Contents

Cover

Title page

Copyright page

Dedication

Foreword

Acknowledgements

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.0 Introduction of the Book
1.1 Introduction of Drilling Engineering
1.2 Importance of Drilling Engineering
1.3 Application of Drilling Engineering
1.4 Drilling Problems, Causes, and Solutions
1.5 Drilling Operations and its Problems
1.6 Sustainable Solutions for Drilling Problems
1.7 Summary
References

Chapter 2: Problems Associated with Drilling Operations

2.0 Introduction
2.1 Problems Related to Drilling Methods and Solutions
2.2 Summary
References

Chapter 3: Problems Related to the Mud System

3.0 Introduction
3.1 Drilling Fluids and its Problems with Solutions
3.2 General Case Studies on Lost Circulation
3.3 Summary
References

Chapter 4: Problem Related to Drilling Hydraulics

4.0 Introduction
4.1 Drilling Hydraulics and its Problems and Solutions
4.2 Overall Recommendations
4.3 Summary
References

Chapter 5: Well Control and BOP Problems

5.0 Introduction
5.1 Well Control System
5.2 Problems with Well Control and BOP and their Solutions
5.3 Case Studies
5.4 Summary
References

Chapter 6: Drillstring and Bottomhole Assembly Problems

6.0 Introduction
6.1 Problems Related to Drillstring and their Solutions
6.2 Case Studies
6.3 Summary
References

Chapter 7: Casing Problems

7.0 Introduction
7.1 Problems Related to Casing and their Solutions
7.2 Case Studies
7.3 Summary
References

Chapter 8: Cementing Problems

8.0 Introduction
8.1 Problems Related to Cementing and their Solutions
8.2 Good Cementing Practices
8.3 Case Studies
8.4 Summary
References

Chapter 9: Wellbore Instability Problems

9.0 Introduction
9.1 Problems Related to Wellbore Instability and their Solutions
9.2 Case Studies
9.3 Summary
References

Chapter 10: Directional and Horizontal Drilling Problems

10.0 Introduction
10.1 Problems Related to Directional Drilling their Solutions
10.2 Case Studies
10.3 Summary
References

Chapter 11: Environmental Hazard and Problems during Drilling

11.0 Introduction
11.1 Problems Related to Environment during Drilling
11.2 Case Studies
11.3 Summary
References

Chapter 12: Summary and Conclusions

12.1 Summary
12.2 Conclusions

Index

End User License Agreement

List of Illustrations

Chapter 2

Figure 2.1 Placement of casing.
Figure 2.2 Typical Landing Base and Surface Casing Set Up (modified from Farooqui, 1998).
Figure 2.3 Damaged surface casing on an water injection well (Farooqui, 1998).
Figure 2.4 Pitted surface casing of a oil well (Farooqui, 1998).
Figure 2.5 Water leaking from a water supply well casing.
Figure 2.6 Basic fishing tools.
Figure 2.7 Bit components.
Figure 2.8 Junk magnet.
Figure 2.9 Boot basket.
Figure 2.10 Drillstring failure (Perforated drill collar).
Figure 2.11 Overshot.
Figure 2.12 Lead mill (left) and string mill (right).
Figure 2.13 Fishing BHA.
Figure 2.14 Junk retrieve operations.
Figure 2.15 Pipe twist-off.
Figure 2.16 Pipe failure due to twist-off and/or fatigue.
Figure 2.17 Relationship between rock shear strength and threshold bit weight at atmospheric pressure (Hossain and Al-Majed, 2015).
Figure 2.18 Typical response of ROP to increasing bit weight (Hossain and Al-Majed, 2015).
Figure 2.19 Typical response of ROP to increasing rotary speed (Hossain and Al-Majed, 2015).
Figure 2.20 Historical drilling trend (from EIA Report, 2016).
Figure 2.21 Example of bit-run data showing interval to be extracted and averaged (Fear, 1999).
Figure 2.22 ROP for different wells.
Figure 2.23 Stinger bit crush and shear the cuttings.
Figure 2.24 Drilling bit balled up.
Figure 2.25 Formation cave-in.
Figure 2.26 Bridging in Wells.

