SPE/IADC

SPE/IADC 13490

Air Drilling Practices in the Midcontinent and Rocky

Mountain Areas
by J.S. Sheffield and J.J. Sitzman, Exxon Co. U.S.A.
SPE Members

Copyright 1985, SPE/IADC 1985 Drilling Conference

This paper was presented at the SPE/IADC 1985 Drilling Conference held in New Orleans, Louisiana, M~rch 6-8, 1985. The material is .subject to correc-
tion by the author. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Wnte SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, Texas
75083-3836.

Abstract When and When Not to Air Drill

This paper is adapted to air drilling in the The advantages of using air as a circulating
Midcontinent and Rocky Mountain areas. A compila- fluid are substantial. In comparison with mud
tion of operational experience and design data drilling, rates of penetration are significantly
dealing with air drilling is explained and sum- increased; sometimes three to four fold. This
marized. results in less drilling time which in turn means
dollars saved. Also, less bits are used when
Discussion includes when and when not to air drilling with air. Wellbore problems such as lost
drill, how to plan for air drilling, and different circulation and sloughing of sensitive shales are
drilling strategies employed during air drilling virtually eliminated. Additionally, air drilling
operations. allows for the use of percussion drilling tools
which can improve drilling rates and/or hole
Operational experience is reviewed in several deviation problems. Another big, advantage is
Rocky Mountain areas and in Arkansas. Air drilling being able to detect the presence of hydrocarbons
has proven to be a significant factor in reducing almost immediately.
drilling costs in these areas. Conclusions and
recommendations are made with regard to the major Considering the advantages of air drilling
areas discussed in the paper concerning what well over mud drilling, conditions must be evaluated to
conditions lend themselves to air drilling, and determine when to use air or not to use air. The
when to use mist, inhibited mist or foam. following summarizes suggested conditions for use
and circumstances which tend to restrict its use:
Methods to utilize air drilling to its full-
est potential such as the use of air hammers and When to Air Drill
polymer foam drilling are also discussed.
Drilling in areas of hard rock is particu-
Introduction larly appealing to air drilling because
the formations are generally impermeable
Conventional hard rock drilling is slow and and therefore minimize water inflow.
expensive. Many techniques have been and are
being attempted to improve penetration rates in Lost circulation may be prevalent in the
hard rock drilling. Some of the progress that has well. This problem is virtually eliminated.
been made in hard rock drilling is improved con-
ventional tri-cone bit design, improved drilling The presence of formations sensitive to
muds, improved methods for getting more weight on excessive damage by drilling fluids.
the bit, improved diamond bit design, improved
hydraulics and improved air misting and foam Adequate strength in formations being
drilling techniques. drilled through to withstand mechanical
stresses without collapse.
This paper addresses Exxon's field experience
in hard rock air and foam drilling in the Limited groundwater flow.
Midcontinent and Rocky Mountain areas and covers
pertinent operational design topics. An important Unlikelihood of high pressure formations
ingredient to any air or foam drilling operation or hydrogen sulfide gas.
is knowing when and where to use it. An approach
to this and other key operational aspects are
offered.

