OTC 17798

Managed-Pressure Drilling; Techniques and Options for Improving Efficiency,

Operability, and Well Safety in Subsea TTRD
B. Fossli, Ocean Riser Systems AS, and S. Sangesland, O.S. Rasmussen, and P. Skalle, Norwegian U. of Science and
Technology

Copyright 2006, Offshore Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2006 Offshore Technology Conference held in
Houston, Texas, U.S.A., 14 May 2006.
This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of
the Offshore Technology Conference, its officers, or members. Papers presented at OTC are
subject to publication review by Sponsor Society Committees of the Offshore Technology
Conference. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for
commercial purposes without the written consent of the Offshore Technology Conference 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 where
and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, OTC, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX
75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
Subsea field developments are generally recognized as having
lower recovery factors than fields developed by fixed
installations. To increase the recovery factor from subsea
developed reservoirs, new technologies that will reduce the costs
of infill drilling and allow for more cost effective well
interventions, must be developed. One potential technology is
Through Tubing Rotary Drilling (TTRD). However, for the
industry to perform extended reach TTRD from existing subsea
producers using floating rigs, the way we manage pressure must
be re-evaluated. TTRD combined with Managed Pressure
Drilling (MPD) will be the key technologies needed to achieve
the low cost, high performance drainage points.
This paper describes several MPD methods that can be
combined with TTRD and how these methods can be classified,
evaluated and applied.
Specific results from theoretical
simulations will show how two different MPD methods can be
used to drill longer departure drainage points than with
conventional pressure control. Successful TTRD is believed to
produce low cost drainage points for a fraction of the cost of a
new subsea well.
Introduction
Some of the reasons behind the lower recovery factors from
subsea developed reservoirs are:
1. Reduced accessibility to the well for interventions,
repair and workover purposes
2. Lack of cost efficient well intervention tools and
methods
3. High cost of new wells for infill drilling purpose
4. Escalating tangible costs and dayrates of Mobile
Offshore Drilling Units (MODU)
Effective well spacing and well placement in the producing
reservoir is recognized as requirements for optimum reservoir

drainage. The ability to access bypassed oil and gas reserves in

mature fields has been gaining more and more attention in recent
years. Mature fields have huge reserves that lie in multiple
isolated pockets that would be uneconomic to produce using new
wells. This may particularly be the case in subsea fields in
deeper waters where the soaring dayrates for mobile offshore
drilling units (MODU) will make the minimum economical
reserve requirements hard to find.
Through Tubing Drilling (TTD) is a method that eliminates
the need for expensive conventional (new) wells or sidetracks.
Avoiding drilling the transport distance down to the reservoir
reduces the costs significantly. In addition, the re-use of the inplace completion equipment saves time for removing the old
completion, time for running the new completion and CAPEX of
the new completion.
Coiled Tubing Drilling (CTD) has been the preferred and
dominating TTD technique from fixed installations. However,
when a drilling rig is available, the use of jointed pipe and rotary
drilling operations has gradually become the more attractive
option. The main advantage of using TTRD is the ability to
rotate the drillpipe which improves hole cleaning, drilling
mechanics, and ultimately increases the reach capability. Thus
an obvious potential application of TTRD is infill drilling to
access new reserves in subsea wells.
TTRD in subsea fields faces several challenges. Many are
associated with the narrow annulus between the production bore
and the drillpipe, and to the variable formation pressures and
lower fracture strengths in depleted formations. Another of the
industrys concerns of TTRD is the potential for wear/damage of
the tubing and downhole safety equipment.
Subsea TTRD operations are at the present in its infancy.
Subsea TTRD has been performed in horizontal 7 in. monobore
completions on the Norwegian continental shelf by Norsk Hydro
on the Njord field and by Statoil on the Norne field. These
operations have been conducted using a conventional drilling
riser package, consisting of a 21 in. marine riser and a 18 3/4 in.
subsea blowout preventer (BOP) package. Several new tools and
procedures have been developed to protect key elements in the
completion string and in the subsea christmas tree. However,
this conventional riser and BOP set-up will significantly increase
the challenges of incorporating MPD technologies with the
TTRD concept. This paper will describe some of the options
available and the pros and cons for these concepts of MPD in
subsea TTRD.

