? Or, are you simply looking at how CWD could make an efficient operation better? Don't get me wrong, either is a valid reason but we have to be clear what you want as the engineering will be different.
The plastering effect comes from pipe rotation, hence, I assume that you are looking at rotating the entire string and will be using some sort of drillshoe. Plastering/smear effect reduces losses, if there were any, and does some stress caging, so to speak. The CBL won't be better than in any other well without losses.
Matthias

Original Message:
Sent: 10-23-2022 09:41 AM
From: Andrey Yugay
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Thanks, Mathias.
yes, I am aware about the project reported in this SPE paper. Unfortunately, situation is not crystal clear hear. That's why I put this post. in terms of difference in friction pressures - I mean friction the annulus. Our DP is 5 or 5.5", so if instead we drill with 9-5/8" or 13-3/8" casing we induce more losses...
For the stresses - it is both cases you mentioned.
For the CBL - I assume some improvement for the fluid displacement due to plastering effect but need more feedback from the people who uses it now. if.
thanks
rgds


Original Message:
Sent: 10-21-2022 07:58 AM
From: Matthias Kirchhoff
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Andrey,
There are a few good SPE papers on the topic already you may want to consult, at least one (SPE-207565-MS) written by your colleagues at ADNOC.
I think you'd need to weigh the pros and cons of casing drilling compared to conventional operations. Also, casing drilling isn't for every application but rather specific sets of circumstances. What section at what depth are you looking at drilling? Are you interested in a Tesco-like system to drill directional or simply drill with a dumb drill-shoe 100 m through a loss zone? Are you worried about stresses from rotating through high doglegs causing fatigue failure or compression of seals areas and box-belling? What are your concerns with losses while cementing? The hole size would be the same as with conventional drilling, hence the same annular clearance. The greater worry during cementing are the installation of float valves.
What casing coating are you referring to? The best cement bond is with slghtly rusty casing rather than slick oiled and greased surfaces; better adherence on rough surface. I know that drillpipe is plastic-lined but have not seen that in casing.
Cheers,
Matthias

CWD was a very hot topic some 10 years ago when every operator gave it a shot and investigated how this could be used to make operations more efficient. I investigated the technology in the early 2000s and then followed it closely over the years but projects have been far and few between. It's become a niche application of sorts with a champion here and there. There are isolated projects but due to the issues highlighted in Robert's reference, there was very little uptake in the technology. There are a few projects here and there, though no one has made this their staple, go-to process; too many things that can go wrong and outweigh the potential advantages.
One main thing to consider from a well integrity point of view is the lack of centralisation of your casing string.
Original Message:
Sent: 10-24-2022 08:26 AM
From: Andrey Yugay
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Hi, Matthias.
I don't want to solve any problem with this technology. Just some of my colleagues asked me to endorse this project from well integrity point of view, so I collect the feedback. From their side it is optimization of the drilling process.
So far, I don't have anything except statements from service providers, publication posted by Robert here above (thanks a lot) and our trial.
As per contractors, it is old and well-recommended technology which is being widely used all over the world. Therefore, I expect to get some feedback here mainly from operating companies.
thanks
rgds


Original Message:
Sent: 10-24-2022 08:04 AM
From: Matthias Kirchhoff
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Hi Andrey,
OK. I can only speak for myself, however, we don't have a lot of information on what you are trying to do with casing drilling. Right now you've told us that you are likely going to drilling with 13 3/8 and 9 5/8 in. casing. Good. There are greater friction losses and a resulting greater ECD, if, and only if you maintain the same flowrates. Evidently, we are only concerned about annular velocity for hole cleaning, hence, reduce the flowrate, reduces ECD, reduces your pressure losses. Those will still be greater than with drillpipe though. Perhaps, CWD is not the right application for the problem you have.
What is the problem you are trying to cure with CWD? Or, are you simply looking at how CWD could make an efficient operation better? Don't get me wrong, either is a valid reason but we have to be clear what you want as the engineering will be different.
The plastering effect comes from pipe rotation, hence, I assume that you are looking at rotating the entire string and will be using some sort of drillshoe. Plastering/smear effect reduces losses, if there were any, and does some stress caging, so to speak. The CBL won't be better than in any other well without losses.
Matthias

Original Message:
Sent: 10-23-2022 09:41 AM
From: Andrey Yugay
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Thanks, Mathias.
yes, I am aware about the project reported in this SPE paper. Unfortunately, situation is not crystal clear hear. That's why I put this post. in terms of difference in friction pressures - I mean friction the annulus. Our DP is 5 or 5.5", so if instead we drill with 9-5/8" or 13-3/8" casing we induce more losses...
For the stresses - it is both cases you mentioned.
For the CBL - I assume some improvement for the fluid displacement due to plastering effect but need more feedback from the people who uses it now. if.
thanks
rgds


