Drilling Optimization

James L. Lummus, SPE-AIME, pan American Petroleum Corp.

Introduction
The development of rotary drilling can be divided .. . . ~.. Da.i~ mto four dlstmct periods: m---~UJIVePtlull, ~.,V=_ I 900 to 1920; Development Period 1 920 to 1948; Scientific Period 1948 to 1968; and Automation Period, which began in 1968. The major accomplishments of the first three periods, and a prediction of what lies in the future for the Automation Period are shown in Table 1. In reviewing these development periods, the question naturally arises as to the reason for the approximate 30-year lapse between the end of the Conception Period and the start of the Scientific Period. There are a number of reasons that can be given, but und~~btedly the most significant is that major oilfield equipment firms, mud service companies, and operators did not start appropriating the large amounts of money it takes to do high-quality drilling research until about 1948. When we look at the major accomplishments of the Scientific Period, the most productive years are found to be from 1958 to 1968. A measure of the impact of the drilling technology developed during the latter part of the Scientific Period on homemaking costs, as compared with total well costs, can be seen from Fig. 1. Total well costs increased 14 percent from 1958 through 1967, but homemaking costs remained at the 1958 level; i.e., about $4.25 /ft. Other costs such as completion, logging, and casing expenditures increased 21 percent. It is estimated that if the extensive drilling research effort of the past 10 years had not been undertaken and had not been successfully reduced to practice in routine drilling operations, a typical 8,000- to 9,000-ft hole would cost an additional $3.00/ft to drill today. This would amount to a savings of approximately $500 million for 1967 alone, which is testimony that the investment in drilling research undertaken by many companies has paid off. Optimized drilling has been one of the most significant accomplishments of the Scientific Period, but it was not introduced comprehensively until 1967, and therefore will not reach its full potential for several years. It is important to realize that optimized drilling would not be possible today without the hard work of numerous researchers who have spent con,.. - w.iuyiilg --- -1-.: --+ d ATN.,2 f drilling th~ ~,~--t- 0.-. ..-..= vari~bles sicierame time and how they relate to each other.

Definition and Philosophy of Optimization

There is no such thing as a true optimum drilling program; invariably compromises must be made because of limitations beyond our control that result in something less than optimum. Perhaps it can be explained this way: for years it has been known that rate of penetration could be increased by drilling with water, by rotating the bit faster, and by increasing flow velocity through jets in the bit. Lack of sufficient mechanical and hydraulic horsepower, however, often prevents the proper balancing of variables to obtain maximum drilling efficiency. Also, there has always been a limiting value over which an increase in rpm,

Optimized drilling techniques, first applied in 1967, have significantly reduced drilling costs, but have not yet reached full potential. Detailed treatment is given to the interactions oj the most important drilling variables. Results indicate that better data, more experience, and confidence will result in greater savings in the future.
NOVEMBER, 1970 ~~r 1379

weight-on-bit, and pump rate does little or no good. New technology has raised these limits, but they are still there. The limits set for drilling variables are all influenced by the resulting bit life, the first major factor. Some are set by the second major factor stability of the wellbore. Although water is the fastest drilling liquid, in many areas some colloidal solids in the fluid are necessary to provide hole stability. In other areas, weight-on-bit is limited by the deviation charactens~c~ of ~he formation. Rotary speedand pump pressure are generally limited by equipment capability and resulting maintenance costs. Therefore, the lowest-cost drilling will result when limits are imposed that maximize not only drilling rate but also equipment life and wellbore stability. In some cases, if wellbore stability and equipment life are maximized, a decreased penetration rate will have to be accepted. In other words, a balanced program must be developed one in which the drilling variables being considered are at their most effective level. Optimum weight and rpm are not achieved unless hydraulics and mud are optimum; what generally results is that a balanced program is developed to fit the specifications of a particular rig. Optimum procedures can more nearly be applied if the optimization approach is also used to select the rig. From a practical viewpoint, the general idea of optimized drilling can be expressed by the series of curves in Fig. 2. A serniwildcat well is drilled at the lowest bid of $ 12.00/ft. It takes 100 days and costs $180,000. From the experience gained on this well, the next well is negotiated at $ 10.80/ft. It takes 90 days and costs $162,000. Thk process continues, with each succeeding well costing a little less, because of
TABLE Period Conception lROTARY DRILLING DEVELOPMENT Development Rotary drilling principle, (Spindletop) Rotary bits, 1908 (Hughes) Casing and cementing, 1904-1910 (Halliburton) Drilling mud, 1914-1916 (Natioriai Lead Cc.) More powerful rigs Better bits Improved cementing Specialized muds Expanded drilling research Better understanding of hydraulic principles Significant bit improvements Optimized drilling Improved mud technology Full automation of rig and mud handling t30se&Loop computer operation of rig Control of drilling variables Complete planning of well drilling from spud to 1900