Chapter 3

Figure 3.1 Lost-circulation zones.
Figure 3.2 Lost-circulation zones showing partial and total loss.
Figure 3.3 Lost Circulation Treatment Decision Tree.
Figure 3.4 Mud loss for different LCM (RIPI-LQC).
Figure 3.5 Mud loss for different LCM (RIPI-LCC).
Figure 3.6 Equilibrium levels of carbonates and bicarbonates.
Figure 3.7 Formation damage.
Figure 3.8 Classification and order of the common formation damage mechanisms (modified after Bennion, 1999).
Figure 3.9 Causes of damage.
Figure 3.10 Formation damage caused by (a) solids plugging, (b) in situ asphaltene deposition, and (c) pore throat plug.
Figure 3.11 Formation damage caused by clay particles activities (a) Adsorbed water; (b) Soil pores with water; (c) Clay swelling.
Figure 3.12 Formation damage caused by dispersion.
Figure 3.13 Formation damage caused by saturation.
Figure 3.14 Reduction in well productivity caused by condensate buildup.
Figure 3.15 Formation damage caused by suspended particles in injected water (Feng et al., 2016).
Figure 3.16 Pressure profile in the near-wellbore region for an ideal well and a well with formation damage (Standing, 1970).
Figure 3.17 Inflow performance relations for different flow efficiencies (F) (Vogel, 1968).
Figure 3.18 Features of Hydroclean™ drillpipe (Hossain and Al-Majed, 2015).
Figure 3.19 An overview of the drilling process and formation of the filter cake (redrawn from Hashemzadeh and Hajidavalloo, 2016) (a) an overview of formation damage; (b) details showing positive and negative skin effect with pressure profil.
Figure 3.20 Pore pressure/Fracture pressure curve (Case Study of Tanzania).

Chapter 4

Figure 4.1 Number of failures versus forms of failure (From Wang et al., 2011).
Figure 4.2 Number of failures versus the position of drillstring.
Figure 4.3 Number of failures versus drilling depth (From Wang et al., 2011).
Picture 4.1 Photos of typical drillstring failure: (a) fatigue fracture of drillstring caused by gas drilling; (b) fracture surface of drillstring; (c) the washout of drillstring due to corrosion; (d) fracture of drillstring due to hydrogen embrittlement. (From Wang et al., 2011).
Figure 4.4 Schematic showing borehole failures in relation to the mud pressure (Zhang, 2013).
Figure 4.5 Types of borehole instabilities.
Figure 4.6 Drilling windows showing pore and fracture gradients.
Figure 4.7 Mud Window with trip margin and correlating Well Design.

Chapter 5

Figure 5.1 Schematic of well control operations (Hossain and Al-Majed, 2015).
Figure 5.2 Schematic of formation fluid influx.
Figure 5.3 Mechanism and reasons of kick.
Figure 5.4 Operational procedure flowing detection of a kick (Hossain and Al-Majed, 2015).
Figure 5.5 Schematic of initial well conditions during well control operations (Hossain and Al-Majed, 2015).
Figure 5.6 Illustration for Example 5.5.
Figure 5.7 Schematic view of the Example 5.6.
Figure 5.8 Schematic view of blowout.
Figure 5.9 Configuration of the well, where the blowout occurred (From Jain et al., 2012).
Picture 5.1 Athey Wagon.
Figure 5.10 Section through the well shows the path of oil channels that had to be plugged with mud, and then cement.
Figure 5.11 Arm of a remotely operated vehicle works at the Deepwater Horizon oil spill site in the Gulf of Mexico (Source: BP PLC).
Figure 5.12 Comparison between observed and simulated pressure build-up.
Figure 5.13 Horner plot of wellhead pressure after closure of the capping stack on the Macondo Well.

