ARMA 10-207

The Effect of Different Rock Types and Roller Cone Insert Types and
Wear on ROP (Rate of Penetration)
Wu, A., Hareland, G., and Rashidi, B.
University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Copyright 2010 ARMA, American Rock Mechanics Association

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 44th US Rock Mechanics Symposium and 5th U.S.-Canada Rock Mechanics Symposium, held in
Salt Lake City, UT June 27–30, 2010.
This paper was selected for presentation at the symposium by an ARMA Technical Program Committee based on a technical and critical review of
the paper by a minimum of two technical reviewers. The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of ARMA, its officers, or
members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written consent of ARMA
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 acknowledgement of where and by whom the paper was presented.

ABSTRACT: One way of improving the drilling operation is to utilize drilling simulation software. Modeling the bit
performance, ROP (rate of penetration), is an inseparable part of the drilling simulation software. In this paper three main factors
affecting ROP are discussed, including rock types (shale and limestone), insert types (Scoop, Chisel, Conical and Ovoid), and
insert wear (IADC dull grade). Computer models were developed and simulations are conducted to analyze the three factors’ effect
on ROP. From these simulations, some interesting results are obtained. The decrease rate in ROP for limestone is greater than that
for shale when IADC bit wear increases, but when weight on bit (WOB) is very small, the phenomenon is opposite. The
normalized decrease rate in ROP as a function of IADC bit wear for shale is getting smaller with increasing WOB, and the
normalized decrease rate in ROP as a function of bit wear for limestone will approximately remain the same for different WOB.
This indicates that when WOB is relatively low, the sharpness of insert, or the dull grade, will bring bigger effects on ROP and that
the effects on ROP with different dull grades are different for different rock types.

cutting structure. For example, if insert type changes or

1. INTRODUCTION
Improving the drilling operation is an effective approach
to cost reduction. One way of improving the drilling
operation is to utilize drilling simulation software, which
can optimize the drilling operation by predicting and
comparing different drilling scenarios. Modeling the bit
performance, ROP (rate of penetration), is an
inseparable part of the drilling simulation software.
Therefore improvements in ROP prediction will bring
value to the drilling industry.
People began to investigate the bit performance when
the first bit came to the world. The focus of their
investigation is put on the mechanism of interaction
between bit and rock. This paper first introduces the
interaction mechanism between roller cone insert bit and
rock. Based the mechanism, a bit performance model is
introduced and some simulations are conducted with the
model. The simulations emphasize the effect of rock
types, insert types and wear status of inserts on ROP.
Some interesting results are obtained from these
simulations.
Two main characteristics of the model are not integrated
into other bit performance models: one is that the model
includes as much rock mechanical properties as
hardness, elasticity, plasticity and failure angle. The
second is that it takes into account the bit detailed
inserts are used with different dull grades, then the
model can reflect the effects from these changes very
well.
The model is very useful to a drilling engineer when
selecting the proper roller cone bit with the same IADC
code but with different other features and the different
rock types and properties. Utilizing this proposed model
and method, it can optimize the drilling performance,
improve the drilling efficiency and finally cut the
drilling cost.
2. INTERACTION OF ROCK-BIT
Rock-bit interaction while drilling has been modeled for
many years but a complete understanding of the
phenomena occurring has a long way to go [1]. A rock-
drilling machine to facilitate full-scale drilling
experiments was used to study the dynamics of the rock-
bit interaction. The frequency analysis of data from a
full-scale drilling machine reveals that the rock-bit
interaction process is very complex, and difficult to
model [2]. In order to get a good understanding of the
mechanism, investigators performed their research based
on rock indentation tests. This is because the inserts on
the bit interact directly with the rock on the bottom of
the well. Rock indentation is the basic process in drilling
 by mechanical means [3]. One theoretical study of bit
penetration into rock is the static wedge penetration
model developed by Paul and Sikarskie [4], which is
based on the Coulomb-Mohr failure theory. Based on the
mechanism of interaction between the rock and a single
insert, some models and computer programs for
predicting ROP and torque have been put forward.
Warren developed a penetration rate model for tri-cone
rotary bits which were used in soft rock formations [5].
The model was modified by Hareland considering the
effect of confining pressure and normalized bit wear [6].
All the above models are obtained by simplifying the
geometry of a tooth and using only UCS as the
representing rock property. D. Ma developed a
computer simulation program (BRIAS) which can be
used to compare performance of roller cone bits with
different IADC codes when inputting rock properties
and drilling parameters [7]. The program can deal with
real shape and size of a tooth, and integrates these
geometrical properties in the rock bit interaction. The
surface of each tooth of roller bits is represented by 3-
D compound coordinates which can reflect the shape and
size of the tooth while the bit is working. The bottom
hole at each time point is also represented by tens of
insert (like sculptured insert). The work presented herein
has utilized a new discretization model which can be
applied for any type of insert (Fig.1, Eq. (1)).
3.2. Bottom Model
The bottom is also discreted into a number of 3-D
coordinate points (Fig.2, Eq. (2)).
Fig. 2. Surface discretization of the bottom.
 p = 1, q 
 D  (2)
BM (m∆t ) =  BMP ( x p , y p , z p ( x p , y p )) : x 2p + y 2p ≤ 
 2 
 
