Advertisement

Computational Particle Mechanics

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 163–175 | Cite as

An implicit unsteady hydraulic solver for suspended cuttings transport in managed pressure wells

  • R. FloresEmail author
  • E. Ortega
  • A. Ilin
  • D. Simpkins
  • E. Oñate
Article

Abstract

We present a simulation tool for transient events in complex hydraulic networks. The code includes modelling of the transport of suspended cuttings in near-vertical wells. An unstructured finite volume formulation with implicit time integration has been chosen. The unconditional stability of the integrator makes the method suitable for the simulation of transient events over a wide range of characteristic timescales. It handles both very fast transients (e.g. fluid hammer events) and the long-term evolution of the well (e.g. hole cleaning operations). The software has been developed to address the need of the oil industry for a robust and efficient predictive tool allowing effective well control in managed pressure drilling operations. The physical modelling follows the standard practices accepted by the industry (e.g. mud rheology computations). The mathematical foundation of the algorithm is described followed by validation cases that illustrate its capabilities and accuracy. Finally, a practical industrial application example is provided to demonstrate the real-world performance of the software.

Keywords

Unsteady Hydraulics Oil well Cuttings transport 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was partially funded by Weatherford International.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Malloy KP et al. (2009) Managed-pressure drilling: what it is and what it is not. In: IADC/SPE Managed pressure drilling and underbalanced operations conference and exhibition, San Antonio TXGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Elliot D et al (2011) Managed pressure drilling erases the lines. Schlumberger Oilfield Rev 23(1):14–23Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    van Riet EJ, Reitsma D (2003) Development and testing of a fully automated system to accurately control downhole pressure during drilling operations. In: SPE/IADC Middle East drilling technology conference and exhibition, Abu DhabiGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guo C et al (2010) Managed pressure drilling micro flux technology allows safer drilling in highly sour reservoirs. In: International oil and gas conference and exhibition in China, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Streeter VL, Wylie EB (1998) Fluid mechanics, international 9th revised edn. McGraw-Hill Higher Education, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lohrasbi AR, Attarnejad R (2008) Water hammer analysis by characteristic method. Am J Eng Appl Sci 1(4):287–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Amein M, Chu HL (1975) Implicit numerical modeling of unsteady flows. J Hydraul Div ASCE 101(6):717–731Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wylie EB, Streeter VL (1970) Network system transient calculations by implicit method. In: 45th Annual meeting of the society of petroleum engineers of AIME, Houston TXGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ghidaoui M et al (2005) A review of water hammer theory and practice. Appl Mech Rev ASME 58:49–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Greyvenstein GP (2002) An implicit method for the analysis of transient flows in pipe networks. Int J Numer Methods Eng 53:1127–1143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Anderson JD (1995) Computational fluid dynamics: the basics with applications. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    (2010) Rheology and hydraulics of oil-well fluids—API recommended practice 13D, 6th edn. American Petroleum Institute, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Herschel WH, Bulkley R (1926) Konsistenzmessungen von Gummi-Benzollösungen. Kolloid Zeitschrift 39:291–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Celigueta MA et al (2016) A FEM-DEM technique for studying the motion of particles in non-Newtonian fluids. Application to the transport of drill cuttings in wellbores. Comput Part Mech 3(2):263–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Walker RE, Mayes TM (1975) Design of muds for carrying capacity. J Pet Technol 259:893–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bourgoyne AT, Millheim KK, Chenevert ME, Young FS (1986) applied drilling engineering. SPE Textbook Series, Richardson, pp 173–183Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lomax H, Pulliam TH, Zingg DW (2003) Fundamentals of computational fluid dynamics. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Godunov SK (1954) Different methods for shock waves. Ph.D. thesis, Moscow State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stein E, de Borst R, Hughes TJR (eds) (2004) Encyclopedia of computational mechanics, vol 1, Chapter 14, Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sifferman TR, Mayers GM, Haden EL, Wahl HA (1974) Drill-cutting transport in full-scale vertical annuli. J Pet Technol 26(11):1295–1302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Araya W, Chaudhry M (2001) Unsteady friction in rough pipes. J Hydraul Eng 127(7):607–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© OWZ 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International Center for Numerical Methods in Engineering (CIMNE)BarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Serra Hunter professor at Escola Superior d’Enginyeries Industrial, Aeroespacial y Audiovisual de TerrassaUniversitat Politècnica de Catalunya (ESEIAAT-UPC)TerrassaSpain
  3. 3.Weatherford InternationalHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations