FISHING TIME

© All Rights Reserved

Просмотров: 1

FISHING TIME

© All Rights Reserved

- DRILLLING tech
- Drilling and workover best practices
- Rig Designs 2010
- Basic Drilling Engineering
- Stick-slip Training Guide
- Selmo Plate 1
- Drilling Rig
- Stream File
- 00059263
- Global Production Practices - CBM
- Hole Capacity
- 091 Preventing Crown Collisions
- Presentation 1
- SCR-Slow Circulation Rate
- Basic Drilling Engineering[1]
- SOP CPT
- 11-06 NOGEPA Newsletter
- Part 7 - Shallow Gas Blowouts
- 00079797
- 2095

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 6

Mexico: A Risk Economics Approach

R.M. Shivers III, SPE, and R.J. Domangue, * SPE, Texaco U.S.A.

Summary. The purpose of this study was to identify the most effective methods to free stuck pipe and to quantify the success rates

of these methods under various wellbore conditions on the basis of historical data. This information has been integrated into a decision-

making flow chart based on risk economics to determine when to begin and terminate operations to free stuck pipe.

Introduction

The Offshore Producing Div. at Texaco U.S.A. has developed a The data were grouped into two periods. Period 1 includes wells

standard operational procedure for handling stuck pipe. The proce- drilled from 1981 to 1986; Period 2 represents wells drilled from

dure involves spotting a diesel-based pill (DBP) if the pipe cannot 1987 to 1990. Before 1987 (Period 1) 83 sticking incidents occurred

be worked or jarred free in the first few hours after sticking. If in 278 total wells drilled (30% sticking frequency). After 1986 (Peri-

the DBP fails to free the pipe after about 24 hours, the pipe usually od 2), 22 incidents occurred in 105 total wells drilled (21 % sticking

is backed off above the free point and we try to free the pipe with frequency). The reported average pipe-sticking frequency report-

fishing jars. ed by the drilling industry for the Gulf of Mexico for 1983 through

Until now, we made these decisions without supporting data to 1986 was 23. 1 %. I

indicate whether the benefits of operations to free stuck pipe justi- The decline from 30 % to 21 % in sticking frequency after 1986

fied the cost. Although the costs of pipe-freeing procedures usually may be attributed to a combination of (1) using measurement-while-

are small compared with sidetracking costs, they are significant. drilling (MWD) logs to optimize casing points, (2) using fewer drill

Attempts to free stuck pipe by spotting pills or jarring usually re- collars, (3) avoiding or minimizing use of small-diameter direc-

quire several rig days and can cost hundreds of thousands of dol- tional holes, and (4) having better mud properties, particularly

lars. These operations should be implemented only if their potential filtrate and solids control.

benefits outweigh their costs.

The primary objectives of this study were to quantify the proba- Important Wellbore Parameters. Hole angle, hole size, and mud

bilities of success for various methods of freeing stuck pipe and weight all were found to affect the chances of freeing stuck pipe

to formulate a generic stuck-pipe decision-making process based significantly.

on risk economics. When fishing operations begin, a certain cost Hole angle. As Fig. 1 shows, low-angle holes had the best suc-

is associated with freeing the pipe successfully, and a higher cost cess rates for freeing stuck pipe. Success rates decrease steadily

is associated with an unsuccessful fishing attempt that leads to plug- as inclination increases.

back and sidetrack. This situation (two possible outcomes with Hole size. Fig. 2 shows that the success rate for freeing stuck

known costs and known probabilities) lends itself well to expected- pipe was slightly higher for larger (9.875- and 12.25-in.) than for

value analysis. In this study, the expected cost of attempts to free smaller holes.

stuck pipe is called risked fishing cost (RFC). The ability to quan- Mud weight. The chance of freeing the pipe is higher in wells

tify the probability of success, <P s' for freeing stuck pipe as a sim- with lighter mud weights, as shown in Fig. 3. The apparent in-

ple function of mud weight, hole size, and inclination, made RFC creased success for muds> 151bmlgal is caused by a higher propor-

evaluation possible. tion of low-angle holes in this particular range compared with muds

<P s is highest when the pipe sticks and declines rapidly as time in the 13- to 15-lbm/gal range. If only directional wells are com-

elapses after sticking. Attempts to free the pipe should be begun pared, the success rates are about the same for 13- to 15- and > 15-

only if <P s is high enough that the RFC is less than the alternative Ibm/gal muds (12.5% and 16%, respectively).

cost (plugback and abandon or sidetrack). If the pipe fails to come As Fig. 4 shows, the openhole length did not consistently affect

free as soaking and fishing operations progress, <P s declines. The the success rate for freeing the pipe. Except for openhole length,

RFC should be re-evaluated at certain discrete points in the fishing 'this information confirms what many operators have believed for

process in response to a decline in <P s' Soaking and fishing opera- years.