575
2 AIR DRILLING PRACTICES IN THE MID-CONTINENT AND ROCKY MOUNTAIN AREAS
Areas where drilling rate is highly sensi-
tive to borehole pressures. Due to reduc-
tion in hydrostatic head when using air
substantial rates of penetration are
realized.
When Not to Air Drill
Known areas of large groundwater flows.
However, techniques such as foam drilling
have been developed to handle excessive
water flows to some degree.
Weak formations or high dip angles are
present. Unconsolidated formations, very
brittle rock, or high dips usually require
mud in the hole to prevent sloughing.
High formation and pore pressures. If a
well needs to be shut in during air drill-
ing operations, almost the full force of
the bottomhole pressure will be reflected
at surface. If this pressure is higher
than the BOP stack rating or the casing
seat integrity, a potentially dangerous
situation exists.
Presence of HzS in formations to be drilled
through.
Formations which air erode easily. How-
ever, this could also be remedied by a low
velocity foam system.
Areas where high rates of penetration are
achieved which is usually with clear water
as a drilling fluid. In these cases, eco-
nomics will be the deciding factor. The
question is, will the increased penetra-
tion rate and the savings on bits offset
the additional cost per day of the com-
pressors and other equipment needed for
air drilling.
Planning
When planning to air drill a well several
factors should be looked at before decisions are
made. The first step is to use the above con-
siderations as a check list to determine if your
well meets all or some of these items. If not all
the criteria for air use are met, estimate the
degree of risk for your specific well; it still
may be economical to attempt air drilling.
The second step would be to analyze offset
wells. In some instances, another operator could
have used air and been either successful or unsuc-
cessful. Either way, this could help in deter-
mining the chances of you having a successful
well. Also, offset wells indicate any hole
problems, such as lost circulation or sloughing
problems which could be remedied by air drilling.
A third step would be to evaluate the geology
of the well. Age of rock and type of rock plays
an important role in air drilling. Young rock
such as Jurassic and Triassic seem to contain more
water than older rock. Also, younger rock is
576
SPE13490
usually more sensitive to sloughing due to its
structural weakness. Lithology of the rock should
be analyzed to determine the amount of sandstone
and shale that is present. Hard, tight sandstones
are excellent for air drilling along with older
shale sections. Also air drilling has worked in
hard limes, anhydrites, and quartzitic zones.
A final step would be to analyze the economics
of air drilling. Estimate the volume of air
needed and determine the cost of an air equipment
package to provide this amount. Compare this to
the expected mud costs taking into consideration
hole and lost circulation problems. In some cases
the costs may be equal. Finally, calculate the
breakeven rate of penetration for air and compare
this to your anticipated rate of penetration. In
most instances, the increase in ROP, which is
equivalent to dollars saved, outweighs the addi-
tional cost for equipment or chemical products.
Areas of high rates of penetration is a case where
air is usually uneconomical.
No matter which order or what method of
planning is chosen, time must be taken to fully
analyze the use for air. The tremendous advan-
tages of air definitely support the effort to
determine if air has a potential. If planning of
a well would take this initial approach, more
operators and drilling contractors would realize
substantial economic benefits in areas thought of
as "mud country" •
Drilling Strategies
Once the planning stage has been completed,
different techniques and drilling methods should
be evaluated to develop the overall well design.
This will insure the best possible chance for a
successful air drilling operation. Several stra-
tegies can be employed such as the redesigning of
a casing program, use of inhibited mist, polymer
foam, or aerated fluid.
Simply redesigning a casing program can make
the difference in a well's success or failure. By
setting a surface string deeper or incorporating
an intermediate casing string, a well could
possibly be air drilled to substantial depths.
However, one must always consider the economic
impact of setting more casing. Due to its
expense, it must be compared to the cost savings
expected by drilling with air.
If water sensitive shales or soft, brittle
formations are. a concern, the use of inhibited KCl
mist or a low velocity polymer foam should be con-
sidered. These are both low hydrostatic cir-
culating mediums which provide equivalent rates of
penetration as with straight air (dusting). They
also provide certain advantages over dusting such
as the ability to tolerate water and better hole
cleaning properties. The major reason they should
be considered is that they allow for continued
drilling with air after straight air drilling is
halted by water.
Aerated fluid should also be considered if
too much water is present to air drill and if the
SPE13490 JOHN S. SHEFFIELD and JOSEPH J. SITZMAN
wellbore is sloughing or severe lost circulation
is occurring. In most cases, these problems can
be cured by this method with the added attraction
of faster rate of penetration than conventional
mud drilling. However, corrosion problems can
become severe; therefore, it is recommended that
special attention be given to the monitoring of
the drill string corrosion rate.
OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCE
Paradox Basin
The Paradox Basin is located in the Colorado
Plateau region of southeast Utah and southwest
Colorado. It encompasses about 20,000 square
miles of high plateau and desert country charac-
terized by broad mesas, broken sage plains and
isolated "laccolithic" mountain ranges. Since
1982, Exxon has drilled three wells in this area,
each with slightly different results, using air as
the primary circulating fluid. The geology in the
subject wells ranged in the surface portion of the
holes from the Cretaceous-Mancos Shales to the
Triassic-Wingate Sandstone with the majority of
the footage drilled through the Permian-Cutler
Group and the upper portion of the Pennsylvanian-
Hermosa Group.
The initial and highly successful attempt at
utilizing air was the Onion Creek Federal No. 1
located in Grand County, Utah, approximately 22
miles northeast of Moab. Air was used from sur-
face to a depth of 11,725 feet resulting in a tre-
mendous cost savings for this interval. Air was
selected due to a nearby offset showing moderate
success with air and also due to the high risk of
lost circulation and sloughing of water sensitive
shales. The overall well design for air was to
drill a 17-1/2 inch hole to 3, 000 feet and set
13-3/8 inch surface casing. A 12-1/4 inch would
