Professional Documents
Culture Documents
similar well programs. Another examples of pending Figure 3, page 9 (200 ton rig) and Figure 4, page 10
ideas towards smaller platforms are concepts such as (500 ton rig). As shown in these sketches, the design of
the SPP (Slim Production Platform) drilling and the substructure changed as
production system (2) shown to the right in Fig 2 and
discussed further in the Future of Modular Platform
Rigs section. Many Operators are leaning towards
these new ideas.
cost is even greater to the Operator when the platform Average time on platform = 1,335 hours
must be shut-in during any part of the rig move. All (55.6 days)
efforts must be made to minimize the number of lifts that Average of 4 wells are worked per platform.
must be put on or taken off a boat, the time it takes to Assumptions:
assemble or disassemble the rig components, and 7 rig moves per year (365 / 55.6days
reduce, if not eliminate, platform shut-in time. per platform)
Rig B = 120 hours (5 days) to move rig
CASE HISTORIES between platforms.
The following case histories of recent modular platform Two boats used to move the rig for both rig A
rig programs are used to prove estimated cost savings to &B
the operator. These examples are of varying rig size, Production rate on platform = 2,000 bbls /day
program work, and geographical location. Assumptions Operator requires platform to be shut-in during
are used in a comparative estimate to the cost of rig move.
alternative, less technologically evolved rig equipment.
Operator cost per hour during rig move =
Average day rates within the time frame of each case
US$1,875/hour
will be used as base cost estimates. As much
($3,000/day x2 boats)+($7,000/day rig
information as possible has been gathered from the
rate)+($20,000/day overhead & admin.) +
operator in each case. Sensitive well related information
($15,000 for shut-in 12 hours @US$15/bbl
is often protected by the Exploration and Production
@2,000 bpd) = $45,000/day = US$1,875
companies and not accessible.
/hour
Weather does not adversely effect the move.
A. GULF OF MEXICO - Case History
Calculations:
Operator Shell Offshore Inc.
Rig A rig move cost = (37 hours) x ($1,875/hour) =
Time Frame: April, 1989 through February,
$69,375
1992
Rig B rig move cost = (120 hours) x ($1,875/hour) =
Rig Class - 120 ton hook, 650 hp, electric rig
$225,000
Location 11 platforms (see table 6-1 page 13)
Difference = $225,000 - $69,375 = $155,625
Wells 65 total wells
Operator cost savings = ($155,625) x (7 rig moves
Program - Workover program.
per year) = US$1,089,375 / year
Information for table 6-1 was gathered from daily IADC
Results:
reports. Weather and platform crane mechanical failures
Comparing rig move times of Rig A (1.5 days) and
were included in the total hours required to move the rig.
Rig B (5 days), both 120 ton capacity rigs, and
A comparison to older, similar class rigs can be made
assuming all other variables listed above are the
assuming a 5 day rig move time for unimproved rigs.
same, results in an average savings of $1,089,375
From experience, moving older, unimproved modular
per year to the Operator (roughly $3,000/day). Not
workover rigs in the 120 ton range can add at least 3.5
only does the Operator save in rig associated costs,
days to a rig move. The increases in rig move times are
but it also gains by increasing its production level
due to heavier component lifts which require an
quicker by working over more wells in a shorter
additional crane to be installed on the platform,
period of time. This makes an even larger difference
inefficient component connections which require more
in present value terms.
time to assemble the rig, extra components that require
more time to install the rig and poor mechanical
B. ADRIATIC SEA Case History
assembly connections resulting in lost time from
mechanical malfunctions. The new technologically
Operator AGIP
advanced platform rigs overcome these problems by
Rig Class - 200 ton hook, 1,000 hp, electric rig
utilizing many of the improvements described in the
Location nine various platforms ( table 6-2 , page
Technological Developments in Modular Rig
14)
Equipment section. The results for this case history
Wells 41 wells
analysis are derived as follows.
