You are on page 1of 18

SPE 134580

Borehole Quality Design and Practices to Maximize Drill Rate Performance
Dupriest F.E., Elks Jr. W.C., Ottesen S., Pastusek P.E., Zook J.R., ExxonMobil Development Company, Aphale
C.R., ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company
Copyright 2010, Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Florence, Italy, 19–22 September 2010.
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.

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, 1996 ) and the operator's "limiter redesign" workflow implemented in 2005 (Dupriest, 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.
The workflow is built on the insight that factors that limit performance do so by essentially limiting the ability to apply greater
weight on bit (WOB). These are systematically identified and redesigned so that desired increase in WOB becomes possible.

approximately 60% of the operator's worldwide footage appears to be limited by factors other than the bit. Rate of penetration (ROP) should increase linearly with WOB if the rock cutting process is efficient. whether the limitation is due to bit dysfunction or a non-bit limiter. indicating that we are operating with linear behavior and a simple increase in WOB will yield the desired increase in ROP. Notionally. which is to say the indention exposure of the cutting structure is not increasing linearly with WOB. 2.. Progress is then referred to as bit-limited. The workflow is then simply to identify the current limiter and redesign or change operational practices to extend it. et. which has resulted in a variety of unique design and operational practices. The fact that the MSE rises the further the performance diverges from the straight line is used diagnostically by the driller in real time to manage the drilling parameters and in post analysis for redesign. However. 2005). The objective of redesign is to extend the limiter to a level that causes another factor to become the limiter. The high level of focus on a single limiter has also tended to drive the organizations technical understanding to deeper levels. regardless of their nature. 1 . the operator has trained approximately 3000 contractor and vendor personnel in this The operations shown occurred over a period of approximately 4 years. The state of operations this results in is commonly referred to as control drilling. In this footage the MSE is low and uniform. 231 160 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 -10 63 % Average Fig. in this footage we're unable to apply the desired WOB because other non-bit limiters prevent it. The fact that there can only be one limiter is important because it allows the allocation of scarce technical resources to be prioritized to achieve the greatest business impact. Performance is increased by practices or redesign that extend the WOB that can be utilized. Rate of Penetrations Redesign to extend onset of non-bit limiters (40+) Rig top drive or rotary torque Drill string make-up torque Available BHA weight BHA angle build tendency Redesign to extend onset of bit dysfunction (founder) „ „ „ Bit Balling Bottom Hole Balling Vibrations Founder Point Hole cleaning Directional targeting control Motor differential rating The linear response model helps prioritize the work effort.2 SPE 134580 % Increase Footage per Day The traditional drill-off curve shown in Fig. . Previous papers have described the manner in which mechanical specific energy (MSE) surveillance is used to detect and quantify the degree of this dysfunction (Dupriest.Increase in footage per day for each operation that has been active since the global implementation of the performance management process. More than 40 non-bit limiters have been identified across global operations. To date. 2 is used notionally to illustrate the concept. notionally lie on the straight line. some form of dysfunction is occurring. This means that at any moment in time there can be only one limiter that prevents further increase in WOB. 2 . and then the team works to extend this new limiter. there can only be one limiter at a point in time Weight on Bit Fig. While MSE is effective in identifying bit limiters. from 2005 to mid-2009. A key observation is that all limiters. If weight is applied and a non-linear response is seen. A few examples of factors that result in control drilling are shown on the straight line portion of the curve in Fig.Notional depiction of relationship between performance limiters and weight on bit.