continue underneath surface casing to as deep a
depth as possible on air not to exceed 12,600
feet, the estimated top of the Paradox Salt.
Correlating with the offset well, a depth of 9,500
feet was selected as a goal to reach with air.
The well spudded in the Triassic-Wingate for-
mation using straight air with an approximate air
volume of 4, 000 CFM. Drilling continued through
the Chinle, Moenkopi, and into the Cutler to the
planned depth of 3, 000 feet without contacting a
wet formation. Average rate of penetration was
20.7 ft./hr. with 35,000 pounds of bit weight. A
slick bottom hole assembly was run consisting of
14, 10, 9, and 7 inch drill collars accompanied by
a shock sub for smooth drilling. No deviation
problems developed in the surface hole with this
set up and drilling parameters.
Dusting continued underneath surface casing
in a 12-1/4 inch hole to a depth of 4, 687 feet
where water seepage was encountered making it
necessary to convert to an air mist system.
However, during this interval of dusting, an air
volume of 2,500 CFM was used and a weight on bit
of 30,000 pounds to achieve an average rate of
penetration of 24.6 ft./hr. A packed bottom hole
assembly utilizing string reamers and stabilizers
577
3
was being used to control any deviation which
might develop.
As air misting operations continued, the air
volume was increased to 3,400 CFM to account for
the water being carried in the air stream. As the
water influxes became excessive, hole cleaning and
pressure problems started to develop. The rate of
penetration had also decreased to 11.2 ft./hr. due
to controlled drilling with 10-15,000 pounds of
bit weight to reduce angle. However, this was
still substantially faster than the other wells
drilled with mud. Based on this ROP and the deve-
loping hole problems, another air system had to be
selected that would maintain this rate of penetra-
tion and manage large amounts of water. There-
fore, at 7, 300 feet misting was converted to a
polymer foam system.
The foam used in this well consisted of a
chemical foamer, a synthetic polymer, and KCl
water. The foamer in combination with the polymer
created a mixture exhibiting superior hole
cleaning properties and, due to its encapsulating
characteristic, the ability to handle larger water
influxes than air mist. The KCl mix water was
used for shale inhibiting while drilling through
sensitive formations.
Drilling with this foam allowed us to main-
tain an average rate of penetration of 8.0 ft./hr.
while applying only 10-15,000 pounds of bit
weight. However, a drill off test with 30,000
pounds resulted in a rate of 20-25 ft./hr. But,
even with a packed bottom hole assembly the angle
increased over 1.5° in 100 ft.
Air volume needed to circulate the foam was
found to be 70% less than that needed for air
mist; 1,000 CFM vs. 3,400 CFM. This resulted in
an equipment cost savings of more than 50% due to
less air being required. In addition, less air
meant lower annular velocity which reduced hole
erosion and formation damage which usually accom-
panies high velocity air systems.
Drilling continued to a depth of 11,725 feet
where a salt water flow, estimated at 400 barrels
per hour, put a halt to the foam drilling. The
hole was therefore mudded up with an 8.6 PPG mud
and drilling continued. The average rate of
penetration at this point dropped to 3. 5 ft./hr.
representing a 56% reduction'as compared with foam
drilling. Based on this and the expected rates
while drilling with mud, an estimated 53 operating
days and $1 million (based on $19,000 daily well
cost) were saved as a result of surpassing the
goal of 9,500 feet and drilling with air to 11,725
feet.
The second well drilled in the Paradox Basin
was the Gold Basin Federal No. 1 located in the
Manti-LaSal Mountains near Moab in San Juan
County. The geology was anticipated to be similar
to the Onion Creek Federal No. 1 making it a prime
candidate for air drilling. Therefore, the basic
drilling plan was identical to th:!.s well; dust as
deep as possible, convert to air mist if water
contacted, and if necessary use a polymer foam. A
4 AIR DRILLING PRACTICES IN THE MID-CONTINENT AND ROCKY MOUNTAIN AREAS
20 inch surface hole was planned through the
Jurassic-Triassic formations from the MOrrison
through the MOenkopi to a depth of 3,500 feet at
the top of the Cutler Group. A 12-1/4 inch hole
would continue through the Cutler and into the
Upper Hermosa where a water flow was expected.
However, due to unexpected geology slightly dif-
ferent results were achieved on this well.
Problems began when conductor pipe had to be
set deep to case of surface waters and boulders
discovered below the location pad. A 30 inch con-
ductor hole was drilled to 300 feet using mud, but
due to the deviation in the hole only 115 feet of
· 24 inch conductor could be set. The hole was
unloaded with air and drilling with mist was
attempted. However, the 185 feet of open hole
began caving in. This was remedied by filling the
hole with cement to consolidate the boulders.
Again, air mist was used in an attempt to drill
the surface hole but additional boulders were
encountered below 300 feet. Therefore, the deci-
sion was made to drill the surface hole on mud so
hydrostatic pressure could be used to hole back
the formation.
Once surface pipe was set and all surface
waters and boulders were cased off, straight air
was used to drill out. Dusting was carried out
using an air volume of approximately 3,500 CFM.
This continued to a depth of 5,331 feet, where 5
joints of drill pipe were dropped in the hole
necessitating a side track. Before this point,
rate of penetration was averaging 19.5 ft./hr.
with 25-30,000 pounds on the bit. A packed bottom
hole assembly was run due to expected deviation
problem.
Sidetracking was achieved by first pumping a
cement plug and displacing with air. This mini-
mized the amount of water that was placed in the
dry hole. Once the plug was in place and dressed
off to 4, 880 feet, a whipstock was set to kick-
off. A downhole motor was not used due to fluid
required in the air stream to operate it which
would induce unwanted water into the hole.
Dusting continued to a depth of 5,830 feet
where water was contacted. A reduced rate of
penetration of 8. 5 ft./hr. was experienced from
5, 359 feet to 5, 830 feet due to the predominant
drilling of volcanic rock that was first encoun-
tered in the Cutler Formation. An attempt was
made to dry the hole using an industrial drying
agent while drilling from 5,830 feet to 5,912 feet
with very little success. Therefore, misting had
to incorporated to continue on air.
At a depth of 9,826 feet, a water flow (esti-
mated at 300 barrels per hour) was encountered
which required the hole to be mudded-up. No
attempt was made to foam due to the depth of the
wellbore and the unsuccessful attempt to unload
the hole of water. During the interval misted to
9,000 feet, rate of penetration averaged 6.5
ft./hr. due to excessive amounts of volcanic rock
