Changing the Way We Drill

Walt Aldred
Jim Belaskie
Rustam Isangulov
Cambridge, England

Automated drilling systems decrease risk to rig personnel, reduce costs and

Barry Crockett
Bobby Edmondson
Cameron, Texas, USA

experts at any location to monitor and control drilling operations.

improve efciency. Operating these systems remotely will be the next progression
in a maturing oil and gas industry, allowing operators to utilize their most qualied

Fred Florence
M/D Totco
Cedar Park, Texas
Sundaram Srinivasan
Sugar Land, Texas
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Emma Jane
Bloor and Andy Hendricks, Sugar Land, Texas. We also
thank Joe Fuentes and Wade Wiley, Cameron, Texas, for their
contribution to the remote automated drilling project.
PERFORM, PowerDrive, PowerDrive Xceed, PowerDrive
Xtra and PowerPulse are marks of Schlumberger. Iron
Roughneck is a mark of Varco LP. VisiWear is a mark of
VisiWear Corporation.

On November 19, 2004, a remote command sent

across the Atlantic Ocean from Cambridge,
England, successfully changed a drilling operation in Cameron, Texas, and in the process, may
have changed the way wells are drilled in the
future. This achievement was not a stand-alone
event; it was supported by the collaboration of
experts, enabling technologies and a long history
of innovative developments in drilling automation.
As industries advance and mature, automation
enters almost every level of operation. Automation
enables companies to achieve consistency in both
processes and products, improve safety and
efciency, and reduce risk and costs. Automation

Early 1860s
Rodolphe Leschot, a French
mining engineer, developed
the first automatic bit
feedoff into the formation.

1860

1865

1935
Dillon, Dreyer and Jenks of
Westinghouse Corporation
patented an automatic driller
for rotary drilling equipment.

1925

1930

1935
1930s
Hydraulic feed rotary tables
were designed and applied.

> A time line of the evolution of automated drilling systems.

42

1940

breakthroughs have allowed companies to be

more competitive by replacing manual and
cognitive tasks done by humans with those
performed by machines. A prime example of the
indispensability of automation is in automobile
manufacturing, because machines do repetitive
tasks better and faster with highly consistent
results. In addition, automation removes humans
from inherently dangerous tasks, such as welding.
Automation is also evident in the commercial
aviation industry, which has undergone a major
transformation since the 1970s. Increased
passenger counts and cargo loading led to more
airlines, more planes and more congestion in the

1940s
Pneumatically actuated
feed control of band
brakes was introduced.

1945

1955
Paul Scott developed the
first hydraulic power swivel
and hydraulic hoist..

1950

1949
The first prototype three-arm
pipe-racking system was
built by BJ-Hughes.

1955

1960

1956
The first float rig included
a lay-down pipe-racker and
horizontal pipe-storage system.
Early 1950s
First drillships included the
pipe-racking system, and also
used the first power swivel
and power subs.

Oileld Review

sky and at airports. An increasingly inexperienced

workforce, operating under more stringent safety
and security regulations, was also a factor in
moving the airlines to automation. Whether on the
ground or in the cockpit, automation was a
perfect t, and a necessity for survival of the
airline industry.
Automation offers a degree of precision that
humans cannot deliver. For example, the modern
eye procedure called laser-assisted in-situ
keratomileusis (LASIK) relies on computerdriven automation to improve the eyesight of
millions of people around the world. The
precision of the operation is ensured because
experts specically program the sophisticated
machine to accomplish delicate tasks. In
addition to automation in the medical eld, the
practice of remote surgery has recently allowed a
limited number of experts to perform complex
surgical procedures from afar.1
Since the 1970s, automation in exploration
and production (E&P) drilling operations has
developed steadily for many of the same reasons.
Just as in other industries, E&P drilling
companies seek improved efciency, reduced
risk, and higher degrees of precision and
repeatability, even when drilling complicated
well trajectories in challenging environments.
This article reviews advances in automated

drilling and examines available levels of control.

