IADC/SPE 115286

Extended Reach Drilling (ERD) Design in Deepwater Application

Ing. Rudi Rubiandini R. S, Lecturer from Petroleum Engineering ITB

Copyright 2008, IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology Conference and Exhibition

This paper was prepared for presentation at the IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology Conference and Exhibition held in Jakarta, Indonesia, 2527 August 2008.

This paper was selected for presentation by an IADC/SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not
been reviewed by the International Association of Drilling Contractors or the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily
reflect any position of the International Association of Drilling Contractors or the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any
part of this paper without the written consent of the International Association of Drilling Contractors or 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 IADC/SPE copyright.

Abstract
Characteristic difference between Extended Reach Drilling (ERD) well and conventional directional well often cause
problem in drilling an ERD well. Drag, torque, and hook load force that occur in an ERD well is higher than conventional
o
well, because of long Horizontal Displacement and near 90 lateral inclination angle which are characteristics of an ERD
well. Three critical parameters are affected by that characters, those parameters are: drill string design, casing design, and
hydraulic design.
Drill string design optimization in ERD well is analyzed based on four basic parameters, those are: neutral point, torque
force, hook load force, and axial force. Casing design optimization is analyzed from hook load force that occurs when
picking up and slacking off. For casing design, there are three alternative methods: conventional method, casing floatation or
negative weight method, and partial floatation method. Hydraulic design optimization is analyzed base on cutting
concentration, mud weight, and drill string rotary speed.
Rig specification in drilling an ERD well is based on minimum requirement for rig hookload, rig drawwork, and pump
power. Software with 3D trajectory visualization feature has been developed to calculate tubular and hydraulic design
sensitivity regarding to friction force and pipe composition. In a study case, ERD method will be applied for deep water
drilling process to extent the cluster system range. By using the developed software, calculation result gives information
about ERD design optimization for similar case.
Keywords: ERD, drillstring design, casing design, hydraulic design, deep water drilling.
2 IADC/SPE 115286
I. INTRODUCTION
ERD (Extended Reach Drilling) is one of drilling method
that is developed from directional drilling application.
The difference between ERD and conventional directional
drilling is ERD has longer Horizontal Displacement
section. Ratio between Horizontal Displacement to True
Vertical Depth (HD/TVD) in an ERD well (R/D ratio) is
greater than two, of which TVD is measured from Kick
Off Point (KOP) depth. Illustration HD/TVD ratio for
ERD well is shown in Figure 1.
ERD well has long lateral section after End of Curve
(EOC) point
o ando high inclination angle (usually greater
than 75 80 ). These characteristics cause several
constraints that usually never occur in conventional
Directional Drilling well. These constraints are:
1. Drag and torque force are too high.
2. Pushing force is too low.
3. Cutting accumulation in the wellbore especially in
high angle inclination section.
4. Rig specification requirement can not be fulfilled.
5. Pipe sticking.
6. Pipe buckling.
7. Pipe/casing break.
Those constraints are influenced by three equipments
design in drilling activity: drillstring design, casing design
and hydraulic design. For the next explanation these three
equipments design are called as critical parameters in
ERD design.
II. DRILLSTRING DESIGN
Friction force amount that occur in well bore trajectory,
cause drill string design becomes a critical parameter that
is affecting drilling successfulness. The friction force that
is too high could cause drill string can not reach target
while slacking off. On the other side drill string can break
while pulling up.
Drill string consists off drill pipe (DP), heavy weight drill
pipe (HWDP) and Bottom Hole Assembly (BHA). In drill
string design, BHA occurrence is neglected, because does
not give significant effect to the friction force. DP and
HWDP placement in drill string can be done in many
variations. To achieve an optimal design, there are four
constraints that need to be considered in DP and HWDP
placement in drill string, those constraints are:
1. Tripping in, tripping out as less as possible
Tripping in/out process in ERD well will take a long
time because of trajectory length. The longer and
often tripping process occur, the cost is getting
higher.
2. Drill string yield minimum rig specification
requirement
Rig specification will reduce if maximum load that
has to be handled by rig is reduced.
3. Drill pipe string requires HWDP as short
as possible
For cost reason, DP utility will reduce cost than
HWDP utility. HWDP has heavier pounder than DP
therefore makes the price is more expensive.
4. Drill pipe string requires HWDP as short
as possible
By utilize low quality DP, the price could be
reduced.
The four parameters above are technical parameters that
need to be adjusted with field condition, like pipe and rig
availability, rig rent time, and other factors. These
parameters will be compared with drill string design
calculation that depends on drill string configuration.
To optimized drill string design, there are four boundary
parameters that need to be calculated, those are: torque,
neutral point, hookload, and axial force. Those four
parameters are influenced by three forces that work
together, which are drag, torque, and weight force.
Drag calculation will be done by using Frank formula
SPE 12050, 1989.
D = Wm L sin
Torque calculation will be done by using Frank formula
SPE 12050, 1989.
T = OD Wm sin 24
Weight force calculation will be done base on Newton
law
W = Wm L cos
In drill string design, sensitivity analysis needs to be done
for friction factor and drill string composition to get
optimal economic and technical result. The result is drill
string design with DP and HWDP composition as shown
in Figure 2.
III. CASING DESIGN
Casing installation in ERD well becomes more
complicated than conventional directional well, because
of the longer trajectory length. The problem that often
occurs is inadequate rig capacity because of casing load
becomes the highest load that need to be handle during
the drilling activity. Another problem that occurs is the
casing can not be placed on the target, due to larger
friction force than available weight force could overcome.
There are four methods of casing installation that are
usually used in ERD well, those are conventional, tie
back, casing floatation and partial floatation methods.
Conventional method is a casing installation method
IADC/SPE 115286 3