Chapter 6

Figure 6.1 Different cases for stuck pipe (from wordpress.com).
Figure 6.2 Flow chart for determining the location of the stuck pipe.
Figure 6.3 Drilling failure (http://petroleumsupport.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Cyclic-Loading.jpg).
Figure 6.4 Torsional vibration.
Picture 6.1 HI tool.
Figure 6.5 Collapse pressure (Hossain and Al-Majed, 2015).
Figure 6.6 Collapse pressure at different situation for a typical drillpipe (Hossain and Al-Majed, 2015).
Figure 6.7 Axial Load distributions on the Drillstring.
Figure 6.8 Axial Load distributions on the drillstring for Example 6.1.
Figure 6.9 Axial Load and maximum load distributions on the Drillstring for Example 6.1.
Figure 6.10 Internal catchers.
Figure 6.11 Example of heat check cracking near the primary shoulder of a box tool joint.
Figure 6.12 (a) Ductile fracture occurring at maximum shear stress, τ at 45° (b) Brittle fracture which requires crack propagation from stresses at 90° (Lucien Hehn et al., 2007).
Picture 6.2 Damages caused by V&S in different drillstring components (Dong et al., 2016).
Figure 6.13 The relationship of drilling parameters, ROP, and input energy (Dong et al., 2016).
Figure 6.14 Lateral/transverse vibrations.
Figure 6.15 Pipe failure due to twist-off and/or fatigue.
Figure 6.16 Drillstring (K.A Macdonald, 2007).
Figure 6.17 Drillstring failure (nola.com).
Figure 6.18 Commonly encountered modes of fracture: ductile (a); brittle (b); SCC (c) and fatigue (d) where R – radial steps along initiation region at thread root; B – beach marks from fatigue and W – washout. (Macdonald, 2007).
Figure 6.19 Post-separation damage to fracture surfaces of a BHA connection. (Macdonald 2007).
Figure 6.20 Various stages (a) and data flow (b) information of the case study (from Gundersen and Sørmo, 2013).

Chapter 7

Figure 7.1 Sensitivity of parameters in a vertical well (redrawn from Ifeanyil et al., 2017).
Figure 7.2 Sensitivity of parameters in a horizontal well (redrawn from Ifeanyil et al., 2017).
Figure 7.3 Parameters affecting inclined well.
Figure 7.4 Effect of temperature on yield strength (redrawn from Tancret et al., 2003).
Figure 7.5 (a) Filter-cake buildup into a perforation channel. (b) Perforation channel filled with dehydrated cement and a cement node is protruding from the perforation.
Figure 7.6 Various prevailing pressure in the subsurface.
Figure 7.7 Mud Window with trip margin and correlating Well Design (from Eikås, 2012).
Figure 7.8 Setting depth based on kick criteria (from Eikås, 2012).
Figure 7.9 Problem in snowball.
Figure 7.10 Some of the casing configurations used around the world (from Khosravanian and Aadnoy, 2016).
Figure 7.11 Well path is suitable for well completions of optimization well design problem.
Figure 7.12 Casing repair procedure used in South Texas field.
Figure 7.13 Number of wells suffering from different barrier element failure (from Vignes & Aadnoy, 2008).
Figure 7.14 Age of wells with integrity issues. 75 out of 406 wells show integrity problems.
Figure 7.15 Cement outside the 9 5/8 in. casing is set below the production packer.
Figure 7.16 Well cemented above production packer according to the Norsok standard D-010 (from Eikås, 2012).
Figure 7.17 Fluid from the high pressure zone enters the well causing pressure build up in annulus b (from Eikås, 2012).
Figure 7.18 The high pressure formation is properly sealed off preventing any inflow to the well (from Eikås, 2012).
Figure 7.19 The 9 5/8 in. casing is set as a liner instead of a casing going all the way to the surface (from Eikås, 2012).
Figure 7.20 13 3/8 in. casing shoe is set in weak formation (from Eikås, 2012).
Figure 7.21 Casing shoe set in the strong formation (from Eikås, 2012).
Figure 7.22 An additional 11 in. casing string (from Eikås, 2012).
Figure 7.23 Leak below liner hanger packer migrating into annulus a, b, and surrounding formation. Primary barrier is marked with blue and secondary barrier with red color (from Eikås, 2012).
Figure 7.24 The 9 5/8 in. Casing is set deeper to extend the secondary barrier so that it protects leaks from below casing hanger packer. Primary barrier is marked with blue and secondary barrier with red color (from Eikås, 2012).
Figure 7.25 A 7 in. production casing is added after the 9 5/8 in. to extend the secondary barrier so that it can prevent leaks from under the liner hanger packer to travel into annulus b and the surrounding formation. Primary barrier is marked with blue and secondary barrier with red color (from Eikås, 2012).
Figure 7.26 Well design preventing inflow from surrounding formation into annulus if the cement is perfect without channels and the cement-formation/casing bond is good etc. Primary barrier is marked with blue and secondary barrier with red color (from Eikås, 2012).
Figure 7.27 Variability of leak-off test results (From Baron and Skarstol, 1994).
Figure 7.28 Surface casing depth selection (From Baron and Skarstol, 1994).
Figure 7.29 ERCB Surface casing requirements (From Baron and Skarstol, 1994).
Figure 7.30 Surface casing and long string cement cost (From Baron and Skarstol, 1994).
Figure 7.31 Change in net cost.