tions should be terminated when <P s declines so much that the RFC

is higher than the alternative cost (plugback and abandon or Texaco Freeing Index. The primary objective of this study was

sidetrack) . to develop a generic operational decision-making process based on

risk economics pertaining to attempts to free stuck pipe. The cen-

Discussion terpiece of this analysis is the ability to quantify the probability of

Database and General Statistics. Between 1981 and 1990, we freeing the pipe under various wellbore conditions.

drilled 383 wells in the Gulf of Mexico, where 105 incidents of Love 2 described a method to predict the probability of freeing

stuck pipe were experienced on 65 wells. This is a 27.4% overall stuck pipe by use of basic drilling parameters. Efforts ~ere made

sticking frequency (incidents per well). This figure excludes stuck to develop a predictive equation suited to Texaco's drilling data

pipe owing to human error, equipment failure, and well-control and philosophy. As Figs. 1 through 3 show, strong correlations

problems. Only pipes stuck as a result of routine drilling and drilling- exist among three basic well parameters and the success of freeing

related operations were considered. stuck pipe. Through trial and error, a simple equation was con-

Straight wells «6°) accounted for only 8.6% (9) and directional trived to combine the effects of hole angle, hole size, and mud

wells accounted for 91.4 % (96) of the 105 incidents. The total cost weight on freeing stuck pipe:

of all stuck-pipe incidents from 1981 to 1990 was approximately I 1F =25(5i",+3i w +idH )-45.8, ...................... (1)

$65.8 million. The total rig time consumed by fishing or sidetracking

as a result of stuck pipe was 1,122 days (3.1 years). where I 1F =Texaco freeing index, i", = success rates for freeing

stuck pipe for various hole angles in Fig. 1 [e.g., a well with a

'Now with Texaco North Sea U.K. 20° hole angle has a 52.4% (0.524) chance of freeing the pipe],

Copyright 1993 Society of Petroleum Engineers id = success rates for various hole sizes in Fig. 2, and iw=success

H

Pipe Freed "" Of The Time (Succe.. Rate)

Pipe Freed "" Of The TIme (Succeaa Rate)

100 r---------------------------------------~

100 r-------------------------------------~

90

90

80

80

70

70

60

60

SO.

SO

40

40

30

30

20

20

10

10

o

OSlO 10:>25 25$40 4OS80 80+ o

Hole Angle (Degrees) 8 th 9'11

Hole Size (Inches)

Arrow: of 32 stuck pipes in holes with angles of 25:::; 40 0 , 13 Fig. 2-Effect of hole size on freeing pipe, 105 cases. Arrow:

(40.6%) came free. of 24 stuck pipes in 9%-ln. holes, 14 (58.3%) came free.

rates for various mud weights in Fig. 3. To cancel out the influence Multiple Pills. In some stuck-pipe cases, more than one DBP was

of additional straight holes in the;?; 15-lbm/gal mud, factors 0.222 spotted. In all but one (21 out of 22) of the incidents where multi-

and 0.200 are applied arbitrarily for 13- to 15- and for> 15-lbm/gal ple DBP's were spotted, I TF <45. Only 14% (3 out of21) of the

muds, respectively. stuck pipes where ITF <45 were freed when a second pill was

1TF is a number ranging from 0 to > 100. The chance of freeing used. Neither of the two pipes where a third spotting pill was used

the pipe after sticking increases as the ITF increases. Fig. 5 shows became free. Multiple pills have seldom freed pipe when 1TF was

the results of this method applied in 72 stuck-pipe incidents when low, and generally have not been required when 1TF was high.

DBP's were spotted. Effect of Spotting Time. We analyzed how the time between when

The initial probability of freeing stuck pipe can be determined the pipe stuck to when the pill was spotted affected the chances

according to I TF : probability is low (5.4%) when ITF=O to 45, in- of freeing the pipe. The literature 1,3 has stated that the quicker the

termediate (50%) when ITF=45 to 55, and high (92.6%) when pill is spotted, the higher the chance of success.

I TF =55+. Figs. 6 and 7 show the success rates for straight and directional

For the 72 incidents where DBP's were spotted, 90.3% overall wells as a function of the time between sticking and spotting the

pill. On straight holes, success rates are insensitive to spotting time

accuracy was achieved with I TF =47. In this case, accuracy is de-

up to 48 hours after sticking. On directional wells, however,

fined as the percentage of correct predictions made if we assumed

spotting-pill success depends on spotting time. Success rates as a

that in cases where ITF exceeds the reference value, the pipes come function of spotting time on the 61 total directional wells is sum-

free and in cases where 1TF is below the reference value, the pipes marized as follows. For 0 to 6 hours after sticking, pipe was freed

remain permanently stuck. If the intermediate ITF values (45 to 55) 57% of the time (in four out of seven cases). The success rate de-

are excluded, the 1TF method is 93 % accurate (nearly 90% of the creased to 39% (18 out of 46 cases) after 6 to 18 hours had passed,

total incidents in the database are in the highest or lowest 1TF and decreased further to 25% (two out of eight cases) after 18 or

group). more hours.