experience previously gained, until after many wells the average drilling time has been reduced to 50 days, and the cost has been reduced to $90,000, at a standard field price of $6.00/ft. The philosophy of optimized drilling is to use the record of the first well as a basis for calculations and to apply optimum techniques to the second and third wells, thus arriving at a negotiated field price of $6.00/ft much sooner. If drilling costs could be reduced by utilizing optimum techniques, an operator could drill more wells per year in a given area than L e ~g~t othe,%~isedrfl!, or he might be able to d~l wells that would otherwise be uneconomical from a cost-to-production standpoint. The reduction of costs through the use of optimum techniques does not stem from faster penetration rates alone. An optimum drilling program anticipates possible well problems and provides methods to handle these problems as they arise, thus reducing over-all rig days.

General Concept of Optimization as Applied to Rotary Drilling

Ma&ematically, the drilling variables can be classified as alterable or unalterable, as shown in Table 2. The classification is not strict, as some of the unalterable ones may be altered by a change in the alterable ones. For example, a change in mud type may allow for a change in bit type, resulting in a faster penetration rate through a particular formation. The compressive and tensile strength of the rock drilled remains constant, but the rocks drilling properties have been altered by changing the drilling fluid and bit type. Of course, there is considerable interdependence

Date
1900-1920

TABLE Alterable Mud Type Solids Content Viscosity Fluid Loss Density Hydraulics Pump Pressure Jet Velocity Circulating Rate Annular Velocity Bit type Weight-on-bit Rotary speed

2DRILLING

VARIABLES Unalterable

Development

1920-1948

Scientific

1948-1968

Weather Location Rig conditions Rig flexibility Corrosive borehoie gases Bottom-hole temperature Round-trip time Rock properties Characteristic hole problems Water availability Formation to be drilled Crew efficiency Depth

Automation

1968-

TABLE

3-VARIABLES

CONSIDERED

IN OPTIMIZATION I lnaltcimb!~ ,, ,----

Alterable Mud Hydraulics Bit type Weight-rpm

Formation Depth

to be dril!ed

pi~dti~~.~fl 1380

JOURNAL

OF PETROLEUM

TECHNOLOGY

among the alterable variables. For instance, mud viscosity and fluid loss are considerably irdluenced by the type and amount of solids. The weight-rpm combination is interrelated; an increase in one may necessitate a reduction in the other for smooth economical operation. In considering which variables to choose for mathematical optimization, experience and research suggest six: four alterable ones and two unalterable ones. These variables are listed in Table 3. The basic interactive effects between these variables were determined by factorial design experiments. Variable interaction exists when the simultaneous increase of two or more variables does not produce an additive effect as compared with the individual effects. The meaning of variable interaction is illustrated in Fig. 3. This shows the related responses in drilling rate when the variables are increased from one level to another; first individually, second simultaneously. A negative interaction exists when increasing both .._.: =l_l _- Uucs A-... -,.. -.aA,.,..a ~= ~i.h n t-k~~g ~~f~ ~S Varldolcs expected, even though it may be higher than increasing either variable alone. A positive interaction exists when the driliing rate is higher than expected wheii both variables are increased; i.e., one helps the other. Thus a negative or positive interaction does not mean a reduced or increased drilling rate as such; it means that the resulting drilling rate, when two or more variables are increased, is less than or more than what would normally be expected if the variables have an additive effect upon each other. Table 4 shows typical interactions among the important drilling variables. Note that these results are not fixed, but may change if the levels at which the variables are being compared are changed.
Ilul p Uuu-w a. 1 A&. --

14-

3S3960616263U65 YEAR 195s- 196s

HOLE CUTTING GCWN 1%EL(WER PART) OTHER WELL COSTUP 21%IUPPERPART) Fig. lTrend of industry drilling coats.

6667

5,UID

DEPTH, FEET

k
1 t \ I n \ \

SURFACE CASING

FIRST WfLL (AWARDLCW BID, $12FFT)

SECOND WELL (tWGOTIATEtI,$10.W~)

LAST WELL (FIELD PRICE $6.OWtT)

Expansion of Effects and Problems of The Most Important Variables

Mud The fist step in putting together an optimized drilling program should be to plan a detailed mud program, since the drilling fluid is the single most important factor affecting drilling rate. Selection of the best mud for a particular area will allow use of optimum hydraulics to clean the bk and hole and enable effective implementation of optimum weight-rpm relationships to drill faster and to properly wear out the bit. The best mud, excludkg clear water, is a nondispersed fluid having a total clay solids content of
TABLE &TVPICAL DRILLING IN HARD Combination VARIABLE ROCK INTERACTION

10,OOO\, \ $, *+
15,W0 k SD 90 ~m_ DRILLING TIME MYS (OVERALLI COST

$W,000
Fig. 2-Optimum

$162,0LlT$lSO,GIO

drilling philosophy.