tight hole reported on trips.. i. Dupriest et.. reaming to reduce drag. packoff with high ROP . 2007.. footage per day increases...... In this continuous improvement workflow limiters are identified and extended without a targeted end point.... Examples include reaming on connections.. The concept is similar to the safety pyramid (Heinrich.... It was also observed that the manner in which drill crews respond to near misses results in preventative operations with large hidden costs becoming routine.. LWD failures. or reaming out of hole. unusual friction factors. or calculated technical performance limits (Bond. On a global basis..e...... which include bit balling.. it was necessary to establish guidance to ensure performance was not actually over designed. sidetracks.. which was that limiters would be redesigned to the "economic limit of performance". et. 1992)... equipment would continue to be redesigned and new operational practices developed until the cost to extend the current limiter exceeded the value of the gain in performance. torque fluctuations. fishing operations.. the risks associated with the plan. 2009).. reaming time. bridges after trips in vertical wells.... It was necessary to develop additional metrics and to rationalize the redesign process. The difficult challenge is in projecting the value... Not only does the response to near misses reduce the minor hidden time that controls footage per day.Near misses are used as the primary diagnostic to identify borehole limiters.. Bailey et.. An example of the work process as it is applied to borehole stability is shown in Fig. Many of the significant new bit-related practices that arose from this have been previously published (Dupriest et. extreme throw ... enlarged hole on calipers. et. ballooning.. seepage losses. unscheduled casing.... Bailey... cuttings load trends.. Finally. high LWD failure rate. Each well program identifies the current limiter for each interval. There is also an industry history of making this judgment based on whether non-productive time (NPT) was acceptable and casing run to bottom and cemented. . cavings on shaker. Remmert et... lost returns.. additional circulation time... 2009. February inadequate formation evaluation. When near misses are addressed at lower levels in the well planning and execution process.e. much as MSE was used for bit limiters.. or cavings.... 1999).. The decision was made that near misses would be used as the primary metric in driving redesign of borehole and NPT is eliminated. Logical Potential NPT Redesign logical risks in the well plan as if they were a near miss i... fishing operations.. Sowers. bit damage patterns. The industry has traditionally used objective-based mechanisms such as target wells.... drag in sands on trips.... even when they were not needed. MSE and vibrations data . .. stuck pipe.. but because it lies lower in the pyramid it also eliminates the NPT events that have traditionally been the focus of the industry's borehole design practices NPT i.e. bottom hole balling and vibrations.. small drilling window. A detailed study of wells with high NPT showed that virtually all major events were preceded by near misses. The underlying philosophy was already in place.. 2008.. Fig... it is not used as an objective. Real-Time Near Miss React to every event observed in real-time Historical Near Miss Redesign to eliminate near misses observed in offset wells i....... By late 2006 it was recognized that the same level of gains were not being achieved in non-bit limiters.. limited hydraulics for hole cleaning.. well poor well productivity. hidden costs Dupriest November 2005.... 2009... While MSE provides a very distinct metric for identifying bit dysfunction. such as tight hole.. The result was that the focus on continued improvement in hole quality was difficult to maintain... there was no simple tool to determine the degree to which borehole quality was limiting performance. as they would be in a management by objectives system.SPE 134580 3 The process also differs from many in that specific performance objectives are not established..... 3. the hidden cost of these operations was believed to be greater than the actual NPT.. packoffs while reaming. For example..e. 3 ..... elimination of NPT (Kadaster... 1931) in that there are multiple levels at which near misses can be identified and addressed.. packoffs. high overbalance..... sweep results... or regard of the actual performance achieved (Deming.. marginal MW for stability.... and the mitigations for those risks... seepage losses. rather than on whether borehole quality was limiting footage per day performance. While footage per day is used as the metric to measure 1996) to move the organization toward a desired end point.. particularly those related to borehole quality. the plan to extend it. Early progress was dominated by the new insights MSE surveillance provided on rock cutting limiters. The importance of near miss identification has also been reported as a key tool in other borehole management efforts (Aldred. Logically.. Walton 1986)..

