SPE 54456

The Science and Economics behind Coiled Tubing String Design and Optimization
Lance Portman, BJ Services

Copyright 1999, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

tubing has increased over the years from yield strengths of
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1999 SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing Roundtable 70,000psi to 110,000psi. The reliability of the materials has
held in Houston, Texas, 25–26 May 1999.
also improved greatly, as has the understanding of the low
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of cycle fatigue properties of the constructed pipe. All of this has
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to lead to the practical and reliable use of bigger and stronger
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at coiled tubing strings.
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is

Coil Maximum Diameter (in)

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
7
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435. 6
5
Abstract
Coiled tubing has made great advances in recent years, 4
increasing in size, strength and reliability. This has lead to a 3
great increase in services that can be run on coiled tubing and
in turn has lead to bigger, more complex and more expensive 2
coil equipment being built and offered to the market. 1
With all this new equipment now on the market, it becomes 0
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
more difficult to select the most appropriate equipment for a
particular job, or indeed for a project of work that involves
many different types of operations. There is a tendency to
assume that "biggest is best". Both commercially and
technically, the big coil unit may not always be the best Figure 1 Historical growth of coiled tubing
choice.
With the availability of the larger coil sizes and their much
This paper gives examples of the current capabilities of coiled publicized use for applications such as coiled tubing drilling, it
tubing units, dispelling some of the myths associated with the is important to keep in perspective the benefit/cost ratios
smaller units such as "You cannot drill with a small coil unit" associated with larger pipe. The sometimes overlooked fact is
or "You always need a big coil unit in order to get higher that in most circumstances, for well workovers, small coiled
circulation rates". The paper also lists applications where big tubing is actually a better choice than large coiled tubing. This
coil units absolutely should not be used. Finally, guidelines are reality is borne out by the size distribution seen by the two
set out based on general technical and economic performance primary manufacturers of coiled tubing. Figure 2 shows the
comparisons between varying size coil units. 1998 coiled tubing sales split by outside diameter for Precision
Tube Technology. Figure 3 shows the same split for Quality
Several techniques are listed which permit smaller coil sizes to Tubing Inc..
be used in place of bigger units. The paper uses examples
from actual field work and computer simulations. As a generalization, one third of pipe sold is 1¼”, one third is
1½”, and only about 5% is larger than 2”. The purpose of this
Introduction paper is to examine when the large pipe sizes are appropriate,
Figure 1 shows the historical growth in the maximum coiled and to examine just how small, small pipe can be in certain
tubing outside diameter available. It can be seen that since the applications, remembering that small pipe is cheaper to
beginning of this decade, the maximum available size has operate and is lighter, important in offshore environments.
grown by a more than a factor of 3½. The strength of coiled
2 LANCE PORTMAN
2.375" thru
3.250"
1.75" &
2.00" 1" & 1.25"
1.50"
Figure 2 Precision Tube Technology sales by size
3.50" & Larger
2.375" thru
3.250"
1.75" & 2.00"
0.75" thru 1.25"
1.50"
Figure 3 Quality Tubing Inc. sales by size
The more specialized coiled tubing materials such as plastic,
composite, titanium and amorphous bonded seamless pipe are
not considered in this paper as they represent only a tiny
fraction of the total coil market.
Factors driving the choice of larger pipe
The driving forces behind the choice of larger coiled tubing
are:
1. The need for high flow rates
2. The need for greater push/pull down hole
3. The need for entry into extended reach wells
In actual fact, reasons 2 and 3 are related and both refer to the
increased stiffness and strength of bigger pipe, allowing it to
push tools harder, and to push itself harder to gain access into
extended laterals.
In essence, the reasons that big pipe is desirable are all related
to the fact it can handle more flow, is stronger and stiffer.
Factors driving the choice of smaller pipe
The driving forces behind the choice of smaller coiled tubing
are:
1. The need for higher annular flow rates
2. The need to keep equipment light weight
3. The need for high pressure snubbing
4. The need to save money
Driving force 1. is often overlooked. In most coiled tubing
workover applications, there is a simple rule that applies,
which is adapted from a common colloquial saying. The rule
is:
“What goes down must come up”
SPE 54456
In other words, a job that requires circulating materials down a
well and back up the annulus requires two flow paths. Making
the down direction flow path bigger is at the expense of
making the up flow path smaller. A balance must be struck to
optimize the workover application.
Reason 3 stems from the fact that small pipe has a higher burst
pressure and a higher collapse pressure, making it more
suitable to high-pressure applications in general.
The principle reason for using smaller pipe is reason 4., to
save money. Small pipe is cheaper to support than large pipe.
It is easier to spool, weld and transport. Small pipe is cheaper
to buy, lasts longer typically and requires smaller, less
expensive equipment to run it. The money saving is often
amplified when offshore as there can be additional costs lifting
