Technology Tested - RMOTC

Playing Hide and Seek with
the Hole-in-the-Wall Gang:
Recent Technology Testing at Wyoming’s Rocky
Mountain Oilfield Testing Center (RMOTC)
A presentation for
The Salt Lake City SPE Chapter
October 19, 2005
Tom Anderson
Business Development Manager
Data Management Project Manager
RMOTC

Outline
• What is RMOTC?
• The Hole-in-the-Wall Gang
• “Virtual Field Trip” of Teapot Dome
• Hiding:
–CO 2 Sequestration
– Pipeline Leak Detection
• Seeking:
– Microhole Drilling
– High Pressure Jet-Assisted Drillbit
– Flow Assurance Test Loop
– Tubing Rotator
• Sharing Data With Partners

The Hole-in-the-Wall Gang
Doug
Jim
Butch and
Sundance
Judith
Mark
Spike
Ralph
Wyoming
Joe
Vicki
Brian
Lyle

106°15'0"W
106°15'0"W
48-X-28
71-1-X-4
\A1;Flow Assurance Loop
41-2-X-3
67-1-X-1
61-2-X-1
25-1-X-1
A Virtual Field Visit
018
017
016
015
014 013
018
019
020
021
022
023
024
019
030
029
028
027
026
025
030
031
032
033
034
035
036
031
006
005
004
003
002
001
006
007
008
009
010
011
012
007
018
017
016
015
014
013
018
019
43°15'0"N
019
020
021
022
023
024
43°15'0"N
030
029 028
027
026
025
030
Legend
NPR3 Basemap
0 0.2 0.4
1:18,000
0.6 0.8
0.1
Miles
NPR3.dwg Polyline
natronatwp
natronasect
Roads
teapot_dem
Value
High : 5784.390625
Low : 4827.637695
Recent well locations

Hiding: CO2 Sequestration –
Science Goals
• NEEDS:
– demonstration of storage safety and permanence
– public safety, understanding and acceptance:
• needed for wider deployment of geologic storage
– site selection criteria, best practices
– relationship / synergy with EOR
• TEAPOT FOCUS AREAS:
– site characterization and baseline assessment
– leakage risk evaluation and prediction
• behavior of fractures and faults
• development of risk mitigation techniques
– wellbore and cement integrity
– sensitivity and detection limits of monitoring tools,
recommended suites and practices
– EOR/storage relationship

Project Plan
PHASE 1, FY03 – 05 (complete):
• Conceptual design for
NPR-3 project
• NPR-3 Reservoir /
Geologic Characterization
• Initiate development of
Geologic Model
• EOR Assessment and
preliminary design
• Preliminary Modeling of
Target Zone
• Baseline studies at NPR-3,
data sharing with Salt
Creek
• Funding development
PHASE 2: Proposed FY05-
06, pending funds:
• Detailed design
• Submit proposals, secure
permits
• Bidding for construction
• Initiate funded experiments
PHASE 3: Proposed, starting
FY06-07, pending funds:
• EOR CO2 injection
initiates, construction
• Monitoring, measurement,
verification
• EOR / Storage research
• Technology transfer

Existing infrastructure and data
500 active wells, 1300 wells total, drilling rig & staff;
Anadarko to supply low-cost CO 2 for experiments

NPR-3 Reservoir Summary
9 Producing (oil-bearing) intervals
• Depths 500’-5500’ (Shannon to
Tensleep)
• Miscible & immiscible floods
• Good range of oil/rock chemistry
• Range of rock composition &
petrophysics
Additional 5-6 water-bearing
intervals
• Fresh and saline, 3000-8000’
• Range of dep. environments, clastic
& carbonate
• Crow Mt., Flathead, Sundance

Tensleep EOR / storage demonstration
Compelling state and regional drivers to study
storage in the Tensleep at Teapot Dome:
• 2/3 of Wyoming’s production
comes from Tensleep
or equivalent
• Rangely (Colorado) CO 2
EOR in the Weber
(Tensleep equiv.)
• Significant volumes
in Colorado & Utah
• Analogs throughout
U.S. & international

NPR-3 Gravity Stable Miscible CO2
• Cost effective testing of gravity stable
operation in Tensleep Formation
– High relief structure
– Significant fracturing
– Active aquifer
– Available wellbores for operation
• Fluid analyzed and test design simulated
– Laboratory tests used to generate equation of state
for simulation tuning
– Simulation at field scale and proposed test scale
• Results support proceeding with injection

Saline Aquifer Storage Test
• Saline aquifers as sinks:
– International: Sleipner
– U.S. DOE projects: Frio, Mountaineer
• Crow Mountain Ss
• Existing Class 2 wells, Section 10
• Water analysis, permeability, caprock
• Several surrounding wells possible for
monitoring
• Field Work Proposal in progress
• Focus:
– MMV tool sensitivity, comparison, and detection limits
– Evaluation of multiple storage mechanisms

Baseline Assessments / Partner Research
• CSM- Ron Klusman:
– Soil gas and gas flux, baseline and monitoring phases
• CSM- Neil Hurley:
– LIDAR mapping of Tensleep outcrop
• U of Md / LLNL- Julio Friedmann:
– Fault seal / leakage risk assessment
• U of Manchester- Chris Ballantine:
– Noble gases as tracers (May 2005 field work)
• USGS- Bob Burruss:
– Reservoir compartmentalization and seepage assessment
• U of Houston- Kurt Marfurt / Charlotte Sullivan:
– 3D seismic data, curvature and attribute analysis for detailed
fracture and fault understanding (initiated April 2005)
• Princeton U:
– CO2-cement interactions
• LANL / LBNL / NETL:
– Microdrilling and VSP monitoring applications

Reservoir Heterogeneity: LIDAR mapping
A new laser-based surveying
technique collects many millions
of amplitude and XYZ data, which
can render the outcrop in high
detail.
These data are being used to
characterize the heterogeneity of
the Tensleep SS, including
fracture distribution & character.
Colorado School of Mines

Reservoir Heterogeneity: LIDAR mapping
These data have
been processed
for statistical
information on
fractures and
bedding.
Colorado School
of Mines

Reservoir Characterization and
Modeling High-level Task List
• Meet with existing partners to
define roles & responsibilities
• Digitize logs from “deep wells”
• Import wells and logs into
GeoGraphix system
• Build cross sections
• Create structure maps
• Do full 3D integrated seismic
interpretation of multiple key
horizons and faults
• Do seismic depth conversion
• Special geoscience analysis
• Build a 3D geocellular model
• Run dynamic flow simulation,
perform history match and
tune model for fit
• Load production history and
completions data into
production mgmt system
• Implement real-time
production data capture and
surveillance
• Load (historic) drilling data
into a system to enable
improved drilling operations,
planning and design
• Instrument drilling rig for realtime
operational data capture
Yellow text means completed, white is still to be done

Example of initial
subsurface structure
map on the top
Tensleep
3D seismic time structure map
for comparison

Sample Cross Section A-A’

-8.000
-4.000
0.000
3D Seismic
Amplitude
Survey
4.000
8.000
L
221 211 203 195 186 178 170 161 153 144 134 125 L
XL
80 88 93 99 106 112 118 124 130 137 144 150 XL
0.00 0.00
0.10 0.10
0.20 0.20
? ?
0.30 0.30
Note data gaps in
shallow part of survey
Shannon?
0.40 0.40
0.50 0.50
0.60 0.60
0.70 0.70
0.80 0.80
0.90 0.90
1.00 1.00
1.10 1.10
1.20 1.20
1.30 1.30
Second
Wall Creek
Lakota
Sundance
Tensleep
Basement
1.40 1.40

University of
Houston,
Allied
Geophysical
Laboratories
890 ms
Curvature time slice
890 ms
Coherency time slice

New Visualization Methods
Slide courtesy of Transform Software and Services

BYU High-Resolution Seismic
• 48-channel (24 fold)
• 10-ft station intervals
(5 ft. CDP)
• 28-Hz phones
• Conventional CDP
roll-along (internal
software switch)
• Accelerated weight
drop (with 100 lb.
hammer)
• 2 Profiles (each about
3/4 mile long)
Graduate student: John South

Section
34 area
Location of BYU High-Res Seismic
Seismic
2D lines

Example of High-Resolution Seismic
from BYU
This is not
from Teapot
Dome, but
illustrates the
kind of detail
we expect to
see in the
shallow
seismic lines
they shot at
NPR3 (which
are not yet
processed).

