SPE 117109-PP Real-Time Drill Bit Wear Prediction by Combining Rock Energy and Drilling Strength Concepts

B. Rashidi, SPE, University of Calgary; G.Hareland, SPE, University of Calgary ; R. Nygaard, SPE, Missouri University of Science and Technology

Copyright 2008, Society of Petroleum Engineers This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2008 Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, and 36 November 2008. This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract A central element to reduce drilling cost is to improve drilling operation by analyzing real-time data. Developing advanced real-time analysis tools is one way to improve the drilling operation. Two approaches which currently are used for optimizing the actual rotary drilling process are mechanical specific energy and inverted rate of penetration models. The mechanical specific energy method is defined as the work needed to destroy a given volume of the rock. It can act as a tool during the drilling operation to detect changes in drilling efficiency thus providing a method to optimize the drilling parameters to enhance instatanious rate of penetration. Rate of penetration models, on the other hand, can be used to calculate formation drillability considering the effects of drilling parameters, bits design and bit wear. Drilling optimization using rate of penetration models is done by changing the drilling parameters and/or bit design to find the optimum drilling scenario for an entire bit run. The mechanical specific energy log and the drillability ratio differ when mud weight is changed and when bits are worn. These two differences are due the fact that mechanical specific energy does not include bit wear as well as the effect of changing mud weight. By combining these methods and modifying the mechanical specific energy equations to incorporate these effects and the mechanical specific energy can be used as a real-time trending tool for bit wear estimations. In this analysis, wells from offshore Middle East and onshore North America are analyzed. The field results are very encouraging in that the bit wear for both roller cone and PDC bits can be predicted. The field validation of this new approach shows that the supplementary information on the bit wear status can in some cases benefit in the decision of when to pull the bit while it still is in the hole and thereby possibly improve overall economics of the drilling operation. Introduction For any given drilling operation, several drilling technologies are available to optimize the process drilling. The intent of any drilling optimization process is to conduct the drilling operation in a safely and in the most cost-effective manner possible. One important aspect of this optimization scheme is to asses drilling performance continuously during the drilling operation. The operators drill rate management process should be designed to maximize the overall rate of penetration based on the cumulative footage drilled. The manner in which different drilling parameters can affect penetration rate is complex. However, two main methods of optimizing drilling are mechanical specific energy (MSE) and inverted rate of penetration (ROP) models. Both methods can help to optimize the drilling operation by analyzing drilling variables like weight on bit and rotary speed. One effective way of drilling a well would be to have a rough idea of the in hole bit wear status. The goal of this paper is to establish a method for evaluating real time bit wear and to create a field tool that can assist in the decision when to pull the bit. Rate of Penetration (ROP) Several ROP models have been proposed to combine known experiemental or mathematically derived relationships between operating conditions and rate of penetration. These models make it possible to apply formal optimization methods to the problem of selecting the best weight on bit and rotary speed to achieve the minimum cost per foot. By utilizing ROP models significant drilling cost reductions and increase in rate of penetration has been reported (Nygaard, et al. 2002, Hareland et al 2007).

[SPE 117109-PP]

Borgouyne & Young ROP Model In this model, penetration rate is a function of several variables such as sediments compaction, pore pressure, bit weight, rotary speed, impact force, bit hydraulics; cutter wear (Borgouyne and Young 1974). The model is mathematically expressed as:

ROP = f1 f 2 f 3 f 4 f 5 f 6 f 7 f 8

(1a)

where f1 to f8 expresses the different normalized effects on ROP such as rock drillability, operational perameters and bit wear. In the f1 to f8 functions formulas a1 to a8 are experimental model constants. f1 is the effect of rock drillability which is proportional with formation rock strength and is given by;

f1 = e 2.303a1
The second term is the depth effect given as;

(1b)

f 2 = e 2.303a 2 (10000 D )

(1c)

where D is depth in feet. The third term is the effect pore pressure has on ROP where overpressure will increase ROP and f3 is given as;

f3 = e

2.303 a3 D 0.69 ( g p 9 )

(1d)

Where gp is the pore pressure in pounds per gallon equivalent. The fourth term is the effect of overbalance on ROP caused by mudweight increase.

f4 = e

2.303 a4 D ( g p Pc )

(1e)

Where Pc is mudweight in pounds per gallon. The fifth term is the effect on ROP caused by changing the weight on bit.

w w ) ( )t d d B a5 ] f5 = [ B w 4 ( )t d Where , w is weight on bit, db is the bit diameter. The sixt term is the effect of rotary speed on ROP. (

(1f)

f6 = (

N a6 ) 60 Where N is revolutions per minute. The seventh term is the effect of bit wear on ROP.

