A proposal for

DEVELOPMENT OF STINGER ELEMENTS

To
Directorate General of Hydrocarbons
OIDB Bhawan, Plot No 2, Sector 73, Noida

November 19, 2013



By
OLIVIA OIL CORPORATION
Head Office-AB-22, Alberta, Canada


GLOSSARY
Bit n : the cutting element at the bottom of the drillstring, used for boring through the
rock.
Bit record n : a report containing information relating to the operating parameters and
performance of the bits run in a well.

Bit sub n : a short length of pipe installed immediately above the bit. The threads on
the bit sub accept the pin thread on the bit and the pin thread for the drillcollars.
Bottom hole assembly (BHA) n : the part of the drillstring which is just above the
bit and below the drillpipe. It usually consists of drill collars, stabilisers and various
other components.
Bottom hole pressure (bhp) n : the pressure,
1. at the bottom of the borehole, or
2. at a point opposite the producing formation.
Cable tool drilling n : an earlier method of drilling used before the introduction of
modern rotary methods. The bit was not rotated but reciprocated by means of a strong
wire rope.
Circulate v : to pump drilling fluid through the drillstring and wellbore, returning to
the mud pits. This operation is carried out during drilling and is also used to improve
the condition of the mud while drilling is suspended.
Core Bit (Core Head) n: A donut shaped drilling bit used just below the core barrel
to cut a cylindrical sample of rock.
Cuttings n : the fragments of rock dislodged by the bit and carried back to surface by
the drilling fluid.
Diamond bit n : a bit which has a steel body surfaced with diamonds to increase wear
resistance.
Directional drilling : n the intentional deviation of a wellbore in order to reach a
certain objective some distance from the rig.
Drag bit n : a drilling bit which has no cones or bearings but consists of a single unit
with a cutting structure and circulation passageways. The fishtail bit was an early
example of a drag bit, but is no longer in common use. Diamond bits are also drag
bits.
Drilling fluid n : the fluid which is circulated through the drillstring and up the annulus
back to surface under normal drilling operations. Usually referred to as mud.
Drilling line n : the wire rope used to support the travelling block, swivel, kelly and
drillstring.
Formation fluid n : the gas, oil or water which exists in the pores of the formation.
Formation pressure n : the pressure exerted by the formation fluids at a particular
point in the formation. Sometimes called "reservoir pressure" or "pore pressure".
Insert bit n : a type of roller cone bit where the cutting structure consists of specially
designed tungsten carbide cutters set into the cones.
Milled tooth bit n : a roller cone bit whose cutting surface consists of a number of steel
teeth projecting from the surface of the cones.
Roller cone bit n : a drilling bit with 2 or more cones mounted on bearings. The cutters
consist of rows of steel teeth or tungsten carbide inserts. Also called a rock bit.
R.O.P. abbr : rate of penetration, normally measured in feet drilled per hour.
W.O.B. abbr : Weight On Bit. The load put on the bit by the drill collars to improve
penetration rate.

Introduction:
When drilling with conventional PDC bit only a small portion of diamond cutting
element is used during a bit run. The percentage of cutter that contacts formation
will depend upon a number of factors including cutter size and amount of depth-
of-cut bearing surface. However in most cases only 10% to 40% of the cutter will
be used to actually shear the formation. The remaining 60 to 90% of the cutter is
locked into the bit body and remains unused during the run. This resulting wear
flats generate a high degree of frictional heat which breaks down the carbon
bond, the increased temperature causes more wear. A drillers effort is to reduce
this wear and generate more ROP (rate of penetration) and RPM (rotations per
minute).
Also with conventional drilling system the speed of bit at periphery is max and
quite sufficient to drill the formation but at the center it is nearly zero thus
exposing the drill string directly to solid formation. This can lead to vibrations and
thus drill string instability, therefore a danger to entire setup. And, the present
PDC bits cannot efficiently drill all range of formations especially the hard
carbonaceous rocks.
These problems have been together solved with solved with innovation of a
stinger element. This comprises of a conical diamond element that is placed at
center of bit with additional feature of ultra-thick diamond layer. The bit is
modified in design for these cutters to fit inside the bit. The cutters rely on
crushing unlike the previous concepts.
BACKGROUND -
The relatively poor performance of PDC bits in harder formations has been
discussed by various
authors since the inception of the PDC in the 1970s.
Despite the fact that PDC bits tend to start drilling at
higher ROP than roller cone or impreg bits, PDCs
have been observed to reduce ROP quickly leading to
increased Weight On Bit (WOB) and ultimately the
pulling of the bit. Steady state testing of early drag
bits (Appl et.al, 1962) and PDC cutters (Langveld,
1992) showed that both cutters and bits should last
much longer than had been observed in the field.
The difficulty of obtaining long bit life in hard rock
was discussed by Feenstra (1988) where temperature
limitations and impact resistance of the PDCs were
highlighted as areas for improvement.