Program - Workover program
Statistics:
The 200 ton modular platform rig in this case study has
Rig A = 37 hours (1.5 days) to move rig
been working in the Adriatic Sea for AGIP for over five
between platform.
years. It has made nine rig moves to platforms with a
relatively small amount of available deck space. As
IADC/SPE 77231 TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN MODULAR RIG DESIGN LOWERING OPERATOR COSTS 5
compared to the earlier Gulf of Mexico case history of 500 ton platform rig requires two boats for 8.5 days at
the 120 ton rig, this 200 ton rig had more associated rig $8,000 per day per boat to move the rig from one
equipment to match the needs of the Operator and the platform to another. Assume a rig mobilization day rate
work performed on the wells. Extra mud tankage, of $25,000 per day. The mobilization cost to the
generator, piperack structure, diesel tank, taller mast operator for the 500 ton rig comes out to roughly
and no rig moving after dark, lengthen rig move time $350,000. This can save the operator over $390,000
relative to the similarly designed 120 ton rig. (US) ($740,000 - $350,000) over the use of an API rig
with a derrick barge for one move. Assuming there are
Prior to 1993 AGIP utilized the H525 Saipem Ideco four moves in a year the average yearly savings would
model rig to perform workovers in the Adriatic. Although be more than $1,500,000 (US). This does not take into
this platform rig had excellent qualities, it was essentially account the costs saved by the operator by having less,
a modular rig welded together to be moved by a crane if any, platform shut-in time due to lack of
barge because the modular aspects were deemed to be welding required.
inferior to the presumed ease of a one-lift rig move. The
resulting rig was a half done effort where part of the rig 7 - ENRICHING THE VALUE OF THE EXPLORATION
was a single-lift, while the rest still had to be moved in AND PRODUCTION COMPANY
little pieces. Also, this rig had several cumbersome An important aspect in the development of modular rig
systems to meet local regulatory requirements. The technology is that it has immense enriching value for the
introduction of the fast moving 200 ton rig brought AGIP Exploration and Production Company. By bringing on-
cost effective rig moves and eliminated the need for line more wells in a shorter period of time the greater the
expensive crane barges, while it was designed to meet net present value of oil and gas becomes. In other
the regulatory requirements of the times with systems words, if in a one year time frame an exploration
integrated in the design. company drills or works-over 20% more wells than they
would have otherwise drilled without improved
technology, the company gains 20% more production for
C. TRINIDAD Case History revenue generation in current dollars instead of future
dollars. Current revenue has a greater impact on the
Operator Amoco value of the company than future revenue primarily due
Rig Class - 500 ton hook, 2000 hp electric rig to Net Present Value (NPV) and compounding.
Location Trinidad
Wells 17 wells 8 - THE FUTURE OF MODULAR PLATFORM RIGS
Program Drilling and Workover As modular platform rigs have developed to adapt to a
higher level of offshore competition and changes in
This 500 ton modular platform rig shown in figure 4 is demands from Operators, the need to continue
built with the same quick modular assembly concept improving designs and methods will not abate. Some of
design as the previous 120 ton and 200 ton rigs. The the greatest potential for modular platform rigs is minimal
500 ton rig does not require a derrick barge, sets up on a spaced platforms in all water depths, deep-water
very small footprint, has 148 lifts, requires no welding, platforms and marginal fields. Minimal spaced platforms
and is easy to assemble. It performs the same work as are emerging as Operators continue to find ways to cut
a standard 2000 hp API platform rig, yet can move development costs. Many Operators are requesting the
from one platform to another in roughly a quarter of the experience of drilling contractor engineers to help design
time as the API rig. Most importantly, it saves money platforms that can maintain as small deck space as
by not requiring a derrick barge. As shown in the data of possible and still perform the necessary drilling,
table 6.3, page 14, this modern 500 ton modular rig can completion, and workover operations. Modular platform
move from one platform to another in about 8.5 days, rigs must stay attune to the need to increase efficiency,
where-as the average 2000 hp API rig can take about 4 reduce size and weight as the Operator demands. The
days to move but requires an expensive derrick barge current deep-water frontier for finding large holdings of
and welding. Approximate cost savings to the operator reserves is demanding significant engineering
can be found making the following assumptions innovation. Platforms, such as SPARs and TLPs moving
and conclusions. into water depths of 5,000 feet (1,525 meters) and
The standard API 2,000 hp rated platform rig requires a deeper having greater impacting environmental forces
derrick barge. Assume $160,000 (US) per day for the requiring frugality of available deck space and applied
derrick barge and rig, which equals $640,000 (US) for a weight constraints. The future modular platform rigs
four day period to mobilize the rig onto the platform. Add must continue to be more operationally efficient, lighter,
another four days of rig time at $25,000 per day to prep smaller, and in the deep offshore environment,
the rig for working the well. This amounts to roughly dynamically engineered to withstand the demanding
$740,000 for the derrick barge assisted rig. The modern oceanic forces.