Original Message:
Sent: 10-21-2022 07:58 AM
From: Matthias Kirchhoff
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Andrey,
There are a few good SPE papers on the topic already you may want to consult, at least one (SPE-207565-MS) written by your colleagues at ADNOC.
I think you'd need to weigh the pros and cons of casing drilling compared to conventional operations. Also, casing drilling isn't for every application but rather specific sets of circumstances. What section at what depth are you looking at drilling? Are you interested in a Tesco-like system to drill directional or simply drill with a dumb drill-shoe 100 m through a loss zone? Are you worried about stresses from rotating through high doglegs causing fatigue failure or compression of seals areas and box-belling? What are your concerns with losses while cementing? The hole size would be the same as with conventional drilling, hence the same annular clearance. The greater worry during cementing are the installation of float valves.
What casing coating are you referring to? The best cement bond is with slghtly rusty casing rather than slick oiled and greased surfaces; better adherence on rough surface. I know that drillpipe is plastic-lined but have not seen that in casing.
Cheers,
Matthias

Your worry about the  losses from drilling with casing is unfounded. you will have a better annular velocity and hence lower GPM that with the drill pipe AND you will have less cuttings coming back. The casing will work the cuttings into the formation providing much less spurt loss and thus better reservoir properties near well bore. 

I ran casing drilling for Tesco for 5 years and if you can keep from rotating the string in two and can pump the cement without reversal you will have a great cement job. 

But reading papers, While helpful won't help you much unless you have done it before. It is not paint by numbers. What do you plan to do for stabilizers?

------------------------------
Mike Loudermilk
COO
Volturo NRG
Spring Texas
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 10-23-2022 09:41 AM
From: Andrey Yugay
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Thanks, Mathias.
yes, I am aware about the project reported in this SPE paper. Unfortunately, situation is not crystal clear hear. That's why I put this post. in terms of difference in friction pressures - I mean friction the annulus. Our DP is 5 or 5.5", so if instead we drill with 9-5/8" or 13-3/8" casing we induce more losses...
For the stresses - it is both cases you mentioned.
For the CBL - I assume some improvement for the fluid displacement due to plastering effect but need more feedback from the people who uses it now. if.
thanks
rgds


Original Message:
Sent: 10-21-2022 07:58 AM
From: Matthias Kirchhoff
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Andrey,
There are a few good SPE papers on the topic already you may want to consult, at least one (SPE-207565-MS) written by your colleagues at ADNOC.
I think you'd need to weigh the pros and cons of casing drilling compared to conventional operations. Also, casing drilling isn't for every application but rather specific sets of circumstances. What section at what depth are you looking at drilling? Are you interested in a Tesco-like system to drill directional or simply drill with a dumb drill-shoe 100 m through a loss zone? Are you worried about stresses from rotating through high doglegs causing fatigue failure or compression of seals areas and box-belling? What are your concerns with losses while cementing? The hole size would be the same as with conventional drilling, hence the same annular clearance. The greater worry during cementing are the installation of float valves.
What casing coating are you referring to? The best cement bond is with slghtly rusty casing rather than slick oiled and greased surfaces; better adherence on rough surface. I know that drillpipe is plastic-lined but have not seen that in casing.
Cheers,
Matthias

Mike is rights.

Several statements are unfounded.
Where’s the evidence to make such statements.

You must work the numbers better in the pre planning concept to design phase.

Understand fully the numerous benefits from CWD.
Understand the pros and cons.

Gather all the evidence be convinced.
that CWD will

* reduce loss
* Reduce risks
* Add more value

To sanction this technology option.

That should result in a supporting basis of design document that quite clearly states the drilling engineers / all other integrated team members, consensual decision, logic, rational, strategy, and clearly defined objectives why CWD is required eg ( to typically replace substitute conventional train wreck failures that have already resulted more than once.)

So something radically different is warranted.

Because this is why CWD is has been successfully used.

I remember I had a 2002 slide. Of 202 CWD jobs executed on land in USA. Success rate was 98.5%

I doubt if you will ever find as high conventional drilling jobs percentages. So if CWD is the radical process change needed. Get people who know how to do this involved.

Where if We can’t drill certain wellbore sections safely effectively efficiently using convention.

With well train wreck reports evident enough to make us seek alternate solution to such well drilling loss/waste.

The solution is then to get SMART and review alternatives options.


* wellbore strengthening
* Continuous circulation
* MPD
* CWD

Regards.