heavy reels onto a platform, if it is possible at all. The savings
are also more significant when there are no large coil units
available in an operating area, requiring expensive
mobilization.
Balancing the forces for large and for small pipe
The simple driving forces have been identified that lead to
large pipe and that lead to small pipe selection. The next step
is to balance these drivers to come up with the optimum size
of coil for any given application. Of course each application is
different but the mechanics of the process of making this
optimization will be demonstrated by using several examples.
Gas lifting
Gas lifting or unloading wells is a very simple operation with
coiled tubing. The process involves simply pumping nitrogen
into the well, via the coiled tubing, to a depth that sufficiently
reduces the hydrostatic pressure in the well, allowing the well
to produce on its own.
The rates of gas required are very low for small size
completions, increasing as the completion size increases. For
small completions, not only is small coil desirable, but in
many cases it is much more efficient or potentially the only
size of coil that will work. The reason for this is the annular
choking effect in the completion. In the case of gas lifting
through small completions, the pressure drop up the annulus is
far more critical than the pressure drop inside the coil.
To illustrate this point, consider the gas lifting of a depleted
oil well with a 27/8” completion. The well is vertical with a
bottom hole pressure of 1,000psi and a true vertical depth of
6,000ft. Figure 4 shows the lift efficiency for various sizes of
coiled tubing. Plotted is the steady state lift rate that can be
achieved with 0.8sg oil, with the coil run to bottom.
Clearly, the smallest coiled tubing is best. The reason being
that the most important factor in most gas lifting operations is
minimizing of the annular friction. (Note that for larger sizes
SPE 54456 THE SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS BEHIND COILED TUBING STRING DESIGN AND OPTIMIZATION
of coil, not only is the achievable lift rate lower, but also
increasing gas injection rate makes matters worse, again
demonstrating the importance of annular friction. For
reference, the injection pressure that would be required with a
10,000ft 1” coil is 1,670psi, normally considered to be a low
pressure.)
1
Liquid Removal Rate
0.8
(bbl/min)
0.6 200scf/min
0.4 500scf/mim
0.2
0
1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 side door mandrels. In these operations it is the physical force
Pipe OD (in)
Figure 4 Gas lift efficiency example
In very big completions, such as tubingless wells, the nitrogen
rates required can be much higher. Here, small pipe is no
longer essential as the annular path is so large. In some
circumstances it may be desirable to use a large diameter pipe
to reduce the injection pressure to permit the use of air
compressors, perhaps with nitrogen membrane units, as a
source of gas.
Large pipe leads to a reduction in surface injection pressure.
However, there is also a method of achieving the same effect
with small pipe. In effect, it is possible to add a
friction-reducing chemical to the gas to greatly reduce the
friction losses along the coiled tubing. This chemical is water!
Adding just the right amount of water has the effect of
forming a thin film on the inside of the coil. This then presents
a very smooth surface against which the gas flows, resulting in
a much-reduced friction pressure. The following example is
given by way of illustration.
Consider a vertical water injector with 95/8” casing. The size
of the coil is not significant with reference to annular friction
in this case, as the annulus is so big. Typically, the gas lift
might be carried out at 2,000scf/min. The following table
shows the friction pressure losses seen when pumping through
the reel for different sizes of coiled tubing, with and without
the addition of 0.01bbl/min of water.
Table 1 Nitrogen friction pressures
Coil Size Friction Pressure (psi/1,000ft)
Nitrogen with water Dry Nitrogen
1” x 0.080” 17.6
1¼” x 0.095” 6.5
1½” x 0.125” 4.7
1¾” x 0.125” 2.9
2” x 0.125” 1.8
3
There are many different factors effecting friction pressures
when pumping compressible fluids. The above table
represents one specific scenario and the same dramatic
reductions may not be seen in all cases. However, the
magnitude of these numbers shows that in some cases, it is
possible to use even 1” coiled tubing for a job that would
appear to require quite large coil, by using innovative
solutions, in this case friction reducers for gas.
Manipulation of down hole equipment
Vertical Wells
Another common application for coiled tubing is the
manipulation of down hole equipment. Examples of this
would be fishing operations or perhaps the shifting of sliding
that can be applied down hole that is important.
In a vertical well, the available pull is strictly determined by
the strength to weight ratio of the pipe and the depth of the
pipe. Frictional drag is not an issue as there are no significant
forces between the coil and the well to develop any drag
forces. High strength pipe increases the available overpull
significantly.
Maximum Overpull (000's lbf)
45
40
35
30
25 Tubing gas
20 filled
15 Neutral
bouyancy
10
5
0
1" x 0.080"
2" x 0.156"
1.25" x 0.095"
1.5" x 0.109"
1.75" x 0.134"
Figure 5 Coiled tubing overpulls
Figure 5 demonstrates some example overpulls available, this
time in a 10,000ft vertical well. The figures assume a
maximum working pull of 80% of yield, in a well full of
water, with no differential pressure applied across the pipe.
The extensions to the bar charts demonstrate the additional
pull that can be gained downhole by displacing the coiled
366.6 tubing contents to nitrogen, gaining buoyancy forces.
181.4
112.5 The dark bars represent 90,000psi yield pipe; the light bars
64.7 represent 70,000psi yield pipe. Clearly, the larger pipe has the
38.2 advantage in maximum pull. However, it should be noted that
the smaller pipe can be provided with much heavier wall and
4 LANCE PORTMAN SPE 54456