It also highlights the recent milestone in remote
automated drilling and considers its possible
business implications.
Minds and Machines
The evolution from mechanized to semiautomatic
to fully automated drilling systems is under way.
Semiautomated and locally automated drilling
systems are common today. Generally, semiautomated processes necessitate regular human
involvement, but still offer significant safety
advantages. For example, mechanized roughnecking equipment developed in the 1970s
removed people from the most dangerous
operations and improved rig safety from that time
forward (previous page and below).2
In the 1970s, hand tools were replaced with
labor-saving devices, such as power slips and
spinning wrenches. The rst power slips were
spring-assist designs to reduce roughneck
fatigue. The rst pneumatic slips, developed in
the early 1980s, gave way to hydraulically
operated bodies with interchangeable slips for
various pipe diameters.

1982
Varco developed an electrically
powered topdrive that used an
integral pipe handler to make
and break connections at any
height in the derrick.

1974
A Sedco drillship included the
first commercial horizontal piperacking system by Western Gear.
1975
The first mechanized
roughnecking equipment
was developed.

1965

1970

Early 1970s
Brown Oil Tool and Bowen
developed and commercialized
the first electric-drive power swivel.

Spring 2005

1975

1980
1981
The Kaspmorneft II
semisubmersible rig
included a mechanical
racking system.

With the advent of computers and microprocessors in the 1980s, local automated systems
were developed for roughneck and pipe-handling
operations. Just as in automobile manufacturing,
many rig tasks comprise repetitive motions and
therefore lend themselves to automation. These
methods captured the attention of the drilling
community and helped drive the ongoing
improvement in safety and efciency in difcult
operating environments.
1. Orenstein D: Remote Surgery, http://www.business2.
com/b2/web/articles/0,17863,530930,00.html (accessed
February 24, 2005).
2. von Flatern R: Automating the Drill Floor, http://www.
oilonline.com/news/features/oe/20030610.Automati.11633.
asp (accessed March 15, 2005).
Allen HG and Scott P: Semi-Automatic Drilling Rig,
paper SPE 1378, presented at the SPE Automation
Symposium, Hobbs, New Mexico, USA, April 2829, 1966.
Zinkgraf HL, Hammett DS and Boyadjieff G: Drilling
Improvements Using Power Swivels, paper IADC/
SPE 11404, presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference,
New Orleans, February 2023, 1983.

1996
The first modular pipe-racking
system was installed on a
North Sea jackup rig.

1996 1997
The PowerDrive rotary steerable National Oilwell developed a
system was commercialized. compensated drawworks.
2003
Schlumberger launched the
PowerDrive Xceed rotary steerable
system for harsh, rugged environments.

1993
The first system to remotely manage
pipe on the pipe deck in addition to picking
up and laying down pipe was deployed.

1985

1986
The first full-column
racking system was
introduced and
deployed on the
Transocean 8
semisubmersible rig.

1997
Helmerich & Payne and
Varco began development of an
electronic bit-feed control system.

1990

1995

2000

2005

1998
The PowerDrive rotary steerable system
contributed to the drilling of the worlds longest
extended-reach well, the Wytch Farm M-16SPZ.

2002
The PowerDrive Xtra 475 system drilled the
first slim hole using a rotary steerable system.

2004
The first transatlantic remote control of a drilling
operation from Cambridge, England, to Cameron, Texas,
was carried out by Schlumberger and M/D Totco.

43

monitoring and control technologies continue to

advance. This increased real-time data availability promotes early detection of drilling
problems, which can now be mitigated by human
intervention, or in the future, by automated
systems using simulations and models.6

> An automated rig oor. Mechanization and automation of driller and roughneck operations have
reduced exposure of rig personnel to hazards during pipe-handling duties, increased efciency on
the rig oor and in drilling, and improved borehole quality. Mechanized roughneck equipment (left)
makes up drillpipe and casing joints. Dual-operations automated pipe-racking (upper right) retrieves
and stacks double or triple stands of drillpipe and the required bottomhole assembly (BHA), and
casing. Automated system consoles allow drillers to monitor and control all facets of drilling
operations (lower right).