Glowka (1989) stated that wear flats on diamonds
require additional force to make a cut since the WOB
has to crush additional rock to achieve penetration.
The frictional energy generated by the higher WOB
on dulled cutters heats up the cutter. This leads to
thermal damage and delamination of the PDC and
ultimately limits bit performance.
Brett et.al,(1990), described bit whirl as the cause of
cutter chipping and failure, where chaotic bit motion,
due at least in part to unbalanced cutter forces
(Weaver and Clayton, 1993), leads to whirling of the
bit. Bit whirl resulted in off rotation axis motion and
cutters engaging the formation in directions other
than perpendicular to their intended direction.
Subsequent work by many manufacturers resulted in
Anti-Whirl bits with low friction gauge, as
described by Warren et.al, (1990) and Clegg (1992).
Once the bit balance and whirl issues appeared
solved, bit manufacturers set about improving the bit
longevity by increasing the diamond volume on a bit
through thicker diamond, increased cutter and blade
count, increased back-rake, and use of smaller cutters
(Sinor et.al, 1998; Mensa-Wilmot and Calhoun,
2000). This tactic, despite generally making the bits
drill slower, did appear to make the bits last longer.
Discussion of drill string effects that include
vibration axially, laterally and torsionally by
Langveld (1992) and Warren and Sinor (1994)
showed that each of these modes of vibration could
significantly damage cutters and the bit as a whole.
This work has led to the modeling of the bit and BHA
as a single system (Barton et.al 2007) in an effort to
fully understand the various forces that affect the
ROP and overall bit performance during the drilling
process.


Aim: Development of Stinger Element.
Objectives:
Development of optimized bit design.
Selection of appropriate technology.
Field Testing.
Modified drill string.
Statement of Purpose: To reduce the production costs by increasing the bit
durability.
LIMITATIONS
Despite their dominance in oil and gas applications, fixed PDC cutters have an
inherent limitation: because most of its cutting edge is fixed into the bit blade,
very little of the cutter contacts the formation. Accordingly, more than 60% of the
cutters circumferential edge is unused during a bit run.

Methodology: Variable declaration.
Development of optimized bit design
i. Bit shape.
ii. Fluid vents on bit.
iii. Size of stinger element.
iv. Cutting angle.
v. FEA (finite element analysis) modeling.

Selection of appropriate technology.
i. ONYX 360 rolling PDC cutter technology.
ii. SHARC PDC drill bits.
iii. Vertical Turret Lathe.

Field Testing
i. Quartz Granite Wash (GW).
ii. Feldspar Granite Wash (GW).
iii. Highly abrasive Granite Wash (GW).

Modified Drill String.
i. CERTIS isolation technology.
ii. Control with IRDV.
iii. SCAR sampling technology.


EVALUATION OF RISK -

1) a common problem in drilling is that something breaks in fall or down during
drilling . for example , drill string twists off and fall to the bottom . a cone can
break off the tricone bit or tool such as pipe wrench falls from the the rig floor
into the well . This is called fish and cannot be drilled with a normal drill bit due to
which drilling has to be suspended .
This risk can be mitigitated with the help of spear or overshoot by which the pipe
can be retrieved , a tapered mill reamer is also used for overcoming fishing .

2) The drill string can become stuck in the well due to either mechanical problems
or differential pipe stucking like adhering of drill pipe to the well walls due to
suction .
This is a mitigated risk as drill pipe can be cut with a string shot or chemical cutter
.

3) Sloughing shale is soft shale along the wellbore that absorbs water from the
drillng mud .
This is a mitigated risk as chemical such as potassium salts added to drilling mud
are used to avoid sloughing shale .

4) unexpected abnormal pressures are the common risks in the subsurface which
can't be mitigated .

5) While drilling a well with overbalance , part of the drilling mud liquid with some
fines called the mud filterate is forced into the permeable rock adjacent to the
wellbore . This is called Formation damage and can't be prevented so is a
unmitigated risk during drilling .
6) In some areas corrosive gases such as carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulphide
can flow out of the rocks and into he well as it is being drilled . This is is an
unmitigated risk .