Section 34 Subsurface Interpretation
Well log cross section above
BYU 2D seismic cross sections

Pipeline Leak Detection
Sensor companies participating:
• En’Urga Inc.
• ITT Industries, Inc.
• LaSen, Inc.
• Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
• Physical Sciences Inc.
S O U T H W E S T R E S E A R C H I N S T I T U T E ®
SAN ANTONIO
DETROIT
HOUSTON
WASHINGTON, DC

Objectives
• Provide a forum where developers of remote sensor,
natural gas leak detection systems would be able to test
or demonstrate the operation of their systems.
• Form an advisory panel of interested gas company
personnel.
• Develop a test plan, including the development of a
“virtual” pipeline and leak site-specific designs.
• Conduct the field tests, where the equipment providers
collect their own data.

Advisory Board
• American Gas Association
• Department of Energy, National Energy
Technology Laboratory
• El Paso Pipeline Group
• Northeast Gas Association
• Office of Pipeline Safety, Department of
Transportation
• Pacific Gas & Electric Company
• Pipeline Research Council International, Inc.
• Southwest Research Institute

0
500' 1000'
0
500' 1000'
North end of virtual pipeline
18 17
19 20
N
14 13
23 24
20
B-1-20
21
To Midwest 7 Mi.
22
23 24
26 25
Hwy 259
29
28
27
33
34
To Casper 31 Mi.
Scale:
33
34
Scale:
Passes gas plant
34
34
3
2
Vortex LLC Project
Car Wash (SG 2)
10
10
11
VIRTUAL
PIPELINE MAP
7 8
18 17
Scale:
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Ft.
0 1/4 1/2 Mi.
LEGEND
Primary Roads
NPR-3 Boundary
16
9
14
(Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3)
16
Calibration leak site 25-STX-3
23
27

Virtual Pipeline Leak Sites
Leak
Site
Gas Source
Leak Type
Latitude
(N)
Longitude
(W)
DISTANCE FROM
LEAK SITE TO
CENTER OF
ROAD (FT)
Side of
Road
1 RMOTC gas Below ground 43 14 53.6 106 11 12.1 36 East
2A Cylinder Below ground 43 15 12.9 106 11 50.1 76 West
2B Cylinder Below ground 43 15 26.3 106 11 59.9 78 West
2C Cylinder Below ground 43 15 46.0 106 12 09.1 122 East
3 RMOTC gas Aboveground 43 16 15.7 106 12 19.5 44 East
4 RMOTC gas Below ground 43 16 20.1 106 12 24.6 90 East
2D/1F Cylinder Below ground 43 16 34.4 106 12 43.2 100 East
5 RMOTC gas Below ground 43 17 44.1 106 13 15.8 59 East
P1 RMOTC gas Side-drilled 43 18 12.7 106 13 06.3 78 West
P2 RMOTC gas Side-drilled 43 18 37.0 106 13 17.9 240 West
6 RMOTC gas Below ground 43 18 56.4 106 13 30.4 170 West
2E Cylinder Below ground 43 19 12.4 106 13 40.3 74 East
P3 RMOTC gas Side-drilled 43 19 44.5 106 13 51.5 116 West
P4 RMOTC gas Side-drilled 43 20 13.2 106 13 37.8 66 West
P5 Cylinder Side-drilled 43 20 27.7 106 13 36.3 39 West

10 feet
Underground leak outlet
is roughly 10 feet from
rotometer location (in
gravel area).
View of bottle and regulator
View of leak site
and vegetation.

Summary
• The “virtual pipeline” route was defined, including
leak sites.
• Specific leak details were developed for the 15
different leak sites. Some of the leak sites were
designed to release gas at the roots of plants in
order to provide the required test conditions for one
of the detection systems. The leak rates ranged
from 1 sfch to 5,000 scfh.
• Where appropriate, leak equipment was hidden
from plain view when traveling along the road. In
addition, decoy piping was installed at sites that
were not intended as true leak sites.