where the casing installed at whole trajectory section.
Illustration for conventional casing installation can be
seen in Figure 3. Tie back method is a casing installation
method where the casing does not place at whole
trajectory section but only be placed at certain depth
below the surface. See Figure 4 for illustration.
Casing floatation method is a casing installation method
of which mud is removed from casing inside, therefore
make the inside part of the casing only filled with air
(Figure 5). The purpose of this method is to reduce casing
weight by increasing the buoyancy force. The formula
bellow is being used to calculate casing density reduction
because of casing floatation method.
OD 2 ID 2
Wair = Wmud
OD 2
Partial floatation method is a modified from casing
floatation method. In this method, some part of casing
string is filled with air while the other part is filled with
mud (Figure 6). Division of the casing string into these
two different parts is done by using a tool which is called
as shear out plug.
Method that is chosen for casing installation is depend on
field condition and forces that work in casing string. Two
forces that work in casing string are drag force and casing
weight force. Calculation formulas that are used are the
same with drillstring calculation formula. Sensitivity
analysis is needed to be done for friction factor and
chosen method in casing design.
o
higher than 45 . A critical point of which cutting bed is
o o
formed occurs in 60 70 , however for higher inclination
angle the tendency of cutting bed occurrence is decrease.
High mud density always used for ERD well. It is done to
keep wellbore stability while drilling and casing
installation is in process. High mud density also gives
higher buoyancy effect that can help to reduce tubular
string weight. Because of the high mud density
characteristic, mud pump rate is needed to increase. This
effect is not predicted in early calculation method.
From field and laboratory experience, wellbore cleaning
process will be better if drill string is still at rotating
condition while drilling and tripping in/out. Sliding
drilling by using mud motor is proved have affecting
cutting bed forming that could cause pipe sticking. It is
need to consider RPM correction while drilling with
regard to rotary pipe effect importance.
By considering the factors that are explained above,
Moore method is corrected by using Rudi method. Rudi
method corrects Moore method for
inclination angle, mud density, and RPM calculations,
therefore the calculation results could reached near actual
condition on field. Rudi Method Formula is shown in
Table 1.
Table 1 Rudi Method Formula