INCREASING VARIABLE 1 WEIGHT RPM WEIGHT4PM ACTUAL WEIGH7-RPM

RELATIVE GRIUINGRATE

Variable

Interatiion Negative Positive None Positive Positive Either Positive Negative Positive

Weight-rpm Weight-hydraulics rpm-hydraulics Low solids-hydraulics Low solids-weight Bit type-formation Low solids-bit type rpm-formation Mud Solids-NDP*

HYORAIAICS

E F

E
WEIGH7

RPM --NEMTIVE INTERACTION

q Nondispemed, NOVEMBER,

dual-action polymer

fig. 3-Positive

and negative

interadlon.

1970

1381

no more than 4 percent and having a drilled-solids: bentonite ratio of less than 2:1.2 A number of articles dating from 1960 have presented laboratory and field data showing that the solids content of a drilling fluid has a significant effect on penetration rate, number of bhs used, and on drilling days. A statistical average of data from more than 100 wells drilled in the U. S. and Canada to various depths is shown in Fig. 4. Most of the data were from wells drilled with dispersed muds, but a few wells drilled with true nond@ersed muds showed faster penetration rates than nearby wells drilled with dispersed muds with the same clay solids content. ~hk prompted hiboraterj driliirrg tests> -..1..1 4 , .Ph a% ~~om in Fig. 5. This work the results L wk. -----showed that the particle size as well as total colloidal size has an important bearing on drilling efficiency. The idea is to keep particles as big as possible while still retaining flow and fluid-loss properties. Hydraulics Optimum hydraulics is the proper balance of the hydraulic elements that will adequately clean the bit and borehole with filmum horsepower. The ele-

ments are flow rate, which sets amular velocity and pressure losses in the system; pump pressure, which sets jet velocity through nozzles; flow rate-pump horsepower relationship, which sets hydraulic horsepower at bit; and the drilling fluid, which determines the pressure losses and cuttings transport rate. To achieve optimum hydraulics, these elements must work in the proper ratios; the complexity of the interactions of the elements is shown in Fig. 6. These ratios are sometimes hard to define. For example, the proper balance between flow rate and annular velocity depends on bit cleaning, erosion of borehole in turbulent flow, and lost circulation problems. optimum . ---- -~ .mfi+-~.tipc nll~d jet velocity depends on rormatiorI ~i,a,~~-....., ... soiids, weight-on.~i~, bit type,and annular velocity limitations. Decisions on defining the proper balance between the hydraulic elements make thk one of the most difficult phases of drilling optimization. However, successful hydraulics programs can be prepared by first considering two factors: bit cleaning and hole cleaning. Adequate jet velocity and fluid impact or momentum are required for bit cleaning. Recommended range is from 250 ft/sec to 450 ft/sec jet

%
/
I
1

ETs

#-l-l

MAXIMUN

lM~ACT

SYSTEM

LOSSES

FLW RATE.GPM INCREASING J~ HttP . INCREASING ANNLLAR VELOCITY DECREASING JETHHP

~j
Is

DECREASING JETVELOCITY
PERCENT SOLIDS BY VOLUME

Fig. 6-interrelations of hydraulics constant pump pressure. Sr.lr

at

Fig. 4-Effect
95

of solids on drilling performance.

g90 3

h
1

EENTONIT~ TOLOWYIFLDCLAYRATlOkl

To KI -

50 -

4D 30 -

l/2
20 10
6s ---

1/4 CUTTING IN 12-U4 HOLE

ANNULAR VELOCITY .90 F1/MIN

*
3

0 o~;

SIXIDS CONTENT, VOLUME % Fig. 5-Effect 1382 of solids dispersion on drilling rate. Fig. 7Effect

YIELD VALUE, LB/100 IT.z

af yield ve!ix+ orr cutting carrying capacity.

JOURNAL

OF ?ETROLEUM

TEKHNQI.-QGY

velocity as drilling rate varies from 5 to 100 ft/hr. Guidelines to obtain adequate fluid impact vary from 73 percent hydraulic horsepower at bit during the fast upper-hole drilling to 49 percent during slower drilling at greater well depths. r-nest important consideration In hole ...l ~l~~m;mo . ...~. the ---- --is to have a mud with sutlicient yield value to lift cuttings from the hole. Results of cutting lifting tests (Fig. 7) indicate that a yield value above the 4 to 6 range does not significantly improve the abflity of drilling fluid to remove cuttings. An adequate annular velocity depends on hole size and on the yield value of the mud system. These values should be adjusted together for the following reasons: (1) to maintain the yield value as low as possible to facilitate settling of small cuttings in surface pits; (2) to keep ve!ocity and cutting transport rate reasonably close in value; and (3) to assure that the annular flow pattern is neither in extreme turbulence nor in total plug flow. Fig. 8 shows that the properties of the drilling fluid, particularly yield value, have a critical effect on flow patterns. Assume a flow rate of 345 gal/rein, an annular velocity of 139 ft/min in a 9-in. hole with fairly fast drilling, and large chips. If the drilling fluid is clear water or contains only a small amount of drilled solids, yield values are zero and fluid is in turbulent flow, which results in low cutting transport; i.e., about one-half annular velocity. By increasing yield value to the 3 to 5 range, flow is changed to laminar, which increases the cutting transport to equal the annular velocity. These results, which have been duplicated many times in the field, show that a small

