SPE/IADC 113682

MPD Planning: How Much Is Enough?

Paul Spriggs and Philip J. Frink, Blade Energy Partners

Copyright 2008, SPE/IADC Managed Pressure Drilling and Underbalanced Operations Conference and Exhibition

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2008 SPE/IADC Managed Pressure Drilling and Underbalanced Operations Conference and Exhibition held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 28–29 January 2008.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE/IADC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not
been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily
reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any
part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is
restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE/IADC copyright.

Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to address the key drivers and risks associated with the use of Applied Back Pressure Managed
Pressure Drilling. One of the two key issues to understand early on is whether the well can be drilled statically overbalanced
or needs to be drilled with a statically underbalanced fluid. The second issue to comprehend is the level of service needed to
avoid compromising safety and well objectives. Answering these two questions defines the path to be followed for adequate
planning.

Detailed planning aspects, such as flow modeling, crew training, operational procedures, process flow diagrams and HAZID /
HAZOPs meetings are also described in this paper. By asking the ‘what if’ questions prior to operations, it should become
apparent what additional surface equipment is required to safely and efficiently drill in MPD mode. Control of the ‘what if’s
should help to keep the planning and rig up both reasonable and cost effective.

Introduction
Managed Pressure Drilling (MPD) in the form of Applied Back Pressure (ABP) or Constant Bottom Hole Pressure (CBHP) is
becoming increasing popular as a means of overcoming certain drilling problems. However, its entry into the market has
come several years after the adoption of industry best practices and regulations for planning Under Balanced (UB) wells.
Because reservoir fluids are typically handled at surface, UB wells require extensive study and planning before being
implemented. One problem now confronting our industry is the level of study and planning required for ABP MPD wells
drilled overbalanced. By understanding key application aspects, such as the proposed mud weight, required level of service,
and company and regulatory policy on the use of well control equipment; it is possible to determine the appropriate amount
of planning needed for the project to be successful.

MPD Application Drivers

Before planning an MPD project, the driver for application should first be understood and quantified. This exercise is
typically performed by the operator and falls into one or more of the following categories:

• Minimize overbalance to
– Increase ROP
– Avoid differential sticking
– Prevent lost returns
– Reduce formation damage
• Maintain constant BHP to avoid wellbore ballooning
• Extend the depth between casing setting points
– Narrow kick tolerances
– Deplete tight gas zones containing nuisance gas
• Faster kick detection because of better flow measurements
• Enable dynamic well control methods

If commercial benefits are difficult to justify, then other factors should be explored before discounting MPD and reverting
back to a conventional well with the associated conventional drilling problems. Reviewing offset well data will help quantify
2 SPE/IADC 113682

the potential Non Productive Time (NPT) likely on the well. By asking the right questions of MPD, it may become apparent
that it offers solutions in more than one problematic area.

MPD Risk Factors

The downside risk of applying MPD should also be identified early in the planning process so the technology can be fairly
assessed. Risk considerations fall into three main categories:

• Pressure tolerance between minimum and maximum limits to avoid kicks and lost circulation
• Flow potential of the well if a kick is encountered
• Difficulty of control due to pressure transients, measurement errors, and equipment response characteristics or
failures

Under ideal conditions, simple MPD control systems can be used to drill formations with low flow potential and wide
pressure containment windows. Unfortunately, few MPD wells are drilled under these conditions. Pressure tolerances can be
reduced due to wellbore stability limits, and/or pressure reversals or depleted zones. Parameters that describe the flow
potential of the well are defined by Darcy’s flow equation (permeability, contact area, differential pressure, and fluid
composition). Control complexity is driven by a variety of factors, including well geometry, equipment performance, and
human response factors.

The application of MPD in deep HTHP well environments represents the most challenging combination of risk factors.
Elevated temperatures can create significant bottom hole pressure (BHP) transients and measurement errors due to its effect
on fluid densities and rheologies. Highly pressured formations are typically drilled with high density fluids and can result in
high surface pressures if gas kicks are encountered and circulated to surface. Deep wells are also usually drilled with
slimhole well geometries that can create significant frictional pressures while circulating.

Statically Overbalanced or Statically Underbalanced.

