Characterization of Sampling-While-Drilling Operations
- Steven Villreal (Schlumberger) | Julian J. Pop (Schlumberger) | Francois Bernard (Schlumberger) | Kent Harms (Schlumberger) | Albert Hoefel (Schlumberger) | Akira Kamiya (Schlumberger) | Peter Swinburne (Schlumberger) | Sylvain Ramshaw (Schlumberger)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
- Publication Date
- February 2012
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 9 - 24
- 2012. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 1.6 Drilling Operations, 1.11 Drilling Fluids and Materials, 4.1.6 Compressors, Engines and Turbines
- contamination, fluid sampling while drilling
- 2 in the last 30 days
- 816 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 12.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
The while-drilling environment poses several potential challenges to acquiring representative formation-fluid samples; in particular, sampling times are expected to be restricted (perhaps severely) and dynamic filtration conditions are expected to predominate. With the aim of formulating effective strategies for sampling-while-drilling (SWD) operations, it is natural to seek answers to at least the following questions: When should samples be acquired--immediately after drilling the formation when invasion is shallowest, or after some time when the mudcake is more mature? What is the effect of circulation rate on sample quality? What levels of sample quality are achievable under while-drilling conditions?
The first part of the paper describes the SWD tool used to investigate the questions posed. The tool is composed of the following components: a probe module; a pump-out module, which contains within it fluid-property sensors, including a resistivity cell and a 10-channel optical spectrometer; sample-capture modules; and a power-generation module consisting of a dedicated mud turbine and alternator that provide the required pumping power to the sampling tool.
The second part of the paper is devoted to the description and analysis of a series of tests performed to characterize SWD operations. In particular, the following aspects were studied for their effect on sampling efficiency and sample contamination: time after drilling, mud-circulation rate, ceasing and resuming pumping operations as a means of mitigating sticking risk during protracted pumping operations, and the integrity of samples captured under drilling conditions. All tests were performed in water-bearing formations drilled with a water-based mud. A wireline sampling (WLS) tool was run after the while-drilling tests were completed in order to compare the performance of the two sampling tools.
The principal conclusions derived from the tests conducted are that present-day sampling technology can be made to survive and operate effectively under drilling conditions, and that there appear to be substantial advantages to acquiring samples soon after drilling a formation.
|File Size||4 MB||Number of Pages||16|
Alpak, F.O., Elshahawi, H., Hashem, M., and Mullins, O.C. 2008.Compositional Modeling of Oil-Based- Mud-Filtrate Cleanup During WirelineFormation Tester Sampling. SPE Res Eval & Eng 11 (2):219-232. SPE-100393-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/100393-PA.
Bourgoyne, A.T., Millheim, K.K., Chenevert , M.E., and Young, S.F.1986. Applied Drilling Engineering, Vol. 2, Sec. 4.11.4. Richardson,Texas: Textbook Series, SPE.
Chang, Y., Hammond, P.S., and Pop, J.J. 2005. When Should We WorryAbout Supercharging in Formation Pressure While Drilling Measurements. SPERes Eval & Eng 11 (1): 165-174. SPE-92380-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/92380-PA.
Dewan, J.T. and Chenevert, M.E. 2001. A model for filtration of water-basemud during drilling: Determination of mudcake parameters. Petrophysics 42 (3): 237-250.
Fordham, E.J., Allen, D.F., and Ladva, H.K.J. 1991. The Principle of aCritical Invasion Rate and Its Implications for Log Interpretation. Paper SPE22539 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas,6-9 October. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/22539-MS.
Fordham, E.J., Ladva, H.K.J., Hall, C., Baret, J.-F., and Sherwood,J.D. 1988. Dynamic Filtration of Bentonite Muds Under Different FlowConditions. Paper SPE 18038 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conferenceand Exhibition, Houston, 2-5 October. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/18038-MS.
Hammond, P.S. 1991. One- and two-phase flow during fluid sampling by awireline tool. Transport Porous Media 6 (3): 299-330. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf00208955.
Hodder, M.H., Samir, M., Holm, G., and Segret, G. 2004. ObtainingFormation Water Chemistry Using a Mud Tracer and Formation Tester in a NorthSea Subsea Field Development. Paper SPE 88637 presented at the SPE Asia PacificOil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Perth, Australia, 18-20 October. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/88637-MS.
Hsu, K., Hegeman, P., Dong, C., et al. 2008. Multi-Channel Oil-Based MudContamination Monitoring Using Downhole Optical Spectrometer. Paper 2008-QQQQpresented at the SPWLA 49th Annual Logging Symposium, Austin, Texas, USA, 25-28May.
Mullins, O.C. and Schroer, J. 2000. Real-Time Determination of FiltrateContamination During Openhole Wireline Sampling by Optical Spectroscopy. PaperSPE 63071 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,Dallas, 1-4 October. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/63071-MS.
Pop, J., Laastad, H., Eriksen, K.O., O'Keefe, M., Follini, J.-M., and Dahle, T. 2005. Operational Aspects of Formation Pressure Measurements WhileDrilling. Paper SPE 92494 presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference,Amsterdam, 23-25 February. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/92494-MS.
Sarkar, A.K., Lee, J., and Kasap, E. 1998. Adverse Effects of Poor MudCake Quality: A Supercharging and Fluid Sampling Study. Paper SPE 48958presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans,27-30 September. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/48958-MS.
Schlumberger. 2000. Log Interpretation Charts, 2000 edition. Sugar Land,Texas: Schlumberger.
Sherwood, J.D. and Stone, H.A. 2001. Leakage through filtercake into a fluidsampling probe. Phys. Fluids 13 (5): 1151-1159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.1360712.