3.3. Wall Model
Because there is no wall model in BRIAS at all a new
model was developed which divides the whole bottom
hole into wall and bottom. The bore wall is also
discreted into a number of points (Fig.3, Eq. (3)).
centerline of bit

i=1,720
thousands of 3-D compound coordinates which can
express the shape and size of the bottom hole at an O1

arbitrary time. However, there still exist some j=1,500

problems using the program. For example, it can not O2

thickness

simulate the bit directly as it wears or when the insert

has a complicated geometry. Then the effective ratio
of rotary speed of the cone to the bit will change when Fig9 the description of borehole wall

Bottom Wall
the geometry of the insert changes. These effects must
be addressed if it is to simulate accurately the effect of
Fig. 3. Surface discretization of the bore wall.
wear status on ROP.
 θ t = 1,720 
  (3)
3. SIMULATION MODEL W (t ) = wallp{θ t , zt , ρt (θ t , zt )}, zt = 1,500 
3.1. Bit Model  D1
≤ ρ t (θ t , zt ) ≤ D2 
 2 2 
Inserts on a bit contacts the rock on the well bottom
directly, and the bit is represented by discrete points of 3.4. Worn tooth Model
surface. There are just a few discretization models for New tooth models Worn tooth models

Conical insert

Fig. 1. Surface discretization of working part of an insert.

 i = 1,3  Scoop insert
 j = 1, JN (i) 

Bit (t ) = Tijk (t ){XTC (n), YTC (n), ZTC (n)}, 
 k = 1, kn(i, j )  (1)
 n = 1, NTP (i, j )
Chisel insert
common insert types in BRIAS, therefore at this time
these models are not suitable for a new and complicated
Fig. 4. Comparison of new and worn inserts.
There is no wear model in BRIAS, so it can only be used
to simulate new roller cone bits. A wear model was
developed to simulate the effect of wear status on ROP.
Here we assume the wear flat is perpendicular to the axis
of the insert (Fig.4), which comply with the IADC dull
grading.
3.5. Cone Rotary Speed Model
The ratio of rotary speed of each cone to bit will change
as the teeth wear. In addition, the situation is totally
different when the bit is connected with down hole
positive displacement motor (PDM). This can be solved
by knowledge of conservation of angular momentum.
Main forces on a roller cone include active force from
torque P, friction from bearing load f1, vertical reactive
force on teeth Fz, lateral force on teeth Fc, and friction
on teeth f2 (as shown in Fig.5). The direction of f2
depends on whether the inserts slip or not. Fig.5 shows
the insert has a slip or slip tendency forward.
Insert
Rock
Brittle part Plastic part
Fig. 6. Rock craters fractured by inserts.
3.7. Simulation Mechanism
The principle of the simulation is: Once WOB and RPM
are applied, the bit begin to rotate and penetrate rock.
Some inserts start to contact bottom hole rock. When the
reactive force on all the inserts contacting the rock is
close to WOB, the simulation within a time step is done.
In the mean time the penetration of the bit is obtained in
that step. The process continues until the predetermined
simulation time is up.

ω 4. SIMULATION TESTS
Cone Simulations were carried out based on the above
P improved simulation program. Four common types of
inserts (scoop, chisel, conical and ovoid), two kinds of
f1 roller cone bits (IADC537 and 637) and two types of
Rock rock (shale and limestone) are selected for the
simulations (as shown in Figs.7 to 17).
Fc f2
Fz 4.1. Effects of Insert Type and Wear on ROP
20
Scoop
Fig. 5. Analysis of forces on a roller cone. 16 Chisel
Conical
Rotary motion equation of the cone is expressed as Eq.
ROP(m/h)

12
(4):
8
n
d
Iε t = (Iω ) = ∑ m( Fi ) (4) 4
dt i =1
0
Angular speed at arbitrary time ωt can be obtained using 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Eq. (5) if the acceleration εt is assumed as constant Dull Grade

within a small time step ∆t.