Sticking Incidents Where no Pill Was Spotted. As mentioned

Spotting Fluids. General Statistics. Spotting fluids were used in previously, in 82 of the 105 total stuck-pipe incidents in the data-

78% (82) of the total 105 stuck-pipe incidents. DBP's accounted base, we spotted pills. Of the remaining 23 incidents, in 61 % (14

for 76 of the 82 pills. The DBP success rate is 46% (35 out of 76 out of23), the pipes came free. Nearly 80% (11 out of 14) of these

incidents). This is comparable to the reported drilling industry aver- pipes came free within 3 hours after sticking, and all but one came

age success rate with DBP's, 50.8%, for 1983 through 1986. 1 free within 8 hours.

Drilling industry success rates with rnineral-oil-based pills have been Although spotting a pill as quickly as possible is recommended,

reported at 33 %. 1 we also recommend using the first 3 hours after sticking to free

100 r---------------------~----------------~ Pipe Freed "" Of The TIme (Succe.. Rate)

90 100 r---------------------------------------,

80 90

70 80

60 70

SO 60

40 SO

30 40

20 30

10 20

o 10

S10 10,,11.5 11.5$13.0 13$15 15.0+ o

Mud Weight (ppg) <2,000' 2-5,000' 5-10,000 10,000+

Open Hole Length (feat)

Fig. 3-Effect of mud weight on freeing pipe, 105 incidents.

Arrow 1: of 11 stuck pipes where 11.5· to < 13.0-lbm/gal muds

were used, 5 (45.5%) came free. Arrow 2: for 13· to 15·lbm/gal Fig. 4-Effect of open hole length on freeing pipe, 105 inci·

muds, i w = 0.222. Arrow 3: for muds that are 15 + Ibm/gal, dents, Arrow: of 32 stuck pipes in 2,000· to 5,000-ft open

iw =0.200. holes, 18 (56.3%) came free.

Number Ollncldenls

Pipe Freeing Succe.. Rate %

1" r-------------------------... ~;_--------,

10 r----------------------------------------,

9

90

80 8

70 7

60 6

50 5

40 4

3/3

30 3

20 2

oLL""_.

10

o 10 20

2/37

0

0 6 12 18 24 36 48

Time (Hrs.)

Fig. 5-I TF after first DBP was spotted (see Eq. 1),72 inci- Fig. 6-Effect of delay before spotting first DBP for freeing

dents. Where ITF =47, the success rate was 90.3%. Four of stuck pipe, seven straight holes. Arrow: in two incidents

the total 76 stuck-pipe cases where one DBP was used were where DBP's were spotted 12 to 18 hours after the pipe stuck,

excluded because of insufficient data. one pipe (50%) came free.

the pipe by working or jarring before spotting a DBP, which con- can be used to justify decisions to discontinue soaking because of

taminates the mud system. poor future success rates.

Effective-Soaking-Time Limit. The effective-soaking-time limit This same probability chart was constructed for directional holes

(ESTL) is the time after spotting a DBP when the majority of stuck and for each of the three ITF ranges. The ITF ranges compare

pipe comes free. Few pipes that remained stuck after the ESTL stuck-pipe incidents of the same relative difficulty. As expected,

came free. Figs. 8 and 9 show the ESTL's for straight and direc- success increases as ITF increases. Fig. 11 is a composite of all

tional holes, respectively. After the ESTL, the probability of freeing five probability charts, showing the remaining future soaking suc-

stuck pipe drops sharply. For six pipes freed in straight wells, five cess at any given soak time for straight or directional holes and

(83 %) became free within 30 hours after soaking. For 25 pipes in for each of the three I TF ranges. The curves for the three I TF ranges

directional wells, 21 (84 %) came free within 24 hours after soak- are used to determine (» s in conjunction with the decision-making

ing. Thus, the ESTL is about 30 hours for straight holes and 24 flow chart in Fig. 12.

hours for directional holes.

