TEESSIDE UNIVERSITY

MIDDLESBROUGH
SCHOOL OF SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING

Department of Petroleum Engineering

[Date]

Drilling Engineering and Well Completion

(SPT-12874-0715-SST-2014)

Assignment on
MANAGED PRESSURE DRILLING (MPD)

Submitted by

NWAICHE JASON CHINEDU

N3264679

Date: 20 November, 2014

In Partial fulfilment for the award of M.Sc. Petroleum Engineering

Supervisor: DR. SINA .R. GOMARI

ABSTRACT

As the petroleum industry experiences constant transformation and new technologies are
introduced, there have been needs for designs to control annular pressure while drilling.
Underbalanced drilling (UBD) and Managed pressure drilling (MPD) have been identified as
some of the practises used to achieve this. UBD is practised mainly to maximize reservoir
performance, while MPD techniques are often used to enhance drilling safety and minimize
non-productive time (NPT). This research tends to briefly discuss on how MPD works, some
of the practised methods, variations and techniques used in MPD and also while highlighting
some of the key advantages of this drilling technique (MPD), this research looks at some
demerits and other limitations and cost associated with running an MPD system. In
conclusion, managed pressure drilling offers more ease of drilling in a safer environmental
condition than any of the conventional over balanced (OBD) or underbalanced drilling
(UBD).

2
Table of Contents Page

TITLE PAGE …………………………………………………………………………………. 1

ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………………………... 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS ……………………………………………………………………... 3

LIST OF TABLES ……………………………………………………………………………. 4

LIST OF FIGURES …………………………………………………………………................ 5

1.0 INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………………. 6

2.0 HOW MANAGED PRESSURE DRILLING WORKS ……………………………… 6
3.0 CATEGORIES, VARIATIONS AND METHODS OF MPD ……………………….. 7
3.1 Categories of MPD …………………………………………………............... 7
3.1.1 Reactive MPD ……………………………………………….............. 7
3.1.2 Proactive MPD ………………………………………………………. 8
3.2 Variations of Managed Pressure Drilling ……………………………………. 8
3.2.1 Constant Bottom Hole Drilling (CBHD) ……………………............. 8
3.2.1.1 Friction Management Method ………………………............ 8
3.2.1.2 Continuous Management Method ………………………….. 8
3.2.2 Mud Cap Drilling (MCD) …………………………………………… 8
3.2.2.1 Pressurized Mud Cap Drilling (PMCD) ……………............. 8
3.2.2.2 Control Mud Cap (CMC) …………………………………... 9
3.2.3 Dual Gradient Drilling ………………………………………………. 9
3.2.4 Return Flow Control (RFC) or HSE ………………………………… 9
4.0 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF MPD TECHNIQUES …………….. 9
4.1 Advantages ……………………………………………………………............ 9
4.2 Disadvantages ………………………………………………………………... 9
5.0 HEALTH, SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT ISSUES REGARDING MPD ……….. 10
6.0 LIMITATIONS AND COST OF MPD ………………………………………………. 11
6.1 Limitations …………………………………………………………………… 11
6.2 Cost …………………………………………………………………………... 11
7.0 CONCLUSION ……………………………………………………………………….. 12
7.1 Impact of Using MPD on Reservoir Performance …………………………… 12
7.2 Future and Improvements on MPD …………………………………………... 12

NOMENCLATURE …………………………………………………………………………… 13

REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………………………….... 14

APPENDIX ……………………………………………………………………………………. 16

3
List of Tables

Tab 1: MPD Well Control Matrix (Rai, Vudathu et al., 2011, p.6) ………………………… 16

4
List of Figures

Fig 1: A typical managed pressure drilling system (Muir, 2008) …………………….............. 6

Fig 2: Safe system performance (Hollnagel, 2008) …………………………………………..... 10

Fig 3: Sequence of event prevention and outcome ………………………………………… 11

Fig 4: Flow diagram of a closed well system (Handal, 2013) …………………………………. 16

Fig 5: Constant Bottom Hole Pressure Variation Setup (Malloy, Stone et al., 2009) …………. 16

Fig 6: Constant Bottomhole Pressure Variation of MPD (Malloy, Stone et al. 2009) …………..... 16

Fig 7: Pressurized Mud Cap Drilling Setup (Rohani, 2012) …………………………................ 17

Fig 8: PMCD Pressure-gradient profile (Rohani, 2012) ………………………………………... 17

Fig 9: Controlled mud cap variation setup (Rohani, 2012) ………………………………… 17

Fig 10: Pressure gradient profile for Dual-gradient drilling (Rohani, 2012) …………………... 18

Fig 11: Pressure profile for drilling dual gradient without a riser (Rohani, 2012) …………….. 18

Fig 12: MPD rig up for Return Flow Control (Nas, Toralde et al. 2009) ………………..... 18

Fig 13: Relationship between OBD, UBD and MPD (Kumar, 2010) ………………………. 19

Fig 14: Showing Depth against Pressure in a drilling window (Gala, Toralde 2011) ……… 19

5
1.0 INTRODUCTION

According to the International Association of Drilling Contractors (IADC), Managed

Pressure Drilling as an adaptive drilling process used to precisely control the annular pressure
profile throughout the wellbore (IADC, 2011, p.8).

The major objective of MPD includes ascertaining the down-hole pressure, its environmental
limits and managing the annular hydraulic pressure profile accordingly. MPD is intended to
avoid continuous influx of formation fluids to the surface because of the narrow gap between
pore pressure and fracture pressure (Rehm, Schubert et al., 2008, p.1)

Fig 1: A typical managed pressure drilling system (Muir, 2008, p.9)

2.0 HOW MPD WORKS

“The basic technique in MPD is the ability to manipulate the Bottom Hole Pressure (BHP)
and the pressure profile as needed. In the conventional drilling, the BHP can be calculated by
summing the mud weight’s hydrostatic head and the annular friction pressure (AFP). The
AFP is the friction pressure that results from the circulation of the mud while drilling.
Equivalent Circulating Density (ECD) constitutes the BHP. It is basically the BHP while
circulating that is converted into the units of mud weight. During a connection, the pumps
turn off and the fluid stops circulating, thus eliminating the annular friction pressure. The

6
starting and stopping of pumps can greatly affect the pressure profile, causing the pressure to
fluctuate out of the pressure-gradient window and thus leading to drilling problems. The basic
configuration for MPD is to have a rotating control device (RCD) and a choke. The RCD
diverts the pressurized mud returns from the annulus to the choke manifold. A seal assembly
with the RCD enables the mud returns system to remain closed and pressurized and enables
the rig to drill ahead. The choke with the pressurized mud return system then allows the
driller to apply backpressure to the wellbore. If the pressure starts to rise above the fracture
pressure of the formation, the driller can open the choke to reduce backpressure and bring the
pressure down. If the driller needs to increase the pressure throughout the well, closing the
choke will increase backpressure. This technique is mainly used during connections when the
pumps are turned off then on. When the pumps are turned off, the choke is closed to apply
backpressure to replace the lost AFP. As the pumps are turned on and the AFP increases, the
choke can be opened to decrease backpressure. This helps pressure profile to remain inside
the pressure window throughout the well. The pressure profile shows that, in static
conditions, the pressure will fall below the pore pressure and that, while circulating, the
pressure will exceed the fracture pressure. By adjusting the mud weight and using
backpressure, a driller would be able to keep the pressure inside the pressure window. The
driller can decrease mud weight so that the pressure stays below the fracture pressure while
circulating. Applying back pressure while not circulating could keep the pressure above the
pore pressure of the formation. By adjusting the drilling plan, a driller would be able to
successfully drill a well that has tight pressure margins successfully” (Martin, 2006, pp.6-7).

3.0 CATEGORIES, VARIATIONS AND METHODS OF MANAGED PRESSURE

DRILLING

3.1 CATEGORIES OF MPD

According to (Grayson, 2009), Managed Pressure Drilling has further been defined by two
main categories (approaches) - Reactive and Proactive MPD.

3.1.1 Reactive MPD

This technique is effective, but on “standby” as an enhanced form of passive well control
which helps to manage unexpected down-hole pressures (Malloy et al., 2008; Weatherford,
2010).

Typically, the well is planned conventionally and MPD equipment and procedures are
activated during unexpected developments. Utilizing a Rotating Control Device (RCD) alone

7
does not necessarily constitute managed pressure drilling operations. A rotating control
device is an excellent supplementary safety device and is adjunct to the BOP Stack above the
Annular Preventer (Malloy, Stone et al., 2009)

3.1.2 Proactive MPD

This method uses MPD equipment to actively control the annular pressure profile throughout
the exposed wellbore. Proactive MPD maximizes the effectiveness of preventing a wide
range of drilling hazards by reducing the drilling non-productive time (NPT) through
enabling fundamental changes to fluid, casing and open-hole programs. All of these lead to
more time drilling and less time spent in non-productive activities as reported by (Malloy,
Stone et al., 2009; Weatherford, 2010).