Varco introduced the Iron Roughneck in the

late 1980s, rst as an extension of power tongs
for drillpipe only. Casing tongs were added next.
In the latest designs, the machine size was
reduced to t on land rigs, allowing automation
to reach a wider market.
Developments in automated rig systems
have primarily focused on reducing personnel
exposure to fatigue and risk during pipe-handling
activities. These activities still require human
input and supervision from a local control
console or drilling control room.3 Over time,
signicant advances in automating roughneck
and pipe-racking tasks have decreased risk
in more dangerous operating environments, such
as on semisubmersible rigs oating in rough
seas (above).
Pipe-racking machines were developed rst to
trip and rack stands of drillpipe. Ofine stand
building allowed faster drilling operations by
making up the bottomhole assembly (BHA) while
drilling. Dual-operation deepwater rigs have two
penetrations through the rig oor to enable
running drilling riser and surface casing
simultaneously. With pipe-rackers, the need for

44

someone in the derrick disappeared, but remotely

operated elevators were required. With more rig
automation, control systems were ergonomically
designed to allow the driller and assistant driller
to coordinate drill-oor activities and monitor all
facets of the drilling operation.
Fully automated rig systems, which must
function without rig personnel and specialists on
site, require extensive monitoring and control
capabilities. These systems potentially offer
significant advantages in deepwater subsea
environments, but a fully automated rig remains
a challenge for the future.4 Although initial
efforts to reduce rig manpower had only limited
success, recently, the industry has been
interested in monitoring several operations from
a remote facility staffed with experienced
support personnel who can assist relatively new
drilling crews.
Automated drilling systems address the
mechanics of drilling in the subsurface, and
tripping in and out of a wellbore.5 These systems
require real-time surface and downhole data to
effectively control drilling processes, and have
recently become more practical as oil and gas

Under Control
Judicious and effective control of complex
drilling processes requires data, experience and
expertise. Automatic drilling control can be
accomplished by surface or downhole actions. In
the 1970s, the rst semiautomatic systems were
surface controlled and required drillers to
manually set standard drilling parameters such
as weight on bit (WOB), torque, rotations per
minute (rpm) and pump pressure. Generally,
these early systems had serious reliability
problems, did a poor job of controlling drilling
parameters, and were not able to set and
maintain the rate of penetration (ROP).
As time passed, several different methods
were used for automatic feed controlthe
gradual application of weight to the bit to
facilitate the cutting and penetration of
subsurface strata. Feed control is accomplished
through the use of the brake on the rig oor. As
early as the 1940s, the automated actuation of rig
braking systems was accomplished pneumatically.
However, drillers using manual systems overwhelmingly outperformed these semiautomatic
systems. Eventually, with improved valve design
and integrated system testing, pneumatic control
systems became successful.
Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, system
capabilities were boosted by increased computer
power and by the quantity and quality of
measurements-while-drilling (MWD) data. These
data provided crucial information on drilling
conditions and helped pave the way for
automated rig systems capable of controlling
drilling parameters, including ROP (next page).
Multiparameter control systems by Wildcat and
Varco were built to regulate the payout of drill
line based on desired WOB, ROP, torque and
standpipe pressure. The standpipe pressure was
representative of the position of the drill bit
relative to the bottom of the hole, which is critical
for horizontal and extended-reach drilling.
In addition, the combination of a new
proportional current-regulated electric brake
controller, developed by the Baylor Company, and
clutch-type and disk brakes manufactured by
Eaton and National Oilwell, respectively, gave
more precise braking than self-energizing band
brakes. New control algorithms by Varco, an
advanced data acquisition system developed by

