Understanding Running Behavior to Improve 4.5" Lower Completion in ERD Well Injector

Abstract The deployment of single trip 4.5″ lower completion in longer lateral and extended reach well to accommodate requirement of maximum reservoir contact (MRC) campaign especially in mature field with huge number of well drilled becomes the new normal with technique and advance technology application. The lower completion in extended reach drilling (ERD) wells presents challenges due to the extended horizontal section and the complexity of well trajectory. The challenges frequently lead to problems such as the friction factor (FF), the effect of buckling, insufficient weight and limitation of rotation delivered to total depth (TD). The challenges increase in water injector (WI) wells, where the design uses a light casing design (LCD) approach to enhanced drilling efficiency, well duration, operational and cost effectiveness of the well injector. The LCD characteristic implies a lesser number of casings, which consequently allows for an extended section in both the surface and intermediate casing. The extended section preceding the 6″ horizontal sections which is 7″ liner affected the deployment of the 4-1/2″ lower completion run. In the planning stage of the well, two main concerns need to be considered to counter the challenges are the preparation of the open hole prior to running in hole and the configuration of running string. The drift run is an analog method used to measure the hole condition, as indicated by the friction factor during the trip in process. The friction factor is a theoretical value that characterizes the running behaviors, derived from surface hook load records. Additionally, torque and drag (T&D) simulations help analysis of what happens during the trip in, because in real situations drift runs might be unsuccessful to reach the target depth on elevator, requiring rotation to reach TD. In the market, advanced drilling and completion technology has been developed to counter the challenges and minimize risk during deployment of lower completion. Each well has different challenges and processes where the practice and technology selection should be fit for purpose, effective and efficient. The paper aims to present the concepts, challenges, and problem-solving strategies by exploring engineering analysis and operational perspectives in the context of a successful 4.5″ lower completion.