change in the yield value of the mud can significantly improve hole cleaning. Bit Selection To do a good job of selecting bits for drilling a particular well, the engineer must have a workhg knowledge of the types of bits available from the major bit manufacturers and how best to use these bits in driiling formations ranging from very soft to very hard, considering such problems as deviation, solids content of the mud, hole gauge and lost circulation. A comprehensive bit correlation chart, continually updated to include new bits, is therefore the starting point in selecting the proper bits for drilling a well. It is also important that the engineer have both qualitative and quantitative descriptions of bit wear from at least two nearby control wells in order to do a good job of selecting bits for the proposed well. Information needed, which may have to be obtained from various sources, is listed in Table 5. it can besurmised from the foregoing remarks and from studying the list of information needed that complete information on bit wear from control wells is an absolute necessity in planning a comprehensive bit selection program. The present AAODC-API Bit Grading Code is good as far as it goes, but it is not definitive enough for comprehensive planning of an optimum drilling program. The present code could be improved by establishing more thorough guidelines to obtain more uniform and detailed grading. Following are some suggestions for improvement: 1. In addition to s~cif ying the amount of tooth

Pv=l
Yv=o

CUTTING RATE I&#j-$ T j5 FT/Ml h

PV3
Yv=o WT -8.6

WT =8.5

1
CUlllNG RATE ~;*4 T 71 FT/MIN ASSUMPTIONS /d / ANNULAR
NOVEMBER, 1970

;:; WT = 9.0 ~ P CLllllNG RATE PV=6 YV=5 -- FAST DRILLING, LA!?(% 0-!1 % -139 FEET/Ml NUTE [M7;IMINI WT = 9.0 139 HIMI N H W*3 WT = 8.7

VELOCITY

Fig. 8-Flow

patterns for 9-in. hole. 1383

wear, criteria should be provided to indicate which teeth should be measured to obtain the grading for a given bit type. 2. Guidelines should be developed for measuring the remaining useful tooth life; this could be a procedure similar to the one presently used to estimate remaining bearing life. 3. Bits pulled because they have reached an economic limit as a result of formation changes or loss in penetration rate, or for other reasons such as becoming plugged, should be so noted. 4. Insert-type bits should be graded in terms of wear caused by feet of hole made at specified weight and rotary speeds rather than in terms of repairability. 5. Any abnormal wear such as number of broken teeth and position of these broken teeth on the bit should be so noted. These, and possibly other suggested guidelines, ~o.~d & in~~rp~rated into the present bit-grading code without undue complication of the grading procedure and would provide more uniform grading throughout the industry. An improved bit-grading code would make it possible to obtain better data for more skillful planning. Weight-rpm Pan Americans optimized drilling program is based on equations developed by Galle and Woodss and Billington and BlenkamG, which define how the complex relationship between weight-on-bit and rpm
TABLE *BIT
WEAR OPTIMIZED INFORMATION REQUIRED DRILLING PROGRAM FOR

affects the wear of a bit in a particular formation. To get some concept of optimization, it is important to understand what these equations can provide in terms of data output. Using these equations, the weight: rotary-speed relationship can be categorized as follows : Variable rpm-weight. Because so few rigs are electric or completely versatile as far as range of rpm and weight is concerned, little use can be made of a variable optimum rpm and weight program. However, it is the most efficient method for drilling with mill tooth bits. Constant rpm-Variable Weight. This method for &Illing with mill tooth bits appears to be practical. Generally, good drillers gradually apply more weight as bits become dull. This method has not been widely accepted since it requires an automatic driller and more supervision than other weight-rpm programs. -However, vdier& app!icabh% the .... Constant rpm and variable weight method is considerably more eflicient than constant rpm and constant weight programs. Constant rpm and Weight. Because of the limitations indicated above, most computer programs have been restricted to constant rpm and weight. i3eca-use so many limitations do exist, it has been necessary to make programs as flexible as possible and to cover as wide a range as the drilling engineer considers necessary. There are three available approaches. ?~.rn !2.?Ui Weight. This is the rpm 1. O~th&% and weight that one might run if no limitations except the bit could be considered. This is the rpm and weight for absolute minimum cost, not considering any other factors such as condition of drill string, deviated hole or development of torque. 2. Best Weight for Given rpm. Should formation or rig capability limit rpm, the program will determine the proper weight for minimum cost with imposed restrictions. This will cost more per foot than when . + -** optimum rpni and weiw! L~ ~ ,,C(WI .=... 3. Best rpm for Given Weight. Should the available drill collars or deviation control dictate a certain weight-on-b]t, this program predicts proper rpm for optimum cost considering this restriction. This cost will also be more than for optimum rpm and weight. Fig. 9 shows an example of how optimum drilkg programs select the proper weight and rpm to achieve minimum-cost drilling. In this instance, a mediumhard formation is being drilled with an 8%-in. mill tooth bit inside the computer at varying weights ~-ld ic~&~Y~ speeds. The data show that a combination of 150 rpm and 45,000 lb weight-on-bit would drill this particular formation at the lowest cost. The next best combination would be 100 rpm and 55,000 lb on bit. The advantage of the computer is that equations can be quickly and economically solved to provide information, such as show-ii in Fig. 9, for r! multiple number of conditions. This provides the driller with a flexibility that he never had before. Rig !kkction No discussion on drilling optimization
OF PETROLEUM