PHASE WISE DISTRIBUTION OF THE WORK PLAN

PHASE 1: Technological advancements introduced
Description:
Firstly, the limitations of the conventional bit system and drilling were analyzed.
The main problem areas and their root cause were given prime attention. Our
research team then got certain ideas and thoughts on basis of research that could
prove to be a vital key towards unlocking the mystery.
This solution not only solved current problems but also formed basis for certain
technological discoveries like the Wireless Logging Tools called Quartet system
that provide logging like wireless music telemetry.
Requirements:
Tentative cost: $ 0.8 million
Infrastructure: Smith bits, a Schlumberger company
Manpower: A team of 10 researchers including 2 formation engineers , 3 well
logging engineers, 2 drilling fluid engineers, 1 geologist, 2 drillers
Timeline: 1 year


PHASE 2 : Designing and manufacturing of the bit
Description:
In this phase, we worked upon the stinger bit design which includes its cutting
angle, its revolutionary roller cutting technology with ONYX 360 cutters and
stinger element, proper water course for the injection of drilling fluid in the
wellbore ,hardness and strength parameters with setting up industrial diamond
and PDC material are taken into consideration. All these have developed during
Infrastructure: Smith Bits, a Schlumberger company
Man Power: 2 HR manager
1 Project manager
3 Finance managers
2 bit designer
Time: 2 month


PHASE 3 : Test run and evaluation of results

Description:
Confirming greater durability through comprehensive testing.
To determine how the new rolling cutter design compared with premium fixed
PDC cutters, drilling durability tests were conducted using a granite test formation
with an unconfined compressive strength of 30,000 psi.
After 90 passes on the test formation, the premium fixed cutters developed
extreme wear flats. The ONYX 360 rolling cutters showed virtually no sign of wear
after 480 passes, and little wear after 600 passes.
Requirements:
Tools - conductor casing, drill string, derrick including hoisting system, drill line
Materials - test formation
Transport: 2 trucks containing cantilevered masts, 1 tool truck transporter
Infrastructure: Test rig
Tentative cost: $ 2.7 million
Manpower: 2 drilling engineer
1 tool pusher
1 company man
1 finance manager
1 supply manager
Time: 1 month





PHASE 4: Further modification of the bit according to the results
Description: they results obtained under test runs were computed and the bit was
further modified with better designs and high strength reinforced materials were
used in bit. This new design was further analyzed by the team. Again certain
minute problems were removed. These were loaded on the bit and it was again
set for test runs.
Infrastructure: Smith bits
Materials: Substrate, thermally stable poly crystalline diamond,
Manpower: Team of 10 researchers including 2 formation engineers, 3 well
logging engineers, 2 drilling fluid engineers, 1 geologist, 2 drillers
Transport: 1 tool truck transporter
Tentative cost: $ 0.3 million
Timeline: 4 months

PHASE 5: Successful run
Description: After the modifications were adopted on basis of previous test runs,
the bit was brought for another run. This process of moving of bit between two
positions continues until bit registers a series of successful runs. This in our case
was observed as 15 successful runs on succession. After this final results and data
were tabulated. And, a factor of safety was introduced and bit was passed tested
OK.

Requirements:
Tools - conductor casing, drill string, derrick including hoisting system, drill line
Infrastructure: Test rig
Materials: Test formation
Manpower: 2 drilling engineer
1 tool pusher
1 company man
1 finance manager
1 supply manager
Transport: 2 tool transporter trucks
Tentative cost: $ 2.3 million
Timeline: 1 month