Subsea TTRD Challenges

Equivalent Circulating Densities
A major challenge in both on- and offshore TTRD operations is
the problem related to Equivalent Circulation Density (ECD).
High annular pressure losses, resulting in high ECDs can lead to
lost circulation and differential sticking. The small annular space
can also cause high surge pressures or increase the risk of
swabbing in a kick when tripping (localized ECD effect). The
optimum safe trip speed must be predicted from surge and swab
calculations. Pipe protectors might be prohibited because they
lead to an even higher ECD. However, selecting smaller
drillpipe to reduce ECD effects is not necessarily an option as
only slight changes of drillpipe ID will significantly change the
standpipe pressure, which in turn may limit circulation rates1. At
desired circulation rates, exceeding the mud pumps pressure
rating might occur in long deviated wells. For these reasons
TTRD circulation rates are much lower than in conventional
drilling.
In slim hole horizontal drilling operations, the percentage of
solids content in the drilling fluid might be higher than in
conventional drilling (> 20 %). This will influence rheology and
consequently both hydrostatic and dynamic pressures, further
aggravating the situation.
Also, a MODU is also exposed to heave. Today, most rigs
have an active/passive motion compensator built into the crown
block or drawwork that reduce heave-induced pipe movement.
However, when making connections, the drillstring/casing is
suspended from the rotary table and the string will then follow
the rigs movement. Hence, pressure changes caused by pipe
movements can result in alternating surge and swab effects that
results in fluctuating bottomhole pressures.
Hole Cleaning
Hole cleaning in TTRD wells is a balance between competing
technical and operational needs. Hole cleaning can be achieved
through mechanical methods (pipe rotation) or efficient
hydraulics. The effect of drillpipe rotation can reduce the
formation of cuttings bed by as much as 80 %2. If significant
cuttings beds are allowed to accumulate inside the completion
during TTD operations, the drillstring and/or BHA can become
stuck or packed off inside the completion. This can lead to
increased bottomhole pressure, mud losses and formation
damage, and can ultimately lead to the loss of the well.
In todays high-angle wells, barite sag is a well recognized
phenomenon. Barite sag occurs due to settling of the weighting
agent when circulation is stopped and results in undesirable
fluctuations in mud weights3. This can cause problems such as
lost circulation, reduced wellbore stability, well control events,
and stuck pipe incidents4,5.
When the drillstring is not rotated, for example, while
performing oriented drilling, the cuttings cleaning efficiency is
greatly reduced. To improve cleaning, either higher circulating
rates and/or mechanical aids are required. A BHA oscillator
could be helpful in increasing the amount of cuttings bed
disturbance1. A 3-3/8 in. commercially-available agitator will
oscillate the BHA at 26 Hz at a flow rate of 500 lpm (120 gpm).
However, the tradeoff is that the pressure drop across the agitator
is 26-35 bars, which may be prohibitive in some operations.

OTC 17798

Drilling Fluids Selection

The rheology of the drilling fluid must be designed carefully for
TTRD operations. There are two conflicting design requirements:
Low ECD (achieved through low viscosity)
Low solids settling tendency (achieved through high
viscosity)
Two major drilling fluid service companies have solved these
requirements differently, but the results are the same; by
applying weight material with small particle size both rheology
and sagging tendency have been improved compared with
conventional mud systems 6,7. Formate mud, where density is
achieved through soluble salts and not through solids is an
attractive alternative but its high cost may limit its application 8.
Hole Stability
In depleted reservoirs, pore pressures may have dropped
significantly causing the overlying shale to become unstable.
Also, in these reservoirs, the fracture pressure will be reduced
while the pore pressure remains virgin in overlaying and
interbeded shale and sealed sand pockets. The mud weight must
be kept as low as possible to avoid fracturing caused by high
ECD, yet high enough to maintain borehole stability. Figure 1
shows typical pressures in a depleted North Sea reservoir.
Measured
Depth (m)

Lithology

Pore and Fracture

equivalent mud density (SG)

4500
Sand

5400

Shale

5500 -

Sand (Pristine
reservoir)
0.8

1.55 1.61 1.80 1.90

Figure1.
Typical predicted pore and fracture pressures in a
horizontal well at 2859 m TVD.

Well Control (Downhole Considerations)

Slim well openhole annular capacities are typically 2-3 liters per
meter. The surge and swab pressures are high and it is therefore
important to note that:
More than 25 % of the blowouts in drilling result from
pressure reduction in the borehole directly due to
swabbing when pulling pipe.
Excessive surge pressure can cause lost circulation
problems both during drilling operation and during
running of casing/liners into the hole.
A one m3 influx would, because of the small annular capacity,
evacuate 300500 m of hole, which in many cases is more than
the entire openhole. Kick detection and accurate kick volume
measurements are therefore paramount.
The critical difference between conventional well control and
slimhole well control practices is in the handling of annular
pressure loss and its potential impact on wellbore integrity.
Conventional well control methods rely on the assumption that at
the selected slow pump circulation rate, the annular pressure loss
is significantly reduced or negligible. The annular pressure loss
in slimhole drilling, even at slower kill rates, is considerably
higher than in conventional wells.

OTC 17798

Well Control (Subsea and Surface Considerations)

