SPE-178373-MS

Optimization of Hole Cleaning Using Dynamic Real-Time Cuttings

Monitoring Tools
Prof. Adewale Dosunmu, Cosmas Orun, Chimaroke Anyanwu, and Evelyn Ekeinde, University of Port Harcourt,
River State, Nigeria

Copyright 2015, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Nigeria Annual International Conference and Exhibition held in Lagos, Nigeria, 4 6 August 2015.
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
Optimization of hole cleaning remains a vital challenge when planning and drilling deviated, high angle
and extended reach wells. Hole cleaning depends on a number of factors and as to date most existing
models have been deployed in solving hole cleaning problems. However, the flow rate predicted by these
models may not be feasible to apply practically in field operations because it gives a pressure exceeding
allowable limits of the pop-up valves on the mud pump. This is the major cause of downtime during
drilling operations. This research is aimed at adding value to the existing models in achieving better hole
cleaning and reduced down time. This was made possible through the use of cutting monitoring model
which is a real time and quantitative tool. A case study on a well being drilled in the Niger Delta was
conducted whose from which it was observed that within 5800ft to 11500ft, the hole was not properly
clean as less cuttings were recovered. This information was used to initiate hole cleaning procedure. From
the validation, the results shows Non-Productive Time associated with hole cleaning has a significant drop
of 2-5 days when the cutting monitoring model is used in conjunction with the existing models.

Introduction
While planning or drilling a deviated or horizontal well, two of the key parameters which must be
determined is the minimum flow rate required to transport drilled cuttings to the surface and the
rheological properties of the drilling fluid. Different parameters are involved in optimizing hole cleaning.
Its seems obvious but many incident so far are linked with poor hole cleaning practices. However, to
optimize hole cleaning efficiency in deviated and horizontal wells, a balance must be struck between
minimizing particle settling velocity and promotion of fluid velocity under eccentric drill pipe.
Zeidler and Udo (1970) developed mathematical model to predict the volumetric cuttings concentration
in a vertical wellbore. It showed that the predicted concentration is high at low fluid velocities while
drilling is in progress. The model determined accurate values of cuttings concentration, provided that the
annular fluid velocity is at least twice the particle settling velocity. Larsen et al (1997) developed a new
mathematical method for estimating the minimum fluid transport velocity for system with the inclination
between 550 to 900. They found that the model worked well within an inclination angle 550 to 900, and
there were no correction factors yet for inclination less than 550. From the Larsen method it was known

SPE-178373-MS

that there are three parameters which affect the determination of minimum fluid annular velocity for
inclined hole:
y Inclination
y ROP
y Mud density.
Gavignet and Sobey (1989), presented a two layer cutting transport model on slurry transport. They
assumed that the cuttings had fallen to the lower part of the inclined well bore, and had formed a bed that
slides up the annulus. Above this bed, a second layer exists of pure mud. Eccentricity is taken into account
in the geometrical calculations of wetted perimeters and an apparent viscosity can be calculated for
non-Newtonian muds using a rheogram written in polynomial form.
Sharma (1990), extended Gavignet & Sobeys modeling approach by separating the particle layer into
two separate layers. This allows having at the same time both a stationary and a sliding bed, or a bed
sliding up inside the annulus on top and a bed sliding down at the bottom.
Martins and Santana (1992), presented a two layer model that is more versatile than Gavignet &
Sobeys model because it allows particles to be in suspension in the upper layer. The mean particle
concentration in this layer is calculated from a concentration profile that has been obtained from solving
a diffusion equation.
Hyun et. al. (2000), formulated a mathematical three-layer model to predict and interpret the cuttings
transport in a deviated wellbore from horizontal to vertical during coiled tubing drilling. The model
predicts based on the simulation are in good agreement with the experimental data published by others.
Efficient removal of cuttings from the well bore is one of the major considerations during both design
and operational stages of a drilling process. Inadequate hole cleaning may give rise to serious drilling
problems, like increase in torque and drag, stuck pipe, lose control on density, difficulty when running and
cementing casing, etc. Ozbayoglu et al. (2005). If the situation is not handled properly, these problems can
ultimately lead to the loss of a well. A single stuck pipe indecent may cost over million dollars, Bardley
et al (1991)
To avoid such problems, generated cuttings have to be removed from the well bore by the help of the
drilling fluid. The ability of the fluid to lift such cuttings is generally referred to carrying capacity of
drilling fluids may be listed as fluid annular velocity, hole inclination, drilling fluid properties, penetration
rate, pipe/hole eccentricity, hole geometry, cuttings properties, and drill pipe rotation speed Tomren et al.
(1986). In fact, fluid flow velocity is the dominant drilling variable on hole cleaning due to its direct
relation with the shear stress acting on the cuttings bed Kjosnes et al. (2003). It has been stated that in
order to remove cuttings from a horizontal or a deviated well bore, a sufficient shear stress should be
applied on the cuttings bed surface in order to lift the particles and erode the developed bed. Such a lifting
process, of course is directly dependent on not only the fluid properties, but also the cuttings properties,
like shape, compaction properties, etc Saasen A. and Loklingholm G. (2002).