Fishing. General Statistics. In 43 stuck-pipe incidents, fishing was

DBP Probability of Success. Figs. 8 and 9 can be used to con-

attempted after spotting a DBP failed to free the pipe. Fishing is

struct a chart to predict the future probability of freeing pipe at any

an attempt to free stuck pipe with fishing jars. Fishing operations

given soaking time after spotting a pill. 3 For example, from past

typically are begun after spotting the pills fails to free stuck pipe.

experience, the initial probability of freeing stuck pipe by spotting On some of these 43 incidents, multiple fishing attempts were

a pill in a straight hole is 86 %. This means that in six out of seven made. A fishing attempt is a single round trip with jars. In total,

incidents where pills were spotted and allowed to soak, the pipes 68 fishing attempts were made on the 43 incidents where fishing

eventually came free. As time elapses after sticking, the chances was done.

of freeing the pipes decrease. The overall success rate of fishing operations has been poor. While

Fig. 10 was constructed from Fig. 8 to illustrate the future prob- our overall success rate offreeing pipe by soaking DBP's was 46%,

ability of freeing pipe at any given time during soaking for straight- the overall success rate of freeing stuck pipe by jarring after spot-

hole incidents. For example, if a pill has soaked 13 hours, the prob- ting a DBP failed was 33 % (14 out of 43). Fishing attempts are

ability of freeing the pipe initially drops from 86 % to 83 % (from unsuccessful most of the time. Therefore, attempts to free stuck

six out of seven to five out of six). This occurs because one of the pipe by fishing should be applied selectively.

seven stuck pipes in Fig. 8 came free during the first 12 hours after Fig. 13 shows the distribution of fishing attempts and successes

sticking. Past 12 hours, only five of six total pipes were freed. This vs. time after becoming stuck. Note that no pipe was freed from

analogy can be continued for each discrete time interval. Fig. 10 sticking after 96 hours, although 18 fishing attempts were made

36 r----------------------------------------, 3 r-----------------------------------------,

33

30

10/27

27

1/2

24 2

21 8/19

Time To Spot Success Rate

18

15 006 Hr•• 57% (417)

6-18 Hrs. 39% (18146)

12 18+ Hrs. 25% (218)

9

61------

3 1/1 0/2

0/2

01-----

6 12 18 24 36 48+ o 6 12 18 24 30 48+

Time (Hrs.) 1s1 DB Pili Soaking Times (Hrs.)

TOlal: 617

Fig. 7-Effect of delay before spotting first DBP for freeing

stuck pipe, 61 directional holes. Arrow: in 19 incidents where Fig. 8-Soak times for first DBP, seven straight holes (may

DBP's were spotted 12 to 18 hours after the pipe stuck, 8 include fishing incidents). Arrow: in two incidents where the

pipes (42.1%) came free. DBP soaked 12 to 18 hours, both pipes (100%) came free.

Number 01 Incidents Future Success Rate (%) 01 Freeing The Pipe AI Any Given Soak TIme

22 , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , l00r---------~~==~~----------~

20 1/19 90

18 80

16 70

IESTl = 24 Hrs.

14 7/13 60

12 50

~....:....:....--,

10 40

8 30

1/6

6

20

4

10

2

o

o 6 12 18 24 30 48+

6 12 18 24 36 48+ lsI DB Pili Soaking Time (Hrs.)

1st DB Pili Soaking Times (Hrs.)

Fig. 9-Soak times for first DBP, 65 directional holes (may DBP, seven straight holes. Arrow: after a DBP soaks 12 hours,

include fishing incidents). Arrow: in seven incidents where the chance of freeing the pipe is 83.3% (five of the six re-

the DBP soaked 6 to 12 hours, five pipes (71.4%) came free. maining stuck pipes were freed after 12 hours).

after this time. Therefore, 96 hours should be considered an abso- ways are practical alternatives to freeing stuck pipe. Therefore, the

lute limit for continuing or beginning attempts to free stuck pipe decision to implement or continue attempts to free stuck pipe by

either by spotting and soaking pills or by running fishing jars. spotting and soaking pills or by running fishing jars normally should

Fig. 14 shows the distribution of stuck-pipe incidents and freeing be based solely on economic considerations.

success vs. time after the first backoff was made and fishing oper- Economic analysis of attempts to free stuck pipe yields the fol-

ations began. In 77% (10 out of 13) of the cases, the pipe came lowing items.

free within 24 hours after the first backoff, and all the pipes were Alternative costs. These costs include the cost of securing the

freed within 72 hours after backoff. stuck drillstring with cement plugs, the cost of the bottomhole as-

We may infer from Fig. 14 that very little chance of freeing the sembly and drill pipe lost in hole, and the cost of placing the well

pipe remains ifthe first jarring attempt is unsuccessful. This is shown in a condition to proceed with plugback and abandon or sidetrack

clearly in Fig. 15, which plots the number of jarring attempts made operations. If the well is to be sidetracked, the costs ofiaying side-

vs. successes. Note that all but one of the pipes freed with fishing track plugs, sidetracking, and redrilling the hole are included.

jars came free on the first jarring attempt. The success rate was Successful fishing costs. These costs include the cost of mixing,

only 7% (lout 14) on second attempts and was 0% where three spotting, and soaking a DBP or backing off and running fishing

or more attempts were made. Except in extraordinary circumstances, jars. They also include the costs of any planned conditioning trips

fishing operations should be terminated if the first attempt with jars made before drilling is resumed.

is unsuccessful.