Sent from Outlook for iOS<https: aka.ms/o0ukef="">


Original Message:
Sent: 10/25/2022 12:13:00 PM
From: Mike Loudermilk
Subject: RE: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Your worry about the  losses from drilling with casing is unfounded. you will have a better annular velocity and hence lower GPM that with the drill pipe AND you will have less cuttings coming back. The casing will work the cuttings into the formation providing much less spurt loss and thus better reservoir properties near well bore. 

I ran casing drilling for Tesco for 5 years and if you can keep from rotating the string in two and can pump the cement without reversal you will have a great cement job. 

But reading papers, While helpful won't help you much unless you have done it before. It is not paint by numbers. What do you plan to do for stabilizers?

------------------------------
Mike Loudermilk
COO
Volturo NRG
Spring Texas
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 10-23-2022 09:41 AM
From: Andrey Yugay
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Thanks, Mathias.
yes, I am aware about the project reported in this SPE paper. Unfortunately, situation is not crystal clear hear. That's why I put this post. in terms of difference in friction pressures - I mean friction the annulus. Our DP is 5 or 5.5", so if instead we drill with 9-5/8" or 13-3/8" casing we induce more losses...
For the stresses - it is both cases you mentioned.
For the CBL - I assume some improvement for the fluid displacement due to plastering effect but need more feedback from the people who uses it now. if.
thanks
rgds

Peter, saying that my concerns are "unfounded" looks too emotional and aggressive from your side. Is there any reason behind for such kind of approach? It is obvious that small clearance creates higher friction pressures, even a child understands that drinking viscous fluid through thin straw is more difficult than through thick straw. That's why milkshakes / fruit shakes have thick straws. Therefore, in the fields with loss zones problems such technology like CWD may create more induced losses, this is what we've seen here in ADNOC and the same is reflected in the article posted above. That may have negative impact on cementing as well. If you have opposite information - please share it. It could be cementing logs for the same interval drilled with conventional way and with CWD. It could be drilling reports with losses reported for conventional and CWD. Again, if there are representatives from operating companies that use this technology nowadays as a normal drilling method - please feel free to contact me directly at ayugay@adnoc.ae from your official e-mail. thanks, rgds.
Original Message:
Sent: 10-26-2022 01:30 AM
From: Peter Aird
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Mike is rights.

Several statements are unfounded.
Where's the evidence to make such statements.

You must work the numbers better in the pre planning concept to design phase.

Understand fully the numerous benefits from CWD.
Understand the pros and cons.

Gather all the evidence be convinced.
that CWD will

* reduce loss
* Reduce risks
* Add more value

To sanction this technology option.

That should result in a supporting basis of design document that quite clearly states the drilling engineers / all other integrated team members, consensual decision, logic, rational, strategy, and clearly defined objectives why CWD is required eg ( to typically replace substitute conventional train wreck failures that have already resulted more than once.)

So something radically different is warranted.

Because this is why CWD is has been successfully used.

I remember I had a 2002 slide. Of 202 CWD jobs executed on land in USA. Success rate was 98.5%

I doubt if you will ever find as high conventional drilling jobs percentages. So if CWD is the radical process change needed. Get people who know how to do this involved.

Where if We can't drill certain wellbore sections safely effectively efficiently using convention.

With well train wreck reports evident enough to make us seek alternate solution to such well drilling loss/waste.

The solution is then to get SMART and review alternatives options.


* wellbore strengthening
* Continuous circulation
* MPD
* CWD

Regards.

Sent from Outlook for iOS<https: aka.ms/o0ukef="">



Original Message:
Sent: 10/25/2022 12:13:00 PM
From: Mike Loudermilk
Subject: RE: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Your worry about the  losses from drilling with casing is unfounded. you will have a better annular velocity and hence lower GPM that with the drill pipe AND you will have less cuttings coming back. The casing will work the cuttings into the formation providing much less spurt loss and thus better reservoir properties near well bore.

I ran casing drilling for Tesco for 5 years and if you can keep from rotating the string in two and can pump the cement without reversal you will have a great cement job.

But reading papers, While helpful won't help you much unless you have done it before. It is not paint by numbers. What do you plan to do for stabilizers?

------------------------------
Mike Loudermilk
COO
Volturo NRG
Spring Texas
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 10-23-2022 09:41 AM
From: Andrey Yugay
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Thanks, Mathias.
yes, I am aware about the project reported in this SPE paper. Unfortunately, situation is not crystal clear hear. That's why I put this post. in terms of difference in friction pressures - I mean friction the annulus. Our DP is 5 or 5.5", so if instead we drill with 9-5/8" or 13-3/8" casing we induce more losses...
For the stresses - it is both cases you mentioned.
For the CBL - I assume some improvement for the fluid displacement due to plastering effect but need more feedback from the people who uses it now. if.
thanks
rgds