Oileld Review

M/D Totco and similar systems by Hitec and

others, enabled improved control of braking
torque. This advance brought improved bit-feed
control to new automated drilling systems, which
soon signicantly outperformed drillers using
manual systems.7
As the performance of automated drilling
systems continued to improve, the system
software became increasingly complex and more
difficult to use and troubleshoot. It became
necessary to design software that would simplify
control and remove the need to have a skilled
driller operate the system. The new software also
automated the changing, or tuning, of drilling
parameters within practical limits. Much of this
tuning was required because of changing
formation characteristics as the bit drilled
subsurface strata. Extensive modeling of the
dynamic rig system led to the development of
improved software control, which incorporated
formation models to control WOB and ROP.
Faster response time to changes facilitated
fine-tuning, which produced smoother application of the bit to the formation. This reduced
vibration, extending the life of BHA tools and
bits, and improving fullbore core recovery. This
technology produced more consistent drilling
practices than were possible with humans at the
controls, leading to improved borehole quality,
formation evaluation and cementing. Mistakes
made by human drillers when tripping in and out
of the borehole, such as accidental fracturing
and swabbing of formations, were also decreased
as automation took hold. Improved automation
was tested in south Texas, USA, on a Helmerich &
Payne (H&P) drilling rig equipped with
automated drilling hardware and software. This
rst-generation system drilled wells faster, with
37% less rotating time, and used 34% fewer bits
than nonautomated rigs in the same area.8
An essential component of improving both
surface and downhole control was having more
information at hand to direct control decisions.
An expanding array of important data also
became available from logging-while-drilling
(LWD) and pressure-while-drilling (PWD) tools.9
Geologists and engineers can now ascertain
formation properties to direct a well path for
optimal hydrocarbon production and recovery.
Real-time annular pressure data can be used to
determine equivalent circulating density (ECD),
which helps drilling engineers assess wellbore
instability, lost-circulation problems and holecleaning efficiency. These capabilities are
especially important in extended-reach wells. In
addition, PWD data, along with dipole shear
sonic data, have been used in soft-sediment

Spring 2005

Multiparameter Automated Drilling System

Lift
line
Lift
unit

Drum unit
Flexible
shaft

Drawworks

On-off valve
Air filter
Air supply
Spring
Brake lever

Weighton-bit

Pump pressure

> Automated drillers. Automated weight-on-bit (WOB) control is

accomplished by modifying the manual rig brake system through the use of
a pneumatically controlled cable and pulley system. The automated system
can be overridden to resume manual operations. The rst autodrillers
controlled the payout of the drill line to maintain a constant weight on bit.
Horizontal and extended-reach drilling, with most of the drillstring weight on
the bottom of the hole, required payout control based on standpipe pressure.
The newest systems use electronic control.

reservoirs to determine rock-strength parameters for predicting sand production.10 Real-time

monitoring of crucial drilling data reduces risk
while drilling wells by bringing step-change
improvements to prevent stuck pipe, shing jobs
and loss of wellbores.
New information along with advances in
rotary steerable drilling technology have

improved drilling efciency, directional drilling

control and hole quality. In addition, problems
associated with stuck pipe, casing installation
and hole cleaning have been reduced.11 New
technologies, such as PowerDrive rotary
steerable systems, have improved directional
drilling capability because of the immediate
response to high-level commands sent downhole

3. Harbour WD, Kracik J and Ford D: An Ergonomic,

Process Oriented Approach to Drillers Consoles,
paper IADC/SPE 39330, presented at the IADC/SPE
Drilling Conference, Dallas, March 36, 1998.
Reid D: The Development of Automated Drilling Rigs,
paper IADC/SPE 39373, presented at the IADC/SPE
Drilling Conference, Dallas, March 36, 1998.
Hansen MD and Abrahamsen E: Improving Safety
Performance Through Rig Mechanization, paper
SPE/IADC 67705, presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling
Conference, Amsterdam, February 27March 1, 2001.
4. For more on fully automated rig systems: http://www.
kingdomdrilling.co.uk/drillops/openwater/OW9.pdf
(accessed March 9, 2005).
5. Murray D, Montgomery D and Florence F: Risk
Mitigation Technique for Advanced Rig Control Systems,
paper IADC/SPE 72329, presented at the IADC/SPE
Middle East Drilling Technology Conference, Bahrain,
October 2224, 2001.
Hofschrer M: Automated Drilling Application for
Gaining Higher Efciency on Extended Reach Wells,
paper SPE/IADC 85336, presented at the SPE/IADC
Middle East Drilling Technology Conference and
Exhibition, Abu Dhabi, UAE, October 2022, 2003.
6. Rommetveit R, Bjrkevoll KS, Halsey GW, Larsen HF,
Merlo A, Nossaman LN, Sweep MN, Silseth KM and
degaard SI: Drilltronics: An Integrated System for
Real-Time Optimization of the Drilling Process, paper
IADC/SPE 87124, presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling
Conference, Dallas, March 24, 2004.

7. Boyadjieff G, Murray D, Orr A, Porche M and Thompson P:

Design Considerations and Field Performance of an
Advanced Automatic Driller, paper SPE/IADC 79827,
presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference,
Amsterdam, February 1921, 2003.
8. Boyadjieff et al, reference 7.
9. Mallary CR, Varco M and Quinn D: Using PressureWhile-Drilling Measurements to Solve Extended-Reach
Drilling Problems on Alaskas North Slope, paper
SPE 54592, presented at the SPE Western Regional
Meeting, Anchorage, May 2627, 1999.
10. Bratton T, Bricout V, Lam R, Plona T, Sinha B, Tagbor K
and Venkitaraman A: Rock Strength Parameters from
Annular Pressure While Drilling and Dipole Sonic
Dispersion Analysis, Transactions of the SPWLA 45th
Annual Logging Symposium, Noordwijk, The Netherlands,
June 69, 2004, paper O.
11. Williams M: Better Turns for Rotary Steerable Drilling,
Oileld Review 16, no. 1 (Spring 2004): 49.
Tribe IR, Burns L, Howell PD and Dickson R: Precise
Well Placement with Rotary Steerable Systems and
Logging-While-Drilling Measurements, SPE Drilling &
Completion 18, no. 1 (March 2003): 4249.
Brusco G, Lewis P and Williams M: Drilling Straight
Down, Oileld Review 16, no. 3 (Autumn 2004): 1417.
Copercini P, Soliman F, El Gamal M, Longstreet W,
Rodd J, Sarssam M, McCourt I, Persad B and
Williams M: Powering Up to Drill Down, Oileld
Review 16, no. 4 (Winter 2004/2005): 49.

45

to the system-control unit with real-time

feedback from MWD and LWD measurements.
Commands are sent downhole using changing
ow-rate patterns, and data are returned uphole
through the mud column as pulses using rugged
telemetry tools, such as the PowerPulse MWD
telemetry system.
Remotely Possible
The next step in automated drilling will be to
control the process from afar. Computer and
satellite telecommunications technologies have
advanced to the point where monitoring and
control systems are now common in
hydrocarbon-production operations around the
world. Local remote-control operations, also
called local automations, exist today on modern
drilling rigs for automated pipe-handling,
topdrive and integrated drill-oor operations.12

analyze historical drilling data and statistics,

which helps rig companies and operators
formulate improved procedures that increase
efciency and reduce operating costs.13
As the oil and gas industry ages, an older
workforce is retiring, and much of the expertise
is not being replenished because of cyclic
demands (below).14 Some industry observers
have referred to this as the big crew change.
With fewer drilling experts and workers available
to help tap remaining hydrocarbon reserves,
innovative and automated technologies will play
an increasingly important role in moving the
industry ahead and changing the way wells are
drilled. Remote-control capabilities will deliver
expertise to wellsites anywhere in the world.

To date, long-distance remote data communications in drilling operations have been used
exclusively for monitoring and reporting.
Local remote-control operations reduced
manpower requirements and risk to personnel.
Initial designs moved the operator from the drill
oor into an environmentally controlled cabin out
of harms way. Recognizing that the life-style
associated with working on a drilling rig is
demanding, companies have found it easier and
more benecial to hire and retain employees if
they could work from an ofce environment, doing
many of the same tasks remotely. For example,
technicians can now test and analyze equipment
performance from the safety of an ofce. Remote
systems are also being used to automatically
install applications and virus-software updates for
rig-based software. More importantly, these new
capabilities allow drilling experts to track and

SPE Membership
70,000

Members

Student members

60,000

SPE membership

50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

Year
Average Age of SPE Members
25

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

Portion of total, %

20

15

10

0
20 to 24

25 to 29

30 to 34

35 to 39

40 to 44

45 to 49

50 to 54

55 to 59

60 to 64

65 +

Age range

> The big crew change. The talent pool from which to draw expertise within operating companies is on the decline and is only partially replenished by
experts in the service sector. Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) nonstudent membership has decreased since the mid-1980s (top). In 2004, the average
age of SPE members was more than 45 years, indicating an age crisis on the horizon (bottom). Improved utilization of the remaining experienced
personnel is one way to address this problem and is one of the main advantages of remote operations.

46

Oileld Review

Cambridge,
England

Cameron,
Texas

> Transatlantic remote control. On November 19, 2004, the rst transatlantic remote-control drilling command was sent from Schlumberger Cambridge
Research (SCR), in England, to a drilling rig in Cameron, Texas. A command to change pump rate was issued by SCR scientists and sent through a secure
intranet using a prototype application. The command was received and carried out at the Cameron site. An important part of the procedure included audio
and video conrmation from the drilling rig that the command and all subsequent commands were properly executed. Data were sent continuously every
three seconds and every 0.5 ft [0.15 m] with minimal lag times. All transmitted commands required a four-second acknowledgment routine during testing.

Transatlantic Waves
To realize the full power of remote-control
operations, drilling professionals must have the
capability to apply their expertise from anywhere
in the world. This concept became reality on
November 19, 2004, when a command to change
a pump rate, sent by scientists at Schlumberger
Cambridge Research (SCR) in England, was
received and executed by a drilling rig at
the Schlumberger Cameron Test Facility in
Texas (above).
From almost 5,000 miles [8,000 km] away,
drilling parameters, such as WOB, rpm and ow
rate, were adjusted remotely, marking the rst
transatlantic control of a drilling operation. This

Spring 2005

achievement was a result of months of

collaboration with M/D Totco and teamwork
between the SCR remote-drilling project members
and the Cameron engineering and rig staff.
Along with the collaborative aspects, the
success of the project also depended on key
technical requirements. Significant expertise
was required in deciding what parameters would
be controlled remotely and how the desired
actions would physically take place. M/D Totco
installed crucial systems at the Cameron site
the automated driller hardware that physically
controls the existing brake system, and the
automated rig controller, which directs the input
and output control of key electrical systems on

the rig. Vital communication systems also were

installed, such as a VisiWear wireless videocommunication system and a camera on the
drilling oor. Effective communications through
high-quality and reliable videoconferencing
proved extremely valuable to team members
during the course of this project.
12. Gaddy D: Remote-Controlled Operations to Benet
Drilling Industry, http://www.kingdomdrilling.co.uk/
drillops/drill_operations/equipment/RAR01.pdf (accessed
March 9, 2005).
13. Gaddy, reference 12.
14. Membership demographics for the Society of Petroleum
Engineers (SPE) can be found at http://www.spe.org/spe/
jsp/basic/0,2396,1104_1848_0,00.html (accessed April 6,
2005) and http://www.mmsa.net/Publications/
EducationEthicsA_lheinze.pdf (accessed April 4, 2005).

47

Cambridge

Cameron

Wellsite
communications
person

Remote team

Remote driller

VisiWear/Video
Phone
Text messaging

Wellsite driller

Wellsite team

Audible alarm
horn

> Key roles and responsibilities. Ensuring project success, and preventing injury and costly damage to
equipmentincluding expensive prototype tools undergoing testingand possible loss of the well,
required parties on both sides of the Atlantic to have specic roles and responsibilities. The wellsite
driller was responsible for the safety of people, equipment and the borehole, and had ultimate control.
It was agreed that in nonemergency situations, wellsite and remote drillers would consult each other
before acting. In an emergency, however, the wellsite driller would be given complete control using
the emergency disengage procedure.

The success of this project required clearly

dened roles for all participants and contingency
plans to ensure personnel safety, prevent
accidents from occurring on the rig and
eliminate the potential of damaging, or losing,
the test well or downhole equipment (above).
Both the SCR and Cameron teams collaborated
to dene the roles and responsibilities necessary
for project success and how these might evolve
through time.
During drilling operations, audio and video
communications were established between the
wellsite and remote drillers, with a backup
procedure that used a communications person to
relay messages if necessary. All team members
were required to provide support for both the
wellsite and remote drillers, with all commands
going through either the wellsite or remote
driller, depending on who was in control. During
the testing of remote-control drilling, the
wellsite driller, following normal disengagement
procedures, was always to take control at a safe
distance from the kelly bushing down position.
Moreover, the wellsite driller was empowered to
take control of the rig at any time. To ensure a
complete record of commands, it was also
important that the wellsite and remote drillers
log all commands manually.
Face-to-face communication between SCR
scientists and rig personnel, both in person and
by video, reinforced condence in the remote
drillers and promoted project acceptance among
the rig crewkey factors when moving to remote
automation. The human part of the equation was
very important. Prejob visits with the rig

48

personnel to develop use cases and fail-safe

mechanisms ensured safety and understanding
of the tests long before the first remote
commands were sent.
Commands from the remote driller were sent
through the Schlumberger intranet directly to the
M/D Totco automated rig controller, which veried
the receipt of commands and routed them to the
appropriate rig equipment, such as pumps, rotary
table or brake system. Sensor systems constantly
monitored the affected equipment, and sent that
data to the rig acquisition system and to local
displays. Monitoring data also were transmitted
through the Schlumberger intranet to the remote
drilling-control center, allowing the remote driller
to observe operation changes using PERFORM
Performance Through Risk Management
Process software.
Performing remote operations inevitably
introduces latency, a time lagup to a few
secondsbetween commands being issued and
the remote system actuation. This time lag is
critical either when a system becomes unstable
because of the time response of the system, or
when some limit must not be exceeded. A good
example of the latter is setting the bit on the
bottom of the hole after a connection has been
made. If the process were controlled remotely
with a joystick, by the time the signal indicating
that the bit had set on bottom reached the
remote driller and the subsequent stop command
was issued and returned, the bit would have
already crashed into the bottom of the borehole.
To eliminate this problem, the team developed a
high-level remote command to put bit on

bottom, which directs the wellsite system to

safely execute a closed loop process of setting the
bit on bottom.
Remote monitoring and control software
tools installed at the SCR remote drilling-control
center were a crucial element of the project
(next page). The PERFORM software integrates
several drilling-process tools, including rig-state
detection, real-time torque and drag, hydraulics
modeling and event detection. In addition, a
specialized software package was used to set,
change and verify drilling parameters.
Drilling into the Future
Advances in information and computing technologies have fostered new breakthroughs in longdistance, remote-control technology. Increasing
bandwidth capacities allow transmission of
massive amounts of data. Satellite communication with extremely remote locations is now
commonplace. Also, rig automation has become
much more affordable and reliable.
In addition, important human factors have
promoted the trend toward automation.15
Because of the accelerated rate and pervasiveness of technological development in all
aspects of modern life, most people are
reasonably comfortable with emerging new
technologies, particularly those that involve
automation. In the E&P industry, real-time
permanent monitoring of producing wells and
elds is widely accepted and should prove pivotal
in advancing remote automated drilling.
On the surface, the application of remote and
automated drilling systems seems best suited for
high-cost, high-risk environments. However, the
high performance and efficiencies that this
technology introduces could also prove advantageous for other drilling programs, in which
operating costs have a dramatic impact on the
viability of hydrocarbon exploitation. The
Schlumberger and M/D Totco remote-drilling
project team took a bold approach to design a
system that works across a range of available
eld technologies. It was far more challenging to
devise a simple and universal system that can be
deployed on older land rigs as well as advanced
drilling rigs, which are already outtted with
sophisticated equipment.
Automated rig systems can be designed
specically for unique operating environments.
For example, lower cost, automated and lighter
rigs are required for rigorous North Slope,
Alaska, drilling and rig transportation.16 There,
automation allows operators to optimize
reservoir development through fast-track drilling
programs to produce high-quality boreholes at
lower cost, with less risk, in less time.17