Mill Tooth Bits Economic life remaining Tooth height Gauge wear Type of weem (teeth and bearings)

Self sharpening Flat e rested Broken teeth Chipped teeth Upset teeth Shirt-tail wear Tracking Inner-row teeth gone and heel rows good Nose bearing loose Off-center wear Broken cones Broken spearpoint Cones locked Seal failure pinched Coring

Abnormal

wear

Failures:

Insert Bits Bearings Cutthrg structure 1 through 4): Economic iife remaining of conas indicated,

(repairability

lAll cones repairable 2Two cones repairable 3-One cone repairable 4-All cones worn beyond repair 1384

would be

JOURNAL

TECHNOLOGY

complete without emphasizing the importance of the flexibility and capabilities of a particular rig in implementing an optimum drilling program. In most instances, the program is modified to fit a particular rig, which imposes limitations on control of ofie ~i degrees more ~arkdie~, *L.-. d~m-encinu to v~rying the drilling efficiency. Eventually the logic and potential savings to be gained by using the program to set rig specifications will prevail and it will then be possible @ irnp!e-rn.ent drilling techniques more nearly approaching optimum conditions. At the present stage of development, optimized drilling techniques are being used basically to upgrade rigs from x to y percent, x percent being dependent on what degree of selfoptimization a contractor has achieved for a particular rig. For example, a drilling contractor may have drilled a number of wells in a particular area with essentially the same crew and rig equipment and by experimentation obtained near-optimum conditions. In some instances, this has been found to be as high as 80 percent, so the maximum improvement obtainable with optimization would be 20 percent. The criteria for selecting a rig to run an optimum program are shown in Table 6. If the criteria in Table 6 were not used and the wrong rig were selected, the following limitations could result: 1. Inadequate hydraulics would limit bit weight due to balling, and reduce penetration rate. 2. Inadequate selection of rotary speeds could cause ineiiicient drilling of some formations. 3. Inadequate drill collars could cost money by reducing the weight on the bit, which results in lower penetration rate. 4. Inadequate mud-handling equipment would impair the entire drilling effort, since desired mud properties could not be maintained. Generally, at least some of the criteria are not met and drilling is conducted under borderline conditions. For example, hydraulics may be completely satisfactory under relatively shallow conditions but fall short r ~~(j ~ole .-fi..:.-~ h;t hnr.ennw~~ 01 p~O~k@ di& cleaning needed for the bottom part of the hole. Also, failure to provide adequate equipment for chemical and mechanical removai of ciriiied ~~iid~ inay prevent maintaining a desired clay solids content at greater
Lllu. u----Ha lGLtUIl w u.. ... .-y V..

depths where maximum efficiency is needed to drill at minimum cost. ~ Consideration should be given to the capability of a drilling rig and to possible revamping of equipment nneratjon5 are commenced so that necessary adjustments can be made in the optimum drilling program to achieve the greatest et%ciency utider ihnitatioiis imposed byy the rig. Such things as changes in the mud and hydraulics program and provisions for better mud handling are much easier to . .,, . work out in the prearllung conferen@ d the G~~ratOT, contractor, and mud service company than after drilling operations are under way.
bfnre l-n,, , ~ril]ino u. . . . . . . -r-..