Hole angle, hole size, and mud weight were investigated in the

43 cases where fishing was done to determine whether these fac-

tors affected the chances of freeing the pipe with fishing jars. By ,

Plpo Stick.

sorting incidents according to ITF, a consistent pattern of jarring Attempt To Work/Jar Free (Up To 3 Hro.)

1) Stop Continue Operation.

4 % (lout of 27) where I TF = 0 to 45, 25 % (one out of four) where

ITF=45 to 55, and 83% (10 out of 12) where ITF<?55. This pat- ~ra.

or_ng

tern shows that ITF is a strong predictor of fishing-jar success.

~)~':'k'

These statistics represent cases where fishing jars were run after Jor Altompt

the pipe failed to come free after spotting and soaking a DBP.

No _Speclllc

Info. Avallllblll

RFC. In general, no operational, safety, or regulatory reasons ex- To Chongo

DecIllIon

ist to attempt to free stuck pipe in the Gulf of Mexico. The options

Y••

of plugging back and sidetracking or abandoning a hole almost al-

Mix And Spot DB Pili ASAP Book For ESTl AI Foil..... :

Straight· 30 H..... Directional· 24 H....

Future Suc:cesa Rate (%) 01 Freeing The Pipe AI Any Given Soaking TIme

100 Conlin... Dporotlon.

90 =

80 ~

1 I ITF >55

~ Slrai9h~

70 ~

No _Specmc

60 ~ I TF 45·55

Holes

In'o. Avalleble

ToChongo

50 Doctllon

h

40

30 Dlrec1ional Holes

20 ~

I

10 ~ ITF <45 Continue Oper8tlonl

I

o

o 12 24 36 48 Proceed WIth P&A, PB Or SIr

1111 DB PIli Soaking TIme (Hr••)

Fig. 11-Composite future success of freeing stuck pipe af- Fig. 12-Stuck-pipe decision flow chart (PB = plug back,

ter soaking one DBP. P&A = plugback and abandon, and Str = sidetrack).

Fishing Attempts Number Of Incidents

33 ~r----------------------------------,

30 Maximum Allowable I 18

Fishing Time. I

27 16

24

I 14

0/14

21 6/19 3/20 12

0/18 10/10

18

10

15

8

12

3/9 6

9

4

6 012

2

3 1/1

0

0 24 72 96+ 24 48 72 96+

TIme (Hrs.) Time (Hrs.)

Fig. 13-Fishing attempts as a function of time, 67 cases Fig. 14-Effect oftime after backing off, spotting the first DBP,

where DBP's were used. Arrow: in 20 fishing attempts with- and after fishing began, 42 incidents. Arrow: in nine cases

in 48 to 72 hours after sticking, 3 pipes (15%) came free. Af- where fishing began 48 to 72 hours after the first backoff,

ter 96 hours, <p. =0%. two pipes (22.2%) came free.

Unsuccessful fishing costs. These costs include the fishing costs jars may not be warranted. In some cases, proceeding with a side-

described above plus the alternative costs of sidetracking or aban- track may be more economical than beginning fishing. An actual

doning necessary if the pipe continues to stick. stuck-pipe incident from the database has been selected to illustrate

Probability of success offreeing stuck pipe. Although we cannot how the flow chart can save money by reducing the rig time spent

predict whether the pipe will come free in any individual case, we trying to free the pipe.

can estimate the probability that the pipe can be freed by soaking East Breaks Block 172, Well No.2. A 7.625-in. drilling liner

or fishing by calculating the I TF and referring to the pertinent was set at 9,525-ft measured depth (MD), and a 6.5-in. hole was

figures. drilled to 13,715-ft MD. The well was logged and a density-neutron

The fishing cost has two possible values depending on whether logging tool was stuck at 13,163 ft. Drillpipe was stripped over

the pipe is freed. The two outcomes can be analyzed with expected- the logging wireline. The drillpipe became stuck at 13,083 ft while

value analysis by defining an RFC4: pulling out of the rope socket. The mud was 16.8 Ibm/gal and the

CRF=<P sCsF +(I-<P s)C UF ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2) maximum openhole angle was 22 o.

The decision-making process outlined in the chart may be ap-

Attempts to free stuck pipe should be begun only if CRF < CA plied with the following steps.

(where CA =the costs to plugback and abandon or sidetrack). If 1. Calculate I TF and initial <P s'

CA < CSF ' no further analysis is required. In most cases, however,

CSF < CA' As noted before, <Psis highest when the pipe first sticks, ITF=25[(5 xO.523)+(3 xO.2oo)+0.385] -45.8=44.2

and as time elapses, <P s decreases (Fig. 11) and CRF increases. and <P s=0.054 (from Fig. 5 or 11 at 0 hours), where cx=22° and

Fishing operations should be continued only for as long as i",=0.523 (from Fig. 1), d H =6.5 in. and id =0.385 (from Fig.