Challenges of Cutting Suspension in Highly Deviated Well

Rheological properties especially the low end here is key because at low shear rate for instance during
connection time when you are not rotating the string, cuttings naturally begins to drop out and this is
critical for the deviated section of the well as the cuttings has short distance to travel. You therefore need
the minimum viscosity and gel strength that will suspend cuttings within this period. When you are
actually flowing, because of flow effect, cuttings will hardly drop out. However the critical moment is
when the string is stationary, there is no flow, cuttings obeying force of gravity tend to fall down. The
rheology especially the low end is not good, even with a good YP cannot help, you are looking at your
low end, your R3 and R6, at that reduced rotation zero flow; Can your mud still suspend cutting when flow

SPE-178373-MS

reduces? Hence there is limit to optimization of that parameter, hence the only two you can optimize is
the ROP and Hydraulics.
Regarding the ROP, when considering flow limitations at sometimes you can model that drilling a 12
hole section, you will be flowing at 850 gpm and based on that flow is engaged but each time flow is
engaged, the BHA may have have a lot of flow restriction hence flowing at 850gpm becomes impossible,
because it will give a pressure exceeding allowable limits as will be observed by the resulting ECD. This
is the primary cause NPT due to frequent popping up of pop-up valves on the mud pump as the maximum
pump pressure is exceeded. At this point drilling has to be stopped and Non- Productive time is incurred.
The driller is therefore compelled to reduce to a safe flow rate, which will be lower than proposed. If the
same ROP is to be maintained at this stage, the resultant effect will be an increase loading of annulus with
cuttings at a rate not allowing for efficient evacuation from hole. Coupled with ECD effects this may lead
to several hole problems including formation fracturing and fluid loss;
Practically, playing around flow rate and ROP, can help in optimizing hole cleaning.
After setting operating parameters with an optimal flow rate, the ROP is then observed for hole
cleaning efficiency alongside monitoring of cuttings generated from hole.
The first step is to estimate the theoretical volume of cuttings expected from hole
Secondly the record of the actual volume collected from the shale shakers
The two volumes are then correlated for a match; if a no-match situation is observed, then even with
your optimal flow rate and ROP, you are still loading the annular and not evacuating effectively.
Thirdly will be to set a benchmark on what percentage evacuation is allowable to prevent stuck pipe
as measured by your over-pull.
Torque and drag data are been monitored at this point and when the trend is deviating and erratic values
are been observed with a check trip to ascertain the behavior of the hole, this goes to confirm hole cleaning
issues are as a result of cuttings loading. If the set limit of either the torque or drag is exceeded, as BHA
is picked up, reflected by an overpull; the extent of the overpull is an indication of the severity of drag.
This was used to set the benchmark for hole cleaning efficiency.

Cuttings Monitoring Model Equation

Here two equations will be developed and results plotted to establish the two boundaries indicating
maximum and minimum expected volume of cuttings. For the minimum boundary plot equation, it is
assumed that the hole is gauged. Here the hole volume is given by;
(1)
Where Bit Diameter is given by (inches); Depth drilled is given by (ft) Conversion factor 1029.4

Consider the 5% OOC

(2)

SPE-178373-MS

Figure 1Cutting Monitoring Operational Algorithm Flow Chart

Data for Drilling Analysis of OGG Well 78

The test well OGG 78 was used to field test the cuttings monitoring model to acertian the value compared
to other existing models. OGG 78 was drilled in the niger delta. Field reports from previous wells show
that a lot of time was spent on hole cleaning especially in the 12 hole section which was beyond
allowable limits and planned time and thus impacted negatively on the well costs. The objective is to
reduce NPT arising from hole cleaning issues and this was validated on this well as the cuttings
monitoring tool was deployed to quantitatively established the hole condition in terms of volume drilled
against volume collected.