Data Acquisition Success in implementing an optimized drilling program depends on a number of factors such as the skill of the engineer who prepared the program and the cooperation of all parties; but the program is doomed unless the data from control wells, on which recommendations for the proposed well are based, are ...~~..~ .- ~lo=. ~r accurate. Etigt~&iS WIIV ~1 ~Pal. ----- snend -r -... a lot of time gathering data from various sources and checking its validity. Invariably pieces of data are missing; if the data are critical in the preparation of the program, additional searching must be done. The ideal method of collecting data is to install monitoring and recording equipment on the rig with round-the-clock operators and supervisory engineers present to insure all necessary information about the drilling operation is recorded. However, it does not appear practical to use a $25 /hr monitoring trailer and auxiliary equipment to increase efficiency of a $50/hr rig for drilling a few wells. It maybe feasible, however, for gathering data for improving programs if at least 15 wells are to be drilled in a given area. In expensive offshore drilling, where rig cost may be as high as $500/hr, data gathering equipment and an on-the-site computer or a data link to a time-sharing computer for analyzing data and then feeding the corrected values for bit runs back to the driller could pay otl quickly in improved drilling efficiency. IMiitig engineers are becoming aware of the advantage of accurate data and the value of on-the-spot analysis, and there seems to be little question that this phase of
ornmq

1S0RPM
TABLE MRITERIA FOR RIG SELECTION Hydraulic Horsepower Requirements Power to run jet velocities 350 to 400 ft/sec In no case less than 250 ft/sec in slow drilling Horsepower for pump and rotary combined, and compound configuration m-:,, F 11 .= me. ,,i.amantc
urlll uOtiaI= Sufficient weight expected
1 I 1 1 I

I.=q Uo.e,, o----needed, depending on formations

I
0

1
7080

Rotary

102030405060

Speeds Requirements Proper rpm ranges needed,

expected for Adequate Mud

depending
Handling

on formations

WEIGHT ON BIT, KK81LB Fig. 9Effects of weight and rpm on drilling cost (example: 8s~-in. bit, medium-hard formation).

Requirements

Adequate settling tanks, mixing pumps for mud and chemicals, and mechanical solids removal equipment

NOVEMBER,

1970

1385

drilling will expand greatly in the near future. On a less sophisticated but more practical level, Pan American has found since 1966 that effective optimized drilling programs can be prepared usirig hand-recorded data from the AAODC-API daily drilling reports, mud service company mud reports, and bit records, augmented with information from logs and discussions with drilling contractors. This data collection procedure will continue for some time to supply information needed to optimize most of our wells. Improved industry standard forms, such as the Daily Drilling Report, coded to facilitate keypunching, will not only reduce the amount of writing a driller has to do but also upgrade what he does write. Wide use of these forms will soon result in better records. The data required to prepare an optimized drilling program are listed in Table 7.

TABLE B--OPTIMIZATION
Fact Bib

OF SHALLOW WELLS

Rig md Rotetion Howe Feet/Bit Feet/Hour Hour/Bit Bit Cost

Control well 4,767 Well A 4,580 Well B Optimum recommended

8 8

123 128

593 573

38.7 35.~

15.3 i&. i

$8,650

4,519
4,600

7
7

101
99

642
655

44.7
46.5

12.7
14.1

$7,280

Savings: $8,650

$7,280 =

$1,370 or 15.8 percent

Field Application of Optimized Drilling Programs

There have been many problems encountered in implementing optimized drilling programs, These programs suggest changes in past drilling techniques changes involving mud system, drilling assembly, rig geometry, bit types, and hydraulics. Some contractors are accustomed to drilling on experience only, and are naturally reluctant to change their techniques until they see that optimized drilling programs are an improvement over present practices. A number of contractors have now had considerable experience with optimized drilling techniques and several are completely sold on the advantages arid potential of this --- ~-:~1:-- n=-r arh new Another important problem with these programs develops when rig equipment is not the same as that on which the program was based. This difference in rig equipment can have an effect on the weight-rpm program, the hydraulics program, and the mud program. Many problems can develop after the drilling program has been started. Formation tops may be different from those in the program, bit performance may be much lower than expected, pump pressure ~lzY be IQwcr than planned, or well kicks may require premature weighting-up of the mud. To prevent problems that are almost sure to arise from se~,@ti~yY, di~IuPting im@em.entation, the drilling optimization program should be planned to have as much flexibility as possible. The drilling recommenda., Pnt and tions can be cnanged to fit the rig eq~pm..-. . .. then rerun through the computer. Also, equipment can be
ULIU1115 ~pyle-...

rented or modified to satisfy the optimum recommendations. Pan American has used optimum drilling programs on 249 wells during the past 2%2 years. Application has varied widely; in some instances programs have been closely followed and even improved upon by making on-the-spot corrections for unexpected lithological conditions. In other instances the programs have been given to contractors on a we suggest you use basis, with an offer of technical assistance in implementing the program. In some cases only parts of the complete optimum program have been effectively utilized; for example, a drilling contractor on a footage contract may elect to uje the hydraulics and mud programs but not the weight-rpm and bitselection programs. Savings in drilling costs have varied as widely as the degree of application of optimized drilling techniques. Analysis of 115 wells drilled by Pan American in 1968, using partial or complete optimized drilling, showed that savings ranged from $0.35 /ft in West Texas to $4.87/ft in Canada. Average savings