IV. HYDRAULIC DESIGN

Well bore cleaning is one of the critical parameters in

ERD application. ERD well has high lateral inclination
0
angle (greater than 75 ). Cutting accumulation occur in
this part until cutting bed is formed. Cutting bed presence
can cause pipe to sticking and also increasing mud pump
V. SOFTWARE DESIGN
power requirement. Circulation process is needed to be
done while drilling, before tripping out, or when installing
ERD software is designed as an auxiliary tool to
casing and other tubular installation to avoid cutting bed
determine ERD wells three critical parameters design.
formed in the well bore.
First step in calculation procedure is well trajectory
design. This software is help to visualized trajectory
In mud circulation process, the most important parameter
condition in 2D and 3D figure. After knowing trajectory
that determines well bore cleaning is Cutting Minimum
design, sensitivity analysis for drill string design, casing
Velocity. Cutting Minimum Velocity is determined by
design and hydraulic design can be done, by using ERD
Moore method. Moore method utilization in minimum
software.
velocity determination has several weaknesses because
does not consider about well bore inclination, mud
In drill string and casing design, sensitivity analysis will
density, and pipe rotary. These three properties
be done to the number of friction factors. Friction factors
differentiate cutting transport character between ERD
variation that will be used are 0.2; 0.25; 0.3; 0.35; and
well and conventional well.
0.4. Friction factor number consideration is concerned
regarding to wellbore condition and mud type that is used.
To reach long distance departure, the last inclination
o The worst condition (friction factor 0.4) in the wellbore
angle in ERD well always near 90 . According to Larsen
occurs when water base mud being used and the hole is in
and Peden experiment the possibility of cutting
open hole condition. The best condition (friction factor
accumulation occurs is increase while inclination angle
4 IADC/SPE 115286
0.2) occurs when oil base mud or synthetic base mud
being used and the hole is in cased hole condition. If
wellbore condition is unknown, it is preferred to use 0.3
for friction factor number.
Besides doing sensitivity analysis for the friction factor,
this software is also completed by pipe string sensitivity
analysis for non homogenous drill string and casing
string. Non homogenous drill string analysis is required to
acquire the best combination between DP and HWDP in
drill string design. Non homogenous casing string
analysis is needed to identify the best casing installation
method that can be used.
The software has the ability to calculate forces interaction
that arise in pipe string between torque, drag and weight
force when picking up and slacking off the pipe string.
Result of forces interaction could be determined in every
point of well trajectory. At the end, various forces
interaction conditions figure that are caused by friction
factor and non homogenous pipe string sensitivity could
be obtained. Sensitivity analysis is shown in torque, drag,
hook load slack off, hook load pick up, casing running,
and casing hook load graph. To summarize, forces
interaction figure that occurs in many variation of drill
string and casing string design can be developed by using
this software.
VI. CASE STUDY
To see the advantages that could be obtained with the
ERD software, analysis for one ERD well hypothetical
data (we called ERD X well) will be done. Hypothetical
data consist of trajectory data (Table 6) such as depth,
inclination and azimuth. Tubular specification (Table 7),
hydraulic (Table 8), and others assumption data are given.
From trajectory calculation by using ERD software, it is
known that ERD X well use Single Build Curve Design,
of which the length of lateral section is 12000 ft, ERD
ratio 3.3 and total length (Measured Depth) is 17400 ft.
Trajectory calculation software result view is shown in
Figure 7.
6.1. Drillstring Design
To optimized drill string design, analysis for the four
boundary parameters will be done. Those boundary
parameters are: neutral point; torque; hook load; and axial
force. First, drill string design sensitivity analysis will be
done by placing HWDP in the whole parts of trajectory
section. Then optimization will be completed by placing
drill pipe in vertical section with regard to neutral point.
The second optimization is done by placing drill pipe in
lateral section with regard to torque, hook load, and axial
force.
Neutral point determination is done to acquire maximum
DP length that is allowed in vertical section. Drill pipe
installation in vertical section will be confined by weight
force requirement. From the calculation is known that
position of neutral point (Figure 8) is in 1250 ft measured
depth from the surface. Therefore, maximum limit for DP
installation in vertical section is 1250 ft.
Torque sensitivity is one of the calculated parameter,
which is done to acquire maximum drill pipe installation
capacity in lateral section. Optimization will be done by
consider two properties. The properties are friction factor
and pipe grade that is installed in vertical section. From
those two sensitivities analysis, torque sensitivity graph
will be acquired (see Figure 9). From torque sensitivity
graph, cross over points between friction factors and pipe
grades become drill pipe minimum requirement that need
to be installed in lateral section. Calculation results for
ERD X well is shown at the table below:
Table 2 Minimum Drillpipe Requirement from Torque
Sensitivity
Hook load sensitivity analysis will be done to compare