CRF < CA- CRF should be re-evaluated periodically to determine 2), and W= 16.8 Ibm/gal and iw=0.2oo (fr{jm Fig. 3).

whether continuing attempts to free the pipe are economically 2. Calculate CSF and CUF for spotting a DBP. For CSF , add

feasible. these costs: (1) cost to mix, spot, and soak the DBP for 24 hours

($85,000), (2) cost of washing and disposing of cuttings ($15,000),

Stuck-Pipe Decision Flow Chart. General Guidelines. To pro- and (3) cost of the conditioning trip before logging ($45,000). The

vide a framework for stuck-pipe decision-making, a flow chart was total CsF =$145,000.

constructed (Fig. 12) incorporating <P s from the relevant figures The alternative costs in this case were to sidetrack and redrill

and CRF . These rules circumscribe the general decision-making

the well. To estimate sidetrack (alternative) costs, add the lost-in-

process.

hole charge for the logging tools and drillstring ($369,000) to the

1. Do not try to free stuck pipe if CRF> CA' Attempts to free

costs to plugback, sidetrack, redrill, and log the well ($901,000).

stuck pipe should be terminated when <P s declines to the point

The total sidetrack cost is $1,270,000.

where CRF > CA' This is the central principle of the risk econom-

ics aspect of the study.

2. Allow 3 hours after sticking to work or jar the pipe free. If Number or Incidents

the pipe does not come free in 3 hours, spot a DBP as soon as pos- .r-------------------------------------~

sible (Fig. 7).

3. Do not make more than one fishing attempt to free pipe (Fig. "

10

15). 45

4. Do not begin or continue attempts to free stuck pipe 96 hours 40

35

after the time of sticking. In 18 stuck-pipe incidents where DBP's

30

were spotted that occurred over 10 years, no stuck pipes have been

25

freed after 96 hours (Fig. 13). 20

15 1114

Application. General. Significant cost savings can be achieved by 10

implementing the recommendations in this study. The main con- 5

cept used to save money is to reduce the amount of time spent try- o

ing to free stuck pipe. Experience has shown that the chances of 2 3 4 5 6 7

Number or fishing Attempts

freeing stuck pipe decline with time. In the past, we have spent

too much time fishing with little or no chance of success on many

Fig. 15-Flshing attempts with jars and DBP, 68 cases. Ar-

wells. row: in 43 cases where only one fishing attempt was made,

From the flow chart in Fig. 12, it may be shown that, in a 13 pipes (30.2%) came free.

particular incident, spotting a pill or spending any time fishing with

Authors 2. Do not spot mUltiple pills on wells where the first DBP was

allowed to soak for the ESTL. Multiple pills have proved unneces-

R.M. Shivers III Is sary in straight holes and have a low success rate for freeing pipe

manager of the in directional or low lIF wells.

Drilling Engineer- 3. The success rates of DBP's differ greatly on the basis of lIF

ing Dept. for Texa- and range from 5% for lIF <45 to 93% for /YF>55.

co North Sea, U.K., 4. The probability of freeing stuck pipe by spotting a DBP is

In Aberdeen. He highest immediately after the pill is spotted and declines rapidly

joined Getty 011 Co. over time in all cases.

in 1981 and spent 9

years in various

Gulf of Mexico op- Fishing.

erations and drill- I. The chances of freeing stuck pipe with fishing jars after spot-

Shivers Domangue Ing engineering ting a DBP fails to free the pipe differ greatly on the basis of lIF

assignments with and range from 4% for lIF<45 to 83% for lIF>55.

Getty and Texaco U.S.A. He holds BS, MEng, and DEng 2. Most stuck pipes that came free after fishing did so within 24

degrees in mechanical engineering from Texas A&M U. R.... hours after backoff and during the first jarring run. Do not attempt

Domangue is a petroleum engineer with Texaco U.S.A. in to free stuck pipe with fishing jars a second time if the first attempt

New Orleans, where he has worked on various Gulf of Mexi-

co operations assignments since 1983. He holds a BS degree

is unsuccessful after spotting a DBP.

in petroleum engineering from Louisiana State U.