SPE-178373-MS

In the methodology, the drilled cuttings were collected in skips and volume drilled (theoritical) was
matched against actual cuttings collected. The volume profiles were ploted against depth drilled. The plot
clearly showed depths at which volume collected were below expected depicting poor hole cleaning.
Table 1Well OGG 78 Geometrics
Operation

Cased Hole

Open Hole

Rotary Drilling

13 3/8 @10090ft

12.25 @15250ft

MUD Properties
A representative mud system for drilling the 12.25 hole section is detailed below.
Table 2Mud properties.
Parameter
Mud Type
Weight
PV
YP
6 RPM
3 RPM
GEL STRENGTH 10s/10 min

Unit
Ppg
Cp
lb/100 sq.ft

1b/100 sq.ft

12.25
OBM
11.9
32
24
12
11
20/32

Table 3Drill Pipe Specifications

Pipe Type

Grade

OD (in)

Weight (lb/ft)

Make-up Torque (ft-lb)

Tensile Strength (lbf)

DP
HWDP

(S-135)

5.5
5.5

25.60
49.3

35466

746443
690,750

Table 4 Casing Specifcation

Description
Surface

OD (in)

Weight (lb/ft)

Grade

Shoe depth (ft)

1338

54.5

N-8

9477 D)

Assumptions

A relatively smooth wellbore is assumed.

The drilling mud is a Bingham fluid and as such its density is constant.

Model Output:
The model has the capacity of determining the amount of cuttings collected while drilling in real time
thereby ensuring reduced non productive time while ensuring drilling safety as well as target depth
objective. This is possible as a direct quantitative measurement of hole cleaning and hole stability is vital
information to reach these three objectives.
Measuring the volume of rock flowing out of the well provides a quantitative, dirrect indication of hole
cleaning and wellbore stability in real time. This concept is straight forward: the amount of cuttings
measured at the surface enables the operator to guage exactly position, size and evolution of unstable well
sections. A volume of cuttings coming to surface lower than the expected theoritical volume indicates a
hole cleaning problem.

SPE-178373-MS

Field Application of Results:

The technology to accurately measure rock volumes coming out of a well exist and has been around for
a few years. The cuttings coming out of the hole is measured by dedicated machine installed at the shakers
or by routing the cuttings into a cutting skip and by applying a series of coefficient for density and drilling
mud parameters, the weight of the cuttings is transformed into volume. The difference between this
volume and the theoritical rock volume drilled in a given time/depth indicates and quantifies hole stability
issues and hole cleaning efficiency.

Case History of OGG 78 well

In this study, a well 78 in the OGG field was drilled to 15000ft. By plotting the volumeof cuttings recover
on surface against the minimum theoritical and maximum theoritical volume of cuttings expected based
on the assumption that the hole may gauge or a washout of 10 percent may occur.
From the plot it was observed that from 5800ft to 11500ft, the hole was not properly clean as less
cuttings was recovered. This information was used to initiate hole cleaning procedure.

Figure 2Interface of Cuttings monitoring model showing both maximum ton collected

SPE-178373-MS

Figure 3plot of cuttings tonnage (actual, maximum and minimum)