the acquired result with torque sensitivity result. Hook
load sensitivity calculation procedure is the same as
torque sensitivity procedure. The different is the pipe
property that is used as boundary parameter. Pipe torque
strength becomes boundary parameter in torque
sensitivity, while pipe tensile strength becomes boundary
parameter in hook load sensitivity. For ERD X well, the
result of hook load sensitivity (Figure 10) is in the table
below:
Table 3 Minimum Drillpipe Requirement from Hookload
Sensitivity
To determine minimum drill pipe requirement in lateral
section, torque and hook load sensitivity results will be
compared. Maximum result from each friction factors and
pipe grades becomes minimum requirement for drill pipe
installation in lateral section. Another property that needs
to be considered is axial force. Axial force is a force that
occurred in every single elements of drill pipe which is
caused by pipe weight force accumulation in upper part of
measured point. If axial force that occurred in the pipe is
greater than internal pipe force (critical buckling, Fc),
then pipe buckling effect will occur. From software
calculation results (Figure 10), it is known that internal
pipe strength is greater than axial force that is occurred in
the pipe. Therefore pipe buckling risk could be
IADC/SPE 115286
eliminated. Minimum drill pipe requirement that need to
be installed in lateral section is given in the table below:
Table 4 Minimum Drillpipe Requirement in Lateral
Section
6.2. Casing Design
Casing design optimization will be done for 7 casing by
trying two different installation methods. The first design
is using conventional casing installation method, where
the casing being installed from the surface. The second
design is tie back casing installation method, where the
casing being installed from EOC point.
6.2.1. Conventional Casing Running
Conventional casing installation sensitivity analysis is
evaluated base on surface pushing force condition while
casing is slacking off. If at surface, casing is in the
compression condition it means casing cannot run down
to the target depth, because off insufficient pushing force.
Otherwise, if at the surface, casing is in the tension
condition, it means there is enough pushing force for
placing casing to the target depth.
From software analysis results for ERD X well (Figure
11), it is known that for surface condition, casing still in
tension state. Therefore casing installation by using
conventional method could be done without float the
casing.
6.2.2. Tie Back Casing Running @ EOC
By starting casing installation from EOC point, casing
requirement can be reduced, but on the other hand
available pushing force may not be enough. Therefore
casing string should be a combination betwen DP and
casing. DP is used to place casing until the target depth
and then pulled back to surface afterward. From the
software calculation (Figure 12), it is known that for
friction factor 0.2 until 0.3 casing is in tension condition.
For friction factor 0.35 casing is near to neutral condition.
For friction factor 0.4 casing is in compression condition.
Thus, for friction factor between 0.35 until 0.4 a half or
whole parts of the casing need to be floated.
0.20.250.30.350.4
6.2.3. Floatation Method
Floatation method is done by unoccupied the inside part
of the casing, to reduce casing density. Casing floatation
method will be tried in tie back casing installation @
EOC, due to insufficient pushing force. According to
5
software simulation result (Figure 13), casing could be
run to target depth by using floatation method.
6.2.4. Partial Floatation Method
If floatation method were applied, time requirement for
casing installation increase due to reduced casing density.
Therefore to decrease time for casing installation, partial
floatation method will be used. From sensitivity analysis
(Figure 13), it is proved that for friction factor 0.4,
minimum casing section need to be emptied is 4391 ft
from target.
6.3. Hydraulic Design
Hydraulic design is done to determine cutting minimum
velocity for preserve the wellbore cleanness. Sensitivity
analysis is done for various cutting concentration and pipe
rotary speed (RPM). Cutting concentration represent
wellbore cleanness degree, of which wellbore cleanness is
determined by cutting left over concentration. From the
calculation (Figure 14), cutting transport velocity
requirement for 5% until 2% cutting left concentration is
vary between 3.4979 ft/s until 5.5049 ft/s.
6.4. Rig Recommendation
Minimum rig requirement for ERD X well could be
inferred from the calculation results of the three critical
parameters. Minimum hook load requirement is 747148
lbs. Minimum draw work rig requirement is 773 HP. Mud
pump rate requirement is between 405 638 gpm. Mud
pump HP requirement is between 1772 2791 HP.
VII CONCLUSION
1. There are three critical parameters that need to be
calculated in ERD well design, those parameters are
drill string design, casing design, hydraulic design.
2. ERD software is designed to assist design process for
those three critical parameters.
3. ERD software could show trajectory condition in 2D
or 3D view.
4. ERD software is able to do sensitivity analysis based
on friction factor and tubular variation in the
wellbore.
Conclusion point 5 6 show calculation result from ERD
software to ERD X well :
5. Drill string Design
HWDP is installed in the whole segment of drill
string except several parts at the vertical and lateral
section. In vertical section, maximum DP installation
is 1250 ft. In lateral section minimum DP installation
is like in the table below:
6 IADC/SPE 115286