S.
No.
Phase Requirement Description Unit
Price
(in $)
Quantity Total
1 I Manpower Formation
Evaluation
Engineer
116000 2 232000
2 I Manpower Well Logging
Engineer
85000 3 255000
3 I Manpower Drilling Fluid
Engineer
84000 2 168000
4 I Manpower Geologist 33000 1 33000
5 I Manpower Driller 28000 2 56000
6 II Manpower HR manager 13000 2 26000
7 II Manpower Project manager 12000 1 12000
8 II Manpower Finance manager 10000 3 30000
9 II Manpower Bit designer 9500 2 19000
10 III Manpower Drilling Engineer 10000 2 20000
11 III Manpower Tool pusher 6000 1 6000
12 III Manpower Company man 30000 1 30000
13 III Manpower Finance manager 5000 1 5000
14 III Manpower Supply manager 9000 1 9000
15 III Manpower Truck driver and
assistant
4000 6 24000
16 IV Manpower Formation
Evaluation
Engineer
38670 2 77340
17 IV Manpower Well Logging
Engineer
28330 3 84990
18 IV Manpower Drilling Fluid
Engineer
28000 2 56000
19 IV Manpower Geologist 11000 1 11000
20 IV Manpower Driller 9330 2 18660
21 IV Manpower Truck driver and
assistant
4000 2 8000
22 V Manpower Drilling Engineer 10000 2 20000
23 V Manpower Tool pusher 6000 1 6000
24 V Manpower Company man 30000 1 30000
25 V Manpower Finance manager 5000 1 5000
26 V Manpower Supply manager 9000 1 9000
27 V Manpower Truck driver and
assistant
4000 4 16000
28 I Infrastructure Test rig 110000 1 110000
29 III Infrastructure Test rig 110000 1 110000
30 II Materials Substrate 1200 5 6000
31 II Materials Thermally stable
poly crystalline
diamond

20000 10 200000
32 III Materials Test formation 12000 5 60000
33 IV Materials Substrate 120 5 600
34 IV Materials Thermally stable
poly crystalline
diamond

200 10 2000
35 V Materials Test formation 12000 1 12000
36 III Transport Truck 82000 2 164000
37 III Transport Tool Truck
Transporter
107000 1 107000
38 IV Maintenance Tool Truck
Transporter
38000 1 38000
39 V Transport and
Maintenance
Tool Truck
Transporter
145000 1 145000
40 III Tools Cantilevered
Masts
34000 2 68000
41 III Tools Conductor
Casing
20000 1 20000
42 III Tools Drill String 500000 2 1000000
43 III Tools Derrick including
hoisting system
320000 2 640000
44 III Tools Drill line 100000 4 400000
45 V Tools Conductor
Casing
20000 1 20000
46 V Tools Drill String 500000 2 1000000
47 V Tools Derrick including
hoisting system
320000 2 640000
48 V Tools Drill line 100000 4 400000

REJECTION RATIO
The rejection ratio is defined as the ratio of the number of products not fit for application or rejected to
the total number of products manufactured during a specific period of time.
During the manufacturing process, some of the bits were not found to be successfully produced due to
inefficiency of the production machines.
Also some of the bits were found to undergo abrasion due to their exposure to severe operating
conditions. Accumulating the reports, approximately 2 out of 100 bits were estimated to be incapable of
serving the drilling purpose.
Therefore, the rejection ratio,
Rejection Ratio = (No. of products rejected)/(Total no. of products manufactured)
= 2/100
= 0.02
Hence, Total Cost: $6537782
Cash Plan

PHASE 1 :
Description: Technological advancements introduced
Total cost: $854000
Time: 1 year
PHASE 2 :
Description: Designing and manufacturing of the bit
Total cost: $293000
Time: 2 months
PHASE 3 :
Description: Test run and evaluation of results
Total cost: $ 2663000
Time: 1 month
PHASE 4 :
Description: Further modification of the bit according to the results
Total cost: $ 296590
Time: 4 months
PHASE 5 :
Description: Successful run
Total cost: $ 2303000
Time: 1 month

Timeline
First 3months: $683200 (Phase1)
Next 6months: $170800 (Phase1)
Next 2months: $293000 (Phase1 Followed by Phase 2)
Next 2months: $2692659 (Phase 2)
Next 2months: $497231 (Phase2 Followed by Phase 3)
Next 4months: $2072700 (Phase 4 and followed by phase 5)
Total Budget
Total Cost: $6,409,590
1. Manpower: $1,266,990
2. Infrastructure: $220,000
3. Materials: $280,600
4. Transport and Maintenance: $454,000
5. Tools: $4,188,000

TECHNICAL BENEFITS -

1) Revolutionary cutting technology extends PDC bit durability

2) Unique rolling cutter design ensures reliability

3) The rolling cutters orientation in the bit blade relative to its contact
with the formation, coupled with the bits drilling force, drives efficient rotation of
the
cutter. And because the entire diamond edge of the cutter is used,
wear is reduced for more sustained rates of penetration and fewer bit
replacement trips.

4) Minimizing loading force to drill more efficiently

5) Innovative diamond element increases drilling speed and improves stability

6) Maintain high ROP in hard, abrasive formations

7) minimize vibration during drilling providing extra stability .