Chapter 8

Figure 8.1 Variation in thermal conductivity of normal strength concrete as a function of temperature (from Kodur, 2014).
Figure 8.2 Stress-stress response of concrete at various temperatures (from Kodur, 2014).
Figure 8.3 Pressure differential within the subsurface can trigger fluid migration through the annulus.
Figure 8.4 Pore pressure in layer 2 is larger than the fracturing pressure in layer 1 (From Eikås, 2012).
Figure 8.5 Key-seating.
Figure 8.6 Packed hole assembly.
Figure 8.7 Key-seating, reaming helps.
Figure 8.8 Schematic of the cementing operation (from Mwang’ande, 2016).
Figure 8.9 Impact of the presence of OBM on cement strength (from Li et al., 2016).
Figure 8.10 Displacement of mud affected.
Figure 8.11 Uniformity of the cemented annulus by eccentric annulus. suffers greatly for low standoff values.
Figure 8.12 Standoff is 0, when casing touches the bore wall (C = 0).
Figure 8.13 Displacement profiles affected by flow regimes.
Figure 8.14 Principal sketch describing estimation of mean diameter, Dm in equation 8.1 (Amanullah and Banik, 1987).
Figure 8.15 Principal sketch describing parameters in equation (8.1)
Figure 8.16 Principal sketch describing parameters in equation (8.2).
Figure 8.17 Spacers help keep fluids isolated (From Crook et al., 2001).
Figure 8.18 Positioning of filtrate, filter cake vis a vis mud mobility (From Crook et al., 2001).
Figure 8.19 Configuration of the casing/wellbore homogenizing the fluid loss system.
Figure 8.20 Cement setting configuration in a non-centralized casing system.
Figure 8.21 Challenges and possible sources of problems (From Mwang’ande, 2016).
Figure 8.22 Cross section view of sources of casing problems.
Figure 8.23 Cross-section of a cemented annulus defining displacement efficiency of equation (8.4).
Figure 8.24 Production history of GoM (from IEA, 2017).
Figure 8.25 Causes of barrier failures for the 75 (of 406) production and injection wells surveyed in offshore Norway that showed evidence for such failures (from Vignes, 2011).
Figure 8.26 Well configuration and planned and attained TOC of Case I (From Mwang’ande, 2016).
Figure 8.27 Well configuration, planned and final for Case II.
Figure 8.28 Well configuration, planned and final for Case III.
Figure 8.29 Normal CBL attenuation logs indicating four TOC’s due to lack of contrast between cemented and non-cemented pipes. Additional log data are needed to clearly show the specific TOC (Hayden et al., 2011).
Figure 8.30 Clear TOC indicated by VDL and Flexural Attenuation map.
Figure 8.31 Well schematic; Planned and resulting cement job for well 34/10-37A in Good case V.
Figure 8.32 Well schematic; Planned and attained TOC’s for well 2/1-3 in failed case 01.
Figure 8.33 Well schematic; Planned and attained TOC’s for well 2/1-4 in Failed Case 02.
Figure 8.34 Well configuration as planned and actual.
Figure 8.35 Well schematic; showing resulting cement job (Poor cement bond and coverage) in narrow annulus of section 8 VV” for an inclined well 7/12-3A of Failed Case 04.

