Borehole Quality Design and Practices To Maximize Drill Rate Performance
- Fred E. Dupriest (ExxonMobil Corporation) | William Curtis Elks (ExxonMobil Development Co.) | Steinar Ottesen (ExxonMobil Development Co.) | Paul E. Pastusek (ExxonMobil Development Co.) | Jason R. Zook (ExxonMobil Development Co.) | Chinar Aphale (ExxonMobil Corporation)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 19-22 September, Florence, Italy
- Publication Date
- Document Type
- Conference Paper
- 2010. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 1.11 Drilling Fluids and Materials, 4.3.4 Scale, 1.10 Drilling Equipment, 1.6.9 Coring, Fishing, 1.1 Well Planning, 3.3.2 Borehole Imaging and Wellbore Seismic, 1.1.6 Hole Openers & Under-reamers, 3 Production and Well Operations, 1.4.1 BHA Design, 1.12.1 Measurement While Drilling, 1.6.10 Running and Setting Casing, 1.11.2 Drilling Fluid Selection and Formulation (Chemistry, Properties), 6.1.5 Human Resources, Competence and Training, 1.7.7 Cuttings Transport, 7.2.1 Risk, Uncertainty and Risk Assessment, 1.5.1 Bit Design, 7.2.2 Risk Management Systems, 1.10.1 Drill string components and drilling tools (tubulars, jars, subs, stabilisers, reamers, etc), 1.6 Drilling Operations, 1.7.2 Managed Pressure Drilling, 1.12.2 Logging While Drilling, 1.6.1 Drilling Operation Management, 1.12.6 Drilling Data Management and Standards, 1.6.3 Drilling Optimisation
- 5 in the last 30 days
- 1,691 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 5.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 28.00|
In 2005 the operator implemented a workflow that ensured drilling performance limiters were identified, redesigned, and extended continuously. The use of mechanical specific energy surveillance to address bit limiters and dysfunction has previously been published. The purpose of this paper is to discuss additional practices that have been developed to extend the non-bit performance limiters, particularly those related to borehole quality.
There have been over 40 non-bit performance limiters identified and redesigned globally. While these are diverse, those with the greatest global impact were found to be tied directly to borehole quality. Consequently, in 2008 the performance management workflow was modified to increase awareness of borehole quality as a performance limiter. The result was that acceptable borehole quality became defined as that which would not limit footage per day. Quality is now redesigned to the "economic limit of performance" in the given interval. The economic limit of performance is a significantly higher standard than the common industry objective for borehole quality, which is to achieve low trouble time and run casing successfully.
The average drilling footage per day drilled by the 23 operations that have been active since the performance management process was implemented has improved by about 63%. Instantaneous drill rates have typically increased 100-300%. Advances in bit and non-bit limiters appear to have contributed equally, and the majority of the gain in non-bit limiters has come from improved borehole quality. Other gains have come from related limiters, such as an increased understanding of the manner in which cuttings transport and tripping operations are controlled by borehole quality.
The paper discusses the technical models that are used to understand the major borehole limiters, the engineering design and the real-time practices that have been developed, as well as the field results.
Performance management tools tend to share a core process, which is the basic plan-do-analyze cycle. This is seen in important early works like the process used by the industry to optimize hydraulics (Lummus, 1970), to the "technical limit" workflow in the late 1990's (Bond et.al., 1996 ) and the operator's "limiter redesign" workflow implemented in 2005 (Dupriest et.al., 2005; Dupriest, 2006). Each reflects the intuitive process through which progress is made in any endeavor, which is to identify an issue, make changes to address it, and then repeat the process based on the results. While the fundamental cycle is the same, the detailed workflows differ, and probably should. To be effective, a performance management process must be consistent with a variety of factors, such as the company's risk management culture, its technical resource base, the availability of internal training resources, and the complexity and diversity of its operations. The gains shown in Fig. 1 since the rollout of the Fast Drill Process (FDP) suggest that the work process has been effective. These were largely mature programs in which the expected early learning curve gains had already been achieved (Brett, 1986). While there are elements of the workflow that would be effective in any organization, it should be noted that this effectiveness also reflects the degree to which the workflow is consistent with the organization's capabilities and culture. The key elements that one might expect to work universally have been previously discussed (Dupriest, 2006). Other details may be uniquely tailored to the operator's own strengths, well mix, or operating environment.
|File Size||1 MB||Number of Pages||18|