Oileld Review

> A wall of information and communication. The remote drilling-control center at SCR in Cambridge,
England, is equipped with multiple screens to facilitate complete monitoring and analysis of drilling,
MWD and LWD data. The control room also supports full videoconferencing capabilities. Data and
communications are transmitted through the Schlumberger intranet.

This new way to drill wells will allow qualied

people across multiple disciplines to have
greater involvement in drilling decisions. It will
also reduce logistical costs and minimize
transportation-related risks. Combined with
ongoing efforts in collaboration and visualization, remote automated drilling has the
potential to move the industry forward
signicantly. However, those from other E&P
disciplines can become involved in actual drilling
processes only when they are adequately crosstrained and have acquired both knowledge and
experience in drilling.
Intertwined with the progression and
application of remote automated processes is the
all-important human element.18 Although they
anticipated skepticism from the drilling
community, the remote-drilling project members
at SCR were buoyed by the drillers wide
acceptance and eagerness to move the remotedrilling project forward. This acceptance was
largely because the rig personnel were directly

involved in use-case developments and fail-safe

designs that covered all operational scenarios.
Other human factors have yet to be encountered.
Can we anticipate the possible dynamics and
mitigate the potential downfalls of having a
single expert at a remote location managing
several drilling operations at once? Will we
underestimate the complexity of drilling and
revert back to simplied and ineffective models
and control systems?
The marriage of automation and remotecontrol capabilities in drilling operations further
reduces wellsite personnel exposure to
hazardous environments and bolsters efciency
gains already realized in automation. The
synergy of automation and remote-control
capabilities utilizes expertise at central locations
more efficiently by placing experts at the
controls of multiple and simultaneous drilling
operations. Remote collaboration also brings the
opportunity to directly incorporate more
crossdisciplinary knowledge into decision

15. Wilson J and Stanton N: Safety and Performance

Enhancement in Drilling Operations by Human Factors
Intervention, http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/
rrpdf/rr264.pdf (accessed March 20, 2005).
16. Dunn MD, Archey PJ, Opstad EA, Miller ME and Otake T:
Design, Specication, and Construction of a Light,
Automated Drilling System (LADS), paper IADC/
SPE 74451, presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling
Conference, Dallas, February 2628, 2002.

17. Hofschrer, reference 5.

18. Whyte JA: Adding the Human Factor to Rig AntiCollision Systems: A New Technology Explored, paper
SPE 84352, presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Denver, October 58, 2003.

Spring 2005

making, for example, in subsurface target

selection and directional drilling processes.
In the future, remote automated operations
could directly connect drilling operations
to mechanical earth- and reservoir-modeling
software tools, which are not practical to run and
support on drilling rigs but could be run from
centralized control facilities onshore. This might
also enable automated real-time control, simulation and model updating under the watchful
eye of experts.
Drilling takes place in some of the most
hostile environments on earth. Out of necessity,
well drilling has become a precise science. And
while the industry must depend on a decreasing
number of drilling professionals, it is
strengthened by technological advances that
help accomplish the vital task of drilling wells
with greater precision and efficiency, and
decreased risk and cost. Remote control from
afar is the next step in automated drilling
operations, but reaching that goal will require
universal acceptance and ownership by the
drilling community. Just as complex tasks have
been performed remotely by other industries,
remote automated drilling, with its obvious
benefits, will inevitably change the way
we drill.
MGG

49