would then have the same pulling characteristics as a bigger chart represent the theoretical run in hole (RIH) weight, and
pipe with an equal metal cross sectional area. the RIH weight at the point of failure of the pipe. As the pipe
size becomes smaller, the operating window between the
Two other points to be made are that generally speaking, normal and minimum weights becomes smaller and smaller. In
increasing the strength of pipe from 70,000psi to 90,000psi the case of 1¼” pipe, the difference between normal and
provides more additional overpull than moving up a coil size. minimum surface weight is only 2,600lbf. Practically
Also, in case of difficulty, if buoyancy forces can be used by speaking, this is a very difficult operating range for the coiled
displacing the coil over to nitrogen, then an additional 15% in tubing operator to manage. The operator has very little margin
overpull may be recognized. to play with when running in, in the event of unexpected hold
ups.
The maximum set down weight that can be applied with coiled
tubing is much more dependent on the well geometry. Coiled In summary, big completions are best suited to large coil.
tubing readily goes into a spiral when weight is applied. However, even moderately large conventional completions do
Further compressive loadings can cause the coil to lock up in a not warrant the same degree of concern. For example, if the
tight spiral and finally break. The coil is especially susceptible water injector well listed above had a 4½” completion, the set
to breaking in very large completions and in completions with down graph would be as shown in figure 7.
sudden changes in diameter.

Maximum set down Weight (lbf)

6,000 30,000

Surface Weight Readings (lbf)

To illustrate this point, figure 6 shows the maximum set down
weight that can be applied down hole, using the same 5,000 25,000
tubingless water injector example well used earlier, completed
4,000 20,000
with 95/8” casing. It should be noted that the buckling
mechanism that dictates maximum set down is dependent on 3,000 15,000
the modulus or stiffness of the metal, not the yield strength.
Changing grade of steel pipe has no significant impact on the 2,000 10,000
maximum push figures.
1,000 5,000
Maximum set down Weight (lbf)

6,000 30,000
Surface Weight Readings (lbf)

0 0
0.080"

0.109"

0.156"
1.25" x

1.75" x
1.5" x
0.095"

0.134"
5,000 25,000
1" x

2" x
4,000 20,000
RIH weight at failure Normal RIH weight
3,000 15,000
Set down weight
2,000 10,000
Figure 7 Set down weight in 4½" tubing
1,000 5,000
Not only have the maximum set down weights improved, but
0 0 also the operating window between normal run in weight and
0.080"

0.109"

0.156"
1.25" x

1.75" x
1.5" x

minimum weight has increased. For example with 1¼” pipe,

0.095"

0.134"
1" x

2" x

the operating margin is now 4,500lbf.

RIH weight at failure
Set down weight
Figure 6 Set down weights in 95/8" tubing
Normal RIH weight Notably, in figure 7, there is a significant increase in the size
of the operating window when 1¾” pipe is used (16,100lbf).
This is another example of how the optimum coil size follows
the size of the completion and will be discussed further.