When planning TTRD in subsea wells, there are several issues
that must be evaluated regarding the marine riser system and
surface equipment when considering well control aspects. If a
conventional, low-pressure 21 in. marine drilling riser is used,
riser boosting will be needed to transport cuttings because of the
low circulating rates used. This might hinder the detection of a
small influx.
Detecting a small influx though conventional pit gain
monitoring or an increase in flow might not be possible even if
very accurate boosting volumes are kept. In deep waters, the
mud volume in the riser is often several times greater than the
annular volume below mudline. For example, with 3 in.
drillpipe in 1000 m water depth, the annular mud volume in a 21
in. riser is more than 3 times the annular volume in a well
completed with 4000 m of 7 in. tubing and 500 m of openhole.
The use of conventional LP risers with a subsea BOP package
will create higher chokeline frictions than HP risers with surface
BOPs. In environments with tight tolerances, a surface BOP
package might be preferred.
Cementing Operations
Cementing operations of slim liners face two important challenges:
1) high ECDs, particularly at the end of the displacement period,
and 2) poor mud displacement efficiency that can cause
insufficient circumferential cement coverage of the liner.
Liner centralization can reduce these effects, but centralizer
selection is limited. Bow centralizers are not used because of
excessive running friction forces, thus rigid centralizers are often
selected10. The cement slurry must be pumped in laminar flow
due to high ECD hence preventing effective displacement of mud
and filter cake. Because cementing operations often are difficult,
other forms of zonal isolation methods should be considered.
One such alternative might be to use swell packers 9 or other
forms of external liner/casing packers.
The Role of Managed Pressure Drilling
Seven challenges have been briefly discussed above when
applying TTRD in subsea wells.
1. High ECDs
2. Hole cleaning
3. Drilling fluid selection
4. Hole stability issues
5. Pore pressure variations
6. Well control issues
7. Cementing and zonal isolation
All of the above issues can be solved or managed with the proper
application of Managed Pressure Drilling (MPD) methods and
equipment. MPD can be defined as the ability to drill in
overbalance with a near constant bottomhole pressure
independent of the circulation rate used. Therefore, MPD will be
even more applicable to TTRD than in conventional drilling.
However, because most methods of MPD so far has been applied
to land operations or offshore platforms with dry christmas trees
and BOPs, there are special considerations which must be
addressed when applying this technology to subsea TTRD.
These considerations are particularly related to;
1. Subsea BOP package and the drilling riser
2. Well control and well integrity issues
3. MODU specifications and surface equipment issues

Subsea BOP Package and the Drilling Riser

Several issues need to be considered when evaluating the BOP
and riser package if MPD technology is to be used. There will be
three main options;
1. Low pressure riser
2. High pressure riser
3. Variations of the above or concentric risers
In broad terms, the riser and BOP package will determine what
methods of MPD technology that will be applicable.
In general low pressure riser systems will require a full
subsea BOP package with high-pressure (HP) kill/choke lines
running back to the rig. By choosing this setup, the MPD
technologies available will be more limited. Although a surface
Rotating Control Device (RCD) might be used in conjunction
with a LP riser in certain situations, the potential high pressures
that might be encountered in many areas will generally require
the RCD to be placed subsea. Chokes might be placed either
subsea or at surface.
In general, high pressure riser packages will carry a surface
BOP package or a split BOP package (surface and subsea
components). The RCD and the chokes in this setup will be
placed at surface. Hence, a high pressure riser system will allow
for more MPD options to be used.
There could also be considerable economic benefits from
utilizing a slim riser and BOP package. When slimming down
the riser and BOP package, the ability to handle high pressures
also becomes evident. Because most subsea completions have an
outside diameter of 7 in. or less, the BOP and riser could be
slimmed down to 7 1/16 in. 7 3/8 in. ID. A smaller and lighter
riser package would also allow for the use of a less expensive
MODU in deeper waters. In addition, the use of a small HP riser
would allow for a rapid change from performing conventional
drilling operations to underbalanced well interventions, using
wireline and/or coiled tubing (CT) equipment.
A concentric riser system is also conceivable. However this
will be somewhat more complex to operate and manage with
MPD operations.
One particular challenge in TTRD operations is that wireline
operations (WL) or CT operations may require full wellhead
pressure to be exerted in the riser in preparation for the drilling
operations or in the re-completion phase in preparation for
production. There will be substantial economical benefits from
being able to switch swiftly from underbalanced WL or CT
operations to drilling with jointed pipe. Preferably the same riser
and BOP package should be used for both underbalanced WL,
CT, and drilling activities. When considering the high dayrates
for the larger MODUs, this option becomes most attractive.
Well Control and Well Integrity Issues
Well control issues become particularly important when
performing MPD operations from a floating vessel12. Kick
detection and control of influx becomes even more challenging in
TTRD operations. Hence, well integrity issues are important
when choosing both the riser and BOP system and the primary
MPD technology to be used. In this evaluation, the type of
positioning principle of the MODU and the climatic, met ocean
condition and water depth enter into this equation.
Performing MPD operation with a riser margin (RM) is
desirable, but not always possible. However, some MPD
technologies will make this possible. Normally, a conventional

