SPE-203603-MS

Lessons Learned from Drilling a Long Open Hole Interval and Recovery
from a Stuck Pipe Incident

Ayodele Akinfolarin, Obinna Amah, Isijokelu Ijeh, Chiwar Djauro, Samson Omoregie, Mike Usim, Willhelm Tien,
John Emesi, and Joseph Mordi, The Shell Petroleum Development Company Nigeria Limited

Copyright 2020, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Nigeria Annual International Conference and Exhibition originally scheduled to be held in Victoria Island, Lagos, Nigeria,
11 - 13 August 2020. Due to COVID-19 the physical event was not held. The official proceedings were published online on 11 August 2020.

This paper was selected and peer reviewed for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract and paper submitted
by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material
does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, 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 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 copyright.

Abstract
Drilling long open hole sections has been known to result in many challenges including wellbore instability
problems which may lead to stuck pipe problems. However, well design or operational challenges may
necessitate making such risky decisions. In such situations, precautionary measures will need to be taken
to ensure that the hole is successfully drilledwith minimum to no wellbore instability problems which have
negative impact on time and cost.
The case study, well FX-3 is a well drilled by one of the major oil and gas companies in the Niger Delta.
The tophole was planned to be drilled in two sections: a pilot hole to the planned section total depth and then
with a hole opener to open the pilot hole to the required hole size. Due to the abrasive formation type and
difficulties encountered while drilling to the planned depth, decision was made to set the casing shallower
than planned. This necessitated drilling the 12-1/4" hole section longer than planned. With this decision,
several challenges were encountered and eventually overcome. The well was successfully completed.
The objective of this paper is to present the lessons learned in drilling a long open hole interval and the
recovery operations from a stuck pipe incident within that interval in the well. It discusses both the well
design and actual field practices, with significant emphasis in the recovery operations from the stuck pipe
incident. One of the key events is the spotting of special pipe freeing pills, which in combination of other
activities led to the freeing of the stuck bottom hole assembly which had a radioactive source. Some of the
key learnings are the need to optimise the well design, proper hole cleaning and mud conditioning prior
to drilling to section total depth. The knowledge of the pipe sticking mechanism and the application of the
right pipe freeing formulations are important considerations in freeing any stuck pipe

Introduction
Drilling long open hole sections could lead to many borehole stability problems such as improper hole
cleaning, stuck pipe or hole collapse. In some cases, long open hole intervals that travess different formations
(such as a combination of depleted intervals with high pressure intervals) may also lead to loss of drilling
mud to the formation, consequently resulting in loss of hydrostatic head and potential well control problems
2 SPE-203603-MS

in extreme cases (Warlick, 2009; Hassan, 2018). With stuck pipe taking up a huge part of drilling costs
(Bradley, 1991), various approaches have been designed to prevent and also recover from its occurrence,
including the use of pipe freeing pills (Aadnoy, 1999; Krol, 1981).
Well FX-3 is a development well that lies somewhere in the coastal waters in the Niger Delta. The well
is located on a platform on the shallow waters off the coast of the Niger Delta. The well was drilled with
a Jack-up rig. The initial design of well FX-3 involved the drilling of about 6300ftah of open hole in the
12 ¼" section after drilling and securing the 16" hole with 13 3/8" casing. This design was predicated
on the isolation of freshwater aquifer and the installation of a blow-out preventer before penetrating the
shallowest hydrocarbon. It was also required to set the production casing deep enough to acquire sufficient
shoe strength both for well control and equivalent circulating density considerations and to minimise the 8
½" hole interval. The overall casing design concept of well FX-3 is presented in Figure 1 below. The well
plan showing the well deviation is also presented below (Figure 2).

Figure 1—Casing scheme for well FX-3

SPE-203603-MS 3

Figure 2—Wall plot for Well FX-3

This paper presents the drilling of some sections of Well FX-3 and the recovery operation from a stuck
incident in the 12 ¼" hole.

