To Trip Or Not To Trip

Drilling Simulation Software Aids In Making That Decision

By: Elsie Ross, Nickles New Technology Magazine, October 2007
DRILLING A CONVENTIONAL OIL or natural gas well has always involved a process of trial and error when it comes
to selecting the best drillbit to use or when to trip. While the length of time required to drill a well in a given field may
decline as an operator drills more wells and learns what to expect, in many cases it is still a slow -- and potentially
costly -- process.
That learning curve, though, can be significantly improved with the use of a commercially available rate of penetration
(ROP) drilling simulator, says the developer of the Optimizer software.
"You can increase the learning in an area much more rapidly; instead of 30 to 50 wells you can do it in two or three,"
says Geir Hareland, CAODC/NSERC (Canadian Association of Oilwell Drilling Contractors/Natural Sciences and
Engineering Research Council of Canada) drilling engineering chair at the Schulich School of Engineering at the
University of Calgary. Hareland worked on developing the first phase of the software at the Amoco Research Center
in Tulsa, Oklahoma, in the mid-1980s.
Pason Systems Inc. of Calgary has licensed the North American rights to the Optimizer, which Hareland says is used
in the North Sea. The company is working on the software to make it easier to use but that work is still many months
from completion, according to Jim Hill, Pason's president and chief executive officer.
In a paper presented at this year's Canadian International Petroleum Conference, Hareland said that while
improvements in drilling performance depend on the maturity of the field, a study he conducted found an average
reduction in drilling time of 15% to 20% and as much as 39%, although not all of that could be attributed to the
simulator.
"The objective is to establish a foundation that gives a neutral evaluation of all different types of bit designs and presimulate that before you go into the field," says Hareland. "You try to optimize the performance by selecting the right
bit for the different distribution of the strength of the rock through that well."
The software uses nearby offset well drilling data and records to calculate the different formations' drillability on a
metre-by-metre or less basis. It takes the drilling data in conjunction with the reported bit wear, pore pressure and
lithology composition in the offset field.
The drillability or apparent rock strength log (ARSL) is calculated in the simulator through different bit type inverted
ROP models. In addition to formation geology and pore pressure, the process involves the use of the offset operating
parameters such as weight-on-bit, bit rotational speed, flow and mud rates, bit wear, detailed bit type and design,
says Hareland.
The reference-well ARSL is then either extended or reduced to match the formation tops for the new survey. The
drilling process for the new well is optimized by trying out different drilling scenarios, including bit type selection and
designs, pull depths and different optimal sets and distributions of operating parameters throughout the bit runs.
While this initially is a trial and error process, with a little experience with the simulator "quick and obvious
conclusions" can be drawn regarding bit types and designs and pull depths, according to Hareland. With more time,
the optimal bit wear and distribution of the operating parameters throughout the individual bit runs is obtained.
The results of the new well simulation are then sent to the rig in the form of a simple table that can easily be read in
the doghouse.
A champion of the simulation software is Hugh Munro, drilling superintendent at Shell Canada Energy. He began
working with it nearly three years ago while at Anadarko Canada Corporation, mainly in the Wild River area of westcentral Alberta.

"You are trying to optimize that run; tripping takes time," says Munro. For example, if an operator can drill a 3 000metre well with three bits rather than five, depending upon the rig, that could save three days of downtime and
tripping.
The simulator predicts the ROP on a metre-by-metre basis enabling the optimum simulation in terms of dollars per
metre to be calculated.
"It all comes down to cost analysis," he says. "Sometimes your bit may drill farther but you choose to pull it because a
new bit will give you better penetration and it comes out in real good repairable condition so it costs you less to
repair."
Since changing companies, Munro has introduced the Optimizer to Shell. The first trial well was successful and he
plans to use it on another three wells. "If it works as well as it did in the first well -- and I am confident it will -- I hope
the company will take hold of it and institute it throughout."
Drilling simulation works best in a field in which the operator has access to a broad base of wells, he says. "What we
are using is the best run data we have had from before and looking at it and saying: 'Here is our best average -- how
can we improve on it?'"
With nearly 100 wells from which to choose, Anadarko was able to select "the best of the best," with the objective of
repeating that result, says Munro.
"Our problem was that we would be drilling a well and have, say, 150 rotating hours and that was our best well and
the next would be 175 or 180 [hours]," he says. "What we tried to do was get every well so it was 145 to 155 hours
with a very small standard of deviation."
While the geology may change about 10 kilometres away, "you should be within hours [field hours]" of that objective.
"Everything is repeatable," he says. "It is mass manufacturing of a gas well."
A key feature of the use of the simulation is the communication between head office and the field, ensuring that field
staff know what the operator wants to accomplish. Staff were given some leeway around the simulation and
challenged to try it and see if they could improve on it, says Munro. "Sometimes they did and sometimes they didn't
but they'd try it and if it got better they'd keep it and if it didn't they'd go back to what we suggested," he says.
"You give them an 80% result and they will give you back at least that and if you've got the best operating practices,
you should drill the best penetration rate and the best well."
While initially there was some skepticism, "in the end the guys in the field liked working with it because it took a lot of
the pressure of trying to tweak the bit themselves," he says.
According to Munro, it's hard to quantify the actual savings with the use of well simulation. "The first couple of wells
you get a pretty good gain but after that, once you get it down to where you are doing your best, you don't get any
more gain," he says. "The only thing that changes that is you tweak your bits and a technology change and you get
another maybe two or three per cent, but what you do get is very good predictable [results]."
At Anadarko, the company found that once it starting using the simulator "we kept getting better" as field staff gained
more experience. "Once you start working with it and have got data in an area you can keep bringing your tweak
times down," he says. While at some point, "it's not going to get a whole lot better," the operator still has the
advantage of greater predictability in the drilling operation.
With a better handle on the time and the cost of each well, an operator can start doing more scheduling and putting a
string of wells together with which it can go to a drilling contractor, with resulting cost savings.
CONTACT FOR MORE INFORMATION
Geir Hareland, Tel: (403) 210-6264; E-mail: gharelan@ucalgary.ca