(1g)

(1h) f 7 = e a7 h where h gives the amount of bit wear for a bit. The last term is the jet impact force effect which includes the effect of bit hydraulics on ROP. Fj is further described in Borgouyne and Young (1974).

f8 = (

Fj 1000

) a8

(1i)

Mechanical Specific Energy (MSE) The concept of MSE is defined as the work required to destroy a given volume of the rock. The MSE monitoring process can provide the ability to detect changes in drilling efficiency which possibly can be used to optimize operating parameters. By definition it can be defined as input energy to the output ROP. The MSE equation can be expressed in terms of drilling parameters can as:

MSE =

WOB 120 N T + AB AB ROP

(2)

In above formula AB is bit surface area (inch2), N is rotary speed (Round per minute), T is measured Torque (lbf ft) and MSE in psi (Dupriest 2005, 2006).

[SPE 117109-PP]

In equation (2) torque is used as a variable in the MSE calculation formula. Torque at the bit can be measured by a MWD system but in most cases no bit torque measurements exist. Bit specific coefficient of sliding friction () is introduced to express torque as a function of the WOB and to let the MSE to be calculated in the absence of reliable torque measurement.

T =

DB WOB (3) 36 Finally; equations (2) and (3) are coupled to form the new form of MSE which is called the modified MSE that can be shown as:

MSEMod = WOB(

1 13.33 N + ) AB DB ROP

(4)

The bit sliding friction coefficient is a constant dimensionless number which is used with a specific value for rollercone and PDC bits. The exact bit sliding friction coefficient values were obtained using the measured torque and WOB in laboratory measurements (Pessier 1992). Real-Time Bit Wear Model Development In the Burgouyne and Young ROP model, the ROP is defined as the effect of eight functions which can be inverted to obtain in the formation drillability noted as the f1 function (ft/hr). Offset well drilling data such as ROP, WOB, RPM, flow rate, mud weight and pore pressure from each meter or foot of drilled can be used to estimate the rock drillability value as below:

f1 =

ROP f 2 f 3 f 4 f 5 f 6 f 7 f8

(5)

Also fractional bit wear is simplified and assumed as linear decreasing trend vs. depth using the below equation:

h=

( Depth Current Depth in ) DG ( Depth Out Depth in ) 8

(6)

DG in above equation is the IADC dull grade bit wear state which is reported when the bit is pulled and has a value between 0 and 8 and is shown in Figure 1 for both rollercone and PDC bits. Mechanical specific energy uses the ROP value directly in its formula. To find a relationship between MSE value and rock drillabity a new model is suggested. The new model is originally proposed in the power form as:

MSE = K1 (

1 K2 ) f1

(7)

Field Data Model Analysis Offset drilling data from Northern Alberta in Canada wells and offshore Iranian wells located in Persian Gulf were used to investigate the K1 and K2 constants. MSE and inverse of rock drillibility with the mudweight effect eliminated (f4 =1.0) in the ROP model were calculated for offset bit run sections and plotted on a log-log scale to obtain K1 and K2 constants as seen in Figures 2, 3, 4 and 5. It was seen that the calculated K2 value is independent of changes in drilling parameters (WOB, MW, RPM, etc) which is listed in Table 1. Based on this initial analysis the K2 value was set equal to one in equation 7 and the model was then changed from power form to linear with the K1 value as the constant of proportionality. Next, the bit sliding friction coefficient () is obtained and some of these values are shown in Table 2. It is observed that these values are within the range of previously reported values of 0.21 for rollercone and 0.84 for PDC (Pessier 1992). Next step was analysis of the K1 value. Figures 6 and 7 show typical examples of an increasing trend in calculated K1 as we drill deeper into the bit runs. Real-Time Application of the Developed Model Based on the results it is belived that the K1 constant can be estimated real time and used for real time application to estimate of the wear function when bit is in the hole. To adjust the trends of K1 and bit wear grade versus depth a normalized