Original Message:
Sent: 10-21-2022 07:58 AM
From: Matthias Kirchhoff
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Andrey,
There are a few good SPE papers on the topic already you may want to consult, at least one (SPE-207565-MS) written by your colleagues at ADNOC.
I think you'd need to weigh the pros and cons of casing drilling compared to conventional operations. Also, casing drilling isn't for every application but rather specific sets of circumstances. What section at what depth are you looking at drilling? Are you interested in a Tesco-like system to drill directional or simply drill with a dumb drill-shoe 100 m through a loss zone? Are you worried about stresses from rotating through high doglegs causing fatigue failure or compression of seals areas and box-belling? What are your concerns with losses while cementing? The hole size would be the same as with conventional drilling, hence the same annular clearance. The greater worry during cementing are the installation of float valves.
What casing coating are you referring to? The best cement bond is with slghtly rusty casing rather than slick oiled and greased surfaces; better adherence on rough surface. I know that drillpipe is plastic-lined but have not seen that in casing.
Cheers,
Matthias

Andrey,

Well first of all, your mud should not look like a milk shake. Maybe you don't need CWD. When I ran the drilling optimization group for Baker Hughes I found that many "weak zones" were actually drilling induced losses due to bad mud and poor hole cleaning. 

You need to look at NWB stress cage  and wellbore strengthening to get your head around what casing drilling is doing. The cuttings are literally strengthening the hole as you drill. The AV will be higher and yes you will have higher torques but that is why we had specially trained casing drilling engineers.

Most standard drilling engineers are not sophisticated enough on ECD management, hole hydraulics and the role that PV and PY actually play in drilling dynamics to design a casing drilling job. In casing drilling you can pump the bit off bottom while running 40k of bit weight. Bet you've never seen that!!

However, CWD does take care of weak zones. We used it successfully in several areas to extend the shoe or get past depletion with no problems. We worked a lot down in South Texas where Doug White is talking about and most of that work was because of weak zones with less than 8.5 ppg break down pressures due to depletion. It worked great. Those wells were about 4 to 6 thousand feet and we drilled from the surface shoe to TD. We worked with Apache for quite a bit until our owner made them mad but later they came back and said the CWD wells had the highest EUR of any wells in the field.

That BP report is a bit strange since we never worked for BP but ok. I personally would take that with a grain of salt since my drilling team of 4 replaced their entire 17 person drilling team in the Eagle Ford when they were my partners. They were taking 50 days to drill wells we were drilling in less than 20!! 

Sent you an old presentation on the technology, suffice it to say it has moved on a bit.






------------------------------
Mike Loudermilk
COO
Volturo NRG
Spring Texas
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 10-26-2022 05:33 AM
From: Andrey Yugay
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Peter, saying that my concerns are "unfounded" looks too emotional and aggressive from your side. Is there any reason behind for such kind of approach? It is obvious that small clearance creates higher friction pressures, even a child understands that drinking viscous fluid through thin straw is more difficult than through thick straw. That's why milkshakes / fruit shakes have thick straws. Therefore, in the fields with loss zones problems such technology like CWD may create more induced losses, this is what we've seen here in ADNOC and the same is reflected in the article posted above. That may have negative impact on cementing as well. If you have opposite information - please share it. It could be cementing logs for the same interval drilled with conventional way and with CWD. It could be drilling reports with losses reported for conventional and CWD. Again, if there are representatives from operating companies that use this technology nowadays as a normal drilling method - please feel free to contact me directly at ayugay@adnoc.ae from your official e-mail. thanks, rgds.

Original Message:
Sent: 10-26-2022 01:30 AM
From: Peter Aird
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Mike is rights.

Several statements are unfounded.
Where's the evidence to make such statements.

You must work the numbers better in the pre planning concept to design phase.

Understand fully the numerous benefits from CWD.
Understand the pros and cons.

Gather all the evidence be convinced.
that CWD will

* reduce loss
* Reduce risks
* Add more value

To sanction this technology option.

That should result in a supporting basis of design document that quite clearly states the drilling engineers / all other integrated team members, consensual decision, logic, rational, strategy, and clearly defined objectives why CWD is required eg ( to typically replace substitute conventional train wreck failures that have already resulted more than once.)

So something radically different is warranted.

Because this is why CWD is has been successfully used.

I remember I had a 2002 slide. Of 202 CWD jobs executed on land in USA. Success rate was 98.5%

I doubt if you will ever find as high conventional drilling jobs percentages. So if CWD is the radical process change needed. Get people who know how to do this involved.

Where if We can't drill certain wellbore sections safely effectively efficiently using convention.

With well train wreck reports evident enough to make us seek alternate solution to such well drilling loss/waste.

The solution is then to get SMART and review alternatives options.


* wellbore strengthening
* Continuous circulation
* MPD
* CWD

Regards.