Applications and Economics. Decisions regarding attempts to free

stuck pipe generally should be based on economics only. Attempts

Then determine CUF=CF+CA , where CF =$85,000+$15,000 to free stuck pipe by spotting pills or running fishing jars should

and CA =$1,270,000. C uF =$1,370,000. be begun if CRF < CA (plugback and abandon or sidetrack). Once

3. Calculate CRF' implemented, such operations should be terminated when

CRF=(J' sCsF +(I-(J's)CUF =(0.054x 145,0(0)+(0.946 x CRF>CA-

The total CRF , $1,304,000, exceeds the total sidetrack costs, 1. Ayers, R.C. and O'Reily, J.E.: "Offshore Operators Committee Gulf

$1,270,000. of Mexico Spotting Fluid Survey," paper SPE 18683 presented at the

1989 SPE/lADC Drilling Conference, New Orleans, Feb. 28-March 3.

4. Use of the pill is not economically justifiable because of its 2. Love, T.: "Stickiness Factor: A New Way of Looking at Stuck Pipe,"

low success rate (CRF > CA ). At this point, plugback and sidetrack Oil & Gas J. (Oct. 3, 1983).

operations should have begun. Instead, 139.5 hours and approxi- 3. Keller, P.D., Brinkman, P.E., and Taneja, P.K.: "Economic and Statisti-

mately $350,000 were spent spotting two pills and making two at- cal Analysis of Time Limitations for Spotting Fluids and Fishing Oper-

tempts to jar the pipe free, both unsuccessfully. This amount would ations," paper OTC 4792 presented at the 1984 Annual Offshore

have been saved if the decision flow chart had been followed. The Technology Conference, Houston, May 7-9.

4. Harrison, C.G.: "Fishing Decisions Under Uncertainty," JPT (Feb.

result would have been the same (i.e., the well still would have 1982) 299-300.

been sidetracked).

Nomenclature

Conclusions CA = alternative costs, M, U.S. dollars

General. CF = fishing costs, M, U.S. dollars

I. Straight wells should be selected instead of directional wells CRF = RFC, M, U.S. dollars

whenever possible because only 8.6% of the total stuck-pipe inci- CSF = successful fishing cost, M, U.S. dollars

dents occurred in straight wells. The probability of freeing stuck C UF = unsuccessful fishing cost, M, U.S. dollars

pipe is higher in straight wells than in directional wells (66.7% vs. dB = hole diameter, L, in.

44.8%).

2. The lIF has been developed as a function of mud weight, hole

size, and inclination to predict the probability of freeing stuck pipe.

i:

id = hole size success rate, dimensionless

= mud weight success rate, dimensionless

i", = hole angle success rate, dimensionless

The lIF is 90% accurate in incidents where DBP's were spotted. lIF = Texaco freeing index, dimensionless

3. Efforts to free stuck pipe should be made as soon as possible (J's = probability of success, dimensionless

after sticking because the probability of freeing stuck pipe declines W = mud weight, m/L3, Ibm/gal

rapidly over time. The longer the pipe is stuck, the less chance there IX = hole angle, degrees

is of freeing it. In 18 stuck-pipe incidents where DBP's were spot-

ted that occurred over 10 years, no pipe was ever freed 96 hours SI Metric Conversion Factors

after sticking. Ninety-six hours should be considered an absolute ft x 3.048* E-Ol m

cutoff point for fishing operations. in. X 2.54* E+OO cm

gal x 3.785412 E-03 m3

Spotting Fluids. Ibm x 4.535 924 E-Ol kg

I. Allow 3 hours to work or jar the pipe free after sticking, then

spot a DBP as soon as possible. DBP's are relatively insensitive • Conversion factor is exact. SPEDC

Original SPE manuscript received lor review March 11, 1991. Revised manuscript received

to time delays up to 48 hours in straight holes, but their effective- Nov. 13, 1992. Paper accepted for publication March 10, 1992. Paper (SPE 21998) first

ness declines rapidly over time in directional holes. presented at the 1991 SPEIIADC Drilling Conference held in Amsterdam, March 11-14.

- DRILLLING techЗагружено:siriuslot
- Drilling and workover best practicesЗагружено:mbhadel
- Rig Designs 2010Загружено:Yuth Yuthdanai
- Basic Drilling EngineeringЗагружено:bhuvanchaudhari
- Stick-slip Training GuideЗагружено:Alexander
- Selmo Plate 1Загружено:Pattrishia Alyanna Selmo
- Drilling RigЗагружено:Erika Arroyo
- Stream FileЗагружено:hiyeon
- 00059263Загружено:phalanaxus
- Global Production Practices - CBMЗагружено:godhanichintan
- Hole CapacityЗагружено:Abdul Hameed Omar
- 091 Preventing Crown CollisionsЗагружено:alduwaiki
- Presentation 1Загружено:Bambang
- SCR-Slow Circulation RateЗагружено:Nagaraju Jalla
- Basic Drilling Engineering[1]Загружено:habboosh
- SOP CPTЗагружено:sunartililik
- 11-06 NOGEPA NewsletterЗагружено:jahehe2000
- Part 7 - Shallow Gas BlowoutsЗагружено:JohnSmith
- 00079797Загружено:JohnSmith
- 2095Загружено:Dmz Freakz
- 00037639.pdfЗагружено:pendexx
- Axial Capacity of Augered Displacement PilesЗагружено:MUHAMMAD ALI
- FaceDrilling3.pdfЗагружено:Anonymous wL79a0YXfp
- Tube Well Tender Jajeetpur.docЗагружено:Brij Pal Singh
- Workshop on Multilateral and Extended Reach WellsЗагружено:byed
- DTS-032Загружено:Dodo Prasetyo
- 732d63f0-8cfa-47af-856e-b2028f52d3b8-160515225303Загружено:chinedu
- LCI 750SpecSheetЗагружено:andy131078
- Documents.tips Boq Metro 6Загружено:Budi Santony
- ouahrani2018Загружено:Anonymous VNu3ODGav