The potential value in a redesign is also judged from the broader experience of the organization through a well-connected global network of concept champions and a uniform process for conducting field trials. Borehole Stability Performance Limiters The dominant borehole performance limiter is instability. The criteria established for selecting the candidates for well-specific borehole stability assessments were: • All business-critical wells • Wells with offset history of instability • Wells with inclination >40º • Wells within complex geologic or tectonic setting Last year (2009) detailed analyses were conducted on approximately 100 wells out a total of 626 wells drilled by the operator. hole cleaning limits. Experience with the detailed analyses and field implementations have lead to the general conclusion that all wells should be drilled with the highest practical MW. what will the gain be in cuttings transport efficiency. Initially there was a concerted effort to conduct detailed stability analysis on a greater number of wells. thorough root cause analysis are conducted following any significant NPT event such as stuck pipe or lost returns to ensure new practices and / or well design changes eliminate the true root cause and not simply allow the team to survive with the current condition . Also. Another significant change was to incorporate the near miss philosophy into the stability design process. Mid-2009 63% Gain in ft/day 54% Phase I 2005 43% 40% MSE Training Phase II 2006 Institutionalized practices/workflow Borehole management initiative Maturing Workflow 2007 Borehole Initiative 2008 2009 Fig. research programs have been initiated to further understand the physics of key limiters to support the development of new science-based practices and improve the ability to predict potential performance gains. And finally. Examples of actions that might be taken at each level are shown in Fig. This is a logical process for any operator. changes are made to the well design and/or operational practices and their cost and effectiveness are evaluated. rather than simply as a possible cause of NPT. A rapid response to real-time events call for increasing the MW immediately if cavings morphology is indicative of instability. elimination of the borehole pattern or other root cause would result in elimination of measurable reaming time. The economic limit of redesign is not reached until the cost impact of historical or logical near-misses are reduced to the expenditure required to address them. if a team is reaming each stand due to pulls in tight hole. 5. tight hole and excessive back-reaming on trips that typically is not captured by the NPT statistics.4 SPE 134580 if mud weight (MW) is increased to reduce hole enlargement. For example. Consequently. If analysis shows this mud weight to still be inadequate. This paper includes discussion of the three major borehole limiters and some of the key practices developed to extend them. but what may differ is the end point for the redesign. Early gains were largely due to extension of bit performance limiters. This was accomplished through changes in both well design practices and real time drilling practices. and how much increase in footage per day will this enable? Other economic benefits are more easily predicted. 4 . but may in some cases represent significant time and cost. When instability is viewed as a limiter to footage per day performance. sidetracks. These include instability limits. and limits created by vibrationally induced patterns. improvement in stability was given a high priority. reduces cuttings transport efficiency and results in very significant hidden costs. The incremental impact of this effort through mid2009 is shown in Fig. The economic limit of redesign considers the cost of such events as intermittent pack-offs. The enhancements to the Fast Drill Process workflow were implemented globally in mid-2008. the desired quality of the borehole becomes much higher. while more recent gains have tended to occur through increased focus on borehole performance limiters. 4.Plot shows trend in average of the performances of each drilling operation since the global implementation of the workflow. The resulting hole enlargement creates high NPT.