and a reduction in bit weight from 35,000 to
15,000 pounds necessary to control deviation.
578
SPE13490
However, below 9, 000 feet the formation was pre-
dominantly sandstone and shale of the Lower Cutler
and Upper Hermosa with intermi tant stringers of
volcanic rock. This change resulted in an
increase in rate of penetration to 10 ft./hr.
Based on the offset wells drilled with mud,
rate of penetration was basically identical to
that on air through the portion of the hole which
drilled predominantly volcanic rock (5,359 feet to
9, 000 feet). However, from 3, 000 feet to 5, 331
feet, estimated rate of penetration on mud was 11
ft./hr. or 44% less than that with air. From
9,000 feet to 9,826 feet, rate of penetration was
estimated at 6 ft./hr. on mud or 40% less than
air. In actuality, this is probably more like 50%
due to the fact that after mudding up on this
well, the drilling rate dropped off to 5 ft./hr.
Therefore, it could be assumed in this well that
air saved us approximately 45% on drilling time,
which based on the 48 days to drill from 3, 500
feet to 9, 826 feet at an average daily cost of
$16,000, this represents a cost savings of $624,000.
Exxon's third well was the Cocklebur Draw
Unit No. 1 located in San Miguel County, Colorado,
approximately eight (8) miles of Naturita. This
well displayed slightly different geology than the
other two wells with respect to the surface hole.
Geology was predominantly young Cretaceous rock of
the Mancos Shale followed by the Dakota Sandstone,
the Jurrasic MOrrison and Entrada formations, and
the Triassic Wingate, Chinle, and MOenkopi. The
Permian Cutler Group did not appear till 4, 980
feet as compared to 740 feet in the Onion Creek
Federal No. 1 and 3, 450 feet in the Gold Basin
Federal No. 1. The overall plan was to drill a
17-1/2 inch hole to the top of the MOrrison at
2,880 feet and set 13-3/8 inch surface casing. An
8-1/2 inch hole would be drilled to total depth
with the option of opening the hole to 12-1/4
inches if a 9-5/8 inch contingency string was
needed. The objective depth for air drilling was
7,500 feet; the point of mud-up due to the possi-
bility of encountering hydrogen sulfide gas in the
Pennsylvanian Hermosa Group.
The well began dusting with 3,000 CFM but the
volume was increased to 3, 850 CFM after fill was
noticed on connections. Dusting continued with an
average rate of penetration of 15.8 ft./hr. to a
depth of 1,167 feet where the Mancos Shale became
wet. A hammer tool and a tri-cone air bit with a
pendulum assembly and a bit weight of 8-10,000
pounds was being employed to control deviation.
The system was converted to a misting operation
with 2% KCl water to inhibit sensitive shales.
Rate of penetration was averaging 17 ft./hr. with
4,050 CFM. Misting continued to a depth of 2,700
feet at which point a 70 barrel per hour water
flow was encountered. Aerated mud was used to
finish the 17-1/2 inch hole to 2, 935 feet uti-
lizing 1,500 CFM of air and achieving a drilling
rate of 13.1 ft./hr. Surface casing was then set
to case off the water flows and the sensitive
Mancos Shales.
Straight air was used to drill into the
Morrison formation underneath surface casing to a
SPE13490 JOHN S. SHEFFIELD and JOSEPH J, SITZMAN
depth of 3,275 feet. The hole was producing very
little water at this point, but surging problems
and no returns made it necessary to begin misting.
A hammer tool was once again being run with a pen-
dulum assembly to obtain an average drilling rate
of 15 ft./hr.
Once misting began in the Morrison formation,
good returns were experienced to a depth of 3,600
feet where a 50 barrel per hour water flow was
contacted. Rate of penetration slowed to 6.5
ft./hr. with the hammer tool therefore it was
removed at 3,730 feet and replaced with a packed
hole assembly. By the time 3, 930 feet had been
reached, the water flow had decreased to 10
barrels per hour and the rate of penetration had
increased to an average of 29 ft./hr. with
25-30,000 pounds on the bit and 3,200 CFM of air.
Misting continued to the top of the Cutler at
4, 982 feet and ended at 5, 470 feet due to hole
cleaning and pressure problems requiring mud. An
average rate of penetration of 20 ft./hr. was
achieved to this point with 20-30,000 pounds of
bit weight and 3,200 CFM. The rate of penetration
after mud-up decreased approximately 55% to 9
ft./hr. with the same bit weight. Also, lost cir-
culation occurred which resulted in mud costs
averaging $4,000 per day; approximately twice as
much as air equipment cost.
Based on these facts and an average daily
cost of $16,000 per day, it is estimated that 23
days and $368,000 were saved due to air. This
savings does not include the cost of lost cir-
culation which would possibly increase these
savings substantially.
Conclusions/Recommendations
Based on the experiences in Paradox Basin
with these three wells, each displaying different
geology with respect to the surface, the following
conclusions regarding air drilling in this region
can be derived:
1. The Cretaceous, Jurassic, and Upper
Triassic Formations are susceptible to
water seepage and flows which make it
necessary to change from straight air
(dusting) to mist or foam.
2. The Permian Cutler Group and the Penn-
sylvanian Hermosa Group air drill with
excellent results. Dusting may be
possible to significant depths in these
formations before water is contacted.
However, continued drilling with air can
usually be accomplished by converting to
a mist operation. Foam may also be a
viable solution·to any problems which may
occur while misting, such as increased
water production or hole cleaning dif-
ficulties.
3. Brine water flows might be encountered in
the Hermosa Group at some point above the
Paradox Salt Formation. In two of the
three wells, the holes were filled with
579
5
water and any attempt to unload the
wellbore with air was futile.
4. Substantial cost savings usually result
from air drilling due to higher rates of
penetration. In most cases increases of
100% or more can be seen over that of
mud. This corresponds with less drilling
days which in turn means dollars saved.
In the three case histories of this
paper, an average of 41 days and $664,000
were saved.
Based on the above conclusion, the following
recommendations are made and should be considered
when planning a well in the Paradox Basin:
1. Safety is the number one concern in any
drilling program. Therefore, the first
thing to consider is the possibility of
H2S being encountered in the area you may
be drilling in. It has been detected in
the Basin in certain areas while in
others it has not. Each well should be
analyzed and a risk level determined.
Also, the chance of high pressure and/or
volumes of hydrocarbon should also be
considered.
2. Review the geology in each well. The
main concern · is which age of rock the
well will be spudding in and what are the
subsequent formations. As was stated in
the conclusions, the Cretaceous,
Jurrasic, and Upper Trias sic formations