- Improving the Accuracy of Mechanical Backoff in Stuck Pipe Situation During Drilling-convertedЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- M 2 Prosper AideyanЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- SPEЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- andersen2009.pdfЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- Tellez 2012Загружено:Jorgito Arias
- Pra Die 2007Загружено:Jorgito Arias
- Charlie2004 Reverse CirculationЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- 18b_IWCF Homework Answers Day 1_Answers HighlightedЗагружено:Ahmed Ayad
- SPE 187447 MS_spivey2017_Challenges & Lessons Implementing RTO DAS ExxonЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- SPE-29460-MS_samuel1997_A Practical Technique to Estimate the Qi-KFormation in a Kicking WellЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- SPE-92565-MS_samuel2005_Tortuosity Factors for Highly Tortuous Wells_A Practical ApproachЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- SPE-90048-MS_samuel2004_Accelerating Drilling Technology With EKnowledge Factory_Changing ParadigmЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- SPE-29408-MS_powell1995_Minimization Of Formation Damage Filter Cake Deposition & Stuck Pipe PotentialЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- SPE-128129-MS_Cake Grueso.pdfЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- SPE-21999-MS_bradley1991_A Task Force Approach to Reducing Stuck Pipe CostsЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- SPE-27528-MS_howard1994_Tracking Stuck Pipe Probability While DrillingЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- SPE-28298-MS_wisnie1994_Quantifying Stuck Pipe Risk in Gulf of Mexico Oil and Gas DrillingЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- adkins1993.pdfЗагружено:Amirhossein
- Adult LearnersЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- SLB Panel 5 Perspective Stuck Pipe 1991Загружено:Jorgito Arias
- Catalogo Tuberias APIЗагружено:exergic
- Oxy Limiters Ryan Davis 10K Forum PresentationЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- Casing Drilling & Smear Effect AnalysisЗагружено:AhmedButt
- MSC Colorado PlasteringЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- PrecisionTree5 EnЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- Jiimaa_GirmaaЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- Super Fishing JarЗагружено:Cristian Popa
- Transformacion DigitalЗагружено:Jorgito Arias
- Data Mining_Differential Sticking_Naraghi Et AlЗагружено:Jorgito Arias

- Square Topology for NoCsЗагружено:Journal of Computing
- Project Presentation-Virtual KeyboardЗагружено:Vijay Raghavan
- Guitar Hero: from Icon of Popular Culture to Nostalgic Self-DesignЗагружено:Milan Popadic
- DsrЗагружено:José Carlos Carvalho
- L78S05Загружено:Mirceam94
- Adult Learning Principles.PDFЗагружено:Paras Ponkhey Sundanis
- d vijay kumar.pdfЗагружено:Vijay Pandit
- TD_AlbertoLopezMartinez.pdfЗагружено:Carlos Manuel Carranza Vega
- Commissioning Guide Integration Manual ZTEЗагружено:David Mdeva
- ilpЗагружено:api-318610627
- Zen4 ManualЗагружено:singulares2199
- Rivkle ElasticЗагружено:Ace Industrial Supplies
- Critique of Pure ReasonЗагружено:foronereason
- ch09Загружено:ROHAN CHOPDE
- 20220760L IS15 GeneralЗагружено:jgasswmc
- PC5204 V2.0 - Manual Instalare.pdfЗагружено:Darie Silviu
- Brochure.ex TENDЗагружено:Billy Zunun
- Tailings WorkshopЗагружено:lcfiner10
- Touch ScreenЗагружено:Dipesh Hargude
- burrini1997Загружено:Carlos Sopán Benaute
- Citizen JournalismЗагружено:Mikki Eugenio
- Intuition is mЗагружено:Darwin Dispo
- nikhilraj planning engg portfolio resume pdf.pdfЗагружено:NikhilRaj
- JURNAL SKRIPSI PUTRI AGUSTINA K4306007.docЗагружено:Udha Sosial Lamp
- v2 Led Lcd Screen Panel RepairЗагружено:Luan Barbosa da Costa
- Research Design Notes Weeks 7-12Загружено:seggy7
- 5_RUEL-A.-BRILLIANTES(1).pdfЗагружено:Aramis Led
- SPA- Court-ejecment-Sample.docЗагружено:Kaiser Olaso
- Goodness FactorЗагружено:Vikas Barala
- MS 544 Part 8Загружено:5483370

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.