This condition generally dictates the path down which MPD planning will go. In the proposed MPD section of the well, if all
surface pressure is removed from the well, will the well remain statically overbalanced? If the answer is yes, then quite often
MPD is being used to maintain a constant BHP during “pumps off” periods such as connections. Figure 1 illustrates this
condition, whereby a defined ‘set point BHP’ has been established and is maintained when the equivalent circulating density
(ECD) is lost in the well bore.

Being statically overbalanced means that normal operations such as running in hole and tripping out of hole are unaffected by
ABP MPD. If power supply to the MPD pump fails, or the MPD backpressure pump develops mechanical problems during a
connection (rig pumps off), then the worst case is wellbore pressure drops to the statically overbalanced state.

If a statically underbalanced fluid is required to achieve the MPD objectives, then a series of additional considerations must
be made. For this, it is recommended that comprehensive upfront planning be undertaken. Figure 2 illustrates the well bore
condition with a statically underbalanced fluid. Sudden loss of the applied surface back pressure could result in an influx,
which must first be detected and then safely removed from the well bore. While on paper this sounds straight forward, it
must be planned for to ensure all people at the rig site clearly know their responsibilities.

What level of Service?

If ‘in-house’ MPD expertise is not available, the Operator should set aside planning time to work with either a third party
Engineering Company or directly with a MPD Service provider. MPD Service companies offer various levels of service,
each having their appropriate application. If the Operator clearly understands his well problems and the solutions available
from all ABP MPD providers, he can directly approach the preferred vendor. If unclear of the solutions and service level
options, it may be prudent to seek advice from third party Engineering Companies or from each of the MPD Service
providers.

Certain ABP MPD control systems offer a fully automated system that utilizes process control logic (PLC) software to
control BHP. These systems run dedicated flow models that, when using annular pressure subs in the bottom hole assembly,
are self calibrating. This level of service has the ability to offer the most accurate control of BHP.

A less sophisticated system enables the MPD choke to be set to maintain a fixed surface pressure. The required pressure is
manually entered and the control system then automatically manages the choke to maintain this condition. Knowing what
BHP is required, the rigsite MPD Engineer maintains a steady state flow model to determine the required surface pressure.

The simplest type of MPD control requires a person to manually operate the choke to try to maintain the choke pressure
advised to him from the person flow modelling. While there is an application for this, its performance is very much
SPE/IADC 113682 3

dependant on the individuals ability to operate a choke for an extended period of time. In some instances operation of the
choke is only required during “pumps off” periods where the pressure loss is captured at the choke.

Each of these service levels has its rightful application. To avoid deploying a premium service on a well that does not warrant
the level of accuracy in managing BHP, a degree of planning should be done. Deployment of a simpler service on a well
requiring more stringent BHP control has obvious negative consequences.

At a minimum, planning should at least determine what level of control is required and whether the drilling fluid needs to be
statically underbalanced or statically overbalanced to stay within the pressure tolerance window

Irrespective of the level of service, the MPD Service Company will need to visit the rig site to assess the equipment required.
As with UBD, there will be a series of “tie ins” where the MPD provider will need to draw and discharge fluid. Adequate
room beneath the drill floor must be confirmed to ensure the rotating control head will fit. Data exchange between the rig,
mud logger and MPD Service Company must be verified. This is normally simplified by the adoption of WITS. If the MPD
service company uses a high pressure pump, then a high voltage, high current supply is required.

Most of this information can be gathered from a rig visit. In the ideal world, the interfaces between the rig, mud logger and
MPD Service company can be resolved over several weeks, and MPD can start quickly. Drilling is far removed from the
ideal world, and so planning normally takes several months. Some of the main issues that need to be considered during the
planning stage are discussed below.

Flow Modelling
Again, well bore flow modelling for ABP MPD will be more straightforward than for an underbalanced well. What should
not be overlooked though is the greater influence the surface lines and components will have on the performance and
objectives of the well.

Depending on what the objectives of MPD are will dictate what evaluations are made with flow modelling. Quite often MPD
is being deployed to reduce the ECD, and so modelling of different mud weights and properties are necessary to see if
reductions can be achieved. However, additional consideration should be given to sensitivity studies into what increases in
velocity can be gained by reducing mud weights, what maximum surface pressures are likely etc.