are known to contain water which may
cause problems when attempting to air
drill. The Permian and Pennsylvanian
aged formations seem to air drill with
excellent results. Also, analyze the
area for possible severe lost circulation
or water sensitive formations. The cost
alone for combating these problems may
make it advantageous . to incorporate air
drilling into the program.
3. At tempt to design your casing program to
set a surface string at the top of or
into the Permian Cutler Group. This for-
mation can range from a depth near sur-
face to over 5,000 feet. Therefore
economics will have to be evaluated if
there is a significant cost associated
with any additional casing. However, by
setting to the Permian formations the
chances of achieving a successful air
drilling operation is greatly increased.
4. Begin drilling with straight air if
possible; this is the most efficient way
to air drill. Dusting eliminates the
possibility of wetting sensitive for-
mations and any additional costs for
misting or foaming products. If water is
encountered in small amounts, misting can
be used to provide hol€ cleaning. An
inhibited KCl mist may c>.lso be used if
sensitive shales are a concern. If water
flows begin to increase and hole problems
6 AIR DRILLING PRACTICES IN THE MID-CONTINENT AND ROCKY MOUNTAIN AREAS
develop or equipment limitations become a
factor, a polymer foam should be con-
sidered next. The final option would be
to aerate the mud.
5. Due to the ever-growing applications of
air drilling and its increasing use, the
business of providing air equipment is
becoming highly competitive. For this
reason, bids should be taken from dif-
ferent companies and their equipment eva-
luated on volume of air provided, fuel
consumption, and reliability. This will
hopefully insure the most economical and
efficient operation that can be obtained.
Arkansas Arkoma Basin
The Arkoma Basin is an east/west trending
Paleozic basin that is shared by Arkansas and
Oklahoma. It extends from Pittsburg County,
Oklahoma, east and north through Conway County,
Arkansas, with a width of approximately 30 to 50
miles. This paper will limit the subject rna tter
to the Arkansas portion of the basin where
drilling is predominant.
Exxon has drilled a total of 39 wells through
September, 1984, spudding their first well in
western Arkansas in October, 1980. Drilling has
mainly been in the Booneville, Chismville, and
Gragg Fields located in Sebastian and Logan
Counties. During this period, important design
changes in the air drilling have resulted in
substantial cost savings.
Drilling has evolved into a general design
consisting of an air misted 17-1/2 inch hole to
500 or 800 feet (depending on the depth of the
well) and setting a 13-3/8 inch surface string.
Straight air is used underneath casing to total
depth if possible. If water is contacted a KCl
mist is employed to drill as deep as possible and
if necessary mud is used to complete the well. If
it is not possible to continue with misting, the
depth reached with mud, the expected rate of
penetration on mud, and the total depth of the
well, are used to evaluate if it is economical to
case off water to allow for air drilling to TD.
Initial drilling in this area by Exxon was
similar to the standard operating practices in the
area. Air mist was used to drill the 17-1/2 inch
surface hole to 800 feet and 13-3/8 inch casing
set. Straight air was used to drill out with a
7-7/8 inch bit to TD. If water was contacted, a
fresh water mist was then employed to open and
drill to an intermediate casing point of 3, 000
feet. This depth was selected due to a 12-1/4
inch hole experience indicating that this provided
enough casing to seal off all water producing for-
mations. However, the hole would usually begin to
slough as a result of wetting the sensitive shales
and erosion from high annular velocities. Mud was
then required to complete the intermediate hole.
A 9-5/8 inch casing string would finally be set
and air used to drill to total depth.
580
SPE13490
Because of the difficulties associated with
the above program, an inhibited polymer foam was
selected for use in two wells. This system would
allow for stabilization of the wellbore, obtain a
better cleaning action than mist, minimize
hydraulic erosion by minimizing annular velocity,
and eliminate the need for an intermediate casing
string.
In the first well, foaming began at 2,800 ft.
with a rate of penetration three times faster than
estimated mud drilling. No problems were
experienced with the foam until gas was contacted
at approximately 5, 600 feet. The gas began to
produce gaps in the foam and returns became incon-
sistent. Also, the half-life (the amount of time
it takes for 50 cc's of water to fall out of a 100
cc sample) of the foam was being destroyed which
was detrimental to the carrying capacity. Without
warning, drill cuttings packed off around the
drill pipe at 6, 300 feet which resulted in stuck
pipe. After displacing with fresh water mud the
pipe was freed and the hole continued to a total
depth of 7,000 feet.
Although problems eventually occurred from a
gas influx while foaming, it did stabilize the
upper hole shales and allowed us to remain on an
air system through a major portion (3,500 feet) of
the hole. Also, by achieving this the need for an
intermediate casing string at 3,000 feet was eli-
minated in this well. This resulted in a total
savings of $50,000.
The second well was eventually drilled with
foam with identical results as the first. Based
on our experience with these two wells and the
difficulty which resulted after gas contact, it
was concluded that excessive gas was a problem
with foam drilling. Due to the liquid-volume
ratio being a critical parameter of a foam system,
the effect of a gas influx was like the addition
of air into the system. This results in
deterioration of the carrying capacity of the foam
and its ability to clean the hole. It was deter-
mined, however, that the hole never produced
excessive amounts of water necessitating a polymer
foam system, therefore, an inhibited mist con-
sisting of a K.Cl/polymer mixture and soap was
tried in a third well. This was tried due to the
inhibited foam achieving stabilization of the
wellbore and the fact that the mist system would
rely on air to clean the hole making it unaffected
by gas influxes.
A subsequent well began misting with the KCl/
polymer mixture at 1, 475 feet when water was
encountered. This continued to a depth of 6, 730
feet before converting to a mud system (fill was
noticed on connections) to TD the hole at 7, 571
feet. A total of 5,255 feet was drilled with an
average rate of penetration of 16.3 ft./hr. This
compares to 20 ft./hr. with straight air and 9.8
ft./hr. with mud. Average daily cost for all
chemicals was $1,320 while mud costs averaged
$1,075 per day.
Once again, by remaining with an air system
through a major part of the hole (5,255 feet), the
SPE13490 JOHN S. SHEFFIELD and JOSEPH J. SITZMAN 7