Fig. 7. Effects of insert types and wear on ROP (Shale,
ω t = ∆tε t + ω t −∆t (5) WOB=180KN, RPM=80r/m).
Where
10
I =moment of inertia of the cone Scoop
8 Chisel
Conical
m( Fi )
=moment caused by Fi Ovoid
ROP(m/h)

N =number of all forces 4

3.6. Rock Fracture and Crater Model 2

The crater includes plastic and brittle breakage of the
0
rock. The plastic part (blue) is removed directly by an 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
insert, the shape of which is the penetration part of the Dull Grade
insert. The brittle part (red) is represented by a conical
shape from vertical crushing and a part of it from lateral
cutting (Fig.6). Fig. 8. Effects of insert types and wear on ROP (Limestone,
WOB=180KN, RPM=80r/m).
 1.4 IADC537 Bit Drills Lime and Shale
Scoop 30
1.2 Chisel Limestone
Conical
Normalized ROP
Ovoid 25 Shale
1
Poly. (Limestone)
20

ROP(m/h)
0.8 Poly. (Shale)

0.6 15

0.4 10

0.2 5
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Dull Grade
DBG

Fig. 9. Effects of insert types and wear on normalized ROP Fig. 10. Effects of rock types and insert wear on ROP
(Limestone, WOB=180KN, RPM=80r/m). (Bit=IADC537).

From Figs.7 and 8, the ROP for four types of inserts is IADC537 Bit Drills Lime and Shale
1.2
decreasing at the sequence conical, scoop, chisel and Limestone
1
ovoid; however the decreasing rate of ROP is opposite Shale

Normalized ROP
Poly. (Limestone)
0.8
when ROP is normalized (Fig.9). Poly. (Shale)
0.6

0.4
4.2. Effects of Bit, Rock Type and Wear on ROP 0.2

0
Table 1. Simulation parameters and results 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
DBG
ROP- ROP-
IADC WOB(T) DBG
Lime(m/h) Shale(m/h) Fig. 11. Effects of rock types and insert wear on normalized
0 9.340 18.24 ROP (Bit=IADC537).
1 6.530 12.16
12 From Figs.10 and 11, ROP of an IADC 537 bit for shale
2 5.315 9.360
3 3.685 7.420
is higher than that for limestone under the same
conditions. However the decrease rate of normalized
0 14.10 22.60
ROP for limestone is higher than that for shale.
1 8.710 15.98
537 16 IADC637 Bit Drills Lime and Shale
2 7.170 13.56 20
Limestone
18
3 4.675 10.66 16
Shale
Poly. (Limestone)
0 15.24 26.60 14
ROP(m/h)

Poly. (Shale)
12
1 10.40 20.92
20 10
2 8.470 16.20 8
6
3 6.000 13.64 4
0 5.065 10.22 2
0
1 4.294 8.420
12 0 0.5 1 1.5
DBG
2 2.5 3 3.5
2 3.680 6.440
3 3.069 6.540
0 7.360 14.06 Fig. 12. Effects of rock types and insert wear on ROP
(Bit=IADC637).
1 5.830 11.90
637 16
2 4.390 9.120
IADC637 Bit Drills Lime and Shale
3 4.487 8.360 1.2
Limestone
0 9.350 17.44 1 Shale
Normalized ROP

Poly. (Limestone)
1 7.520 14.80 0.8
20 Poly. (Shale)

2 5.380 11.80 0.6

3 5.305 11.16 0.4

0.2
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
DBG
Fig. 13. Effects of rock types and insert wear on normalized IADC537,637 Drill Shale
ROP (Bit=IADC637). 1.2
537
637
1
Poly. (537)

Normalized ROP
From Figs.12 and 13, ROP of an IADC 637 bit for shale 0.8 Poly. (637)

is almost twice as much as that for limestone under the 0.6

same conditions. However the decrease rate of
0.4
normalized ROP for limestone is slightly higher than
that for shale. 0.2