Clearly, very large completions are a good application for Deviated and horizontal wells
large coiled tubing. Large coiled tubing is advantageous on Deviated wells represent the added challenge to coiled tubing
two fronts. First, more push can be transmitted to the bottom, of being able to access the well to the desired depth. Relative
enabling more weight on bit when drilling and higher latching to jointed pipe, coil is less stiff and cannot be rotated making
forces when fishing. This is demonstrated in figure 6. 2” coil access along long laterals more difficult. It is fair to say,
can apply a downward force of some 21,000lbf, whereas 1¼” however, that because coil is stronger in tension than in
can only apply a downward force of 5,000lbf. compression, if coil can get into the well, it can also get out.
This is practically always true, although one case where it may
There is another advantage to running the large pipe in big not be true is in the case of an extremely corkscrewed
completions. That is, it is safer. The shaded areas of the above completion.
SPE 54456 THE SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS BEHIND COILED TUBING STRING DESIGN AND OPTIMIZATION 5

Given that the difficult operation is running into the well, it is
this operation that will be discussed here. There are many
factors that influence how far coil can be pushed along a
highly deviated well. These factors are:
1. The size and weight of the coil
2. The size of the completion
3. The size of the liner
4. The well geometry, particularly doglegs
5. The contents of the well
6. The condition of the tubing and liner wall
Generally speaking, the smaller and more uniform the well
internal diameter is, the further coil can access. Doglegs
impede access and the importance of friction between the coil
and the well bore cannot be overlooked.
The most important aspect in increasing the reach capability of
coiled tubing in a given well is to increase its diameter. If that
is not possible due to logistical reasons, then again there are
techniques that can be used to increase the reach capability of
smaller coil.
2.375"
3,000 2"
1,000
300
100
Seawater Drag Reducer
30
10
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000
MD (m)
Figure 8 Horizontal reach example
Figure 8 shows part of a study conducted for a client with a
long reach horizontal section. Initial analysis showed that 23/8”
coil could reach the target of 5,400m with seawater in the
completion. However, it was also discovered that adding a
drag reducer to the seawater, to reduce the friction between the
coil and the completion, could make the well accessible to 2”
coil. The ability to use smaller coil in an offshore environment
can often mean make or break for a project.
Not shown in figure 8 is the effect of displacing the well to
nitrogen. In fact in this case, displacing to nitrogen had a
similar effect to adding the drag reducer, permitting the use of
2” coil.
Long reach horizontal and deviated wells are another natural
application for large coiled tubing. However, again there are
techniques to permit the use of smaller pipe if necessary.
Cleanouts
Still one of the most common uses of coiled tubing is cleaning
some kind of fill from a well. This may be a sand cleanout
following on from a frac job, or maybe a drilling operation
where the cuttings need to be circulated to surface. Designing
a coiled tubing cleanout can be quite complex, but in its
simplest form, requires the generation of enough velocity in
the annulus to drive the solids to surface. In a vertical well, the
velocity required is of the order of twice the fall rate of the
particles. In a horizontal well, the velocity required is of the
order of 40”/sec for non-viscous fluids. Again many factors
are at play but these are some rules of thumb.
Most cleanouts are also required to be conducted with the well
at balance or underbalanced to avoid pushing fluid and fill into
the formation. This then leads to the need to achieve enough
velocity in the annulus, without creating so much backpressure
to over pressure the well. Like with gas lifting, the annular
friction is very important.
The range of variables is too large to conduct an exact
analysis. However, the relationship between the completion
size and the optimum coil size can be investigated. To that
aim, consider a vertical well with a 5½” liner and a 27/8”
completion. The well is 8,000ft deep and has a bottom hole
pressure of 1,500psi. It is necessary to clean the fill from the
7” liner. The following table shows the maximum liquid
velocities that can be achieved in the 7” liner, assuming
reasonable injection pressures on the coil. (Note that there are
many variables here and the numbers are intended only as a
guide).
Table 2 Cleanout comparisons
Coil Flow Rate Velocity Coil Injection
size Liquid Gas (ft/min) Pressure (psi)
(bbl/min) (scf/min)
1” 0.53 230 30 5,000
1¼” 0.65 750 90 4,900
1½” 0.46 700 80 2,000
1¾” 0.28 290 20 720
The above example shows that in this case, the two most
viable coil sizes are 1¼” and 1½”. Either coil size could be
made to work. 1¼” pipe is limited by injection pressure.
Moving to a high strength pipe and increasing the injection
pressure, or using friction reducers would improve the lift
velocity achievable. 1½” pipe is annular friction limited.
Friction reducers may help to a lesser extent but really,
80ft/min is probably close to the maximum achievable. It
should be noted, however, that 1½” pipe has the advantage
that a jetting tool could be added to the bottom to help break
up the fill, and has more ability to push, as compared to the
1¼” pipe.
6 LANCE PORTMAN SPE 54456