9-5/8 inch intermediate casing was not required. 1. KCl mist has proved to be very useful
With an estimated cost of $39,000 to mist drill when water is contacted in areas of sen-
and the elimination of a $110,000 casing string, a sitive shales to provide hole stabiliza-
net savings of $71,000 was achieved. This is tion and possibly eliminate the 9-5/8
equivalent to approximately 11% savings in total inch intermediate casing string.
drilling costs for this well. Also, it was deter-
mined by a breakeven evaluation that misting to 2. When gas is contacted, two problems
2, 600 feet and then mud drilling to 7, 500 feet should be considered; downhole fires and
cost the same as misting to 3,000 feet and setting mudding up. If large flows are deve-
the 9-5/8 inch casing to allow for dusting to TD. loping, reamers should be removed from
However, this analysis was based on the daily the bottom hole assembly, if present, due
costs and rates of penetrations for this well; to the possibility of sparks. A fire
therefore, a breakeven depth for misting would float should also be installed in the
have to be calculated on an individual well basis. drill string above the bit and pressures
should be monitored. Due to the poten-
Conclusion/Recommendations tial hazard of shutting a well in with
shallow surface casing, mudding-up while
Even though air drilling in the Arkansas gas is flowing may be difficult if the
region of the Arkoma Basin has been the predomi- volume is large enough to blow mud out of
nant method, there are always ways to improve upon the hole as it is pumped down. For this
present prac tices. The following are conclusions reason, three million cubic feet per day
made from past experiences and attempts to opti- flow is used as a rule of thumb to mud
mize Arkansas drilling: the hole up.
1. The use of a polymer foam was found to be 3. A breakeven economic analysis should be
effective but not efficient. It provided performed on an individual well basis to
excellent hole stabilization and hole determine the maximum depth needed to
cleaning; however, gas flows seem to be achieve with mist in the event problems
detrimental to its carrying capacity. are occurring and mud may be required to
finish the hole. In some cases, rates of
2. Based on the above conclusion, an inhi- penetration obtainable on mud may be high
bited mist was utilized. It stabilized enough to justify not setting the casing
the hole and because it relied on air as string to allow for dusting to TD.
the prime mover, gas flows had no adverse
effects on its hole cleaning ability. 4. If severe hole problems develop while air
Also, hole problems are much easier to drilling, the well should be mudded-up
detect or see developing with mist as immediately. This will usually prevent
compared with foam. subsequent hole problems and pipe
sticking.
3. Gas flows while drilling are typical in
the Arkoma Basin and can be encountered 5. Use minimum amounts of air to keep the
from surface to TD. hole clean. This will reduce the amount
of erosion in the wellbore and prevent
4. The setting of the 9-5/8 inch inter- cuttings from packing into "possum
mediate casing string for casing of bellys". Below is a table of air volumes
water, is normally not economical in some which have provided optimum hole cleaning
cases even if mud is necessary to finish in Arkansas:
a well to total depth. It was calculated
in the well that misted that the break- Hole Size Depth Air Volume
even point for air was 2, 600 feet which
is above the standard casing setting 17-1/2" 800' 2200-2500
depth of 3,000 feet. This means that mud 15" 800 1 2000-2800
could have been used from this depth to 12-1/4" 800' 1600-2000
total depth and the costs would be the 8-3/4" 7,000' 1500-1700
same for a well with casing. 7-7/8" 7,000' 1300-1600
5. Based on experiences in the Arkansas LaBarge Platform
fields mentioned, the deepest water ever
contacted has been at 2,850 feet. There- Air, mist and foam drilling has been used to
fore 3,000 feet has been determined to be drill the top part of some wells in Exxon's
an optimum setting depth for the 9-5/8 LaBarge deep field. Exxon started its development
inch casing if it is required. drilling in 1983. Air drilling has been used in
the area as early as 1969. The LaBarge field is
The following recommendations are made con- on the LaBarge platform and is located in South-
cerning general drilling practices in the areas of west Wyoming just east of the Overthrust Belt.
experience. They are based on the above conclu-
sions and observations made on the wells. The surface geology is complexed by
Mississippian and Devonian age rock thrusted bet-
ween normal sequence Tertiary and Cretaceous for-