Interpretation of Cuttings Monitoring Plot

Cuttings volume measurement system have the potential of saving significant rig time, if not the entire
well. It is crucial that the utilization of this tool be deployed while drilling wells. The test well OGG78
was used to field test the cuttings monitoring model to acertian the value compared to other exixting
models. OGG 78 was drilled in the niger delta. Field reports from previous wells show that a lot of time
was spent on hole cleaning especially in the 12.25 sections which was beyound the planned time and thus
impacted negatively on the well cost. The objective is to reduce NPT arising from hole cleaning issues
and this was validated this well as the cuttings monitoring tool was deployed to quantitatively establish
the hole condition in terms of volume drilled against volume collected in real time.
In the methodology, the drill cuttings were collected in skips and volume drilled(theoritical) was
matched against actual cuttings collected. The volume profiles were plotted against depth drilled. The plot
clearly shows depth at which volume collected were below expected, depicting poor hole cleaning. Also
torgue and drag data were also reference and this confirmed that the erratic nature of the torgue and drag
profile within the depth bracket under review. this confirm the validation of the cutting monitoring model.
As shown in the various cutting monitoring plots the theoritical volume of cuttings is plotted alongside
the actual volume of cuttings recovered on surface. If the actual volume collected is lower that the
theoritical volume expected, it mean that the hole is not properly clean and if the actual volume collected
is in excess of the theoritical volume, it mean that there are cavings and if the operation at hand was wiper
trip, then the wiper trip procedure need to be review. Decision on what to be done at each each is provided
by the cuttings monitoring model operational algorithm as show below:

Validation of Cuttings Monitoring Model:

The cuttings monitoring model presented in this work was validated by comparing key performance
indicator as regards hole cleaning using various other models.the major highlights of this validation is the
downtime due to extended hole cleaning evaluation and mitigation time associated with previous models

SPE-178373-MS

MODEL

NPT

HYDRAULICS
ROP
CUTTING MONITORING

10 DAYS
12-14 DAYS
4 DAYS

Conclusion
Cutting volume measurement systems have the potential of saving significant rig time, if not the entire
well.
It is crucial that the utilization of these systems is considered during the well planning, and that the
dataset generated becomes part of the Real-Time decision-making process, to maximize the benefit of
such systems.
Hole cleaning while drilling can best be achieve using real time cutting monitoring technique and using
other major drilling parameter such as torgue & drag data to validate it.
Based on the analysis carried out using the developed model, the following conclusions can be drawn:
i. The existing hole cleaning models should be used in conjunction with cutting monitoring model
since this is a real time and quantitative tool.
ii. The cutting collection tracking system is key and must be correctly reported.
iii. The cutting monitoring model can be validated using the torgue and drag data
iv. The model developed will help to control the difficulty encountered in taking decision on the rig
if the hole problem is associated with poor hole cleaning or other geomechanical issues
v. The developed model has added valued by reducing NPT due to hole cleaning issues,

Reference
Akgun F.: (October 2002) How to Estimate the Maximum Achievable Drilling Rate without
Jeopardizing Safety, SPE 78567, Abu Dhabi Inter. Pet. Exh. and Conference.
Azar, J.J. and Sanchez, R.A. (August 30-September 3, 1997): Important Issues in Cuttings Transport
for Drilling Directional Wells, paper SPE 39020 presented at the Fifth Latin American and
Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference and Exhibition, Rio de Janeiro.
Becker, T.E., Azar, J.J. and Okranji, S.S. (October 8-11, 1989): Correlations of Mud Theological
Properties With Cuttings Transport Performance in Directional Drilling, paper SPE 19535,
presented at the 64thAnnual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the SPE, San Antonio, Texas.
Bernt S.A. (1996: Modern Well Design, Rogaland University Center, Stavanger, Norway, Published by A.A. Balkerna, pp 2226,
Bird, R. B., Stewart, W. E. and Light Foot, E. N. (1962): Transport Phenomena, John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., New York City, PP. 5560, 82, 460-462, 468-469.
Bizanti M. S. and Alkafeef S.F. (April 2003): A Simplified Hole Cleaning Solution to Deviated and
Horizontal Wells, SPE 81412.
Bizanti M. S. and Blick E.F. (December 1983): Fluid Dynamics of Wellbore Bottom Hole Cleaning,
SPE 12888.
Bourgoyne, A.T., MiIlheim, K.K., Chenevert, M.E. and Young, F.S.: (1986): Applied Drilling
Engineering, SPE Textbook Series, Vol. 2, Richardson, TX.
Chien, Sze-Foo (1972): Annular Velocity of Rotary Drilling Operations, Rock Mech. Min. Sci., Vol.
9, PP. 403416.
Cho, H., Shah, S.N. and Osisanya, S.O. (June, 2002): A Three Segment Hydraulic Model for Cuttings
Transport in Coiled Tubing Horizontal and Deviated Drilling, JCPT, pp. 3239.