MPD system with a pressurized HP riser and surface chokes, a

riser margin is not obtainable. In order to maintain a riser margin
in MPD operations, variations of dual gradient drilling or using
the Controlled Mud Cap (CMC) method must be applied.
Another factor to consider is the ability and speed of tripping
the drillstring without jeopardizing well integrity, swabbing or
loosing returns due to fracturing. It is not uncommon to spend up
to 30 % of the total time on trips in TTRD operations. Several
MPD methods will require full displacement of heavier mud in
the hole to avoid the requirement for stripping/snubbing.
Stripping pipe in TTRD operations should be avoided for several
reasons: 1) Significant incremental time, 2) risk of losing well
integrity (less barriers) and 3) extra wear on the on the RCD.
Several methods of MPD will allow for fast introduction of
sufficient trip margin without having to circulate the entire
annulus volume to a heavier fluid (and subsequent need to
circulate out the heavier fluid prior to resuming drilling). Some
of these methods will also allow for faster tripping than with
conventional pressure control.
Kick or flow detection from the reservoir has been addressed
earlier. There are significant differences on how this can be
achieved with the different MPD methods.
How influxes are handled depends on the capability of the
MPD system to handle annular pressures losses and the ability of
the MODU equipment to handle various volumes of gas. In
some cases of large inflow volumes, which may occur during
underbalance drilling (UBD) operations, bullheading might be
the only option. Although bullheading formation influx is an
option, it is usually found to be detrimental to subsequent
reservoir productivity, thus should be avoided.
MODU Specifications and Surface Equipment Issues
In severe cases of flow due to underbalance, bull heading might
be the only alternative. This will depend upon the MPD methods
ability to control annular pressure in the well and the MODUs
ability to handle large amount of gas and/or whether the rig has a
4 phase separation package installed.
For TTRD operations, Dynamic Positioned (DP) MODU will
normally be favored. One reason for favoring DP is avoiding
anchor handling among pipeline and production related
installations on the seabed. A second issue is the time saved with
using DP MODU. TTRD operations will normally take less time
than drilling and completing a conventional subsea well, hence
the mean time between rig moves will decline. Several days with
anchor handling can easily neutralize the effect of lower dayrates
with an anchored MODU compared to a DP MODU. The
downside of DP is the higher requirements on well integrity and
in relation to riser/BOP equipment, to compensate for accidental
drive offs or drift offs.
MPD Classification and Evaluation of Options and Methods
An approach to classification for MPD for subsea TTRD has
been suggested as illustrated in Table 1. There are 3 main
categories;
1. Closed systems (CS)
2. Open systems (OS)
3. Independent systems (IS)
Table 1 shows the variations for the different systems and how
the different methods relate to the different riser and BOP

OTC 17798

options, rig positioning methods, and how they may impact

important well control and operational issues.
The closed and open categories of MPD systems can be
divided into 2 main groups;
1. Systems requiring a HP riser system with surface/or split
BOPs (HP)
2. Systems utilizing a LP marine riser system and subsea
BOPs (LP)
Although some MPD methods might be used within both main
system categories (CS or OS) and both riser groups, they seem to
fall naturally into either the HP or LP riser category. One
exception here is the Controlled Mud Cap (CMC) system which
includes a RCD, but the system will always perform as an open
system even though it will generally operate with the RCD in
closed position.
The third category (IS) includes systems that are independent
of whether it is used in open or closed systems and independent
of riser and BOP concepts. These methods can be divided into
downhole systems such as ECD reduction tools or surface
systems such as Continuous Circulation Devices. However, they
are not true MPD methods by definition since the bottom
adjusting annular pressures dependent on the circulation through
the drillstring. Because they are independent of all other
categories or groups, these methods can be used as a supplement
to the other MPD systems. These methods have therefore been
included in the Table 1 for comparison.
The MPD methods evaluated for subsea TTRD are;
1. Pressurized riser systems with a near surface RCD and
surface chokes
2. Low pressure riser systems with a subsea RCD
3. Systems with a riser restriction device and subsea mud
pumping
4. System for controlling mud level in the riser (Low Riser
Return System -LRRS) or (Controlled Mud Cap - CMC)
5. Systems for riser gas lift
6. Secondary annulus circulation method
7. Dual gradient systems
8. Continuous Circulation device
9. Downhole ECD reduction device
The methods that have been classified and evaluated are not
exhaustive. (A schematic diagram of the different methods is
included in Figure 7 in appendix) There will be other methods or
combinations of the methods listed above. Most of these methods
are described and discussed in different papers included in the
reference list 11-23.
Included in the evaluation (Table 1) is also how the different
methods relate to the positioning system for the MODU. For
example, if a pressurized riser with a surface RCD is used on a
DP vessel, a station keeping event could trigger a serious well
control situation such as a blow-out if the subsea BOP did not cut
the drillstring and seal the wellbore. Moreover the riser content
would also discharge to the sea. To illustrate this in Table 1, the
cells under each category and groups have been color coded. In
this example because of the potential risks, the use of a
pressurized riser from a DP MODU has been color coded red due
to the potential risks. Thus, it will probably not be the preferred
method in many areas. An anchored MODU might be preferred,
although using a pressurized riser might be questioned by some
operators for the safety reason mentioned above. This method is

OTC 17798

therefore color coded yellow. The pressurized riser method will

however be most suitable when used on jack-up rigs and is hence
color coded green for this option.
Several important operational and well control issues that
have been addressed earlier in this paper are included in the
Table 1. A qualified judgment has been made as to how the
different options of MPD relates to and handles these issues.
Example Cases
To show the importance of managing pressures during TTRD
operations, two typical example subsea wells will be used for
illustration. Two MPD methods for TTRD have been compared
to a conventional pressure control method. A conventional
system is shown in Figure 2.
Mud pump

through surface lines has to be accounted for when choosing mud

weight and choke pressure, but for simplicity this issue is not
considered in the case.
Mud Tank
Mud pump
Choke manifold
ECD
BOP + RCD