581
8 AIR DRILLING PRACTICES IN THE MID-CONTINENT AND ROCKY MOUNTAIN AREAS
mations. This results in high dip bedding planes
and areas of severe lost returns.
Thirty inch conductor is set and a 17-1/2
inch surface hole is either air, mist, foam, mud
or aerated and drilled depending on the lost
return situation to approximately 4000 feet where
13-3/8 inch surface casing is set. The 17-1/2
inch surface hole may be opened up to 26 inches
for a contingency 20 inch string if required due
to hole conditions. A 12-1/4 inch hole is then
air, mud or aerated mud drilled to approximately
12,000 feet where 10-3/4 inch intermediate casing
is set.
Air has been used in four of the eleven wells
that have spudded since December 1983 and in
several wells drilled in the LaBarge area by Exxon
and others prior to 1983. The primary driver for
air drilling has been severe lost returns in the
surface hole.
There are several major problems associated
with air drilling in the LaBarge area. Water is
prevalent in all surface holes, making dusting
almost impossible for an extended interval of
drilling. Water production from air drilling, as
high as 200 to 300 barrels per hour, makes water
disposal a costly i tern and is a major deterrant
for air drilling.
When a hole starts making water, mist
drilling is commenced. If water volumes become
unmanageable from high injection pressures or too
much water production, foaming may be attempted.
Inhibited mist and foam were tried in the 12-1/4
inch hole which resulted in the sloughing of sen-
sitive shales. Higher concentrations of KCl were
found to be needed, but due to environmental con-
siderations, its use will have to be evaluated.
Hole problems including caving and the inability
to clean the hole may require aeration as the only
alternative.
Cementing water producing and lost return
zones in the surface hole has been tried with
mixed results. Neat cement has been spotted
across water and lost return areas. It has not
been possible to apply a squeeze pressure, because
of the open hole and inability to keep the hole
full of fluid. Parasite air injection strings
attached to the outside of the surface casing with
entry into the surface pipe at approximately 2000
feet are being installed and will be evaluated.
This approach is a substitute for our past inter-
mediate hole mud aeration where air was injected
into the intermediate hole annulus through an ori-
fice in the drill pipe.
During the past fifteen years in the LaBarge
field some twenty-five thousand feet of surface
hole, ranging from 8-1/2 inch to 26 inch in
diameter, has been drilled with air or air
assistance. Only one or two surface holes have
been drilled from spud to surface casing depth.
In Exxon's four air surface holes drilled since
1983, none have been drilled from top to bottom
with some method of air drilling.
582
SPEl11L9_0_
Exxon air drills in the LaBarge area to over-
come severe lost returns, particularly in the sur-
face hole. Air drilling is encumbered with water
production and hole problems but is the only
alternative in some holes. Work will continue in
the area of hole stabilization, sealing off water
flows, and parasite strings.
Air Drilling Optimization
In these areas discussed, air drilling has
proved to be very economical and efficient.
However, some methods have been incorporated into
the drilling plans to utilize air to its fullest
potential. The following are examples:
Percussion Tools/Air Hammers
Hammer tools were used quite extensively with
varying results in most of the case histories.
Significant increases in rates of penetration
could be seen in most cases which resulted in
substantial cost savings. Another advantage to
running a hammer tool is that light bottom-hole
weight can be applied to give equivalent penetra-
tion rates of up to 30,000 pounds of collar
weight. This, in conjunction with a pendulum
assembly, is very effective in dropping hole angle
without sacrificing penetration rate.
In the Paradox Basin a hammer tool was used
to increase rate of penetration 40% over conven-
tional rotary drilling. Deviation in one well was
controlled and the angle dropped from 9-1/2° to 4°
with no reduction in penetration rate. However,
·in one case it was found ROP actually increased
with the removal of a hammer tool while drilling
with a water flow. This could be contributed to
the absorbtion of the tools blows by the fluid
thereby dampening its effects.
In the Arkoma Basin of Arkansas, hammer tools
with flat bottom bits have proved very economical.
Cost per foot was cut in half to $30/foot while
rate of penetration doubled in 17-1/2 inch surface
holes. Flat bottom bits in conjunction with the
hammer tool have also been advantageous in
controlling deviation due to the light bit
weights. However, one drawback to these bits is
that they have very little gauge protection and
invariably are pulled under gauge. Caution must
be taken to avoid running them for extended
periods. With the assortment of sizes available,
the recommended plan is to taper the hole size on
each successive run. Normally, in Arkansas we can
run two flat bottom bits in the production hole
before changing to 7-7/8 inch tri-cone bits.
Based on the well histories, it has been
found that in most cases it is very economical to
employ hammer tools into an air drilling program.
Significant dollars per foot have been saved
and/or hole angle has been dropped by using per-
cussion tools. For these reasons, it is highly
recommended that they be incorporated into any air
drilled well.
SPE13490 JOHN S. SHEFFIELD and JOSEPH J. SITZMAN 9