3.2 VARIATIONS OF MANAGED PRESSURE DRILLING

According to Aadnoy (2009, quoted in Rohani, 2012, p.26), there are four key variations of
MPD often used in practise today. Combining several variations on the same prospect is
expected to become more frequent as the technology develops. They are;

3.2.1 Constant Bottom Hole Pressure (CBHP)

This applies in areas where pore fracture pressure gradient windows are small. The major
consideration is to drill with a lighter fluid so that bottom-hole pressure (BHP) remains
constant, even if the fluid column is static or circulating, which is based on Aadnoy’s views
(2009, cited in Rohani, 2012, p.26). CBHP involves two (2) sub methods;
3.2.1.1 Friction Management Method- used in HPHT or extended reach wells and
keeps BHP constant.
3.2.1.2 Continuous Circulation Method- used to keep ECD constant and does not
interrupt circulation while drilling.

3.2.2 Mud Cap Drilling (MCD)

3.2.2.1 Pressurized Mud Cap Drilling (PMCD)
This method is mainly used in wells that experience total losses and kicks within the well
bore (Nas, Toralde et al., 2009 p.3). It works by drilling with a drilling fluid that has lower
density, cheap and can be lost to formation.

8
 3.2.2.2 Controlled Mud Cap (CMC)
This method is mainly used for areas with unknown pore pressure or pressure gradients of the
formation. It allows modification of pressure by altering mud levels within the riser and
keeps the well confined.

3.2.3 Dual Gradient Drilling (DG)

This method uses two different drilling fluids while drilling to create a pressure profile that
has two gradients. It is preferred for drillings where using one fluid all through the wellbore
can cause the pressure to exceed the fracture gradient. It has 2 sub-methods;
 Annulus Injection Method
 Dual Gradient Method

3.2.4 Return Flow Control (RFC) or HSE Method

This method uses the merits of a closed system and is applied when dangerous conditions
tend to stop drilling and production from a well. Because return flow is controlled, it reduces
risk to drillers and the environment from major incidents.

4.0 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF MPD TECHNIQUES

4.1 ADVANTAGES OF MPD

i. MPD reduces Non Productive Time (NPT) in drilling and saves cost.
ii. MPD helps to improve well production by allowing drilling with little overbalanced
pressure.
iii. MPD allows ease of access to reservoirs that have been previously labelled as un-
drillable by increasing the rate of penetration (ROP) and prolonging the drill bit life.
iv. MPD is preferred for H2S formations because the gas is not allowed to the surface,
therefore the gas is pushed back into formation.
v. MPD ensures safe drilling and risks mitigation by monitoring fluid and pressure
behaviours.
vi. MPD provides alternative for drilling where hydrostatic overbalancing threatens the
integrity of the wellbore.

4.2 DISADVANTAGES OF MPD

i. It supports no surface return, and therefore limits sampling sources for geologists.

9
 ii. For PMCD, at Target Depth (TD), there still exists problems of how to produce from
the wells without any losses.
iii. Large amount of drill fluids are used in MPD-PMCD technique; which could require
about 120,000 – 150,000 bbls of fluid including drill pipe & annulus injection for a
week drilling.
iv. Because of the variations in techniques of MPD, certain techniques are preferred in
certain formations against the others.

5.0 HEALTH, SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT ISSUES REGARDING MPD

Drilling at HTHP is a very risky operation and this has become a key consideration in
the need and uses of an MPD system by ensuring that no Loss Time Incidents (LTI) or
Near Miss occurs. Job safety analyses should also be conducted and supplemented with
safety meetings.

Managed pressure system makes use of chokes and barriers (presence of more than one
barrier helps to prevent / reduce a kick) as safety measure to check these unavoidable
risks associated with drilling through systematic prevention and protection of unwanted
events.

Understanding the role of barriers and other MPD safety control measures must first
involve understanding the various hazards and sources of hazards facing the drilling
activity. For example, drilling in complex reservoirs, drilling with MPD technologies,
drilling in environmental sensitive areas etc. have all been identified as some of the
sources of hazard during drilling (Handal, 2013).

The risk mitigation in the use of barriers can be illustrated using the figure below, where
“X” is considered as barriers in an event sequence.

