SPE 167172

A Work Method to Analyzing Friction Factors in Torque and Drag Modeling

John McCormick and David Wilcox, Halliburton

Copyright 2013, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Unconventional Resources Conference-Canada held in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 5–7 November 2013.

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 have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of 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 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 SPE copyright.

Abstract

Long horizontal laterals with challenging well geometries and fracturing operations with 20-30 stages are commonplace in
the US. Planning for successful completions operations that push the envelope of equipment and lateral reach is critical, and
the ability to more accurately account for drag prior to running swell packers and frac sleeves downhole is needed to assist
with the reliability of completions operations.
This paper will include an in depth look at the rig data, torque and drag models and the post job friction factors, which are
an overall indication of the hole condition, for six wells. The post-job friction factors will be calibrated for drilling the final
hole section and running the completions string, then analyzed to consider a link between the two operations. Production
data will also be taken into account.
By creating a database of friction factors for completions operations that consider completion type, fluids used, use of
centralizers, lithology and work string data, past experience has shown that even offset wells in the Bakken can have
significantly varying amounts of drag. Analyzing the friction factors for drilling the final hole section will provide an
opportunity to predict the level of drag prior to running the completions string.
This paper will provide the torque and drag analysis of both the drilling and completions operations for seven wells, along
with a method to link the two operations. Conclusions will be drawn related to the variance between wells and the ability to
predict the success of running completions strings to TD after gathering the hookload data and calibrating a post-job friction
factor for the final drilled section of a well.
Although the results of the analysis will best apply to shale plays with similar geometries, the work method presented in
the paper is applicable to any well construction scenario.

Introduction

Completions in North Dakota (Bakken):

Horizontal drilling and fracturing technology have had such a large impact in the US because these technologies used in
concert have allowed oil companies to economically produce previously uneconomical shale oil and gas plays. Shale
hydrocarbons are found in many small producible formations. It is now common to fracture and produce from thirty or even
more separate formations, all of which need to be fractured separately. These fracturing operations are called stages.
The majority of completions operations in the Bakken in North Dakota are open hole, though a significant number of
completions are done within cased hole. Cased hole completions are often referred to as plug-and-perf operations where the
various producing zones of interest are isolated using plugs and then individually fractured. Open hole completions adds
additional cost due to the use of swell packers and shiftable frac sleeves, but also allows for a much faster completion.
There is differing opinion on whether open hole or cased hole completions result in greater levels of production. Some
research shows that as reservoir permeability is low, there is little difference between open and cased hole completions,
whereas open hole completions are preferable in higher permeability reservoirs (Augustine, 2011). This is caused by the
restriction to the flowpath that the cement in cased hole completions causes.
2 SPE 167172

Challenges:
The wellpaths drilled in shale plays tend to have challenging well geometries that result in significant levels of drag. The
longer the horizontal section of the wellbore, the more formations that can be drilled through, fractured and produced from.
Also because lease lines are strictly adhered to in the US and the length of the horizontal section is so important, it is standard
practice to build as rapidly as possible from vertical to horizontal, therefore giving up as little of the producible formation as
possible. The use of mud motors also exacerbates the challenge from a drag perspective. If a three degree per 100 ft curve is
desired, mud motors may build at a rate of 12 degrees per 100 ft for 25 ft and switch to rotary drilling where the motor ceases
to build for the next 75 ft. This results in doglegs that are much higher than the overall three degrees per hundred of the
curve.
It is also generally known that there are higher levels of drag, and specifically greater friction factors, when running liners
and casing than running in with a drill string. Since casing is larger than drill pipe, the clearances are smaller and bending
moments through doglegs greater. Although it will not affect the friction factor, the greater weight of casing when compared
to drill pipe will result in more drag. For those unfamiliar with the term friction factor, it is a dimensionless coefficient that
accounts for the coefficient of friction along with a variety of other immeasurable characteristics within a wellbore that will
contribute to drag. Tortuosity between survey points, the presence of cuttings beds, and effects that are not already accounted
for such as fluid resistance to pipe movement or the resistance of the pipe to bending, are accounted for within the friction
factor. For decades, friction factors have been used to define overall hole conditions in terms of friction, and to compare the
predicted results with actual hookloads (Maidla, et.al., 1988).

Predictive Friction Factors:

Failure to get a liner or completion string to TD will have dire consequences in terms of operational difficulty and the
impact on the overall cost of a well (Mason, et. al., 2003). Because of this risk and the higher associated drag levels, the
ability to predict the condition of the well, or the friction factor, prior to running in the hole with the completion string
becomes important. The most common method of friction factor prediction is the use of offset wells to determine a friction
factor for similar operations. Unfortunately, significant variance in open hole friction factors was seen during the open hole
completions that were studied. If a consistent link between the drilling and completion hole conditions, or friction factors
could be determined, then the drilling friction factors would point to a reliable completion friction factor to anticipate margin
of safety in terms of hookload and slackoff while running in the hole.

