HAZOP of Well Control Procedures Provides Assurance of the Safety of the SubSea MudLift Drilling System

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.J. Schubert ◽  
H.C. Juvkam-Wold ◽  
C.E. Weddle
Keyword(s):  
Well Control ◽  
Control Procedures ◽  
Drilling System

MANAGEMENT OF THE UNIACKE G-72 INCIDENT

1985 ◽  
Vol 1985 (1) ◽  
pp. 311-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. D. Gill ◽  
C. A. Bonke ◽  
J. Carter
Keyword(s):  
Monitoring Program ◽  
Chemical Properties ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Gas Well ◽  
Well Control ◽  
Drilling Rig ◽  
Sampling Program ◽  
Control Procedures ◽  
Physical And Chemical ◽  
And Chemical Properties

ABSTRACT During the evening of February 22, 1984, the Uniacke G-72 gas well being drilled 150 nautical miles off Halifax, Nova Scotia, by the semisubmersible drilling rig, Vinland, under contract to Shell Canada Resources, blew out of control, emitting gas and condensate at an estimated rate of 300 bbl per day. During the following 10 days while Shell was assembling personnel, vessels, and equipment for reboarding the rig and initiating well control procedures, a comprehensive environmental monitoring program was put in place. An air, slick, and water column sampling program was initiated to provide information on the physical and chemical properties of the condensate. This paper describes the primary findings of the program that involved the coordination of government, area petroleum operators, and consultants.

Well Control Procedures for Dual Gradient Drilling as Compared to Conventional Riser Drilling

2006 ◽  
Vol 21 (04) ◽  
pp. 287-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerome J. Schubert ◽  
Hans C. Juvkam-Wold ◽  
Jonggeun Choe
Keyword(s):  
Well Control ◽  
Control Procedures ◽  
Dual Gradient

Riser gas risk mitigation with advanced flow detection and managed pressure drilling technologies in deepwater operations in Australia

2014 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 23
Author(s):  
Julmar Shaun Sadicon Toralde ◽  
Chad Henry Wuest ◽  
Robert DeGasperis
Keyword(s):  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Control Device ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Well Control ◽  
Alternative Approach ◽  
Managed Pressure Drilling ◽  
Drilling Operations ◽  
Drilling System ◽  
Flow Detection ◽  
And Control

The threat of riser gas in deepwater drilling operations is real. Studies show that gas kicks unintentionally entrained in oil-based mud in deepwater are unlikely to break out of solution until they are above the subsea blowout preventers (BOPs). The rig diverter is conventionally used to vent riser gas with minimal control and considerable risk and environmental impact involved. Reactive riser gas systems provide a riser gas handling (RGH) joint that is composed of a retrofitted annular BOP and a flow spool with hoses installed on top of the rig marine riser. A proactive, alternative approach to riser gas handling, called riser gas risk mitigation, is proposed by using managed pressure drilling (MPD) equipment. MPD involves the use of a rotating control device (RCD) to create a closed and pressurisable drilling system where flow out of the well is diverted to an automated MPD choke manifold with a high-resolution mass flow meter that increases the sensitivity and reaction time of the system to kicks, losses and other unwanted drilling events. Experiments and field deployments have shown that the deepwater MPD system can detect a gas influx before it dissolves in oil-based mud, allowing for management of the same using conventional well control methods. Since the MPD system has already closed the well in, automatic diversion and control of gas in the riser is also possible, if required. This paper presents experience gained from deepwater MPD operations in the Asia-Pacific to illustrate this, and possible deployment options in Australia are discussed.

Analysis of Field Trial Well Control Results with a Dual Gradient Drilling System

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Hauge ◽  
J.M. Godhavn ◽  
D.O. Molde ◽  
J.H Cohen ◽  
R.S. Stave ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Field Trial ◽  
Well Control ◽  
Drilling System ◽  
Dual Gradient

Kick detection and well control in a closed wellbore

2011 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Nas
Keyword(s):  
Control Process ◽  
Pressure Control ◽  
Control Device ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Pressure Management ◽  
Well Control ◽  
Managed Pressure Drilling ◽  
Drilling Operations ◽  
Control Procedures ◽  
Additional Level

Closing the wellbore at the top with a rotating control device (RCD) for some kinds of managed pressure drilling (MPD) operations raises a number of issues with regards to well control and kick detection. The wellbore is closed and the standard flow check of looking into the well is no longer possible. The use of a RCD provides drillers with an additional level of comfort because it is a pressure management device, but it doesn’t eliminate the need to have well control as a primary objective. In recent MPD operations, it has already been observed that well control procedures are relaxed as a result of managed pressure drilling. Is managed pressure drilling the same as primary well control, and how do we deal with kicks in managed pressure drilling operations? At what point in a well control process do we hand over from MPD to drillers’ well control, and who is responsible? This paper will present some of the issues that need to be considered when planning and conducting MPD operations. Early kick detection and annular pressure control are promoted as an essential part of MPD operations, but there can be confusion as to where the responsibility for well control lies. Does the responsibility remain with the drilling contractor and operator or with the provider of the MPD services. The paper provides some case studies where MPD and well control conflicted, causing a number of issues that in some cases led to the loss of wells.

Field Trial of Well Control Solutions with a Dual Gradient Drilling System

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
John H. Cohen ◽  
Roger Stave ◽  
Espen Hauge ◽  
Dag Ove Molde
Keyword(s):  
Field Trial ◽  
Well Control ◽  
Drilling System ◽  
Dual Gradient
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document