The Drilling of the Top-Hole Section of Well FX-3

The top-hole section of Well FX-3 involved the drilling of the 8 1/2" pilot hole to 4845ftah for shallow gas
hazard mitigations and the opening of the 8 ½" pilot hole to 16" hole prior to the installation and cementation
of the 13 3/8" casing. The 8 ½" pilot hole was drilled in two bit runs to 4845ftah. The first bit run was a
milled tooth bit (IADC 137) and it drilled from 356ftah to 3261ftah; it came out with a dull grading of 3-5-
WT-A-E-1/4-CT-BHA. The second 8 ½" pilot BHA drilled with an insert bit (IADC 437) from 3261ftah to
4860ftah and it came out with a bit dull grading of 5-4-WT-A-E-1/8-NO-TD.
The 8 ½" pilot hole was opened directly to 16" with an 8 ½" × 16" hole opener. This was considered an
optimisation to save time rather than opening the 8 ½" hole in stages. For example, the 8 ½" could have
been opened from 8 ½" to 12 ¼" and a different run would have been made to open the 12 ¼" hole to 16".
Alternatively, a staged hole opener could have been used in a single run. The first 8 ½" by 16" hole opener
run opened the 8 ½" to 16" from 356ftah to 2926ftah. The hole opener came out of hole with a dull grading of
4-WT-A-E-5/8-BU-TQ. A second 8 ½" × 16" hole opener BHA was run in hole and it opened the 8 ½" hole
from 2926ftah to 3182ftah. There was no further progress made due to high torque and extremely low rate
of penetration. It came out with a dull grading of 4-WT-A-E-16/16-BU-TQ. Due to the low performance of
the hole openers, a 16" insert bit was run to ream the 8 ½" hole to 16". However, the bit drilled to 4054ftah
and had to be pulled out of hole due to very low rate of penetration. The bit dull grading was 2-3-WT-A-
E-3/16-BT-TD.
During the deployment of the 13 3/8" casing, the string encountered restrictions at 3,154ftah - 3,174ftah,
3,211ftah and 3595ftah. The casing string was also stuck at 3651ftah but was worked free with 250klbs over
4 SPE-203603-MS

pull and 100 klbs slack off weight with 300gpm circulating rate. However, the casing was successfully run
to setting depth of 4045ftah and cemented in place.
An investigation into the reasons the two-hole opener BHAs could not open the 8 ½" pilot to the planned
section total depth indicated that the formation was abrasive as the five bits deployed within this interval all
came out under gauge. The investigation also showed that the hole openers could have been made of PDC
or TCI cutters or milled tooth cutters of higher IADC classification.

The Drilling of the Intermediate 12 ¼" Hole Section of Well FX-3

The 12 ¼" hole section was drilled from 4045ftah to 11200ftah - an open hole interval of 7155ftah. This
was drilled in one bit run without any tool failure in 149 hours. An IADC M323 six bladed, 3in gauge with
16mm-cutters bit was selected for the section based on offset bit analysis and bit engineering that took into
consideration the formation data such as rock mechanics and lithology. The bit total flow area was optimised
for bit hydraulic horsepower, hence the pump rate range was selected to achieve that objective with hole
cleaning, mud properties and ROP taken into consideration.
There were other factors that constrained the ROP. For example, while drilling initially (prior to the
drilling fluid warming up and shearing properly) there was constant drilling fluid overflow at the shakers
which necessitated cutting down on the designed flow rate. There was some directional work and anti-
collision monitoring that had to be done to meet the well objectives. Furthermore, the required RPM was
limited to about 130 by the rig’s Top Drive System. There were also issues that bothered on communication
as the rig team comprised of multi-national personnel, some who were not proficient in English Language.
Factors that helped in achieving the drilling objective of the 12 ¼" hole were good collaboration of all the
service providers, early call out of tools and personnel, surveys were done before connection to minimise
stationary time, a rotary steerable system bottom hole assembly (BHA) was used and drilling parameters
such as weight on bit were optimised taking into consideration torque limitations.
The 12 ¼" bit dull grading after it was pulled to surface was 2-5-RO-G-X-1/8-LN-TD, shown in Figure
3. The ring out of the bit did not appear to be formation related. However, a long cement shoe track of about
120ft was drilled and a bit nozzle was lost to the formation.