Study

Overview of Study:
The goal of this study was to find a predictive link between the drag for run in hole (RIH) during the final drilling phase and
the drag for RIH with the completion string. The first step was to analyze the daily drilling reports and build predictive
torque and drag models. The second step involved gathering rig data and using it to calibrate post-job friction factors for the
final drilling run and the completion run. The friction factors acquired for the drilling and completion runs served as the
bedrock for the analysis, with a look into several factors that might have influenced these numbers and their relationship.

Calibrating Friction Factors:

Calibrating friction factors can be done using even one hookload reading, though the results will not be very reliable, or
the rig data recorded every ten seconds can be used. As discussed earlier, it has been well documented and accepted that the
friction factors for a drill string will be different from that of a completion or drill string. Friction factors for various
operations using the same string will often be different as well. One example is that soft string torque and drag models do not
take into account the strings’ attempts to straighten when being pulled and bend when being pushed, which would cause
higher normal forces coming out through a bend than going through it. Since the concern for these wells in North Dakota is
the prediction of the relative challenge or ease of running the completion string in the hole, the friction factors for tripping in
alone were isolated and considered.
The daily drilling reports were very helpful in building the torque and drag models. The fluid density in the wellbore will
have a significant impact on the torque and drag calculations because it affects the buoyancy of the string, which averaged
between fifteen and twenty thousand feet in length. It is common practice for this operator to fill the completion string with
different type/density fluids when running the completion string downhole. Attempting to match the friction factors with
actual rig data was not possible prior to accounting for the fluid differences in the annulus and inside the string.
The most significant challenge was handling upwards of 30,000 data points for each well that covered drilling the final
hole section and running in hole with the completion string. Various techniques were used to reduce the number of data
points such as removing duplicate hookloads, using the data in between the block weight and the tripping in hookloads, and
the larger tripping out values. Only values for the open hole were considered in this study. At this point the friction factors
for each of the wells would be determined and tabulated for both the final drilling section and the completion run. Whole
well friction factors (WWFFs) were used to make comparison between the wells easier.
SPE 167172 3

The rig data and predicted hookloads for RIH with the completion string in well 7 are shown in Figure 1. Although the
analysis in this paper will focus on the open hole, the run through both cased and open hole is shown in figure 1 for
demonstrative purposes. The cluster of data points on the left side of the graph show the block weight as the string rests in
the slips. Because several stands of pipe at a time are run dry before filling, the hookloads can regularly represent a slightly
smaller weight than the model due to the buoyant effect of this air column; the curve for this calibration was therefore
matched along the higher end of the hookload data. The WWFF for the well 7 completion run is 0.34.

Hook Load (kip)

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290

LEGEND
2000 Tripping In
Actual Tripping In

4000

6000

8000
Run Measured Depth (ft)

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

22000

24000

Figure 1 - well #7 completions hookload calibration graph

Further Analysis:
While longer laterals result in additional drag, we also know that additional factors impacting the ability to get the string
to bottom become significant in long horizontal wells (Mirhaj, et. al., 2010). The measure of the difficulty in getting the
string to the bottom is, in this study, the friction factor that calibrates the actual hookloads post job. Significant non-
coefficient of friction variables that impact the friction factor are drilling fluid type/composition, total tortuosity, and
formation type and casing condition (Gaynor, et. al., 2002).
The main part of the analysis was to compare the drilling and completion WWFFs for each of the wells to determine a
link, if any. As an additional analysis, the possible causes for the differences between the wells themselves were considered.
Using the concept of the drilling fluids, wellbore geometry (total tortuosity) and formation type was reviewed (Gaynor, et.
al., 2002). Production data was also briefly considered.

Results

Eight wells were chosen to analyze, which are listed as wells 1-8. Unfortunately drilling data was not obtained for well 7 and
the drilling data would not calibrate for well 8. The results for wells 1-6 will be discussed in this section.
The hookload graphs showing the rig data and the calibrated lines for the drill string in the final hole section are shown in
Figures 2-7. The green line is the predicted hookload while tripping in, which is the line that has been calibrated. The
rotating on bottom line used to model rotary drilling is also shown at the same friction factor, and it also calibrates fairly well.
The rig data shown is only for the open hole section of the run. The hookload graphs showing the rig data for the completion
runs are shown in Figures 8-13.
4 SPE 167172

Friction Factor Calibration:

Figure 2-7: Wells #1-6 drilling hookload calibration graphs

SPE 167172 5

Figure 8-13: Wells #1-6 completion hookload calibration graphs

The WWFFs for RIH with the final drill string varied significantly between wells, from 0.23 up to 0.30. This is in line
with prior experience by local engineers. As expected, the WWFFs for running the completion string in hole did come in
higher overall than the friction factors for drilling, from 0.26 to 0.32. These results have been tabulated in Table 1. Based on
the calibrations done, the change in friction factors from the drilling to the completion string was between 0.02 and 0.06, with
an average increase of 0.04.