8) wireless logging introduced with shorter length of drill string needed and
advanced logging in the wellbore .
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS :-
Accelerated abrasion testing leads to the following conclusions:
The Stinger cutter exhibits reduced vertical and drag forces compared to
conventional shear cutters when tested on the VTL. The Stinger cutter has
significantly improved abrasion resistance during extended wet testing on the
VTL.
The Stinger cutter shows far higher linear footage before burn out in dry/hot
testing compared to conventional PDC.
Laboratory testing at Terra Tek showed the Stinger bit to successfully cut hard
abrasive rocks with no observable wear. All this suggests that Stinger PDCs may
represent a significant step toward the goal of long-life bits for hard formations in
hot environments. Obviously additional test-driven, iterative improvements to
Stinger bit design and understanding are needed to attain the longevity and
footage demanded for geothermal applications.


Corporate Profile
Knowledge, technical innovation and teamwork are at the center of who we are.
For more than 80 years, we have focused on leveraging these assets to deliver
solutions that improve customer performance.

Today, our real-time technology services and solutions enable customers to
translate acquired data into useful information, then transform this information
into knowledge for improved decision making-anytime, anywhere. Harnessing
information technology in this way offers enormous opportunities to enhance
efficiency and productivity. This is a quantum leap from providing traditional 'just-
in-case' information to delivering 'just-in-time' knowledge that meets the
changing needs of our customers.
International teamwork
Reflecting our belief that diversity spurs creativity, collaboration, and
understanding of customers' needs, we employ approximately 120,000 people
representing over 140 nationalities and working in more than 85 countries. Our
employees are committed to working with our customers to create the highest
level of added value. Knowledge communities and special interest groups with
our organization enable teamwork and knowledge sharing unencumbered by
geographic boundaries.
Technology innovation
With 125 research and engineering facilities worldwide, we place strong emphasis
on developing innovative technology that adds value for our customers. In 2012,
we invested $1.2 billion in R&E.



Olivia Oil Corporation is the worlds leading supplier of technology, integrated
project management and information solutions to customers working in the oil
and gas industry worldwide.



REFERENCE -

Appl, F.C. and Rowley, D.S.: Drilling Stresses on
Drag bit Cutting Edges, presented at the 5th
Rock Mechanics Symposium, School of Mines
and Metallurgy, University of Minnesota, May 3-5 1962.

Brett, J.F., Warren, T.M. and Behr, S.M.: Bit Whirl
A New Theory of PDC Bit Failure, SPE
19571, SPEDE (Dec. 1990), 275-281.

Clayton, R., Chen, S. and Lefort, G.: New Bit
Design, Cutter Technology Extend PDC
Applications to Hard Rock Drilling, 2004.
SPE/IAD. 91840.

Clegg, J.M.: An Analysis or the Field Performance
of Antiwhirl PDC Bits, 1992. SP. 23868.
Feenstra, R.: Status of Polycrystalline-Diamond-
Compact Bits: Part 1 Development, JPT (June
1988), 675-684.

Glowka, D.A.: Use of Single-Cutter Data in the
Analysis of PDC Bit Designs: Part 1-
Development of a PDC Cutting Force Model,
Journal of Petroleum Technology, August 1989.
Langeveld, C.J.: PDC Bit Dynamics, 1992. SPE
23867.

Mensa-Wilmot, G. and Penrose, B.: Advanced
Cutting Structure Improves PDC Bit
Performance in Hard and Abrasive Drilling
Environments, 2003. SPE 81167.

Mensa-Wilmot, G, and Ramirez, J.: Unique
Polycrystalline Diamond Compact (PDC) Cutter
Improves Drilling Efficiency, 1999. SPE 53954.
Schell, E.J., Phillippi, D. and Fabian, R.T.; New,
Stable PDC Technology Significantly Reduces
Hard Rock Cost Per Foot, 2003. SPE/IADC
79797.

Sinor, L.A., Powers, J.R. and Warren, T.M.: The
Effect of PDC Cutter Density, Back Rake, Size
and Speed on Performance, 1998. SPE/IADC
39306

Warren, T. M., Brett, J.F. and Sinor, L.A.:
Development of a Whirl Resistant Bit, SPE
19572, SPEDE (Dec. 1990), 267-274.
Warren, T.M. and Sinor, L.A.: PDC Bits: Whats
Needed to Meet Tomorrows Challenge, 1994.
SPE27978.

Weaver, G.E. and Clayton, R.I.: A New PDC
Cutting Structure Improves bit Stabilization and
Extends Application Into Harder Rock Types,
1993. SPE/IADC 2574.