Chapter 9

Figure 9.1 Drilling through naturally fractured or faulted formations (from Pasic et al., 2007).
Figure 9.2 Drilling through tectonically stressed formations (from Pasic et al., 2007).
Figure 9.3 Drilling through a mobile formation (from Pasic et al., 2007).
Figure 9.4 Instability in an unconsolidated formation.
Figure 9.5 Examples of borehole instability during drilling of a shaly formation.
Figure 9.6 Drilling through a naturally overpressured shale.
Figure 9.7 Drilling through induced over-pressured shale.
Figure 9.8 Effect of mud weight on the stress in wellbore wall.
Figure 9.9 Effect of the well depth (a) and the hole inclination (b) on wellbore stability.
Figure 9.10 Mud weight window versus wellbore inclination (From Aslannezhad et al., 2016).
Figure 9.11 Conception model of Mody and Hale.
Figure 9.12 Angles of the wellbore avalanche: (a) 100° wellbore avalanche (More than half of the wall is damaged. The wellbore is instable, although density is unchanged); (b) 60° wellbore avalanche (Less than half of the wall is damaged. The wellbore is stable, but density increases by 0.5 ppg). (From Zhang et al., 2015).
Figure 9.13 Diagnosing the four most common wellbore instability mechanisms.
Figure 9.14 Classification of experimental studies about shale-fluid interaction (From Adham, 2014).
Figure 9.15 The comparison of the logging data in Nahr Umr Formation. GR: natural gamma logging; CAL: caliper logging; AC: acoustic transit time logging.
Picture 9.1 The core of Nahr Umr Shale.
Picture 9.2 The shale cavings of the Nahr Umr Shale of N006H Well.
Figure 9.16 Comparison of the shale strength decrease after immersing.
Figure 9.17 Time-dependent collapse pressure of Nahr Umr Shale.
Figure 9.18 Structure correlations for BRS formation.
Figure 9.19 Wells correlation for BRS formation.
Figure 9.20 Wellbore diagram and actual wellbore trajectory X-51.
Figure 9.21 Drilling progress chart well X-51.
Figure 9.22 Non-productive time chart for well X-51.
Figure 9.23 Wellbore diagram and actual wellbore trajectory X-53.
Figure 9.24 Drilling progress chart well X-53.
Figure 9.25 Non-productive time chart for well X-53.
Figure 9.26 Diagram for well X-52.
Figure 9.27 Caliper log of Well X-52.

Chapter 10

Figure 10.1 Count of oil wells producing at least 400 bbl of oil equivalent per day (from Perrin, 2016).
Figure 10.2 Count of oil wells for different orientations and production rate (from Perrin, 2016).
Figure 10.3 Vertical and horizontal views of a directional well (a = inclination or draft angle; b = azimuth).
Figure 10.4 Arrangement of sensors in an MWD tool.
Figure 10.5 Arrangement of sensors in an MWD tool.
Figure 10.6 Cause of crooked well.
Figure 10.7 Schematic of the directional survey.
Figure 10.8 Weight on bit and weight on drill collar.
Figure 10.9 Dipping formation.
Figure 10.10 Anisotropic formation.
Figure 10.11 Flow chart of well management.
Figure 10.11 Differential pressure induced pipe sticking.
Figure 10.12 Mechanical pipe sticking.
Figure 10.13 Ledge-induced pipe sticking.
Figure 10.14 Horizontal drilling assembly (From Noureldin, 2002).
Figure 10.15 (a) Critical regions of the drillpipe and connection causing fatigue failure; and (b) washout failure of the drillpipe transition.
Figure 10.16 Extraordinary stress during horizontal well drilling.
Figure 10.17 Events log for Well X-1 (Rahim et al., 2012).
Figure 10.18 Events log for Well X-2 (Rahim et al., 2012).
Figure 10.19 Mud weight vs. well deviation.
Figure 10.20 Mud weight vs. well azimuth.
Figure 10.21 Event and activity log of Well X3 (Rahim et al., 2012).
Figure 10.22 Event and activity log of Well X4 (Rahim et al., 2012).
Figure 10.23 In-situ stresses and pore pressure profile based on the observed hole condition for a well drilled along the S_Hmin direction.
Figure 10.24 Effect of mud overbalance on calculated breakout severity at a given depth.
Figure 10.25 Drilling experience in horizontal wells drilled in different directions.
Figure 10.26 Mud well azimuth vs. (a) Mud overbalance; (b) Average ROP.
Figure 10.27 Improvement of drilling operations over time.