Sent from Outlook for iOS<https: aka.ms/o0ukef="">



Original Message:
Sent: 10/25/2022 12:13:00 PM
From: Mike Loudermilk
Subject: RE: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Your worry about the  losses from drilling with casing is unfounded. you will have a better annular velocity and hence lower GPM that with the drill pipe AND you will have less cuttings coming back. The casing will work the cuttings into the formation providing much less spurt loss and thus better reservoir properties near well bore.

I ran casing drilling for Tesco for 5 years and if you can keep from rotating the string in two and can pump the cement without reversal you will have a great cement job.

But reading papers, While helpful won't help you much unless you have done it before. It is not paint by numbers. What do you plan to do for stabilizers?

------------------------------
Mike Loudermilk
COO
Volturo NRG
Spring Texas


Original Message:
Sent: 10-23-2022 09:41 AM
From: Andrey Yugay
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Thanks, Mathias.
yes, I am aware about the project reported in this SPE paper. Unfortunately, situation is not crystal clear hear. That's why I put this post. in terms of difference in friction pressures - I mean friction the annulus. Our DP is 5 or 5.5", so if instead we drill with 9-5/8" or 13-3/8" casing we induce more losses...
For the stresses - it is both cases you mentioned.
For the CBL - I assume some improvement for the fluid displacement due to plastering effect but need more feedback from the people who uses it now. if.
thanks
rgds


Original Message:
Sent: 10-21-2022 07:58 AM
From: Matthias Kirchhoff
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Andrey,
There are a few good SPE papers on the topic already you may want to consult, at least one (SPE-207565-MS) written by your colleagues at ADNOC.
I think you'd need to weigh the pros and cons of casing drilling compared to conventional operations. Also, casing drilling isn't for every application but rather specific sets of circumstances. What section at what depth are you looking at drilling? Are you interested in a Tesco-like system to drill directional or simply drill with a dumb drill-shoe 100 m through a loss zone? Are you worried about stresses from rotating through high doglegs causing fatigue failure or compression of seals areas and box-belling? What are your concerns with losses while cementing? The hole size would be the same as with conventional drilling, hence the same annular clearance. The greater worry during cementing are the installation of float valves.
What casing coating are you referring to? The best cement bond is with slghtly rusty casing rather than slick oiled and greased surfaces; better adherence on rough surface. I know that drillpipe is plastic-lined but have not seen that in casing.
Cheers,
Matthias

Mike, saying that my concerns are "unfounded" looks too emotional and aggressive from your side. Is there any reason behind for such kind of approach? It is obvious that small clearance creates higher friction pressures, even a child understands that drinking viscous fluid through thin straw is more difficult than through thick straw. That's why milkshakes / fruit shakes have thick straws. Therefore, in the fields with loss zones problems such technology like CWD may create more induced losses, this is what we've seen here and the same is reflected in the article posted above. That may have negative impact on cementing as well. If you have opposite information - please share it. It could be cementing logs for the same interval drilled with conventional way and with CWD. It could be drilling reports with losses reported for conventional and CWD. Again, if there are representatives from operating companies that use this technology nowadays as a normal drilling method - please feel free to contact me directly at ayugay@adnoc.ae from your official e-mail. thanks, rgds.
Original Message:
Sent: 10-25-2022 11:13 AM
From: Mike Loudermilk
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Your worry about the  losses from drilling with casing is unfounded. you will have a better annular velocity and hence lower GPM that with the drill pipe AND you will have less cuttings coming back. The casing will work the cuttings into the formation providing much less spurt loss and thus better reservoir properties near well bore.

I ran casing drilling for Tesco for 5 years and if you can keep from rotating the string in two and can pump the cement without reversal you will have a great cement job.

But reading papers, While helpful won't help you much unless you have done it before. It is not paint by numbers. What do you plan to do for stabilizers?

------------------------------
Mike Loudermilk
COO
Volturo NRG
Spring Texas
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 10-23-2022 09:41 AM
From: Andrey Yugay
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Thanks, Mathias.
yes, I am aware about the project reported in this SPE paper. Unfortunately, situation is not crystal clear hear. That's why I put this post. in terms of difference in friction pressures - I mean friction the annulus. Our DP is 5 or 5.5", so if instead we drill with 9-5/8" or 13-3/8" casing we induce more losses...
For the stresses - it is both cases you mentioned.
For the CBL - I assume some improvement for the fluid displacement due to plastering effect but need more feedback from the people who uses it now. if.
thanks
rgds