Fig 2: Safe system performance through reducing the likelihood of events consequences (Hollnagel,
2008, p.222)

10
In general, Fig 1 above may transform into the following eventual sequence

Unexpected Protection against

Events Unwanted Outcomes

Unwanted
Outcome
Prevention of Daily Operations
unwanted events

Fig 3: Sequence of event prevention and outcome

6.0 LIMITATIONS AND COST OF MPD

6.1 LIMITATIONS

While some techniques of MPD, for example the CBHP, DG and MCD are used for areas
with low pore-to-fracture gradient, severe circulation loss and single basic drilling fluid,
techniques involving the Return flow or HSE variations tend to operate in regions that have
very dangerous and well threatening conditions. According to (Weatherford, 2006, p.1),
“Drilling performance efficiency must be maintained without incurring any additional
personnel safety or environmental risk exposure”. These variances in the choice and
techniques have made MPD limited in certain areas where Conventional drilling may be
preferred.

6.2 COST

Cost is one important factor to consider in the planning and design of MPD, considering that
most conventional drilling practises makes us of some of these MPD equipment; for example
the barriers and chokes, this has helped in reducing the total cost involved in setting up an
MPD system. By reducing non-productive time, MPD has proven to be a cost effective
system in saving drill cost expenses.

11
7.0 CONCLUSION, FUTURE AND IMPROVEMENTS ON MPD

7.1 IMPACT OF USING MPD ON RESERVOIR PERFORMANCE

MPD and sometimes UBD techniques maximizes reservoir performance and production
because MPD can drill with low mud weights against the ECD thereby trapping annulus
pressure and controlling influx as well as well stability.

7.2 CONCLUSION
In conclusion;

 MPD is effective in the reduction of NPT thereby saving cost.

 MPD helps drilling engineers have a change of mind-set, with a view that ‘there is a
better way’.
 Closed well systems are natively safer and efficient than conventional open well
systems.
 A wellbore drilled with MPD techniques is a well in Safe Mode.
 MPD can drill a well where conventional drilling methods fail
 Using MPD equipment with chokes and barriers have proven to highlight MPD as one
of the safest drilling techniques in modern drilling.

12
NOMENCLATURE

MPD - Managed Pressure Drilling

AFP - Annular Friction Pressure
ECD - Equivalent Circulation Density
NPT - Nonproductive Time
CBHP - Constant Bottom Hole Pressure
DG - Dual Gradient
CMC - Controlled Mud Cap
HSE - Health, Safety and Environment
RCD - Rotating Control Device
BHP - Bottom Hole Pressure
ROP - Rate of Penetration
TD - Target Depth
H2S - Hydrogen Sulfide
PMCD - Pressurized Mud Cap Drilling
LTI - Loss Time Incident
NM - Near Miss

13
REFERENCES

Gala, D.M., Toralde, J.S. (2011) ‘Managed pressure drilling 101: moving beyond “it’s always been
done that way”’, Tech 101, 7(1), pp.12-14.

Grayson, M.B. (2009) 'Increased “operational safety and efficiency with managed-pressure drilling',
SPE Americas E&P Environmental and Safety Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers, San
Antonio, Texas, USA, 23-25 March 2009.

Handal, A. (2013) 'Safety barrier analysis and hazard identification of blowout using managed
pressure drilling compared with conventional drilling', IADC/SPE managed pressure drilling and
underbalanced operations conference and exhibition, Society of Petroleum Engineers, San Antonio,
Texas, USA, 17-18 April 2013.

Hollnagel, E. (2008) 'Risk + barriers = safety?’, Safety Science, pp. 221-229. doi:
10.1016/j.ssci.2007.06.028

IADC (2011) UBO & MPD glossary. Available at: http://www.iadc.org/wp-content/uploads/UBO-

MPD-Glossary-Dec11.pdf (Accessed: 10 November 2014).

Kumar, D. (2010) Managed Pressure Drilling: Experimental and Modeling Based Investigation.
M.Tech thesis. Pandit Deendayal Petroleum University Gandhingar Gujarat India. Available at:
http://spmlib.pdpu.ac.in:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/314/Managed%20Pressure%20Drill
ing%20Experimental%20and%20Modeling%20Based%20Investigation.pdf?sequence=3 (Accessed:
03November 2014).

Malloy, K.P., Stone, R., Medley, G.H., Hannegan, D.M., Coker, O.D., Reitsma, D., Santos, H.M.,
Kinder, J.I., Eck-Olsen, J. and McCaskill, J.W. (2009) 'Managed-pressure drilling: what it is and what
it is not', IADC/SPE Managed Pressure Drilling and Underbalanced Operations Conference &
Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 12-13 February 2009.

Martin, M.D. (2006) Managed Pressure Drilling Techniques and Tools. M.Sc thesis. Texas A&M
University. Available at: http://repository.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/3884/etd-tamu-2006A-
PETE-Martin.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (Accessed: 05 November 2014).