Leak Determination by Leak Rate
Leak
Rate
No. of
Leaks
Presented
No. of
Leaks
Found
Leak
Find %
No. of
Calibration
Leaks
No. of
Calibration
Leaks Found
Calibration
Leak Find
%
5,000 15 13 87 6 6 100
2,500 4 2 50 0 0 N/A
2,000 20 14 70 0 0 N/A
1,000 43 27 63 6 5 83
500 43 27 63 6 5 83
100 39 5 13 5 5 100
15 33 2 6 3 2 67
10 25 2 8 0 0 N/A
1 25 0 0 0 0 N/A

Instrumentation Sensitivity to Leak Rates
100
90
500 scfh found 50-87%
Percent Found
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Important Points
• Vendors were asked to identify sites that they believed
were natural gas pipeline leaks, which were matched up
with the intended leaks for that day. “Positive”
indications that did not correspond with leak sites were
investigated. Most of these sites did not contain gas,
but were old water pipes, fence posts, abandoned well
sites, patches of dirt, etc.
• There was evidence that some of the equipment
providers may have been using visual clues to look for
leaks, as opposed to conducting a “blind” search,
accounting for some of the false positives reported.
• You can access the full report at:
http://www.rmotc.com/Library/Test_Reports.html
Under “Energy Assurance”, “Remote Sensor Gas LDS” (PDF)
Thanks to: Rodney Anderson and Rick Baker (DOE NETL)

Seeking (New Technology):
Microhole Drilling

Micro-drilling Site at RMOTC: From left to right: the Los Alamos
drilling mud cleaning system and the Los Alamos coiled tubing
drilling rig. In the foreground is the reserve pit and flush-joint
tubing to be run as production casing for a Shannon oil well.

Los Alamos Microdrilling Field Team and coiled tubing unit.
From left to right Jim Thomson and Dave Anderson.

The Los Alamos coiled tubing drilling rig with 1-in. coiled tubing running
through the stuffing-box drilling-mud diverter that conducts high
pressure drilling mud to a hydraulic motor and bit on the bottom of the
coiled tubing. The hose in the foreground is the flow line that conducts
the drilling mud returns from the well annulus to the mud cleaning unit.

A RMOTC pulling unit
and Los Alamos coiled
tubing unit rigged up
simultaneously over a
well drilled in
September 2003. The
pulling unit was used to
run a string of steel
flush joint casing; the
coiled-tubing unit made
a clean-out run
following cementing.

Dennis Tool Company equipment being tested on the Los Alamos
coiled tubing micro-drilling rig. From left to right: 1-3/4-in. pilot bit,
2-3/8-in. reamer, and crossover sub to mate equipment to Los
Alamos drilling assembly.

Dennis Tool Company
equipment assembled on an
atypical Los Alamos microdrilling
drilling assembly.
From bottom to top: Dennis
Tool 1-3/4-in. pilot bit, 1-7/16-
in. single-lobe OD drilling
motor, Dennis Tool 1 11/16-in.
OD stabilizer integral to 2-3/8-
in. reamer, and 2-1/4-in. OD
stabilizer.

Lawrence Berkeley Lab –
Vertical Seismic Profile

Foreground. LBNL Microgeophone array sonde between sections of the
deployment cable. Backgound. Contract vibroseis unit with a 16000 lb
amplitude and a sweep range of 10 to 200 Hz.

High Pressure Jet-Assisted Drillbit
• Early Attempts in
1970’s
• Uses high pressure
(8,000 psi) to cut
formation ahead of bit
• Bit knocks off ledges
• High rates of
penetration

RMOTC Test Results
• Mechanical
difficulties with
loss of jets in
bits
• Surface
mechanical
problems fixed
• Increases in
penetration
rates of 2 -6
times over a
variety of
formations
Drilling Rate (ft/hr)
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
156.0
120.0
Crow
Mountain
Sand
49.8
55.1
High Pressure Drilling vs Conventional
77.7
61.9
66.0
39.8 39.3
13.5 14.8 12.9 13.3 13.8 14.1 14.1
Crow
Mountain
Sand/Alcova
Limestone
Red Peaks
Shale
Red Peaks
Shale
Formation
Red Peaks
Shale
Red Peaks
Shale
Jet Assisted Drilling Rate
Conventional Drilling Rate
Rate Ratio
Red Peaks
Shale
Goose Egg
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Drilling Rate Ratio