[SPE 117109-PP]

inverted K1 (1/K1) is correlated against bit wear in such a way that both sides of the equation start from the value of one at the beginning of each bit run and decreases throughout the bit run:

Norm (

1 ) =1 A hB K1

(8)

Offset offshore well data from an offshore Iranian field with bit diameter of 8 was used to check this equation and to obtain the A and B constants to find relationship between normalized value and fractional bit wear grade (0< h <1). A green bit will always be set to the normalized value of one at the first meter of each bit run. In case of completely worn bit the fractional bit wear is one and the normalized (1/K1) value is zero. It is therefore concluded that the only way to reach the normalized value of zero is if the constant A equal to one and equation (8) becomes:

Norm (

1 ) = 1 hB K1

(9)

Typical regressive software was used to obtain the most accurate B constants. Table 3 shows the calculated B values, pertinent errors and reported fractional bit wear. Figure 8 shows the functional behavior of the normalized function observed for each drilled section relative to different bit wear state using the calculated B constants. Final step is to find a relationship between calculated B constants and reported fractional bit wear in each drilled section and extend it to the governing equation in real-time bit wear prediction. This was done by correlating the constants B against fractional bit wear for each bit run as shown in Figure 9. This shows that a good agreement along the datapoints and the final equation.

B = 5.6392 h + 0.4212

(10)

The correlation coefficient for the fit is good (R2= 0.96). It is believed that using more bit run sections will lead to more accurate results. Equation 10 is then inserted into 9 and this is then used as the governing equation to estimate the bit wear for real- time applications. Conclusions The paper presents a new method to combine MSE and ROP models to calculate real time bit wear which takes into consideration the fundamental differences between MSE and ROP models and that the latter only takes into account the effect of bit wear. Encouraging results have been obtained which shows a linear relationship between MSE (Rock Energy) and rock drillability (Drilling Strength) equations with the use of K1 as a constant of proportionality. Change in mud weight and bit wear are the two most dominant factors which cause an irregularity in normal decreasing trend of the inverse of K1 versus depth. The developed model is correlative using different sliding coefficient of friction to account for variations in bit parameters like like bit diameter, number of cutters, cutter diameter, back rake and side rake, etc which are not accounted for in the ROP equation presented and the MSE calculation. This approach has been verified with a small dataset, and by analyzing more bit runs the authors believe this can become a valuable tool in real time analysis of bit wear.

Acknowledgments We wish to acknowledge and express special thanks to Dr. A. Bashari for his advice and cooperation and IOOC (Iranian Offshore Oil Company) for providing the drilling data. Nomenclature
CCS= Confined Compressive Strenght D= Depth DG= Reported Bit wear dullness DOC= Depth of cut EFF= Mechanical Efficiency FDP= Fast Drilling Process

[SPE 117109-PP]

h= Fractional Bit Tooth Dullness MSE= Mechanical Specific Energy, psi MSEadj= Adjust Mechanical Specific Energy, psi MSEMod= Modefied MechanicL Specific Energy, psi N= Round per Minute (RPM) ROP= Rate of penetration T= Torque, (ft-lbf) UCS= Unconfined Compressive Strength WOB= Weight on Bit (W/db) t= Threshold Bit weight per inch of Bit diameter = Viscosity = Density