Mud gradient
Static
Mud gradient
Dynamic

Subsea BOP

Fracture pressure

Mud Tank
Choke manifold
Pore pressure

Figure 4: MPD HP riser / Surface BOP & w/RCD + Choke pressure

Sea water
gradient

Choke- & kill lines

Mud line

Subsea BOP

Mud gradient
Static
Mud gradient
Dynamic
Fracture pressure
Pore pressure

Pressure
ECD

Figure 2: Conventional pressure control w/ Subsea BOP

The Controlled Mud Cap (CMC) or Low Riser Return

System (LRRS) concept is illustrated in Figure 3 (Method F
shown in Table 1). It consists of a slim HP riser with an outlet to
a subsea pump located in a separate conduit from the riser
section. This pump is used to pump the return fluid from the
well back to the drilling unit and thereby creating a lower
interface between the mud and gas/air. The method allows for
the fluid level (virtual flow line) in the drillpipe/riser annulus to
be adjusted up or down in a controlled manner, thereby managing
the annulus pressure profile and hence compensate for the ECD.
Mud pump

Mud Tank
Choke manifold

Sea water gradient

BOP+
RCD
ECD
Lift pump

Subsea
BOP

Mud gradient
Static

Mud gradient
Dynamic

Fracture pressure

Figure 3: MPD Controlled Mud Cap (LRRS) & HP-riser w/ split BOP

The other method to be investigated is the use of a HP riser

and a RCD with a surface choke on the annulus side as shown in
Figure 4. Controlling the choke pressures will allow the operator
to manage the annulus pressure profile and hence compensate for
the ECD (Method A shown in Table 1). Normally pressure drop

Case 1
A typical directional drilled subsea well in a severely depleted
reservoir located in 380 m of water will be used in Case 1. The
drillstring consists of 3 in. drillpipe, BHA, and 5-7/8 in. bit.
The well is completed with a 7 in. production tubing (6.1 in. ID)
tied into a 7 in. liner. The exit point for the drainhole sidetrack in
the 7 in. liner is located at 2562 m TVD, 5500 mMD. From this
point a horizontal well is drilled. The maximum pore pressure
gradient in the depleted reservoir is 1.00 SG. Locally the pore
pressure can be lower than 1.00 SG and the fracture pressure is
estimated to be minimum 1.10 SG and maximum 1.20 SG in
these intervals.
In conventional drilling, the mud weight is increased typically
five points (0.05 SG) above the expected pore pressure to allow
for a riser margin.
Using the CMC method there is no need for any margin as the
mud column can easily be adjusted to compensate for swab or
surge pressures during tripping. Because this method uses a
heavier than conventional mud weight with a low level in the
riser, a positive riser margin normally exists. The pressure inside
the riser at seabed is substantially lower than the seawater on the
outside, hence a riser disconnect would increase the bottom hole
pressure if the subsea BOP did not seal. A positive riser margin
of 9.6 bars is achieved using a mud weight of 1.05 SG.
For the pressurized riser system, a lighter than conventional
mud weight is used with a choke pressure applied on surface.
Using this method, it is not possible to achieve a riser margin or a
trip margin. A riser disconnect would potentially cause an
underbalance of 21.4 bar in the horizontal section with a mud
weight of 0.904 SG. The choke pressure of 22.8 bars was chosen
so that it balances out the friction pressure and the pressure
contribution from the cuttings when pumping at 700 LPM. Also,
the entire mud in the hole must be displaced with higher density
mud to avoid stripping drillstring during trips.
One advantage of TTRD operations compared to coil tubing
drilling is the ability to drill long openhole sections. However,
high ECD will create substantial pressure difference between the
toe of the openhole section compared to the pressure at shoe or
casing/liner window. If the formation fracture pressure does not

increase with depth, as may be the case for horizontal wells, the
length of the hole will be limited unless the ECD can be
managed. It is recognized that the drilling length for all systems
will be maximized when the pressure at the tubing exit point is
kept constant close to balance with the pore pressure. As shown
in Figure 5, the pressure along the section to be drilled increases
due to pressure loss, and the drilling length is limited by the
fracture gradient of the formation.

OTC 17798

The area around the kickoff depth is depleted and weak (Pore
pressure gradient 0.8 SG and fracture pressure gradient 1.61 SG).
However, it is required to drill into an undepleted reservoir
compartment at 5500 m MD with a fracture gradient of 1.8 SG
and a pore pressure gradient of 1.55 SG as illustrated in Figure 6.

Figure 6: Example - Case 2

Figure 5: Example - Case 1

Table 2 illustrates potential openhole drilling lengths for the

three options, based on a mud flow rate of 700 LPM. Three
different levels of fracture pressure have been used to allow for
uncertainties. The results clearly show how MPD allows for a
longer reach to be achieved as illustrated in Figure 5. Using
conventional methods it is not possible to drill at all if the
depleted reservoir has a mud window of only 0.1 SG, whereas a
drainhole length of approximately 4300 m is possible, from a
hydraulic point of view, by applying MPD technology.
Other factors determining the maximum drilling length is the
torque required to rotate the drillpipe. The limitation is generally
the MUT. In this example the 3 in. DP has a MUT of 16,530
Nm. Rotating the string in the main bore requires 8089 Nm
based on a friction factor of 0.15. Depending on the formation
and the lubricating properties of the mud, the friction factor in the
drainhole determines the possible drilling length from a
mechanic point of view. In this case, the MUT will be exceeded
after drilling about 3100 m of open hole.
It can be extracted from Table 2 that if the pressure gradient
is 1.20 SG the potential drilling length could be increased from
2244 m with conventional methods to 8877 m with the two
selected MPD methods, from a hydraulic point of view.
However, the MUT of the drill string will be exceeded earlier so
the added possible drilling length is ultimately about 3100 m
using a friction factor of 0.25 for the open hole.
It can be seen that the fracturing pressure is the limiting factor
for the conventional method, while the MUT is the limiting
factor using the MPD methods in this case, but because the MPD
technologies can accept additional ECD, a larger drillpipe with
higher MUT could be selected. This would also lower the pump
pressure, hence allowing for longer sections to be drilled. The
drillpipe can thus be optimized with respect to long reach, which
might not be an option with conventional pressure control.
Case 2
A subsea well in 330 m water depth is completed with a 7 in.
monobore production tubing. A kick-off point in the 7 in. liner is
planned at approximately 4500 m MD and 2859 m TVD.