Muir, K. (2008) Managed Presssure Drilling (MPD) Systems & Applications, [Drill Safe Forum].
Available at: http://www.drillsafe.org.au/06-
08_pres/DrillSafe_Forum_Jun08_KEEP_DRILLING_Ken_Muir_Managed_Pressure_Drilling_Talk.p
df (Accessed: 11 November, 2014).

Nas, S.W., Toralde, J.S. and Wuest, C. (2009) 'Offshore managed pressure drilling experiences in asia
pacific', SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Amsterdam,
the Netherlands, 17-19 March 2009.

Rai, A., Vudathu, B., Vieira, P. and Torres, F. (2011) 'The challenges and results of applying managed
pressure drilling techniques on an exploratory offshore well in india: a case history', IADC/SPE
Managed Pressure Drilling and Underbalanced Operations Conference & Exhibition. Society of
Petroleum Engineers, Denver, Colorado, USA, 5-6 April 2011.

Rehm, B., Schubert, J., Haghshenas, A., Paknejad, A.S. and Hughes, J. (2008) Managed pressure
drilling. Houston Texas: Gulf Publishing Company.

Rohani, M.R. (2012) 'Managed-pressure drilling; techniques and options for improving operational
safety and efficiency', Petroleum & Coal, 54(1), pp. 24-33.

14
Weatherford International Ltd (2006) Controlled pressure drilling and testing services. Available at:
http://www.weatherford.com/ECMWEB/groups/web/documents/weatherfordcorp/WFT021446.pdf
(Accessed: 03 November 2014).

Weatherford International Ltd (2010) Managed pressure drilling. Available at:

http://www.weatherford.com/dn/WFT021445 (Accessed: 03 November 2014).

15
TABLES

MPD Operating Surface Pressure Indicator

Matrix At Planned Drilling At Planned > Planned Back ≥ Back
Back Pressure Connection Back Pressure Limit pressure Limit
(250psi) Pressure (250psi + (>250psi + ECD & (750psi)
ECD but < 500psi) <750psi)
Increase pump
rate, mud weight
or both AND Pick up, shut in
No Influx Continue Drilling Continue Drilling reduce surface SS BOP,
pressure to evaluate next
planned or action
contingency levels
Increase Increase Increase pump
backpressure, pump backpressure, pump rate, mud weight
rate, mud weight, or rate, mud weight, or or both AND Pick up, shut in
Operating Limit a combination of all a combination of all reduce surface SS BOP,
(5bbls) pressure to evaluate next
planned or action
contingency levels

Cease Operations, Cease Operations,

Increase back Increase back
pressure, pump rate, pressure, pump rate,
mud weight or a mud weight or a Pick up, shut in SS Pick up, shut in
< Planned Limit combination of all, combination of all, BOP, evaluate SS BOP,
(10bbls) circulate out any circulate out any next action evaluate next
influx prior to influx prior to action
resuming operations resuming operations

Tab 1: MPD Well Control Matrix (Rai, Vudathu et al., 2011, p.6)

GREEN: Choke pressure drilling pump rate

YELLOW: Choke pressure when ECD is at fracture pressure

ORANGE: Changes in Pump rates or choke pressure resulting to increase in fracture pressure

RED: A well control event

16
FIGURES

Fig 4: Flow diagram of a closed well system (Handal, 2013, p.10)

Fig 5: Constant Bottom Hole Pressure Variation Setup (Nas, Toralde et al., 2009, p.11; Rohani, 2012, p.27)

Fig 6: Constant Bottomhole Pressure Variation of MPD (Malloy, Stone et al., 2009, p.6)

17
Fig 7: Pressurized Mud Cap Drilling Setup (Rohani, 2012, p.29)

Fig 8: PMCD Pressure-gradient profile Fig 9: Controlled mud cap variation setup (Rohani, 2012, p.30)
(Rohani, 2012, p.29)

18
Fig 10: Pressure gradient profile for Dual-gradient drilling (Rohani, 2012, p.30)

Fig 11: Pressure profile for drilling dual gradient Fig 12: MPD rig up for Return Flow Control
without a riser (Rohani, 2012, p.31) (Nas, Toralde et al., 2009, p.11; Rohani, 2012, p.31)

19
Fig 13: Relationship between OBD, UBD and MPD (Kumar, 2010, p.3)

Fig 14: Showing Depth against Pressure in a drilling window (Gala, Toralde 2011, p.13)

20