SPE-178373-MS

Cho, H., Shah, S.N. and Osisanya, S.O. (October 2000): A Three-Layer Modeling for Cuttings
Transport with Coiled Tubing Horizontal Drilling, paper SPE 63269 presented at the SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, TX, 14.
Doron, P. and Barnea, D. (April 1996): Flow Pattern Maps for Solid-Liquid Flow in Pipes,
International Journal of Multiphase Flow, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 273283.
Dosunmu, A. (1990): Experimental Analysis of Drilled particle Dynamics and Determination of
Minimum Annular Requirements in Directional Wells, Ph.D Dissertation, Univ. of Port Harcourt, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria.
Drilling data management with server-based systems and proprietary software. World Oil, Vol. 229
No. 12, pp 78, December 2008.
Ford, J. T., Peden, J. M., Oyeneyin, E. G., and Zarrough, R. (September 23-26, 1990): Experimental
Investigation of Drilled Cuttings Transport in Inclined Boreholes, paper SPE 20421 presented at
the 65th Annual Technical Conference, New Orleans.
Fuji, K. And Sato, M. (1965): Capacity of Liquid Flowing Through Annulus of Inclined Pipes,
Japanese J. Assoc. Pet tech.; 30, 34 39. (In Japaneses)
Gavignet, A.A. and Sobey, I.J. (October 5 8,1996): A Model for Transport of Cuttings in Highly
Deviated Wells, paper SPE 15417 presented at the 61st Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition of the SPE, New Orleans.
Gray, K. E (1957): The Cutting Carrying capacity of Air at Pressure Above Atmosphere MS. Thesis,
Univ. of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK.
Hall, H. N., Thompson, H. and Nuss, F. (1950): Ability of Drilling Mud to Lift Bit Cuttings, Trans.,
AIME, 189, 3546.
Hemphill, T. and Larsen, T.I. (1996): Hole-Cleaning Capabilities of Water- and Oil-Based Drilling
Fluids: A Comparative Experimental Study, SPED&C, Vol. 11, pp. 201207.
Hopkin, E.A. (January 1967): Factors Affecting Cuttings Removal During Rotary Drilling, paper
SPE 1697, presented at the 3rd SPE Conference on Drilling and Rock Mechanics, Austin.
Hussainni, S. M. M. (1977): A Study on the Applicability of Zeidlers Transport Model to the
Prediction of Actual Drilling Mud Carrying Capacity, MS Thesis, Univ. of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK.
Iversen F.P., Cayeux E., Dvergsnes E.W., Ervik R., Byrkjeland M., Welmer W., and Merlo, A (4-6
March 2008): Offshore Field Test of a New Integrated System for Real-Time Optimization of the
Drilling Process, IADC/SPE 112744, IADC/SPE Drilling Conference held in Orlando, Florida,
USA.
Iyoho, A.W. and Azar, J.J. (October 1981): An Accurate Slot-Flow Model for Non-Newtonian Fluid
Flow Through Eccentric Annuli, SPEJ, pp. 561572.
Kendal, W.A and Goins, W.C. (1960): Design and Operation of Jet-bit Programs for Maximum
Hydraulic Horsepower, Impact Force or Jet Velocity, Tran. ASME, pp. 219, 238 247.
Lapple, C. E. and Newark, D. E. (1951): Fluid and Particles Mechanics, Univ. Of Delaware,.
Larsen, T.I., Pilehvari, A.A. and Azar, J.J. (1997): Development of a New Cuttings-Transport Model
for High-Angle Wellbores Including Horizontal Wells, SPED&C, Vol. 12, pp. 129 135.
Miska, S. and Duan, M. (2006): Transport of Small Cutting in Extended Reach Drilling, International Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition, Beijing, China, 5-7 December, 2006.
Osgouei R. E. (2007): Rate Of Penetration Estimation Model For Directional And Horizontal Wells;
A Thesis Submitted To The Graduate School Of Natural And Applied Sciences Of Middle East
Technical University. September 2007
Ozbayoglu E. M., Miska, S. Z., Reed, T., and Takach, T. (February 19-21, 2003): Cuttings Transport
with Foam in Horizontal and Highly-Inclined Wellbores, Preconference held in Amsterdam, The
Netherlands.