With conventional pressure control, a mud weight of 1.60 SG

is required to balance the pore pressure and provide kick
margins. This mud weight is not high enough to provide riser
margin (A heavier mud with a riser margin would have exceed
the fracture pressure even without circulation). Even with a very
thin mud, circulation will create enough frictional pressure to
break the formation at the heel. As a result, when using the
conventional method, it is not recommended to drill into this
reservoir pocket in one operation. Potential alternatives would
be to set additional liners or use solid expandable technology.
With MPD methods this section could be drilled without
exceeding the mud/ECD window. For the RCD w/ choke
concept, a mud weight of 1.50 SG is selected. In order to remain
in over balance (6 bar), a choke pressure of 20 bar is used (static
conditions). With a circulation rate of 700 LPM, the choke valve
is completely open. In this case, the pressure will decrease
slightly in the heel of the open hole section and there will be a
point located in the horizontal section which will remain at the
same pressure as under static condition. A riser margin will not
be achievable with this low mud weight.
For the CMC concept, a mud weight of 1.64 is selected in
order to maintain riser margin. The static mud column is located
150 m above the riser outlet. Reducing the mud column height
above the pump outlet in the riser allows for sufficient reduction
in bottom hole pressure. The equivalent mud density is kept
within the mud weight window along the entire hole section.
Table 3 in Appendix summarizes the results.
Conclusions
Subsea TTRD has the potential of being an important contributor
for improving the recovery from subsea developed fields.
However, subsea TTRD requires close planning and
considerations in order to achieve this goal.
Particular
circumstances due to downhole conditions, environmental and
met ocean conditions, governmental regulations, well control and
well integrity issues, etc, requires new technologies, methods and
procedures to be developed. There is however, little doubt that
MPD holds the key to success in order for TTRD to realize its
fullest potential.

OTC 17798

Subsea TTRD with MPD technology performed from a

floating rig faces several challenges not encountered on fixed
platforms. These are particularly related to well control and well
integrity issues. The drilling riser and BOP arrangement as well
as station keeping methods also enter into the equation when
evaluating the MPD methodologies that can be used.
Example cases indicate that the problem of high ECD
combined with low mud window is a challenge in TTRD. MPD
technologies can overcome or reduce this challenge. Further it
has been shown that;
- MPD technology will in some cases be a pre-requisite
for any drilling to be performed.
- MPD methods can allow for longer drainholes to be
drilled.
- Where drillstring torsion strength or pumping pressure
is the limiting factor, MPD may be used to increase the
drillpipe size and hence drill longer sections.
- MPD allows depleted reservoirs to be drilled with less
over pressure, and allows the bottom hole pressure to
remain close to constant during drilling, i.e., the method
allows drilling of reservoirs with little margin between
pore pressure and fracture pressure.
- In general, some MPD technologies may allow for the
producing interval to be drilled at balance or slightly
underbalanced safely, which may reduce formation
damage and hence increase the productivity and
recovery from the reservoirs.
- Open HP riser MPD systems seems to have the greatest
potential in subsea TTRD

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.
14.
15.

16.
17.

18.

References
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

Reynolds, H. and Watson, G.: String Design and Application in

Through-Tubing Rotary Drilling (TTRD), SPE 81096 paper
presented at the Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum
Engineering Conference, held in Port-of-Spain, Trinidad, 27-30
Apr. 2003
Sanchez R.A., Azar J.J., Bassal A.A., Hart G., Martins A.L.:
The Effect of Drillpipe Rotation on Hole Cleaning During
Directional Well Drilling, SPE/IADC paper 37 626, presented
at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conf., Amsterdam (4 6 March, 1997
Saasen A.: Sag of Weight Materials in Oil Based Drilling
Fluids, IADC/SPE 77190, presented at the IADC/SPE Asian
Pacific Drilling Technology, Jakarta, 9-11 September 2002
Bern P.A., van Oort E., Ebentoft H., Surdo C., Zamora M.,
Slater K.: Barite Sag. Measurement, Modelling, and
Management, SPE 47784, presented at the IADC/SPE Asia
Pacific Drilling Technology Conference, Jakarta, 1998
Dye W., Mullen G., Gusler W.: Drilling Processes: The Other
Half of the Barite Sag Equation, SPE 80495, presented at the
SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition,
Jakarta, 15-17 April, 2003
Fimreite, G., Asko, A., Massam, J., Taugbol, K., Omland, T.H.,
Svanes, K., Kroken, W., Andreassen, E. and Saasen, A.: Invert
Emulsion Fluids for Drilling Through Narrow Hydraulic
Windows, IADC/SPE paper 87128, presented at the IADC/SPE
Drilling Conference, Dallas, 2-4 March 2004
Franks, T. and Marshall, D.S.: Novel Drilling Fluid for
Through-Tubing Rotary Drilling, IADC/SPE paper 87127
presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Dallas, 2-4
March 2004
Saasen A., Jordal O.H., Burkhead D., Berg P.C., Lklingholm
G., Pedersen E.S., Turner J., Harris M.J.: Drilling HT/HP
Wells Using a Cesium Formate Based Drilling Fluid,