Original Message:
Sent: 10-21-2022 07:58 AM
From: Matthias Kirchhoff
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Andrey,
There are a few good SPE papers on the topic already you may want to consult, at least one (SPE-207565-MS) written by your colleagues at ADNOC.
I think you'd need to weigh the pros and cons of casing drilling compared to conventional operations. Also, casing drilling isn't for every application but rather specific sets of circumstances. What section at what depth are you looking at drilling? Are you interested in a Tesco-like system to drill directional or simply drill with a dumb drill-shoe 100 m through a loss zone? Are you worried about stresses from rotating through high doglegs causing fatigue failure or compression of seals areas and box-belling? What are your concerns with losses while cementing? The hole size would be the same as with conventional drilling, hence the same annular clearance. The greater worry during cementing are the installation of float valves.
What casing coating are you referring to? The best cement bond is with slghtly rusty casing rather than slick oiled and greased surfaces; better adherence on rough surface. I know that drillpipe is plastic-lined but have not seen that in casing.
Cheers,
Matthias

Good reply Mike.
When Phillips bought Conoco, I ended up supervising the two Drlg Supts for the Lobo field where Conoco had work with Tesco (actually an old friend from my Noble Drilling days) and had a great system.  They ordered two casing drilling specific rigs.  Casing drilling was great for the Lobo field when the Geo-types couldn't give us good understanding of crossing faults and whether we would hit pressure or lose circulation.
We used the casing drilling rig (we farmed one out to Apache) on wells with questions about the geology, knowing that in a worse case, we would have casing on bottom and could do our cement job and then proceed!
That was nearly 20 years ago, but as I recall, cementing was never an issue and every well was frac'ed on completion.
Doug WhiteSugar Land


Original Message:
Sent: 10/25/2022 12:13:00 PM
From: Mike Loudermilk
Subject: RE: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Your worry about the  losses from drilling with casing is unfounded. you will have a better annular velocity and hence lower GPM that with the drill pipe AND you will have less cuttings coming back. The casing will work the cuttings into the formation providing much less spurt loss and thus better reservoir properties near well bore. 

I ran casing drilling for Tesco for 5 years and if you can keep from rotating the string in two and can pump the cement without reversal you will have a great cement job. 

But reading papers, While helpful won't help you much unless you have done it before. It is not paint by numbers. What do you plan to do for stabilizers?

------------------------------
Mike Loudermilk
COO
Volturo NRG
Spring Texas
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 10-23-2022 09:41 AM
From: Andrey Yugay
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Thanks, Mathias.
yes, I am aware about the project reported in this SPE paper. Unfortunately, situation is not crystal clear hear. That's why I put this post. in terms of difference in friction pressures - I mean friction the annulus. Our DP is 5 or 5.5", so if instead we drill with 9-5/8" or 13-3/8" casing we induce more losses...
For the stresses - it is both cases you mentioned.
For the CBL - I assume some improvement for the fluid displacement due to plastering effect but need more feedback from the people who uses it now. if.
thanks
rgds

I think I found what I was looking for. I think we can stop this strange technical discussion. Thanks to all for your valuable input. From BP report: "...Casing drilling suffers from significantly higher torque and ECD problems, due, as one would suspect to larger tube diameters and the narrower annulus. Torque and drag and hydraulics analyses must be run to determine project viability. Current limitations, as a starting point are sections with inclinations building up to and including horizontal, less than 7,000 ft in length with total displacements less than 10,000 ft. Liner drilling has fewer problems with torque and ECD as most of the drill string is drillpipe. The biggest problem is hole cleaning. Liner drilling usually has lower flow rates with high annular velocities around the liner, but above the liner hanger, there is a larger annulus with drillpipe and a corresponding drop in annular velocity that can result in cuttings build up. This is not a big issue yet as liner drilling distances and penetration rates are low. As these increase, the problem will become greater. Several vendors are developing a by-pass sub to allow additional flow above the liner hanger but these are not yet in field test."
Original Message:
Sent: 10-26-2022 07:25 AM
From: Douglas White
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Good reply Mike.
When Phillips bought Conoco, I ended up supervising the two Drlg Supts for the Lobo field where Conoco had work with Tesco (actually an old friend from my Noble Drilling days) and had a great system.  They ordered two casing drilling specific rigs.  Casing drilling was great for the Lobo field when the Geo-types couldn't give us good understanding of crossing faults and whether we would hit pressure or lose circulation.
We used the casing drilling rig (we farmed one out to Apache) on wells with questions about the geology, knowing that in a worse case, we would have casing on bottom and could do our cement job and then proceed!
That was nearly 20 years ago, but as I recall, cementing was never an issue and every well was frac'ed on completion.
Doug WhiteSugar Land



Original Message:
Sent: 10/25/2022 12:13:00 PM
From: Mike Loudermilk
Subject: RE: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Your worry about the  losses from drilling with casing is unfounded. you will have a better annular velocity and hence lower GPM that with the drill pipe AND you will have less cuttings coming back. The casing will work the cuttings into the formation providing much less spurt loss and thus better reservoir properties near well bore.