1” pipe in the above example severely limits the flow, fatigue. In fact, if the pipe is kept stationary, coiled tubing can
although again high strength pipe and friction reducers would be used at pressures far higher than typically realized.
help. 1¾” pipe is simply too large for the completion and

Pressure to 80% of first yield (psi)

14,000
results in too much annular choking.
12,000
Drilling 10,000
Drilling warrants special mention. Practically all of the 8,000
workstring pipe above 2” is used for drilling. It is worthwhile 90,000psi
6,000 70,000psi
to note why the larger pipe is used. Generally speaking, the
large pipe is used to achieve the high annular velocities 4,000
required in highly deviated holes. The large pipe is not 2,000
generally required to achieve weight on bit, or to handle the -
reactive torque from the motor.

1.25" x 0.095"

1.5" x 0.109"

1.75" x 0.134"

23/8" x 0.190"

27/8" x 0.224"
1" x 0.080"

2" x 0.156"
Given this, if the well is not significantly deviated, or is of
sufficiently small bore that achieving clean out velocity is not
difficult, small pipe can be used. This is particularly true if
PDC or natural diamond drill bits are used that require low Figure 9 Pressure ratings
weight on bit and low torque.
The reason that the burst ratings are fairly uniform with size is
Table 8 lists representative maximum stall torques for that the example coil sizes deliberately keep the thickness to
different sizes of motors, quoting the most powerful models in diameter ratio fairly constant. It is the thickness to diameter
each size range. The table also lists the torque to 80% of yield ratio that determines the burst rating of pipe.
for 70,000psi coiled tubing. The table demonstrates that the
torque ratings of even small sizes of coiled tubing are Fatigue cannot be ignored, as many operations require the
perfectly adequate for typical drilling applications. simultaneous pumping and movement of the coil. Plastically
bending the coil by moving it across the gooseneck, and on
Table 3 Torque comparisons
and off the reel, damages the pipe. Much testing has been done
Tubing Size Torque to 80% Motor Stall Torque on how many times pipe can be bent over different diameters
yield (ft.lbf) size (ft.lbf) with different internal pressures. The behavior is well
1” x 0.080” 266 111/16” 70 understood and the number of cycles to failure can be
1¼” x 0.095” 499 21/8” 220 predicted.
1½” x 0.109” 833 23/8” 330
1¾” x 0.134” 1,377 27/8” 580 Fatigue life also depends on the thickness to diameter ratio,
2” x 0.156” 2,085 33/8” 840 but it also depends on the diameter of the coil. In general, the
23/8” x 0.190” 3,341 3¾” 1,100 bigger the diameter of the coil, the less cycles it will take
27/8” x 0.224” 6,187 4¾” 3,200 before the risk of failure becomes too great. In some cases, the
higher gooseneck pressure resulting from the use of smaller
Maximum pressure ratings and fatigue lives coil will be offset by the longer fatigue life exhibited by
There are two limits to the maximum pressure that can be smaller coil. Using smaller coil at higher pressures may
applied to coiled tubing. The first limit is simply the static sometimes give the same fatigue life, still gaining the cost
minimum burst figure. Typically, the pump pressure is savings of cheaper, lighter equipment.
arbitrarily limited to say 4,500 or 5,000psi. This limit is
designed to provide for “foolproof” operations. In actual fact, One such example is given in figure 10. The example is based
if the proper engineering is done, the pump pressure on coiled on some studies done for an offshore operator, who has small
tubing can be taken much higher. Figure 9 lists the pressures completions and very limited deck and crane capacity. The
at which 80% of first yield is reached, for several different study was to evaluate if 1” coil could be used instead of 1¼”.
pipe sizes, and 70,000 and 90,000psi material. The dotted line on the graph shows the injection pressure
required to pump through the three different coil sizes listed.
It may be of some surprise to some to see that in figure 9, the The solid lines represent the number of cycles deemed safe for
static pressure ratings are very high, and very uniform. different gooseneck pressures for the three coil sizes.
Particularly the 90,000 psi grades have limits far above
pressures normally considered “safe”. The reason for this is
that the typical maximum pump pressures quoted by service
companies are designed to keep the pressure minimized at the
gooseneck when moving the pipe, as this leads to rapid
SPE 54456 THE SCIENCE AND ECONOMICS BEHIND COILED TUBING STRING DESIGN AND OPTIMIZATION 7

approximated to 10%. The normalized costs for different sizes

200 of coil, not including freight, are given in figure 11.
Cycles to 1 in 1,000 failure odds