Flow modelling of pressure loss through the surface lines is paramount for MPD. There have been more than one occasion
where this has been underestimated resulting in surface back pressures affecting the required BHP objectives. Flow
modelling should investigate line sizes required (normally 4” or 6” inch) and the impact of elbows, pressure loss across the
chokes and through a flow meter. It may be necessary to reduce the mud weight by a few points to obtain the same degree of
control on the bottom hole pressure if surface pressure are higher than anticipated.

Procedures and Training

As with underbalanced drilling, this is the key to success. Quite often the planning for MPD is being done in isolation from
the rig crew and some of the key members of the drilling team. As a result, many people will have apprehensions about
MPD. To quell these concerns and to ensure a common understanding is reached between the rig crew, the MPD crew and
the Operators drilling staff, detailed procedures should be developed.

Procedure development normally serves as a learning process for all involved. By writing a procedure, it offers a document
around which discussion can be held. As with UBD, the development of a process flow diagram as a minimum should be
done. It will serve as a record on which line size’s, pressure ratings, isolation valves and relief valves can be captured. If the
valves are labeled, then procedures can be written to refer to these valve numbers. Several papers have been written on this
approach including SPE/IADC 85294.

Time spent on procedures and drawings is seldom wasted. The end product should serve as a tool to be used and updated
once at the rig site. More importantly, and what is often overlooked, is that development of both procedures and drawings is
what brings all the parties together to reach a common understanding of what is required and how best it can be achieved.

Procedures should consider both routine operational tasks as well as contingency mitigation actions identified during
HazID/HazOP meetings. There should definitely be procedures on tasks such as how to ‘make a connection’ and how to
‘change out the RCD element’. Discussion into RCD element change will lead into the possibility of additional pipework or
circulation. If the well is statically overbalanced, surface pressure can be bled off, and the element change out is simplified. If
the fluid is statically underbalanced, then surface pressure must be maintained while changing out the element. This is
normally achieved by either trapping pressure or maintaining pressure through the rigs choke line with the Annular and
Upper Pipe rams closed.
4 SPE/IADC 113682

At a minimum, contingency procedures should include the ‘failure of BHA non return valves’, ‘failure of surface equipment’
and ‘failure of the rig equipment’. If rig power fails, and the MPD pump is powered from the rig, then maintaining surface
pressure will be affected. The idea is to think these issues through and have a plan in place ready for it occurrence. Whilst
the solution may be straightforward to some, the idea is to develop a common understanding and ensure that all are aware of
the contingency plans.

The number of procedures and complexity of them will most probably be driven by the use of an underbalanced or
overbalanced drilling fluid.

Training should never be underestimated when contemplating MPD. You get out it what you put into it. If, for whatever
reason, time does not permit for complete training, the following should at least be understood prior to drilling in MPD mode.
o How a connection is to be made.
o How to change out the RCD element.
o What to do in the event of an influx.
o Who is responsible for what should certain events occur.

What to do in the event of an influx is paramount. The first objective is to decide who confirms an influx has been taken. The
MPD Operators are monitoring the flow in and out, but they are not well control experts. Training should include the
reporting structure, so that the correct person is immediately made aware of a possible influx. From there, the sequence of
operations should be understood by all. It may have been planned to circulate out an influx through the MPD equipment, or
though the rigs well control equipment. For the former to occur, all the surface equipment must be rated to the maximum
anticipated surface pressure. If well control is to be managed between the rig and the Company Representative, then a
procedure needs to be in place to close in the well, estimate the size of the kick and line up to the rigs well control equipment.
As with underbalanced drilling, there will be non return valves in the BHA, and so standpipe pressure can only be established
by slowly pumping the non return valves open.

Since training standards are driven by Operator, Drilling Contractor and regulatory policies, requirements vary widely. NPT
on offshore wells with expensive rigs has a greater dollar impact than the same NPD on low cost land rigs. The science
behind MPD does not vary though for geographical location, and so the same errors will have the same consequences on the
well and possibly personnel. Training on certain ABP MPD wells has relied heavily on the continual supervison by lead
MPD Supervisor. Drilling could not wait for MPD training and so many of the procedures were explained to the rig crew
whilst on the drill floor. In some cases the training for a procedure is in the form of a tool box talk prior to conductiong the
task. There have been no catatstrophies, but it is a stressful tour for both groups. In addition, there are no tool box talks when
something goes unexpectedly wrong.