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

IADC/SPE 74541, presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling

Conference, Dallas, 26-28 February, 2002
Kleverlaan, M., Van Noort, R.N. and Jones, I.: Development of
Swelling Elastomer Packers in Shell E&P, Presented at the
SPE/IADC Drilling Conferance, Amsterdam, 23-25 February
2000
Queirs, J.G.R., Vidick, E. and Cochran, J.: Through Tubing
Rotary Drilling and Its Associated Cementing Challenges: A
North Sea Experience, SPE paper 83955 presented at Offshore
Europe 2003, Aberdeen, 2-5 September 2003.
Fontana, P. and Sjoberg, G.: Reeled Pipe Technology for
Deepwater Drilling Utilizing a Dual Gradient Mud System,
paper SPE 59160, presented at the 2000 IADC/SPE Drilling
Conference, New Orleans Louisiana, 23-25 February 2000.
Fossil, B. and Sangesland, S.: Managed Pressure Drilling for
Subsea Applications; Well Control Challenges in Deep Waters,
SPE/IADC paper 91633, presented at the 2004 SPE/IADC
Underbalanced Technology Conference and Exhibition
Houston, 11-12 October 2004
Hannegan D.: Pressure Drilling in Marine Environments - Case
Studies, SPE/IADC 92600, 2005.
Hermann R.P., Shaughnessy J.M.: Two Methods for Achieving
a Dual Gradient in Deepwater, SPE/IADC 67745, 2001.
Smith, K.L, Gault, A.D., Witt, D.E., Weddle, C.E.: SubSea
Mudlift Drilling Joint Industry Project: Delivering Dual
Gradient Drilling Technology to Industry, SPE 71357, 2001.
Bern, P.A, Armagost, W.K., Bansal, R.K.: Managed Pressure
drilling with the ECD Reduction Tool, SPE 89737, 2004.
Schubert, J. J., Juvkam-Wold, H.C., Weddle, C.E.: Alexander,
C.H., HAZOP of Well Control Procedures Assurance of the
Safety of the SubSea Mudlift Drilling System, SPE/IADC
74482, 2002.
Eggemeyer, J.C., Akins, M.E., Brainard, R.R., Judge, R.A.,
Peterman, C.P., Scavone, L.J., Thethi, K.S: SubSea MudLift
Drilling: Design and Implementation of a Dual Gradient
Drilling System, SPE71359, 2001.
Scubert, J.J., Juvkam-Wold, H.C., Choe, J.: Well Control
Procedures for Dual Gradient Drilling as Compared to
Conventional Riser Drilling, SPS/IADC 79880, 2003.
Choe, J., Schubert, J.J, Juvkam-Wold, H.C.: Analyses and
Procedures for Kick Detection in Subsea Mudlift Drilling,
IADC/SPE 87114, 2004.
Sangesland, S., Fossli, B.: Low Riser Return and Mud-Lift
System, Proc.At XIV Deep Offshore Tech.Conf., New Orleans,
2002.
Childers, M.:Surface BOP, Slim Rise or Conventional 21-Inch
Riser - What is the Best Concept to Use, SPE/IADC 92762,
2005.
Brander, G., Magne, E., Newman, T., Taklo, T., Mitchell, C.:
Drilling in Brazil in 2887m Water Depth using a Surface BOP
system and DP vessel, IADC/SPE 87113, 2004.

Nomenclature
BHA
BOP
CAPEX
CHP
CLP
CMC
CS
CT
CTD
DP

Bottom Hole Assembly

Blow Out Preventer
Capital Expenditure
Closed High Pressure
Closed Low Pressure
Controlled Mud Cap
Closed System
Coiled Tubing
Coiled Tubing Drilling
Drill Pipe

DP
ECD
FPG
GPM
HP
ID/OD
IS
LP
LPM
LRRS
MD
MODU
MPD
MUT
MW
OHP
OLP
OS
PPG
PWD
RCD
RCH
RM
SG
TTD
TTRD
TVD
UB
WARP
WL

OTC 17798

Dynamic Positioning
Equivalent Circulation Density
Fracture Pressure Gradient
Gallons Per Minute
High Pressure
Inner Diameter / Outer Diameter
Independent Systems
Low Pressure
Litre Per Minute
Low Riser Return System
Measured Depth
Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit
Manage Pressure Drilling
Make Up Torque
Mud Weight
Open High Pressure
Open Low Pressure
Open Systems
Pore Pressure Gradient
Pressure While Drilling
Rotating Control Device
Rotating Control Head
Riser Margin
Specific Gravity
Through Tubing Drilling
Through Tubing Rotary Drilling
True Vertical Depth
Under Balanced
Weight Agent Reduced Particles
Wire Line

OTC 17798

Table1: Methods and options for MPD (TTRD in Subsea wells)

CLOSED SYSTEMS (CS)

Riser & BOP
Arrangements

LP RISER (CLP)

HP RISER (CHP)

Managed
Pressure Drilling
(MPD) Methods

OPEN SYSTEMS (OS)

2)

Sec.
Annulus
Circ.
3)

Subsea
Mud LiftDual
Gradient

Subsea
RCH and
subsea
choke

(B)

(C)

(D)

(E)

Surface
RCH and
choke
valve

Gas Lift
in Riser

(A)

(No.)

