Cost overruns can easily manifest during well construction due to unexpected issues including lost returns, differential sticking, and narrow pore pressure/fracture gradients. To better plan for potential overruns, operators sometimes earmark 10 to 25% of the Authorization for Expenditures (AFE) to cover the unexpected, which can significantly impact drilling budgets. Technical and operational risks versus the potential return on investment (ROI) are critical factors in determining whether a project proceeds. Too often the best drilling practices used to address trouble zones are limited to a few conventional methods with a narrow range of effectiveness. Also, a lack of rock mechanics knowledge can prevent the most efficient solution being applied. Some operators are implementing planning programs that assess and integrate the latest processes and technologies to address drilling risks up-front. Cutting-edge technologies such as managed pressure drilling methods, drilling with casing / drilling with liners, and solid expandable casing have been highly effective. Implementing proactive evaluation processes and applying the latest tools and techniques can efficiently address operational risks and trouble zones to ultimately reduce NPT and associated costs. Employing common practices and technologies that are typically ineffective and that drive up NPT cost should be considered unacceptable. Common sense well construction evaluation processes used in conjunction with validated conventional and new technologies have proven their worth by reducing expenditures and risks, preventing the loss of wells, and increasing the operator's ROI. This paper will review real drilling challenges that have been encountered and the common practices that were employed to address these drilling hazards. This paper will compare and contrast how these same circumstances have and can be addressed much more efficiently with engineering evaluation processes that help determine the best drilling tool and/or technique to mitigate risks and reduce NPT.

Cost overruns can easily manifest during well construction due to unexpected issues including lost returns, differential sticking, and narrow pore pressure/fracture gradients. To better plan for potential overruns, operators sometimes earmark 10 to 25% of the Authorization for Expenditures (AFE) to cover the unexpected, which can significantly impact drilling budgets. Technical and operational risks versus the potential return on investment (ROI) are critical factors in determining whether a project proceeds.Too often the best drilling practices used to address trouble zones are limited to a few conventional methods with a narrow range of effectiveness. Also, a lack of rock mechanics knowledge can prevent the most efficient solution being applied.Some operators are implementing planning programs that assess and integrate the latest processes and technologies to address drilling risks up-front. Cutting-edge technologies such as managed pressure drilling methods, drilling with casing / drilling with liners, and solid expandable casing have been highly effective. Implementing proactive evaluation processes and applying the latest tools and techniques can efficiently address operational risks and trouble zones to ultimately reduce NPT and associated costs.Employing common practices and technologies that are typically ineffective and that drive up NPT cost should be considered unacceptable. Common sense well construction evaluation processes used in conjunction with validated conventional and new technologies have proven their worth by reducing expenditures and risks, preventing the loss of wells, and increasing the operator's ROI. This paper will review real drilling challenges that have been encountered and the common practices that were employed to address these drilling hazards. This paper will compare and contrast how these same circumstances have and can be addressed much more efficiently with engineering evaluation processes that help determine the best drilling tool and/or technique to mitigate risks and reduce NPT.

Cost overruns can easily manifest during well construction because of unexpected issues including lost returns, differential sticking, and narrow pore pressure/fracture gradients. To better plan for potential overruns, operators sometimes earmark 10 to 25% of the Authorization for Expenditures (AFE) to cover the unexpected costs, which can significantly affect drilling budgets. Technical and operational risks versus the potential return on investment (ROI) are critical factors in determining whether a project will proceed. Too often the best drilling practices used to address trouble zones are limited to a few conventional methods with a narrow range of effectiveness. Also, a lack of rock mechanics knowledge can prevent the most efficient solution being applied. Some operators are implementing planning programs that assess and integrate the latest processes and technologies to address drilling risks up-front. Cutting-edge technologies such as managed pressure drilling methods, drilling with casing, drilling with liners, and solid expandable casing have been highly effective. Implementing proactive evaluation processes and applying the latest tools and techniques can efficiently address operational risks and trouble zones to ultimately reduce nonproductive time (NPT) and associated costs. Employing common practices and technologies that are typically ineffective and that drive up NPT cost should be considered unacceptable. Common-sense, well-construction evaluation processes that are used with validated conventional and new technologies have proven their worth by reducing expenditures and risks—preventing the loss of wells and increasing the operator’s ROI. This paper reviews real drilling challenges that have been encountered and the common practices that were employed to address these drilling hazards. Also this paper compares and contrasts how these same circumstances have and can be addressed much more efficiently with engineering evaluation processes that help determine the best drilling tool and/or technique to mitigate risks and reduce NPT.

This paper details the lessons learned in late 2007 and early 2008 whilst air drilling vertical gas wells in the Travis Peak formation of the western East Texas deep Bossier play in Amoroso Field and applying the lessons learned in the US to a deep appraisal well drilled in Northern China.The deep Bossier represents one of the most active onshore plays in the United States. Deep Bossier wells are 14,000 ft (4,267m) to 16,000 ft (4,876m) deep and intersect shale and sandstone formations ranging between 2,000 ft (610m) and 3,000 ft (914m) thick. The Travis Peak is also known as 'tragic peak' during conventional drilling operations because the sandstone is hard and abrasive in nature, leading to extreme low rate of penetration (ROP). Air Drilling technology was utilized to increase the ROP through the formation at depths of 10,000 ft (3,047m) and greater. The deep exploration wells in the Daqing area of Northern China are drilled to depths of 20,000ft (6,095m) and greater in an attempt to explore the deep volcanic reservoir potential in the area.In the US the 8-1/2-in hole size was drilled using air hammers and roller cone bits using straight air or nitrogen. Temperatures in the Travis Peal formation were reported to be above 300°F (148°C). Temperatures in Northern China were reported to be as high as 400°F (204°C) in the 12-1/4-in hole size.The fit-for-purpose equipment needed for the air drilling sections of these wells comprised of air hammers capable of drilling in high temperatures, hammer bits with full diamond inserts, high-temperature float valves, air compressors, nitrogen production units, mist injection systems, and rotating control diverters.The lessons learned in the US were applied to the well in China where similar results were encountered. The drive to enhance air drilling to extreme depths and high temperatures previously believed to be off limits proved to be successful in both parts of the world.

The combination of liner drilling with a casing while drilling (CWD) bit to successfully drill and cement a 7-in. liner in place through a severe loss zone in the Gulf of Mexico, offshore Texas, USA, will be presented in this paper. Previous attempts to drill this problem formation were unable to reach the objective depth because of lost-circulation and hole stability issues. This paper will present equipment selection, operation, and results of liner drilling that allowed this well to be successfully drilled and cased.