Figure 3—12 ¼" PDC bit pulled to surface

SPE-203603-MS 5

Sticking and Retrieval of the 12 ¼" Bottom Hole Assembly

The 12 ¼" hole was drilled to the section total depth of 11200ftah. However, prior to drilling to section
total depth, it was observed that the low-end mud rheology and electrical stability were sub-optimal and
commencement of the required mud treatment was not possible due to logistics challenges. The hole was
circulated clean with a minimum of three annular volumes. After a fifteen-minutes flow check was done,
the first stand of 5 ½" drill pipe was pulled out of hole with intermittent drag which kept dropping off.
An attempt to pull the second stand was not successful. The drill string was pulled with 60klbs overpull
without success. Part of the string weight was slacked off and the pipe did not come free. Attempts were
made to rotate the string, but no pipe rotation could be initiated. However, the pumps were started, and full
circulation was established with normal circulating pressures. The string was subsequently worked with
maximum allowable torque and slack off weight and then also with maximum overpull without it getting
free. All attempts to fire the jar did not indicate that the jar was firing. A stretch calculation indicated that
the string was stuck across the drill collars and above the jar in one of the depleted sands close to the 12
¼" section total depth.
A 57bbls pipe lax pill (about 90% by volume of base oil) was prepared and pumped across the suspected
stuck interval and allowed to soak for about six hours. The string was kept in compression with torque.
After the soaking period, the string was worked severally without success. A second 60bbls pipe lax pill
was prepared and soaked across the suspected stuck interval for about six hours. The string was worked
subsequently with slack off weight and overpull without it coming free.
A specially formulated caustic pill was prepared. 60bbls of the pill consisted of 20ppb of caustic soda and
3% (v/v) of drilling detergent. The fluid pumping train comprised of 10bbls of base oil ahead followed by
20bbls of surfactant pill and the caustic pill. This pill was spotted across the suspected stuck BHA interval
and allowed to soak for about six hours with the pipe in compression and torque. An attempt to work the
pipe in compression was successful as pipe movement and rotation was restored. The stuck interval was
reamed severally with circulation. The rotation and circulation were stopped, and an attempt was made to
pull the drill string out of hole on elevators, However, it was observed that the drill string had immediately
got stuck again. Several attempts to work the string free was unsuccessful.
A second caustic pill formation was prepared and spotted across the suspected stuck interval and the pipe
put in compression and torque. After allowing the pill to soak for about four to ten hours, the pipe was
worked on severally applying the maximum allowable tension and compression (with torque). However, the
5 ½" drill pipe parted at about 76ft below the derrick floor while attempting to pull the string free in tension.
An overshot fishing assembly was made up with 5-3/8" basket grapple (due to the reduced outside
diameter of the necked-out top of fish) and the fish was engaged. It was then observed that the drill string
was free; it was pulled to the rig floor. The parted string was laid down and the remaining string and bottom
hole assembly were back-reamed out of hole to the 13 3/8" casing shoe at 4045ftah. The back-reaming
operation was done at close-to-normal drilling parameters. At the 13 3/8" casing shoe, a viscous pill was
pumped, and twice annular content circulation was carried out. The back-reaming and circulations brought
a substantial amount of non-fresh cuttings to surface. Subsequently, the string was pulled freely on elevators
to surface. This led the team to suspect that the sticking mechanism may initially have been "mechanical
sticking", a scenario where cutting bed (lying on the low side of the well and restricting the hole ID) may
have wedged the string at bottom resulting in the inability to pull the string out of hole but not causing
sufficient flow restriction to result in a pack-off and pressure spikes. It is quite possible that subsequently,
the mechanical sticking may have progressed into a differential sticking scenario as there was substantial
overbalance (>1000psi) across some permeable and depleted sands. Fred, et al (2010) have explained the
difference between differential and mechanical sticking
A review on how the string came free the first time could have been a combined effect of the pipe lax
pills pumped initially which lightened the hydrostatic across the stuck interval and the caustic pill that broke
6 SPE-203603-MS

down the filter cake. An analysis of the freeing mechanism the second time the string was free indicated
help from two likely sources. First, the caustic pill may have broken down the filter cake across the stuck
interval. Second, the axial force due to the parting of the string may have led to some severe shock load
(combined slacking of the weight of the entire string with some impulse force) on the stuck interval, leading
to the freeing of the stuck string and allowing it to fall to bottom.

Figure 4—Part of the string that parted on surface. The lower part of the fish was in hole at the time of this picture.

After the pipe was pulled to surface, a decision was taken to immediately run the 9-5/8" production casing
since extensive back-reaming operation was done while pulling the stuck string to surface. The casing was
run without much issues through all the intervals that were back-reamed up to 11049ftah where it was held
up. That depth interval, 11049ft to 11200ft, was not back-reamed. The casing tally was adjusted, the casing
pulled to 11016ft and the casing hanger landed. The casing was cemented successfully. Worthy of note while
displacing the cement was that the plugs where not bumped after displacing the calculated displacement
volume. Additional volume of about 6bbls was pumped to bump the plugs. The additional volume was
calculated from the mud compressibility correlations. Subsequently, the well was drilled to the final target
depth and other well operations were conducted successfully.