There will always be dependence on individuals such as the Driller and MPD Supervisor to do the right thing at the right
time. However, and as with many UBD wells, all eyes are on these individuals during MPD operations, and so ‘on the job’
training only places additional stress. When mistakes happen, quite often the root cause leads back to a lack of training or
failure to communicate. Therefore provision of training that sets out the lines of communications ahead of time will go a long
way to avoid these failures.

As an ideal, and based on experience, it is prudent to give a basic level introduction about MPD to all the office personnel
involved in the project. This should include personnel from the Operator as well as the Drilling Contractor. It stimulates
thought from all and the feedback gained is insightful.

As the project develops and a clearer understanding of procedures and the process flow at the rig site is understood, a more
focused level of training should be given. This need only include those more directly involved in the drilling. These training
sessions should be two way, and discuss the procedures and philosophies behind them. If a HAZOP was conducted earlier in
the planning stage, then many of these discussions will be a re visit of issues raised at the HAZOP. However, at this stage,
there should be clarity as to who is responsible for what at the rig site.

Practical training inside the casing shoe is always valuable. While it may add time to the well, it will provide the rig crew and
MPD crew the opportunity to become familar with physically conducting the most important procedures. Interaction
between the Driller and the MPD crew is paramount. One is controlling the flow rate in and the other is controlling the flow
rate out. A miscommunication between the two has obvious consequences. The driller needs to become proficient in working
with the choke operator when bringing the mud pumps up and down so as to maintain accurate bottom hole pressure. In
some instances, where back pressure must be captured at the choke, the driller and choke operator must work in unison to
avoid dead heading against the choke or trapping insufficient pressure. Practicing this in cased hole is better than making
mistakes while drilling.
SPE/IADC 113682 5

Equipment and its Configuration

In its simplest form, ABP MPD could be run using a RCD and the rigs well control equipment. The rig choke is used to
control back pressure perhaps on connections, and all returns are directed to the shakers.

If a more sophisticated set is required, then an RCD will be deployed onto the Annular, with a dedicated line to the MPD
choke manifold. There may be an MPD pump, pressure rated isolation valves, a low pressure flow meter and a return line to
the shakers. This again would be the simpler configuration suitable for the majority of the operation.

However, during the planning stage, a series of scenarios may have been considered that require the rig up of additional
equipment. The effects of these scenarios may lead to a similar rig up ad depicted in Figure 3. Some of the scenarios may be:

o Wanting to do a flow check while holding back pressure on the well.

In this instance it is necessary to line the discharge from the flow meter up to the trip tank. If an MPD pump is being
used, then it must be able to draw from the trip tank, thus creating a closed flow loop, while being able to hold back
pressure on the well.

o Wanting to hold pressure on the well while changing out the RCD element.
The simplest means of accomplishing this is to trap pressure below the upper pipe rams using the rig’s choke line
and choke manifold. As long as pressure does not start to bleed off to the formation, the pressure can be held on the
well bore while the RCD element is changed out. If pressure starts to bleed off, it can be reimposed using the rig
pumps down the kill line and across the well head. These may not be the most elegant solutions and they involve
the use of rig BOP equipment. Depending on the rig or Operators viewpoint, this may not be an acceptable solution.

As with many UBD wells, a secondary flow line between the MPD choke and below the upper pipe rams offers a
dedicated line that allows the MPD choke to be in direct communication with the well bore. If the system uses an
MPD pump, the pump can be operating as it would during a connection, and back pressure applied directly to the
well. To facilitate all this cross overs, additional valving and pipework /hose will be required. Care will also be
needed to ensure the well control equipment is not de-rated by having lower pressure rated lines / valves exposed
during a well control event.

o Circulating out background gas.

By having a closed system in the form of a RCD installed upon the annular, the rig is better equipped to contend
with the various forms of entrained gas that may be present in the mud returns. In addition, in HPHT wells where
‘small volume high pressure’ influxes pose continuous problems, MPD will allow gas to be circulated out without
interruption to drilling. To facilitate this however, a connection to the rig Mud Gas Separator (MGS) will be
necessary. This will mean an additional line from the back of the flow meter to either the back of the rig choke or
inlet into the MGS. This now brings about the possible need for a flow manifold downstream of the flow meter to
direct flow to the various discharge points depending on the condition.

o Tripping in and out of the hole.