r
l,OW
gJ~AoL 2,0ik3 FEEI

DIRECT BITS (BUTTON) 34 (13) ROT. HRS. WI FTIHR 11.9 DRILLING COST $142, KM $IFT $13.35

10,685

3#Lm

~#u:L

10, 6b5 24 (81

7s3

13.6

111, lW
98,3W

10.42
9.10

I
4,cw ;Ey 5,000 ~ 6,030 ~\ , c 10,800 22 (8) 737 15.0

SAVINGS . $142,903- $lll,lm

= $31,SW or 2.2%

h m 7,000 [ 8,000 9,ao -

TABLE 7DATA REQUIRED DRILLING OPTIMIZATION

FOR
10,OW Il,ooo 12,0m -

1. Logs (preferably IES or sonic) 2. Bit records 3. Mud records 4. Recorded drilling data: torque,
tration

pump

pressure,

pene-

rater etc. for proposed well: casing points, problems, etc. tops to proposed well

5. Drilling specifications

n,mo~ lm2003004m
Fig. 10-Optimized JOURNAL

5m60070fJm09m
drilling results.

hole size, expected 64 Rig specifications 7 Correlation of formation 1386

ROTATING HOURS

OF PETROLEUM

TECHNOLOGY

TABLE 9-EFFECTS
Depth (ft)

OF MUD WEIGHT
Weight (1,000 lb) Footage Drilled 839 1,030

AND HYDRAULICS ON DRILLING OPERATIONS

penetration Rate (ft/hr) Mud Waight (lb/gal) Pump Pressure (psi) bhp/in. . bit cost ($/ft)

Well
A

rpm

B A B A B

6,000 6,000 6,600 6,600 8,000 8,000

160-180 180 150 160 120 98

32 40 38 &e 42 50

257 ~~~ 94 112

55 100 22 30 6 13

9.7 9.2 9.7 9.3 9.7 9.5

1,450 1,900 1,450 1,700 1,400 1,800

2.8 4.2

2.1 3.3

1.71 1.10 4.46 1.85 17.07 10.43

~QImtecI to about 25 percent of the total intangible drilling costs. A 1969 mid-year review of Pan Aniericans optimized drilling experience shows that ap proximately the same average savings is again being experienced. This, of course, provides a basis for more confident future predictions of possible improvements in drilling efficiency. Improvements in rig days, bit rotating hours, feet per bit, feet per hour, and hours per blt have resulted in savings ranging from 6 to 132 percent, compared with drilling experience on selected control wells. Examples of what can be accomplished through proper application of optimization procedures are shown on Tables 8 and 9 and Figs. 10 and 11. Fig. 10 shows the results of optimization of a well drilled on a footage basis. Curve 1 represents the actual results the contractor experienced by following hk own drilling program. Curve 3 represents a recommended optimum program based on Curve 1, the curve for the control well; Curve 2 shows actual results of following the recommendation. Net days, total bits, and rotating hours were reduced 19, 29, and 13 per-

cent, respectively, and average penetration rate was increased 14 percent. Economically, total rig, bit and mud costs were reduced from $142,900 to $111,100, or 22 percent. Although this represents a savings only to the contractor, it should also effect a savings to the operator at future locations through a reduction in the footage rates. In general, optimization work has been directed toward the deeper, more expensive holes, with little or no regard to the shallow, less costly wells. This is primarily because of economics, as it is normally believed there is little to be gained by optimizing a well drilled to 4,000-5,000 ft in 100 to 150 rotating hours. Contrary to thk belief, a savings can be realized. (See Table 8.) The optimum program, based on the control well, was developed before Wells A and B were drilled. The program was not followed on Well A and the well drilled about the same as the control well. On Well B, the contractor followed the program quite closely and the well drilled almost the same as predicted. Total rig and bit costs were reduced $1,370, or 15.8 percent.