180

Normalized Cost per foot

160
1 x 0.080
140 wall
120
1.125 x
100 0.087 wall
High strength
80 1.25 x Standard
60 0.095 wall
40 Pump
Pressure
20
0

1.25" x

1.75" x

23/8" x

27/8" x
0.080"

0.109"

0.156"
0.095"

0.134"

0.190"

0.224"
1.5" x
4000 5000 6000 7000 8000

1" x

2" x
Gooseneck Pressure (psi)

Figure 10 Fatigue life comparisons Figure 11 Tubing cost comparison

In this case, using 1” coil would require a gooseneck pressure
of 7,000psi, which would lead to a life of about 90 cycles.
Using 1¼” pipe requires a gooseneck pressure of 4,000psi,
which gives a life of some 130 cycles. The 1¼” pipe will last
longer, but if weight limitations dictate the use of 1” pipe, the
job can be done at only minimal additional expense.
Interestingly, there is a size of coiled tubing between 1” and
1¼” that provides the same fatigue life as the 1¼” string, but
still offers size and weight savings. The optimum coil size in
this case, from the point of view of fatigue, is actually 11/8”.
Whereas it will not generally make sense to custom build
coiled tubing strings for single applications, it should be borne
in mind that building custom string diameters is not
prohibitively expensive, and should be considered for large
programs of similar work, or for very difficult applications.
Wall thickness
Little mention has been made of wall thickness as a variable to
optimize string design. The use of tapered strings can be very
important in several instances:
1. To achieve high overpull
2. To run into very deep wells
3. To permit high pressure pumping
4. To permit access into high well head pressures
In essence, doubling the wall thickness of coiled tubing
doubles the maximum pull, doubles the maximum pressure
and adds 0-50% to the fatigue life.
Comparative costs
The two major manufacturers sell coiled tubing by the foot.
However, as a method of comparing prices of different coil
sizes, the cost per pound remains relatively constant for a
given grade of material. Displaying the weights of different
strings can therefore show the relative costs of different
strings. There is a premium for high strength pipe (in this
example 90,000psi versus 70,000psi) and this premium is
The difference in cost per foot is quite significant. 2” pipe is
nearly three times the cost of 1¼”, has additional freight and
handling costs and generally does not last as long in terms of
fatigue. The incremental cost of high strength pipe is very
small, especially when taken in context of the entire cost of
coiled tubing work (materials, freight, handling, operation
expenses, chemicals etc.).
Conclusion
By far the most predominant factor in sizing coiled tubing is
the size of the completion. There are many factors effecting
optimum coil size and the minimum coil size for any
application.
Rule of thumb tables are constructed and shown in figure 12,
to illustrate the likely optimum coil size for a given
completion and given operation. However, much smaller coil
sizes can be utilized if one or more of several engineering
approaches are taken. To summarize, the methods available to
reduce the coil size required are: -
1. To achieve high nitrogen injection rates, add a small
amount of water.
2. To achieve higher flow rates, pump friction reducer or
use high strength pipe.
3. To achieve greater overpull downhole, use high
strength pipe and tapered string designs, or use drag
reducing chemicals, or displace the coil to nitrogen.
4. To achieve more push downhole, or to gain additional
reach, pump drag-reducing chemicals or displace the
wellbore to nitrogen.
5. To drill with smaller coil, use low drag bits that
require less weight on bit such as PDC, natural
diamond or impregnated diamond bits.
Figure 12 shows the likely optimum coil sizes as dark boxes;
the coil sizes that can likely be made to work are shown as
lightly shaded boxes.
8 LANCE PORTMAN SPE 54456

Gas lifting
1” 1¼” 1½” 1¾” 2” 23/8” 27/8”
3
2 /8”
27/8”
3½”
4½”
5”
5½”

Cleanouts
1” 1¼” 1½” 1¾” 2” 23/8” 27/8”
3
2 /8”
27/8”
3½”
4½”
5”
5½”

Heavy duty manipulation or extended reach

1” 1¼” 1½” 1¾” 2” 23/8” 27/8”
3
2 /8”
27/8”
3½”
4½”
5”
5½”
Figure 12 General size recommendations

Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank the management of BJ
Services for permission to publish this paper. Additional
thanks go to Precision Tube Technology and Quality Tubing
Inc. for assistance in preparing this paper.