6 G. CARTER IADC/SPE 77231
Creativity will play a large part in the future of modular absorbing pads similar to those used in buildings for
platform rigs. Below are some ideas that could be earthquake areas. The pads would need to be
brought to fruition allowing there is enough cooperation designed for longer and larger cycles than those
between operator and contractor. experienced in earthquakes.
Lighter platform designs Concepts such as the Laser drilling As laser technology becomes
Slim Production Platform (see figure 2 on page 2) available, it could be applied to modular platform
can significantly reduce the weight of the platform. rigs. Although laser requires a large energy source,
The design reduces operator cost by incorporating a the centralized power station (mentioned above)
combination of smaller production modules, could possibly supply this resource. Drilling with
condensed deck space for platform rig packages, laser is currently being studied in the United States.
and utilization of deviated well conductors which It could possibly eliminate the need to run casing
reduce required well angle while drilling. since the laser is said to harden the walls of the hole
as it cuts the formation. The rig could be designed
Centralized power As the operator plans to with fewer and smaller components since weight on
develop a new field and install platforms, thought the bit and significant rotation is not required.
could be given to a centralized power station either
on land or on a centrally located platform. This
power station could supply power to platforms 9 - CONCLUSIONS
around it with enough reserve for the occasional
addition of drilling or workover rigs. The rigs would Historical data on the efficiency of newer
then not need to bring power packages to the modernized modular platform rigs demonstrates that
platform, reducing required space, weight and the Operators have gained significant cost savings
number of lifts. associated with innovative designs and more
efficient equipment. As demonstrated in the case
Platform storage Some of the most difficult history of smaller workover rigs, 50% to 100% of the
components of a modular platform rig to store on a rig rates can be saved by utilizing the most up-to-
platform are fluid (diesel and water) and bulk tank date modernized modular platform rigs.
storage. These components typically take up large
amounts of space and apply high deck loads. Efficiently designed platform rigs can eliminate the
Should the operator integrate larger tank storage need for expensive derrick barges, reduce rig move
into their platforms there would be greater efficiency time, bring production to the Operator sooner, and
in rig moves and less required top deck space. reduce or eliminate platform shut-in time.
Storage could be added into crane bases, platform
legs, or other unused space. There are many futuristic ideas to apply to modular
platform rigs that, if coordinated by Operators and
Consumable Pods Another idea to remove the Contractors, would significantly enhance the cost
large consumable loads off the platform, such as effectiveness of modular platform rig utilization.
potable and drilling water, mud, diesel, and dry bulk
material is by taking the loads completely off the Modular platform rigs are becoming smaller in size
platform. Remove these loads from the platform and weight, but also more mechanically efficient, in
structure and the platform can be designed with less response to exploration and production companies
required platform rig loads. Instead of using the desires to cut costs.
obvious weather dependant standby barge or lift
boat, build small tubular pods that can be moored The overall efficiency of a modular platform rig is
near the platform with appropriate internal pumps, determined by how well the rig is designed. Simply
and required safety mechanisms for vessel because a rig is smaller and lighter does not mean it
regulations and sea conditions. These tubular pods was designed well.
would have ballasting capabilities, easy to transport
and install and easily maintained. They would vary Modular platform rig technology developed over the
in capacity by varying the length of the tubular. past 10 years is having and will continue to have a
large impact upon the economics of developing
Dynamic compensation Significant rig weight existing deep-water and marginal offshore fields.
reduction and increased efficiency could be
developed by substituting motion compensators in
rigs within deep offshore waters with shock
IADC/SPE 77231 TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN MODULAR RIG DESIGN LOWERING OPERATOR COSTS 7
REFERENCES
Built 1974
Built 1998
Built 1998
Figure 5
Auxiliary Mud PumpsCompact,
designed, 1,000 hp triplex mud pump
package. Note small deck space
required when installed.