k----

----

--

I I
468
NO;E?,4BH?. 1970

@
I 1

CONTROL WELL
I t ! t 1 I 1 I

@
I

OPTIMIZED
1

WELL
1

10

12

14

16

18

12345
HYDRAULIC
i-ip/i N EiT i31AiMETER

10

!N?!LL!NG COSTS DOLLARS/FOOT

Fig. n-Optimization drilling results,

MUD WEIGHT 4BSIGAL

effects of mud and hydraulics. 1387

It has been mentioned throughout this paper that . a.t imnrsrt~nt mud and hydrauhcs are two of the mu.. ....F.factors affecting the optimization of drilling operations. Without optimum mud and hydraulics the weight-rpm program cannot be fully implemented. Examples showing the effects of these two variables are in Table 9 and Fig. 11. Table 9 reflects the results of selected bit runs from two wells drilled in the . . . same area m the Rocky Mountain;. Opti,mIza.... . . culations were not prepared for either well since both are located in an area of fast drilling and relatively low cost. Well B, however, was drilled with iower.. . -..-.. ~. ~..-.., ~~i~h weight mud ana nqgher PMIIP . . . resulted in better ciosvnhole hydraulics. A comparison of the results shows that penetration rate and footage per bit were increased to 100 and 118 percent. Drilling costs per foot, in turn, were reduced 36 to 59 percent. Fig. 11 reflects similar results but also points out the detrimental effects of increasing mud weight and solids content. Shown are the drilling costs by bit ~tifi, ~Perating conditions> hvdras.dic horsepower per inch of bit diameter and mu-d weight for the controi well (Curve 1) and the optimized well (Curve 2). The control well was drilled with a high-weight, highsolids mud and poor down-hole hydraulics. Bit life, penetration rate and feet per bit were quite poor, resulting in high costs per foot. On the other hand, Well 2, the optimized well, employed a low-weight, low-solids mud with considerably better hydraulics down to 8,400 ft. In the interval from 8,400 to 9,300 ft, however, mud weight increased from 8.7 to 9.9
tifin cal-rs.cllre

DIRECT CST FKT ;KTOOTH BUTT HRS HR COST FT DIFF

lb/gal and solids content increased from 3.5 to 9 percent, both approximating the values experienced at the control well. Also, the cost curves during tim -*T; ~...come closer and closer together, until the costs of the control well are actually less. At that point where mud weight and solids content have reached unacceptable levels, down-hole hydraulics apparently has little effect. Although bit type, weight and rpm perhaps varied somewhat as shown, most of the savings must be credited to the better driiiing fiuid and d~~fi-h~ie hydraulics system. In those cases where the bit type,. weight-rpm, and mud-solids content are identical, an improvement in hydraulic horsepower of 50 to 100 percent resulted in an increased penetration rrtte of in costs per fOOt Of 20 to Xl perter.. ~ . ... _ 10 to 30 percent. The data presented in Fig. 12 show that a 10,759ft interval (Well A) was drilled at a cost of $7.41 /ft as compared with $8.01 /ft for 9,508 ft in the control well. Savings were 7.5 percent. The drilling information obtained on Well A was analyzed and used to prepare an ~mpr~~ed drii~ng pro~am for Well B. Results show that drilling costs for a 10,825-ft interval in Well B averaged $6.57/ft or a savings of 11.3 percent as compared with Well A. In this case, second-round optimization resulted in even greater savings than first-round optimization, whereas in the previous example savings were greater in the first round. The reasons why savings vary are complex, but basically the success of optimized drilling programs depends on the quality of the control data u;ed in the planning stage, the confidence that people impie,meflting tiie programs have in the principles being applied, and the efficiency with which the programs are applied. Another important factor is unexpected hole problems that often make it impossible to implement optimum drilling techniques.
n~ and a decrease

References 1. National Petroleum Council Study: Impact Of New Technology on the U.S. Petroleum Industry. (1946-1965). 2. Lummus~ J. L. and Field, L. J.: Non-Dispersed Mud: A New Drdling Concept, Pet. Erzg. (March, 1968).

7 t\ ..

3. Knowlton,. .... Jack: Use of Simple Code on Bit Wear Urger, Drl~/lrsg C~nirti~~~~ ((k%., !961 ) 68: amended in Drilltrrg Contractor (Aprd, 1964) 67. 4. Galle, E. M. and Woods, H. B.: Variable Weight and Rotary Speed for Lowest Drilling Costs, paper presented at Annual Meeting, AAODC, New Orleans, La. (1960). 5. Galle, E. M. and Woods, H. B.: West Constard Weigh: and Rotary Speed for Rotary Rock Bits, paper presented at Spring Meeting of Pacific Coast District, Div. of Production, API, Los Angeles, Calif., May 21, 1963. 6. Billington, S. A. and Blenkarn, K. A.: Constant Rotary Speeds and Variable Weight for Reducing Drilling Costs, paper API 851 -36-G, presented at Spring Meeting, MidContinent District, Div. of Production, API, Oklahoma City, Okla. (1962).
7. Field,

15} I ~zi

\ I
lco2Jl~4w-~ ROTATING iiOiiRS ,,
1
!

L. J.: Low Solids Non-Dispersed Mud Usage in Western Canada, paper presented at Spring Meeting of the Rocky Mountain District CIM, Div. of Production, APJ, Calgary, Alta., May, 1968.

I
Original manuscript received in Society of Petroleum Engineers Jul 17, 1970. office Sept. 15, 1969. Rewsed manu%, --. ip,-b .-.--iv-d ,=-----.-.. Papar (SPE 2744) was presented at SPE 40th Annual California San Francisco, NOV. 6-7, 1969. Regional Fall Meeting, held in ~ Copyright 1970 American Pet roleum Engineera, Inc. Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and

Fig. 12-Optimized drilling results, first- and second-round optimization. 1388

JOURNAL

OF PETROLEUM

TECHNOLOGY