MONITORING DRILLING BIT PARAMETERS ALLOWS OPTIMIZATION OF DRILLING RATES V.C. KELESSIDIS - P. DALAMARINIS vaskel1@hotmail.

com sk l1@h tm il m Technical University of Crete Mineral Resources Engineering SGEM 2009 Albena, June 14-19, 2009

Research aim
Optimization of drilling rates Less expensive and safer drilling practices Hydrocarbon, H d b geothermal, th l mining, i i water t well ll drilling Multitude of parameters affecting drilling performance Availability of data and proper modeling software Optimum combination better drilling rates
2

The problem
Drilling allows for access to subsurface target areas Pythagoras saying whoever digs, finds, he who never digs, digs will never find find Drilling is expensive Optimum drilling practice arrive to target y but with safety y in the most economical way, Main monitoring parameter Penetration Rate (m/ ) (m/h) Depends on two main groups
Formation Drilling parameters
3

Main parameters
FORMATION Local stresses Rock compaction Mineralogical content Fluid d pore pressure Flu DRILLING Weight on bit and torque Rpm y parameters p m Hydraulic Bit condition

Modeling drilling process - Teale

Rock-bit interaction Energy to the bit ff y of f energy gy transfer f Efficiency

WOB 8(RPM )(D )(WOB / Abit ) ENERGY PER SEt = + UNIT VOLUME Abit ROP
ROCK-BIT MODEL

UCS = SEt eff

( 8)( RPM )(D )(WOB / Abit ) ROP =

UCS WOB eff Abit
5

Payzone simulator
Developed by G. Cooper, UCB Similar to Teales model predictions j p parameters m Adjustable Use of historical data for tuning SPE 30213 30213, 36660
ROP = ( flow _ factor )(C )(aggressivity )( RPM )(tooth _ length)(G )

WOB curv 12 G = 1 exp 2 .5 UCS ( ) length D 0 . 4 * tooth _ g

6

Comparison of models with lab data

Use of historical data

Data needed
Lithology Bit records and bit types Casing schedule Drilling parameters
WOB, RPM, FLOW RATE, PRESSURE ROP

Drilling fluid
9

Adequate simulation

10

Case study analysis

Drilling in Norwegian Continental Shelf Reconstruct drill time log 1917 2414 m Four main lithologies, 18 formation intervals

11

Base case and two scenarios

1.Normal drilling curve 2.Drilling curve with RPM+50 rpm 3.Drilling curve with WOB+45 kN

12

Full scenarios

1.Base 1 B drilling d illi time ti plot l t 2.Simulated drilling time plot l t by b having h i extra t 4.5 45 tons, extra 50 RPM and extra t 200 lpm l

13

Increase in UCS by 50%

Increase may y range g between 58 and 96%, giving an overall increase in total drilling g time for the sections chosen for the simulation of 82%

14

Conclusions
Penetration rate the most sought after parameter t f for d design i of f well ll d drilling illi Attempts to simulate the process none very successful , flexible f simulators that Recent advances, could be used on site Payzone, Payzone is one of them (G (G. Cooper) Drilling advance model, few adjustable parameters Can be tuned via use of prior historical data f from the th region i and d the th field fi ld
15

 Data: WOB, RPM, Flow, well geometry, drill bit record, ROP, Lithology gy Normally monitored need to monitor in noncritical wells also Can be used to effectively model and describe the drilling process Re-engineering and re-drilling possible, no great reat difficulties Increase in WOB, RPM, Flow -> beneficial effect, ff need d to worry about b bi bit wear y 50% decrease Increase (error) of UCS by in ROP by 82%
16

Conclusions