I ran casing drilling for Tesco for 5 years and if you can keep from rotating the string in two and can pump the cement without reversal you will have a great cement job.

But reading papers, While helpful won't help you much unless you have done it before. It is not paint by numbers. What do you plan to do for stabilizers?

------------------------------
Mike Loudermilk
COO
Volturo NRG
Spring Texas
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 10-23-2022 09:41 AM
From: Andrey Yugay
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Thanks, Mathias.
yes, I am aware about the project reported in this SPE paper. Unfortunately, situation is not crystal clear hear. That's why I put this post. in terms of difference in friction pressures - I mean friction the annulus. Our DP is 5 or 5.5", so if instead we drill with 9-5/8" or 13-3/8" casing we induce more losses...
For the stresses - it is both cases you mentioned.
For the CBL - I assume some improvement for the fluid displacement due to plastering effect but need more feedback from the people who uses it now. if.
thanks
rgds


Original Message:
Sent: 10-21-2022 07:58 AM
From: Matthias Kirchhoff
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Andrey,
There are a few good SPE papers on the topic already you may want to consult, at least one (SPE-207565-MS) written by your colleagues at ADNOC.
I think you'd need to weigh the pros and cons of casing drilling compared to conventional operations. Also, casing drilling isn't for every application but rather specific sets of circumstances. What section at what depth are you looking at drilling? Are you interested in a Tesco-like system to drill directional or simply drill with a dumb drill-shoe 100 m through a loss zone? Are you worried about stresses from rotating through high doglegs causing fatigue failure or compression of seals areas and box-belling? What are your concerns with losses while cementing? The hole size would be the same as with conventional drilling, hence the same annular clearance. The greater worry during cementing are the installation of float valves.
What casing coating are you referring to? The best cement bond is with slghtly rusty casing rather than slick oiled and greased surfaces; better adherence on rough surface. I know that drillpipe is plastic-lined but have not seen that in casing.
Cheers,
Matthias

not to belabor this conversation (just noticed today) but to pass along a few observations & cautions about CWD based on my personal experience with Conoco in Lobo (who I believe bought Philips, not vice-versa), and in Oman and KSA.  as already stated by others, two reasons for employing CWD (a) to improve operational efficiencies and/or (b) get through LC zones. COPC did both vertical and directional (up to around 30 deg as I recall), thus employed both casing rotation from surface, as well as downhole motor, bent sub, etc. PDO attempted directional with surface rotation. both aforementioned were Tesco or post-Tesco systems.  my observations...
- once the system got up & running it worked very well, and certainly improved drilling performance. however, the learning curve was both steep & costly. (imagine tripping 9-5/8" casing instead of DP)
- the smear effect resulted in a definite improvement w/r to any losses & weak zones, though i don't recall that being the primary objective. It certainly allowed handing of larger ECD's due to smaller annulus. 
- cementing was performed same like any other casing jobs. we did, however, keep a closer watch on surface pressures while pumping & displacing. Only difference was that a wireline-deployed float collar was deployed at TD, since standard FE obviously can't be used in this system. 
- bond logs that I saw were not noticeably either better nor worse that 'conventionally drilled & cemented wells.
- IF any non-casing equipment is run in the string, such as DV tool, ECP, be sure to screen each & every thread, both internal and external, for suitability for drilling. one attempt in Oman to drill with an ECP in the string resulted in twisting off at an internal thread inside the tool (6-stub acme) 

I think the moral of all this is that, if you have a definitive case where it may be applicable, then worthwhile to try. but allow at least 2-3 wells to climb the learning curve.

------------------------------
Scott Myers
------------------------------

Scott, 
I just picked up on your "imagine tripping 9-5/8" casing instead of DP" comment because we supplied stabilizers to a ConocoPhillips (COP) casing drilling operation in S Texas some years ago where they drilled their 7-5/8" casing into the ground with a rock bit on the bottom of the string. As this was their intermediate string it had to be tripped, using a super-single rig, and re-run with a cement shoe in the bit's place. As far as I know this was the most cost-effective way to get these wells down. 
Fast-forward a few years to Australia where COP was partner with an Ozzy company drilling coalbed methane wells, and also trying to drill their intermediate string down with CWD, they couldn't get the (casing drilling) bits to last the interval so CWD had to be dropped.