12 G. CARTER IADC/SPE 77231
Class D
20 (7%)
2000 to 3000 HP
Class A = 6,700 to 9,800 M
550 to 750 Ton Capacity
1,000 to 2,000 HP
Class B = 4,900 to 6,700 M
Class C 250 to 550 Ton Capacity
58 (20%)
Class A 600 to 1,000 HP
Class C = 3,500 to 4,900 M
74 (26%) 100 to 250 Ton Capacity
165 to 600 HP
Class D = 1,500 to 3,500 M
60 to 100 Ton Capacity
Class B
134 (47%)
Sizes of 286 total worldwide Modular Platform Rigs
Chart 1
Asia
Submersibles Canada
7 (1%) Australia New Zealand 4 (1%) Arabian Sea / Persian Gulf
2 (1%)
Platform Tenders 6 (2%) 1 (0%)
31 (3%) Drillships Africa
Artic Other (Europe)
26 (3%) Caspian Sea 7 (2%) 1 (0%)
3 (0.3 %)
Barges 13 (5%)
43 (5%) Mediterranean / Black Sea North Sea & NW Europe
14 (5%) 84 (30%)
Semisubmersibles Mexico
151 (16%) 18 (6%)
Jack-Ups S. America (Venezuela,
382 (41%) Brazil & Other)
25 (9%)
USA Gulf of Mexico
USA Alaska & Pacific
80 (28%)
31 (11%)
Self Contained Platform
Rigs
286 (31%)
Chart 2 Chart 3
IADC/SPE 77231 TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN MODULAR RIG DESIGN LOWERING OPERATOR COSTS 13
TABLE 6.1
THREE YEAR WORKOVER PROGRAM
with MODERN 120 TON RIG
GULF OF MEXICO, USA
Platform Number Total Hours
DATE location of wells hours on to move
(Start) (Gulf of Mexico) Worked-over location rig
4/29/89 ST 26-F 3 1128 30
6/14/89 ST 26-C 2 792 36
7/17/89 ST 26-D 3 1848 42
10/2/89 ST 26-F (return) 2 744 27
11/2/89 ST 26-C (return) 7 1008 21.5
12/14/89 ST 26-D (return) 4 2328 36
3/21/90 ST 26-F (return) 3 1512 33
5/23/90 ST 26-C (return) 2 624 23
6/18/90 ST 26-D (return) 2 744 39
7/19/90 MP 194-A 8 2592 52.5
11/4/90 ST 26-D (return) 5 1128 44
2/12/91 SP 70-C 6 1416 30
4/11/91 SP 70-D 5 1128 52.5
9/10/91 MP 290-B 2 1104 31
10/25/91 SP 62-D 7 2544 52
2/8/92 SP 62-A 4 720 42
TOTAL = 65 21360 591.5
Average move time between platforms = 37 hours (1.5 days)
Average time on platforms = 1335 hours (55.6 days)
14 G. CARTER IADC/SPE 77231
TABLE 6.2
WORKOVER PROGRAM
with MODERN 200 TON RIG
ADRIATIC SEA, ITALY
Platform Number Total Days
DATE location of wells days on to move
(Start) (Adriatic Sea) worked-over location rig
8/24/93 Cervia B 2 74 9
11/7/93 Clara W 3 156 5
4/12/94 Garabaldi A 7 236 4
12/5/94 Antonella 3 176 5
6/1/95 Emma 8 295 3
3/23/96 Ago B 2 197 4
10/5/96 PC 80 2 144 8
2/27/97 Garabaldi B 7 210 5
10/4/97 Ago A 7 240 3
TOTAL = 41 1728 46
Average move time between platforms = 5 days
Average time on platforms = 192 days
TABLE 6.3
WORKOVER PROGRAM
With MODERN 500 TON RIG
TRINIDAD
Platform Number Total Days
DATE Location of wells drilled/ days on to move
(Start) (Trinidad) worked-over location Rig
11/19/97 IMMORTELLE 14 361 8.1
11/14/98 MOHOGANY 3 23 9.1
TOTAL = 17 384 17.2
Average move time between platforms = 8.6 days
Average time on platforms = 192 days