Chapter 11

Picture 11.1 Ground subsidence can be tangibly ‘felt’ in shallow reservoirs that produce oil and sand.
Figure 11.1 Surface subsidence during oil/gas production.
Figure 11.2 Schematic cross-section of a wellbore deformation subjected to the maximum and minimum principal stress components (Al Lacazette, 2001).
Figure 11.3 Shallow water pore and fracture pressure vs. deep water. (From Wærnes, 2013).
Figure 11.4 Well hydrocarbon and kill operations during drilling (HC: Hydrocarbon in well; RIF: Risk Influencing Factors).
Figure 11.5 EER performance (Skogdalen, 2011).
Figure 11.6 Summary of suggested indicators related to deepwater drilling.
Figure 11.7 Location of the exploratory drilling study site in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico (27 ~ 37’ 13.87” N, 96 ~ 57’ 55.17” W in Mustang Island Lease Area, Block 792).
Figure 11.8 Number of symptoms reported for various classes of health impacts reported in the first and second interviews for humans, food animals and companion animals.
Figure 11.9 Number of symptoms reported for humans and animals in the first and second interviews categorized by cases where drilling activity had increased, cases where it remained the same, and cases where it had decreased.

List of Tables

Chapter 1

Table 2.1 Well Inspection Data.
Table 2.2 Variables that affect ROP.

Chapter 3

Table 3.1 PSD Selection criteria (Al Saba et al., 2017).
Table 3.2 Lists of LCMs.
Table 3.3 Time lost during various operations in North Sea (from Stangeland, 2015).

Chapter 4

Table 4.1 Types of problems that can be related to the hydraulics (Albdiry and Almensory, 2016).
Table 4.2 Data for casing and corresponding depth.

Chapter 6

Table 6.1 Dimensions and Strength of API Seamless Internal Upset Drillpipe

Chapter 7

Table 7.1 Buckling criteria.
Table 7.2 Types of excess water production problems (From Seright et al., 2003)
Table 7.3 Profit comparison of optimum conditions under different scenarios for various wells.
Table 7.4 Comparison of results between new approach and previously practiced approach.
Table 7.5 Summary of Field Applications.
Table 7.6 Properties of Ludox and Sodium silicate solutions.
Table 7.7 Cost study area

Chapter 8

Table 8.1 Acceptance table for casing cement according to NORSOK standard D-010 2004, Table 22 (From Norsok Standard, 2018).
Table 8.2 Examples of cement additives with their effects on cement slurry (from Mwang’ande, 2016).
Table 8.3 List of symptoms of various cement-related problems.
Table 8.4 Faults interpreted from well data and seismic data
Table 8.5 Well data for Case 1 (from Mwang’ande, 2016).
Table 8.6 Vital data in case 2 well.
Table 8.7 Vital data on Case 3.
Table 8.8 Data related to Displacement efficiency for Good Case V.
Table 8.9 Data on failed case 1.
Table 8.10 Data related to Ontology engineering for Failed Case 01
Table 8.11 Causal relation for failed case 1.
Table 8.12 Vital data of Bad case 2.
Table 8.13 Data related to Ontology engineering for Failed Case 2.
Table 8.14 Causal relationships of failed case 2.
Table 8.15 Data related to Displacement efficiency for failed Case 0.3.
Table 8.16 Data related to Ontology engineering for Failed Case 03.
Table 8.17 Causal relation for failed case 3
Table 8.18 Data related to Displacement efficiency for Failed Case 04.
Table 8.19 Data related to Ontology engineering for Failed Case 04.
Table 8.20 Causal relation for failed case 04.