------------------------------
John Gammage
Lead Ranch Hand
Dundrillin'
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 11-09-2022 11:58 AM
From: G Myers
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

not to belabor this conversation (just noticed today) but to pass along a few observations & cautions about CWD based on my personal experience with Conoco in Lobo (who I believe bought Philips, not vice-versa), and in Oman and KSA.  as already stated by others, two reasons for employing CWD (a) to improve operational efficiencies and/or (b) get through LC zones. COPC did both vertical and directional (up to around 30 deg as I recall), thus employed both casing rotation from surface, as well as downhole motor, bent sub, etc. PDO attempted directional with surface rotation. both aforementioned were Tesco or post-Tesco systems.  my observations...
- once the system got up & running it worked very well, and certainly improved drilling performance. however, the learning curve was both steep & costly. (imagine tripping 9-5/8" casing instead of DP)
- the smear effect resulted in a definite improvement w/r to any losses & weak zones, though i don't recall that being the primary objective. It certainly allowed handing of larger ECD's due to smaller annulus.
- cementing was performed same like any other casing jobs. we did, however, keep a closer watch on surface pressures while pumping & displacing. Only difference was that a wireline-deployed float collar was deployed at TD, since standard FE obviously can't be used in this system.
- bond logs that I saw were not noticeably either better nor worse that 'conventionally drilled & cemented wells.
- IF any non-casing equipment is run in the string, such as DV tool, ECP, be sure to screen each & every thread, both internal and external, for suitability for drilling. one attempt in Oman to drill with an ECP in the string resulted in twisting off at an internal thread inside the tool (6-stub acme)

I think the moral of all this is that, if you have a definitive case where it may be applicable, then worthwhile to try. but allow at least 2-3 wells to climb the learning curve.

------------------------------
Scott Myers
------------------------------

Thanks John, I can respond privately but sounds as if we worked COPC/STX at different times (no 7-5/8" on any of the tesco rigs I worked with.). those I remember were either 9-5/8", 7" or a few 4-1/2".  and all the BHA's were retrievable via sand-line.  

PS: the comment on tripping may've actually been 7", I'm going from memory on size, but handling the casing coming out of the hole presented obvious logistics & safety challenges - had to be laid down and was very time consuming. to the point that one trip out & in destroyed the economics.

the Oman work I'd referred to was also retrievable BHA (SLB had purchased it from Tesco by that time). the mistake there was not considering all the threads ratings in the string, mainly the internal Acme thread inside the ECP.

------------------------------
Scott Myers
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 11-09-2022 08:48 PM
From: John Gammage
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

Scott,
I just picked up on your "imagine tripping 9-5/8" casing instead of DP" comment because we supplied stabilizers to a ConocoPhillips (COP) casing drilling operation in S Texas some years ago where they drilled their 7-5/8" casing into the ground with a rock bit on the bottom of the string. As this was their intermediate string it had to be tripped, using a super-single rig, and re-run with a cement shoe in the bit's place. As far as I know this was the most cost-effective way to get these wells down.
Fast-forward a few years to Australia where COP was partner with an Ozzy company drilling coalbed methane wells, and also trying to drill their intermediate string down with CWD, they couldn't get the (casing drilling) bits to last the interval so CWD had to be dropped.

------------------------------
John Gammage
Lead Ranch Hand
Dundrillin'
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 11-09-2022 11:58 AM
From: G Myers
Subject: Casing While Drilling VS Cementing and Integrity

not to belabor this conversation (just noticed today) but to pass along a few observations & cautions about CWD based on my personal experience with Conoco in Lobo (who I believe bought Philips, not vice-versa), and in Oman and KSA.  as already stated by others, two reasons for employing CWD (a) to improve operational efficiencies and/or (b) get through LC zones. COPC did both vertical and directional (up to around 30 deg as I recall), thus employed both casing rotation from surface, as well as downhole motor, bent sub, etc. PDO attempted directional with surface rotation. both aforementioned were Tesco or post-Tesco systems.  my observations...
- once the system got up & running it worked very well, and certainly improved drilling performance. however, the learning curve was both steep & costly. (imagine tripping 9-5/8" casing instead of DP)
- the smear effect resulted in a definite improvement w/r to any losses & weak zones, though i don't recall that being the primary objective. It certainly allowed handing of larger ECD's due to smaller annulus.
- cementing was performed same like any other casing jobs. we did, however, keep a closer watch on surface pressures while pumping & displacing. Only difference was that a wireline-deployed float collar was deployed at TD, since standard FE obviously can't be used in this system.
- bond logs that I saw were not noticeably either better nor worse that 'conventionally drilled & cemented wells.
- IF any non-casing equipment is run in the string, such as DV tool, ECP, be sure to screen each & every thread, both internal and external, for suitability for drilling. one attempt in Oman to drill with an ECP in the string resulted in twisting off at an internal thread inside the tool (6-stub acme)

I think the moral of all this is that, if you have a definitive case where it may be applicable, then worthwhile to try. but allow at least 2-3 wells to climb the learning curve.

------------------------------
Scott Myers