References
Bourgoyne, A.T and Young, F.S. Jr.: A multiple Regression Approach to Optimal Drilling and Abnormal Pressure Detection. Paper SPE 4238, Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (Aug. 1974) 371-384; Trans., AIME, 257. Dupriest. F. E., Comprehensive Drill-Rate Management Process To Maximize Rate of Penetration., Paper SPE 102210, presented at the 2006 SPE annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in San Antonio, Texas, U.S.A, 24-27 September 2006. Dupriest. F. E., and William L. Koederitz, Maximizing Drill Rates with Real-Time Surveillance of Mechanical Specific Energy, Paper SPE 92194, presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 23-25 February 2005. Hareland, G., Munro, H. & Nygrd, R. Drilling simulation versus actual performance in Western Canada. Accepted in SPE Rocky Mountain Oil and Gas Technology Symposium, April 16-18 2007, Denver, Colorado USA Pessier. R. C., Hughes Tool Co, and Fear. M. J., BP Exploration, Quantifying Common Drilling Problems With Mechanical Specific Energy and Bit- Specific Coefficient of Sliding Friction, Paper SPE 24584, presented at the 67th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineering held in Washington, DC, October 4-7, 1992. Nygaard, R, Hareland, H, Stene F. Terjesen, H. 2002. Eight Years Experience with a Drilling Optimization Simulator in the North Sea: In Proceedings IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology (APDT) 9-11 September 2002, Jakarta, Indonesia. SPE 77247. Teale, R. The Concept of Specific Energy in Rock Drilling, Intl, J. Rock Mech. Mining Sci. (1965) 2, 57-73.
Well Section # Well A of Iranian Field (3724m-3850m) Well A of Iranian Field (3991m-4116m) Well A of Iranian Field (4169m-4315m) Well A of Iranian Field (4315m-4453m) Well B of Iranian Field (3280m-3314m) Well B of Iranian Field (3510m-3543m) Well A of North Alberta (450m-1515m) Well B of North Alberta (2206m-2671m) K2 1.0608 0.8349 0.8212 1.0225 0.9538 0.9024 1.2464 1.1969

Table 1: K2 Values for Each Well Section with and without Mud Weight Effect
Well Section # Depth (m) 3724-37850 3850-3991 Well A of Iranian Field 3991-4116 4116-4169 4169-4315 4315-4453 Bit Sliding Friction Coefficient 0.7 0.45 0.55 0.5 0.6 0.6

Table 2: Calculated Bit Sliding Friction Coefficients

[SPE 117109-PP]

Well Section # Well A of Iranian Field (3724m-3850m) Well A of Iranian Field (3991m-4116m) Well A of Iranian Field (4169m-4315m) Well A of Iranian Field (4315m-4453m) Well B of Iranian Field (3280m-3314m) Well B of Iranian Field (3510m-3543m)

A 1 1 1 1 1 1

B 3.68 4.65 3.9 1.9 3.45 1.1

Error Less Than 2% Less Than 1% Less Than 2% Less Than 1% Less Than 10% Less Than 6%

DG (Bit Wear Grade) 4.5 5.5 5 2 5 1

Table 3: A & B Values Obtained for Different Bit Run Sections in an Offshore Iranian Field

PDC Bit:

Roller cone Bit:

Figure 1. Schematic shows how PDC and Roller cone bit types cutters have measured

K1
y = 957712x 2 R = 0.9994
1000000
0.9876

K2

MSE

100000

10000 0.01

0.1 Inverse of Rock Drillability

Figure 2. MSE vs. Inverse of Rock Drillability in Northern Alberta, Canada.

[SPE 117109-PP]

K1
y = 7E+06x 2 R = 0.9979
10000000

K2
0.9794

1000000

MSE
100000 10000 0.01

0.1 Inverse of Rock Drillability

Figure 3: MSE vs. Inverse of Rock Drillability in Offshore Iranian well

K1
y = 65598x 2 R = 0.9912
10000
0.8895

K2

MSE

1000

100 0.001

0.01 Inverse of Rock Drillability

0.1

Figure 4: MSE vs. Inverse of Rock Drillability in an Offshore Iranian Field

[SPE 117109-PP]

K1
y = 293899x0.9574 R = 0.9602
1000000
2

K2

100000

MSE

10000

1000

100 0.001

0.01

0.1

Inverse of Rock Drillability

Figure 5: MSE vs. Inverse of Rock Drillability in North Alberta.

8000000 7900000 7800000 7700000 7600000 K1 7500000 7400000 7300000 7200000 7100000 13050

13100

13150

13200

13250

13300 Depth

13350

13400

13450

13500

13550

Figure 6: K1 vs. Depth for Offshore Iranian Well

7500000

7000000

6500000 K1 6000000 5500000 5000000 9200

9400

9600

9800

10000 Depth

10200

10400

10600

Figure 7: K1 vs. Depth in Northern Alberta Well.

[SPE 117109-PP]

1.2

Normalized(1/K1)

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0 0 1 2 3 4 DG 5 6 7 8

Figure 8: Functional Behavior with Known A and B Considering the Model Constraints.

y = 5.6392x + 0.4212 2 R = 0.9558

5 4.5 4 3.5

B value

3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

h (Fractional Bit Wear)

Figure 9: B values vs. Fractional Bit Wear in Field S.