Table 4 Minimum Drill pipe Requirement in Lateral Wair = pipe weight in air, ppg
Section Wmud = pipe weight in mud, ppg
Vs = slip velocity, ft/s
m = mud density, ppg
RPM = Rotary Per Minute
Vsv = Vs vertical Moore, ft/s
Vmin = minimum velocity to lift cutting, ft/s
Vcut = cutting velocity, ft/s
6. Casing Design REFERENCES
Casing could be installed by using conventional 1. J.M Peden, J.T Ford and M.B Oyeneyin, Heriot
method. Watt U, SPE Paper Comprehensive
It is recommended to use casing floatation method or Experimental Investigation of Drilled
using partial floatation method with minimum casing Cuttings Transport in Incline Wells
section that required to be emptied is 4391 ft from the Including the Effect of Rotation and
target, if casing is installed tie back @ EOC. Eccentricity Drillpipe, October 1990. SPE
No 20925.
7. Hydraulic Design 2. M.L Payne, and A.J. Hatch, SPE Paper Critical
Cutting minimum velocity requirement for cutting Technologies for Success in Extended
concentration 5 2 % is vary between 3.4979 ft/s Reach Drilling, September 1994, SPE No
5.5049 ft/s. 28293.
8. Rig Recommendation 3. Moore, P.L Drilling Practice Manual, Pennwell
Table 5 Rig Recommendation Publishing Company, Tulsa, (1974).
4. R.Rudi R.S, Equation For Estimating Mud
minimum Rate for Cutting transport in an
Inclined-Until Horizontal Well, SPE
57541, Middle East Drilling Technology
LIST OF SYMBOLS Conference, Abu Dhabi, November 1999.
5. S. Frank, Horizontal Well Planning-Build Curve
D = drag, lb Design, Drilling Technology, Inc., SPE
Wm = pipe weight in mud, ppg 12050 Reprint Series, 1989.
L = pipe length, ft 6. T.I. Larsen, A.Apilehveari, and J.J.Azar, SPE Paper
= friction factor Development of A New Cutting Transport
= inclination, degree Model for High Angle Wellbores Including
T = torque, lb ft Horizontal Wells, June 1997, SPE No
OD = outside diameter, inch 25872

Figure 1. HD/TVD Ratio

IADC/SPE 115286 7

Figure 2. Drillstring Design Optimization

Figure 3. Conventional Casing Design

Figure 4. Tie Back Casing Design

8 IADC/SPE 115286

Figure 5. Tie Back Casing Design with Floatation Method

Figure 6. Tie Back Casing Design with Partial Floatation Method

Table 6. ERD X Trajectory Data

IADC/SPE 115286 9

Table 7. ERD X Tubular Data

Table 8. ERD X Hydraulic Data

10 IADC/SPE 115286

Figure 7. ERD X 3D Trajectory Figure

Figure 8. ERD X Neutral Point Sensitivity

Figure 9. ERD X Torque Sensitivity

IADC/SPE 115286 11

Figure 10. ERD X Hookload Sensitivity

Figure 11. ERD X Axial Force Sensitivity

Figure 12. ERD X Conventional Casing Installation Software Result

12 IADC/SPE 115286

Figure 13. ERD X Tie Back Casing Installation with Floatation Software Result

Figure 14. ERD X Tie Back Casing Installation with Partial Floatation Software Result

Figure 15. Shear Out Plug Position Sensitivity

IADC/SPE 115286 13

Figure 16. Hydraulic Sensitivity

Figure 17. Software Figure