Chapter 9

Table 9.1 Causes of wellbore instability.
Table 9.2 Indicators of wellbore instability.
Table 9.3 The drilling fluid properties of three horizontal wells of Nahr Umr Formation.
Table 9.4 The formation fluid properties of Halfaya oilfield.
Table 9.5 Mineral composition and content of the Nahr Umr Shale.
Table 9.6 Clay mineral composition and content of the Nahr Umr Shale.
Table 9.7 Swelling ratio and recovery of the Nahr Umr Shale.
Table 9.8 Experimental results of shale UCS after immersing in drilling fluid.
Table 9.9 Key operational parmeters used for drilling in well X-51.
Table 9.10 Key operational parmeters used for drilling in well X-53.
Table 9.11 Key operational parmeters used for drilling in well X-52.

Chapter 10

Table 10.1 The different horizontal drilling categories with the corresponding turning radii and build rates (From Joshi et al., 1991).
Table 10.2 Recommended mud weight planned for well X-4.
Table 10.3 Ranking of wells based on severity¹.

Chapter 11

Table 11.1 Descriptive summary of study site, sampling regime, and drilling activities.
Table 11.2 Sources of exposure and the number of cases with each exposure.

This edition first published 2018 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
and Scrivener Publishing LLC, 100 Cummings Center, Suite 541J, Beverly, MA 01915, USA
© 2018 Scrivener Publishing LLC

For more information about Scrivener publications please visit www.scrivenerpublishing.com.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

Wiley Global Headquarters
111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA

For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products visit us at www.wiley.com.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty
While the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written sales materials, or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

ISBN 978-1-118-99834-2

Foreword

With recent awareness of environmental sustainability, it has become clear that most of our technological advances are in fact a quick fix of problems that arose from practices that shouldn’t have been commenced to begin with. At the risk of being labeled an anarchist, it is only proper to say, this fear has been shared by some of the most non-controversial engineers and scientists (Nobel Laureate Chemist, Robert Curl, for instance). In this era of technological advancement being later labelled as ‘technological disaster’, drilling technologies bring in a silver lining. The advancements made in drilling technologies have been phenomenal and marks one of the proudest moments of the petroleum industry. Unfortunately, whenever disasters strike, the blame game begins and everyone rushes to disavow modern technology. With the spectacular failure in Deep water horizon project in 2010, many questioned the validity of modern drilling advances, particularly in the areas of offshore drilling. Lost in that hysteria was the fact that research that fuelled the instant solutions sought during that fateful drilling operation was in fact flawed. After the dust settled, however, the tragic event established one fact: there has to be a Q&A type of problem solving book that addresses real-life drilling problems with well researched answers. This book is the first of its kind that addresses field problems and answers with solutions that can become a guide for avoiding such problems in future. The book doesn’t compromise the relevance or scientific details in responding to hard hitting field problems. Rather than giving a technician’s response or a quickfix, it gives a researcher’s response with backing of field engineers with decades of experience. The book is a masterpiece that is helpful for practicing engineers as well as professors, who can better serve the discipline by introducing field problems that are solved with a combination of research and field experience.

S.T. Saleh, Geomech
G.V. Chilingar, University of Southern California

Acknowledgements

The first author would like to acknowledge the financial support provided by the Deanship of Scientific Research (DSR) at King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals (KFUPM) for funding this book-writing grant through project number IN141025. The support received from the department of Petroleum Engineering at KFUPM is also gratefully acknowledged. The author would like to thank Prof. Sidqi Ahmed Abu-Khamsin for his countless administrative support toward the accomplishment of the book project. The author acknowledges the support of his family members that provided him with full support during the book-writing project. The dedication of the author’s wife gave him continuous support under all circumstances. During this long journey, the sacrifice of the children, Ijlal Hossain, Ryyan Hossain, Omar Mohammed Ali-Hossain and Noor Hossain remained the most important source of inspiration. In addition, there are many more friends, colleagues, staff and secretaries who have dedicated time to this book-writing project.

Drilling Engineering Problems and Solutions

A Field Guide for Engineers and Students

Foreword

Acknowledgements