Inhibited Mist and Foam and maintain high rates of penetration. At the
point where misting was halted, air drilling had
Two of the biggest problems associated with saved us 22 days and $418,000. By continuing with
air drilling after water contact are; the wetting foam, an additional 31 days and $589,000 were
of sensitive shales and the increase of water saved.
influx which would hal:t a normal misting opera-
tion. However, two methods can be utilized to Acknowledgement
combat these problems; inhibited mist and polymer
foam. The authors express their appreciation to
Exxon Company, U.S.A., for their permission and
Inhibited mist is a mixture of KCl water and encouragement to publish this paper and to Exxon
soap to clean the hole of cuttings and prevent mud Production Research Company for their help.
rings from forming. This formula also works in
protecting water sensitive shales from sloughing. References
Usually a concentration of 3-4% KCl will provide
enough inhibiting qualit~es to eliminate hydration 1. Petroleum Information Corporation; "Petroleum
of clays; however, higher concentrations may be Frontiers - Paradox Basin: Unraveling the
required depending on the degree of sensi ti vi ty. Mystery", Vol. 1, No. 4, Summer, 1984.
An anionic polymer can be used in conjunction with
the KCl water and soap to provide additional inhi- 2. Mason, Mark; "New Interest in Arkansas' Arkoma
biting qualities. Catching of shale samples and Basin", World Oil, May 1983, pp. 63.
analyzing them for swelling tendencies will help
in formulating a misting mixture. 3. Hook, R. A., Cooper, L. w., and Payne, B. R.;
"Air, Mist and Foam Drilling: A Look at
When the volume of.water in mist circulation Latest Techniques", World Oil, April-May 1977.
begins to hinder hole-cleaning or pressures begin
to exceed equipment limitations, a polymer foam 4. Lorenz, Howard; "Field Experience Pins Down
can be substituted. This foam is a uniform mix- Uses for Air Drilling Fluids", Oil and Gas
ture of air, water, a foaming agent, and a
Journal, May 12, 1980.
polymer. KCl water can also be used in the make-
up for shale inhibiting properties. Foam differs 5. Crites, Paul w.; "The Potential for Air Drill-
from mist in that liquid is the continuous phase ing", Drilling, March 1984, pp. 61-64.
and air is the discontinuous phase; the oppostie
is true of mist. A correctly formed foam should
6. Wilson, G. E.; "A General Overview of Air
have the consistency of a good shaving lather.
Drilling and Deviation Control", SPE No. 9529,
(1980).
Foam has many advantages over misting such
as; ability to handle larger volumes of water, 7. Angel, R. R.; "Volume Requirements for Air and
higher solids carrying capabilities, lower bit Gas Drilling", Gulf Publishing Company,
costs, lower equipment costs, and better hole sta- Houston, Texas.
bilization due to its low annular velocities.
However, there are some disadvantages; product
cost is considerably higher, foam is much more
difficult to run, and it cannot tolerate high gas
influxes.

The design of a stable foam incorporates many

interrelated variables which require constant
monitoring at the blooie line. The liquid volume
fraction must be maintained between 2-5% to
possess a high solids carrying capacity. Too much
liquid causes the foam to collapse under its own
weight, whereas too much air causes large air
pockets to form. Both these factors including
water flows and temperature will reduce viscosity,
and hence carrying capacity.

Even though foam has disadvantages over mist,

it has the ability to provide a low hydrostatic
circulating medium which possesses many advantages
over misting. Based on this and the fact that it
is economically consistant with air drilling when
compared with mud, it should be analyzed as a
possible alternative when mist drilling can no
longer continue.

In the case of the Onion Creek, a polymer

foam provided a significant cost saving by
allowing us to stay with a low hydrostatic fluid

583