106°15'0"W
106°15'0"W
Flow Assurance Test Loop
018
017
016
015
014 013
018
019
020
021
022
023
024
019
030
029
028
027
026
025
030
031
032
033
034
035
036
031
Schematic
006
005
004
003
002
001
006
\A1;Flow Assurance Loop
007
008
009
010
011
012
007
018
017
016
015
014
013
018
019
43°15'0"N
019
020
021
022
023
024
43°15'0"N
030
029 028
027
026
025
030
NPR3 Basemap
0 0.2 0.4
1:18,000
0.6 0.8
0.1
Miles
Legend
NPR3.dwg Polyline
natronatwp
natronasect
Roads
Hillshade of teapot_dem
Value
High : 255
Low : 0

Concentric Pipe Jacketed Section
6 inch, 3600 psi rated, inside of 10 inch, to enable heating
and cooling fluid circulation; 190° F produced water available

Bell Holes and Instrumentation
Trenching Hazards
• Pressure/temperature
gauges of the Rosemount
and quartz crystal absolute
pressure types.
• Test section temperature is
sensed by a collateral fiber
optics line.
• Nitrogen-filled pressure
reference line.
• Dual station gamma ray for
hydrate holdup and speed.

Setup for Generating Hydrate Plug

Gas Supply, Dehydrator,
and Operational Pad

Success!
Subsequent mitigation
tests conducted with a
major oil company
(still confidential)
were also successful
at proving their cleanout
technology.

Energy Production Systems
Tubing Rotator System
Why did EPS choose RMOTC for testing?
• Availability of a “problem” well with
significant tubing failure rates.
• Available rigs and crews.
• Detailed well service records.
• Ability to accurately measure well
performance and calculate economic
benefits.
•Ability to accurately quantify post-test
tubing wear data.
•Tech transfer opportunities.

24-AX-10: A Problem Well
• Deviated wellbore, resulting in
high tubing and rod wear rates.
• Holed tubing resulting in lost
production.
• Parted rods and rod couplings.
• Frequent well pulls resulting in
production downtime and
increased operating costs.
• Reduced well operating cycles.
• Economics dictate plans for
abandonment.
The Testing Plan:
• Install all new tubing, rods, and
pump.
• Install a new EPS Tubing
Rotator System.
• Put the well on a 24/7 pumping
cycle.
• Operate continuously for one
year or until failure, whichever
comes first.
• Measure tubing wall thickness
at end of test.
• Return well to production.

Rotating Tubing Hanger

The Key to Success: Tubing Rotator Anchor

Well 24-AX-10 Production History
Down periods due to tubing failures
Addition of EPS Tubing Rotator System, 10/04

The Results
24-AX-10 PRODUCTION SINCE INSTALLATION OF
THE EPS TUBING ROTATOR SYSTEM
10000
1000
BPM
100
10
1
Sep-
04
Oct-
04
Nov-
04
Dec-
04
Jan-
05
Feb-
05
Mar-
05
Apr-
05
May-
05
Jun-
05
Jul-
05
Aug-
05
BOPM
BWPM

12 Month 24/7
Post-Test Tuboscope
Tubing Wear Analysis
The bottom four joints had wall loss
>50%.
94 th joint had 69% wall loss.
Failure of the 94 th joint is predicted
for March 2006, after 16 months of
24/7 operation.
This failure rate is a 400%
improvement over that predicted by
well history.
94 th joint

RMOTC Datasets
3D Seismic
Teapot Dome
Natrona County, Wyoming
3-D Seismic Data Set
Core Data
Teapot Dome
Natrona County, Wyoming
Core Data Set from
Well 48-X-28
Teapot Dome
Natrona County, Wyoming
NPR-3 Deep Well Data Set
Deep Wells
(LAS files)