HP RISER
(OHP)
Controlled
Mud Cap
(Low
Riser
Return
System)
(F)

LP RISER (OLP)
Riser
Pump w/
annular
Restr.

Sec.
Annulus
Circ.
3)

(G)

(H)

INDEPENDENT
SYSTEMS (IS)
Surface
Downhole
(Note 1)
(Note 1)
Downhole
Surface
ECD
Continuos
Reduction
Circulation
Device
Device

(I)

(J)

NA

NA

MODU

DP

Anchored

Jack-up

Riser Margin

Trip Margin

Kick detection

Features

Gas
Handling
Swiftness of
well control
Drill longer
sections?
Total ECD
management
Ability to
perform TTRD
UB operation
Ability to
perform UB
CT/WL
operation

Notes:
1)
2)
3)

System use is either not possible, or NO time/cost/safety benefits can be readily realized, or Systematic Risks/Challenges cannot be overcome
with current technologies/procedures
Combination of Feature/MODU option and MPD system is not recommended
System use is possible and time/cost/safety benefits can be realized. Systematic Risks/Challenges exist, but can be overcome with proper
application or current technologies/procedures in some but not all cases
Combination of Feature/MODU option and MPD system possible in some but not all cases as long all concerns are addressed
System use is readily applicable and time/cost/safety benefits can be realized. Minimal or no Systematic Risks/Challenges exist that are not
addressed by the System design and the application of proper procedures
Combination of Feature/MODU option and MPD system is acceptable

The independent systems may be used in combination with several of the other MPD concepts.
Injection point at Subsea BOP level or downhole through secondary annulus or parasitic string.
Injection point at Subsea BOP level through booster-line or through downhole secondary annulus.

10

OTC 17798

Table 2: Comparing maximum achievable drilling lengths while using LRRS, RCH & Choke or conventional method Case 1

Potential added horizontal drilling length from kick off point (700 LPM)
Case 1 Pore Pressure Gradient 1.00
CMC - LRRS
(MW 1.05 SG)
Fracture
(SG)
1.10
1.15
1.20

ECD
Length
(m)
4319
6598
8877

Torque**
Length
(m)
3174
3174
3174

Pump*
pressure
(bar)
364
438
511

RCD + Choke
(MW 0.904 SG + 22.8 bar choke
pressure at static condition )
ECD
Torque**
Pump*
Length
Length
pressure
(m)
(m)
(bar)
4319
3043
372
6598
3043
439
8877
3043
506

Conventional
(1.05 SG)
ECD***
Length
(m)
35
2244

Torque
Length
(m)
3174
3174
3174

* Conventional mud pumps are normally rated for 345 bars (5000 psi). MPD methods could cater for using 4 in. DP.
** Torque is the limiting factor for the drilling length with MPD. A 4 in. high strength DP would increase the drilling length
*** With conventional pressure control ECD is the limiting factor

Table 3: Comparing annular pressures static and dynamic Case 2

Equivalent densities (700 LPM)

Case 2 Pore Pressure Gradient 1.55
MW
(SG)

Static
Pressure
window
(SG)

Window

Fault

Bottom
Hole

Conventional

1.60

1.600

1.669

1.688

1.698

Pump
Pressure
@
Bottom
(bar)
325

CMC-LRRS

1.64

1.554

1.535

1.568

1.578

286

RCD + 20 bar
Choke
pressure at
static
condition

1.50

1.571

1.568

1.586

1.596

315

Method

Dynamic ECD (SG)

Pump*
pressure
(bar)
261
332

OTC 17798

11

(A)

Conventional

HP riser
systems
with a near
surface RCD and
surface chokes

(B)

System for riser

gas lift

SS Tree
BOP Component

(C)
Secondary
annulus
circulation
method
w/ LP Riser

(D)
Systems with a
subsea mud
lift

Pump

Rotating Control Device

Choke/Kill Lines
Production Casing/Tubing

LP Riser

Drillstring and Bit

HP Riser

Riser Restriction Device

(E)
Low pressure riser
systems with a
subsea RCD

(F)
Controlled Mud Cap
System for
controlling
mud level
in the riser (LRRS)

Relative Fluid Density

Representations

(G)

(H)

Systems with a riser

restriction device and
mud bypass pump

Secondary
annulus
circulation
method
w/ HP Riser

Grey Components are

Low Density High Density

Air Water
Mud
Mud
(or gasified)

Figure 7: Schematics of methods and options for MPD (TTRD in Subsea wells)

Not to Scale