IADC537,637 Drill Limestone 0

18 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
DBG
16 537
14 637

12
Poly. (537) Fig. 17. Effects of bit types and wear on normalized ROP
ROP(m/h)

10
Poly. (637)
(Shale, WOB=180KN, RPM=80r/m).
8
6 Figs.16 and 17 show the larger values for ROP in the
4
shale of the hardness simulated. The effects of insert
2
0
sharpness on two bits are different: 537>637.
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
DBG

Fig. 14. Effects of bit types and wear on ROP (Limestone, 5. WEAR FUNCTION W f
WOB=180KN, RPM=80r/m).
Wf, wear effect function, is a function which contains the
dull grade of the bit. Main features of Wf are that it is 1
IADC537,637 Drill Limestone
1.2 if the bit is new and less than 1 when the bit dulls. There
537
1 637
exist many functions which can meet the features of Wf.
Poly. (537) Wf can be obtained by best fit of data from the modified
Normalized ROP

0.8 Poly. (637)

simulation model. Wf is mainly used in real-time drilling
0.6
simulation models. Eq. (6) represents the wear function
0.4 for an IADC437 bit applied in drilling of shale. Fig.18
0.2 shows the curve of the wear function.
0 W f = 0.9992(1 + ∆BG ) −0.7326 (6)
0 0.5 1 1.5 DBG 2 2.5 3 3.5

1.2
Fig. 15. Effects of bit types and wear on normalized ROP
(Limestone, WOB=180KN, RPM=80r/m). 1

0.8
From Figs.14 and 15, when drilling this limestone the
Wf

537 bit has the higher ROP than that of the 637. From 0.6

the trends in the graphs, ROPs of two bits are closer 0.4
when dull grades increase to some extent. The effect of
0.2
insert sharpness on the 537 is bigger than that of the 637.
IADC537,637 Drill Shale 0
30
0 1 2 3 4
537
25 637
Dull Grade
Poly. (537)
20
Poly. (637) Fig. 18. Relationship between Wf and insert dull
ROP(m/h)

15 grade∆BG
10

5 6. CONCLUSIONS
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 • The ROP of four types of inserts is decreasing at
DBG
the sequence of conical, scoop, chisel and ovoid
both for two formations; however the decreasing
Fig. 16. Effects of bit types and wear on ROP (Shale,
rate in the normalized ROP is the opposite.
WOB=180KN, RPM=80r/m).
• The ROP of bit 537 is higher than that of the 637
for the two types of rock simulated, indicating that
when strength of inserts is not considered, 537 is
the best choice for the two rock types simulated.
• When dull grades reach 3 or more, the bit 637 is
more suitable for drilling limestone than 537.
• The effects of insert sharpness on ROP of two bits
are different: 537>637 when they are applied in
drilling the shale formation simulated.
• Based on the above results a universal wear effect
function Wf can be obtained which can be used in
ROP modeling for real time drilling simulation
applications.

REFERENCES

1. Kelessidis, V.C., 2009. Need for better knowledge of

insitu unconfined compressive strength of rock (UCS)
to improve rock drillability prediction, in the 3rd
AMIREG Conference, Athens, 7-9 September 2009.
2. Aadnoy, B.S, 1981. Experimental Study of the Rock-
Bit Interaction. Experimental Mechanics, p249-253
3. Liu, Y., and C. Mavroidis, 2005. Optimal Design of the
Coring Bit Cutting Edge in Percussive/Vibratory
Drilling, In Proceedings of IDETC/CIE 2005 ASME
2005 International Design Engineering Technical
Conferences & Computers and Information in
Engineering Conference September 24- 28, 2005, Long
Beach, California, USA
4. Paul, B., 1965. A Preliminary Model for Wedge
Penetration in Brittle Materials. Trans. Amer. Inst Min.
Engrs., Vol. 232, pp. 373 –383.
5. Warren, T. M., 1987. Penetration Rate Performance of
Roller Cone Bits, In Proceedings of the 59th Annual
Technical. Conference and Exhibition Houston, Texas.
Sep. 16-19, 1987.
6. Hareland, G., and L.L. Hoberock, 1993. Use of Drilling
Parameters to Predict In-Situ Stress Bounds, In the
Proceedings of the Drilling Conference in Amsterdam,
February 22-25, 1993.
7. Ma, D., D. Zhou, and R. Deng, 1995. The computer
simulation of the interaction between roller bit and
rock. In the Proceedings of the international Meeting
on Petroleum Engineering in Beijing, November 14-17,
1995.