Lessons Learned from drilling a long open hole interval and retrieval of a
stuck pipe
The following were some of the lessons learned in drilling a long open hole interval and retrieval of a stuck
BHA:
SPE-203603-MS 7

i. 8 ½" hole can be opened directly to 16" hole. The Cutters of the hole openers should be selected
based on the formation to be drilled. Review offset data if available
ii. Consider the possibility of short wiper trip runs when drilling a long open hole interval
iii. Condition mud properties to the required specification while drilling (across depleted intervals) and
prior to pulling out of hole the bottom hole assembly
iv. Check that the HPHT filtrate loss is within the programmed value and the filtrate is all oil without
water indent prior to pulling out of hole the drill string.
v. Circulate the well clean till there are no significant returns of formation cuttings from the shakers
vi. Consider running casing rather than a wiper trip when the open hole interval has been back-reamed
at drilling or close to drilling parameters
vii. In highly deviated wells, it is possible for the drill string to be stuck mechanically and have full
returns if the cuttings bed is lying on the low side and not causing substantial obstruction to the
drilling fluid flow path. Mechanical sticking can be prevented by conditioning the drilling fluid
rheology to the right specifications and circulating the well free of cuttings
viii. Have enough quantities of caustic soda and pipe lax on location when drilling across intervals with
high risks of differential sticking
ix. Have acid (e.g. 15% HCl) on location when drilling across depleted intervals with a CaCO3 weighted
mud
x. The caustic pill was effective in freeing the pipe from the filter cake
xi. Consider pumping a long column of base oil across stuck intervals or above as may be required to
reduce the hydrostatic across the stuck interval while taking well control and other borehole stability
issues into consideration
xii. Once a decision is made to back-ream, consider back-reaming the entire open hole and circulate the
well clean at the previous casing shoe
xiii. Back reaming should be done at close to drilling parameters with control over the rotary overpull
to minimise the risk of twist off if restriction is encountered

Conclusion
The 8 ½" top hole section of well FX-3 was opened directly from 8 ½" to 16" and the stuck 12 ¼" bottom
hole assembly was successfully recovered. The 9 5/8" casing was run and cemented in place without any
significant issue. Cutter selection based on formation lithology should be taken into consideration in the 8
½" × 16" hole opener design. About 7151ft of 12 ¼" open hole was drilled successfully in one bit run without
any equipment downtime. Hole cleaning and mud conditioning to the required specification should be taken
into consideration in drilling a long open hole interval, especially if depleted intervals are to be penetrated.
The deployment of caustic pill formulation was effective in freeing the stuck BHA. The additional lesson
learnt was that the 9 5/8" casing was deployed close to setting depth after backreaming the open hole interval
without much borehole related issues.

Acknowledgement
The authors wish to thank all those that participated in the successful drilling of the surface and intermediate
hole sections of well FX-3 especially van Zwol Cee, Princewill Ekeadah and Grace Nnorom. The drilling
contractor personnel, the service company personnel, the company supervisors at both the well site and
onshore were some of the people that participated in the successful drilling of the more than 7000ft of
open hole and the retrieval of the stuck bottom hole assembly. We also wish to thank the Shell Petroleum
Development Company of Nigeria for giving us the permission to publish this work
8 SPE-203603-MS

References
1. Warlick, L. M., Abass, H. H., Khan, M. R., Pardo Techa, C. H., Tahini, A. M., Shehri, D. A.,
Perumalla, S. (2009, January 1). Evaluation of Wellbore Stability during Drilling and Production
of Open Hole Horizontal Wells in a Carbonate Field. Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi:
10.2118/126157-MS
2. Hassan, Zeyad. (2018). Common Drilling well problems (Reasons, indications, mitigation and
prevention). 10.13140/RG.2.2.19138.48327.
3. Bradley, W. B., Jarman, D., Plott, R. S., Wood, R. D., Schofield, T. R., Auflick, R. A., &
Cocking, D. (1991, January 1). A Task Force Approach to Reducing Stuck Pipe Costs. Society of
Petroleum Engineers. doi: 10.2118/21999-MS
4. Aadnoy, B. S., Larsen, K., & Berg, P. C. (1999, January 1). Analysis of Stuck Pipe in Deviated
Boreholes. Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi: 10.2118/56628-MS
5. Krol, D. A. (1981, January 1). Laboratory Evaluation of Stuck Pipe Spotting Fluid Effectiveness.
Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi: 10.2118/10096-MS
6. Fred E. Dupriest, William C. Elks Jr., Steinar Ottesen. (2010), Design Methodology and
Operational Practices Eliminate Differential Sticking