Table 1 - Change in whole well friction factors between drilling and completion runs
6 SPE 167172

Further Analysis:
Previous attempts to determine why the friction factors were high in some wells and low in others did not result in any
concrete findings. After determining an average predictive increase in the calibrated friction factor from RIH with the drill
string, the secondary focus of this study was to determine a cause of the magnitude of change between the drilling vs.
completion string RIH friction factors.
In non-buckled scenarios, the side forces produced in torque and drag calculations are primarily wellbore geometry
dependent, with string weight and fluid densities also having a significant impact. It has also been shown that micro
tortuosity between survey points can contribute up to 40% of the total drag in a well (Gaynor, et. al., 2001). The measurable
portion of the wellbore geometry, namely the survey, was analyzed. Table 2 shows the wells listed in order from the
smallest increase in the friction factor to the largest. There is a correlation between the average dogleg severity in the build
section of each well and the degree of increased friction.

Table 2 - Dogleg severity analysis

The fluids used in the annulus for all of these completions operators were similar oil based mud (OBM) systems, as all of the
wells were operated by the same company. Wells 1-3 were drilled into the Middle Bakken and wells 4-6 were drilled into the
Three Forks play. There appears to be no correlation between the two oil plays and there were no fluid differences to
compare.

Well No Production (per month)

(MCF gas) (BBL oil)
1 2,000 5,000 Middle Bakken
2 2,000 6,000 Middle Bakken
3 2,000 6,000 Middle Bakken
4 3,000 9,000 Three Forks
5 2,500 6,000 Three Forks
6 2,500 7,000 Three Forks
Table 3 - Production data

Production data was available for only six months on average for the six wells considered, which is shown in Table 3. The
Three Forks formation wells did produce around 1,600 bbl/mo more than the Middle Bakken wells. In the absence of
additional variables, however, it is not possible to draw any conclusions about the impact the completions operation had on
production. The completions in this study were all done open hole with the same types of wellbore fluids.

Conclusions

• Over a six well study, no link was found that would indicate the reasons for high vs. low friction factors
• An increase of 0.04 for the friction factor from running a drillstring to running an open hole completion string is a
good predictive estimate
• Higher dogleg severity in the build section of a well may be a good indicator of the severity of the increase between
running in hole with the drilling vs. completions strings
SPE 167172 7

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank QEP and the drilling and completions engineers that provided the well data to analyze. The
authors also wish to thank the management at Halliburton for their support in helping to make this operation a success.
Finally, the authors wish to thank Halliburton for allowing the authors to publish the data and results.

References

Augustine, J., “Openhole versus Cemented Completions for Horizontal Wells with Transverse Fractures: an Analytical Comparison.” Paper
SPE 142279-MS presented at the SPE Production and Operations Symposium, 27-29 March 2011, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA
Maidla, E., Wojtanowicz, A., “Prediction Of Casing Running Loads In Directional Wells.” Paper SPE 5791-MS presented at the Offshore
Technology Conference, 2-5 May 1988, Houston, Texas
Mason, C., Lopez, J., Meling, S., Munger, R. Fraser, B., “Casing Running Challenges for Extended-Reach Wells.” Paper SPE 84447-MS
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 5-8 October 2003, Denver, Colorado
Mirhaj, S., Fazaelizadeh, M., Kaarstad, E., Aadnoy, B., “New Aspects of Torque-and-Drag Modeling in Extended-Reach Wells.” Paper
SPE 135719-MS presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 19-22 September 2010, Florence, Italy
Gaynor, T., Hamer, D., Chen, D., Stuart, D., “Quantifying Tortuosities by Friction Factors in Torque and Drag Model.” Paper SPE 77617-
MS presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 29 September-2 October 2002, San Antonio, Texas
Gaynor, T., Chen D., Stuart, D., Comeaux, B., “Tortuosity versus Micro-Tortuosity - Why Little Things Mean a Lot.” Paper SPE 67818-
MS presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, 27 February-1 March 2001, Amsterdam, Netherlands