The biggest challenge faced in using a statically underbalanced fluid is getting in and out of the well. If surface
pressure is being applied when static, at some point a pipe light situation will occur when pulling out of hole.
Solutions to this are similar to UBD. A downhole isolation valve may be deployed to isolate the formation. The mud
system can be weighted up and then slowly circulated over to kill the well. This would require a slow circulation to
avoid the ECD issues that MPD is being used to mitigate. A heavy pill could be spotted either across the open hole
or further up in the cased hole. The well could be isolated using a gunk plug. A snubbing unit could be used to snub
in and out of the well. Many options are available and each has its pro’s and con’s.

Details of isolations valves are fairly well documented. Weighting up mud or spotting pills requires a good and often
large mud system. There may be offshore rigs that do not have the pit volume to accommodate this option. There is
also the time associated with weighting up, circulating and then reducing the mud weight to resume drilling. Use of
a snubbing unit requires a lot of planning, personnel and equipments. The trip times are also slowed down which
adds to the cost. Unlike UBD wells which may wish to preserve the undamaged formation, MPD will gain less
benefit from use of a snubbing unit.

There are other considerations that may also need to be considered, such as what if flow meters start to plug up, what if a
line or choke manifold starts to plug up leading to excessive back pressure or an over pressure. The outcome of these
questions may quite often result in the need for bypass lines, flushing lines and relief valves.
6 SPE/IADC 113682

ABP MPD Moving ahead.

The MPD Service Companies are still finding their way in this emerging market. They each have unique products that have
application to drilling challenging wells. There are customers out there that will benefit from their products. The goal is to
find the middle ground so that both parties’needs are met. The MPD equipment is being improved as feedback from the field
and customers define what works, what doesn’t, what is necessary and what is ‘just nice to have’. All the time, MPD crews
are gaining more experience, and their numbers are growing. As procedures and process flows for rig ups become more
standard, the need for detailed upfront planning will be reduced.

MPD has been conducted remotely with the back pressure being controlled from the shore for an offshore well. There is
however a stage before this whereby the flow rate into the well is automatically controlled as part of the MPD process. The
technology is there, and its integration will remove a further possible hazard associated with human intervention. At the
moment it is ‘not necessary’. The other perspective is that as rig crews become trained in the use of MPD equipment they
will become able to take full control of the choke, so a dedicated MPD crew is not required. If this approach is considered,
the equipment may end up becoming a rental item called out by the rig, rigged up and operated wholly by the crew.

Conclusions
MPD in the form of Applied Back Pressure definitely lies between an equivalent conventional well and equivalent UBD well.
Initially it will cost more than a conventional well, but should be less initial cost than a similar UBD well. Being statically
overbalanced or statically underbalanced will be the major factor in determining how much planning is required. If formation
uncertainties are low, and a clear understanding of what MPD will deliver exists, then planning may be fast tracked. Certain
facets will still remain however, that if done diligently at the start, will pay off immediately. These facets include training,
procedures, and a clear understanding of roles and responsibilities at the rigsite.

A statically underbalanced MPD well with several uncertainties will require significantly more planning, and may even reach
a similar level to that of a UBD well. Many of the same elements of a UBD well arise in ABP MPD, and failure to consider
them could result in significant influxes and well control problems. The difference being the well is being controlled by two
parties – the Driller and the MPD Choke Operator.

Asking the ‘What if” questions will no doubt add to the complexity of the well design. It may also add equipment, training
and procedures and increase the overall scope of MPD. The key to managing ‘scope creep’often lies in remaining realistic
and pragmatic during HAZIDs and HAZOPs. Both events (sometimes merged into one event) serve as great milestones in
the planning stage. Control of these events and will often control the scope of the project.

As ABP MPD moves forward, the procedures, process flow diagrams and HAZID / HAZOPs will become more standard. At
that stage, the planning phase should reduce as the MPD Service Company swiftly identify anything unique to a well / rig,
make the necessary changes to their standard practices and implement MPD far quicker and safer than possible today.
SPE/IADC 113682 7

Appendix

Fig 1: Statically Overbalanced Mud

Fig 2: Statically Underbalanced Mud

8 SPE/IADC 113682

Fig 3: Typical Surface Equipment layout catering for several contingencies