but these limiters can be extended through other redesign practices. A similar concept has also been proven to be successful in stabilizing cleated coals with higher MW (Zeilinger. These practices have previously been published (Dupriest et. Stuck pipe events due to differential pressure sticking have been practically eliminated through practices implemented by the operator over the last 8 years and this is no longer considered an unmanageable risk when raising MW for stability. the MW. showing examples of the actions that might be take to eliminate near misses and NPT related to instability at each phase of well design and execution. al. which results in elevated confined rock strength. The additional volume of rock generated as a result of instability needs to be effectively removed from the borehole. al. There are situations where an increase in MW can dramatically reduce the ROP by causing the onset of bit dysfunction (bit or bottom hole balling).SPE 134580 5 Conduct root cause analysis and address in response plan Raise mud weight immediately if cavings morphology indicates instability Model borehole stability in all wells with offset history of instability Model borehole stability in high angle (>40º) wells. fracture closure stress (FCS). allowing the probability of drilling success to be determined based on multiple drilling concerns. et. Borehole instability (hole-enlargement or breakout) obviously impacts both hydraulics. Kline et. Additionally. The extended reach wells in which instability is most severe tend to have losses due to circulating pressure which can be manipulated in many ways. borehole enlargement is irreversible and its cost impact is very large. losses stop. 1999...Borehole stability risk triangle. 2005). destabilization of naturally fracture formations.. 2010). hydraulics and hole-cleaning are therefore clearly coupled and can. The QRA approach allows optimum drilling parameters to be determined. Borehole stability. A combination of engineered blocking solids and higher mud weights have been shown to be more effective in promoting stability in fractured rock (Ottesen. or even reduce. Choice of rig specific equipment such as drill sting dimensions and pump capacity are also incorporated into the analysis. The four concerns most commonly sited by the industry are lost returns. The theoretical impact of increased MW on ROP is usually minimal. The borehole quality QRA technology integrates underlying physical models on a risk analysis platform. resulting in potential cuttings and cavings accumulations. and reduced drill rate. When planning mud weights borehole stability has become prioritized over lost returns. When maximizing the mud weight other factors may become limiters. When a loss fracture is created it maintains a closing stress equal to the far field stress. The concern for pressure penetration into fractured rock has led the industry to limit. al. Large-scale flow loop experiments were conducted to validate the physical relationships (limit states) between hole-enlargement and hole-cleaning. tripping. and lost returns. differential pressure sticking. Use maximum possible mud weight NPT Real-Time Near Miss React to every event observed in real-time Historical Near Miss Treat near misses observed in historical data as actual NPT Logical Potential NPT Mitigate hazards to the economic limit of re-design Fig. weak rock. not be individually studied or assessed in isolation. back-reaming and casing running operations. In contrast. Probability of drilling success is defined as the probability of not encountering a well bore condition that may lead to a major NPT event or create a performance limiter. such as MW and flow rate. 5 . lost returns do not result in a significant reduction in integrity. . 2010). engineered particle non-aqueous fluids (EP-NAF) and managed pressure drilling (MPD) methods are available to mitigate the losses. hole-cleaning. high tectonic or complex geology. The most severe impact of instability on footage per day occurs when pack-offs and stuck pipe result from inadequate holecleaning in and around enlarged sections of the borehole. In the majority of cases. for this reason. Al. These challenges led to the development of a new approach that exploits detailed understanding of the physics of borehole dynamics during drilling and the power of Quantitative Risk Analysis (QRA) technology (Ottesen et. because the annular velocity is reduced in the enlarged area. 2010). affecting the ECD and therefore also the lost returns potential. The increased borehole pressure causes the in-situ effective stress to increase. if needed. This borehole quality QRA technology is used to optimize the well design architecture and drilling parameters for each individual hole-section. Holeenlargements also have a negative impact on hole-cleaning. and the overall probability of drilling success for a given hole-section. because historically the consequences of lost returns are less severe (costly) than the consequence of wellbore instability.. If circulating pressures or MWs are reduced to below the fracture closure stress. The change is usually small and the resulting loss of depth of cut (DOC) can be regained by increasing the weight on bit.

stability. 6.5 12. The graph shows probability of drilling success as a function of MW and flow rate.0 10.5 11. Additional data requirements are also identified at this stage.7 0.0 0.8 Probability of Success (0-1) 0. In this example.2 98% 98%probability probabilityofofdrilling drillingsuccess. In this example. With this borehole quality significant NPT or failure to meet objective has a high probability of occurring and.6 700 gpm 725 gpm 750 gpm 775 gpm 0. using a stability MW of 12. etc.0 12. The borehole will now look more like the middle 3D image on the left hand side of Fig. considering consideringwellbore wellborestability. hydraulics. . success.0 ppg and a flow rate of 750 gpm will result in minimal hole breakout and a quality borehole with good cuttings transport at an ROP of 50 m/hr (165 ft/hr).5 ppg there is still a relatively high probability that this hole section can be drilled "successfully". If the mud weight is further reduced to 11.9 0.5 Mud Weight (ppg) Fig. the chance of success is also indicative of the likelihood of high hidden costs associated with managing poor hole quality. cleaning & lost returns. Designs with higher probability of success have lower NPT and hidden cost time. While the geologic objectives may be achieved. near misses will likely drive the crew to conduct more reaming. XXXSS SSdepleted depletedtoto6.40 6. borehole stability. Assumes 0. This "relentless re-design" (to the economic limit) work-flow is illustrated in Fig.3 ppg.Quantitative risk analysis (QRA) assessment for selection of mud weight and flow rate to maximize borehole quality and footage per day.0 ppg @ 20 20°ºC C 75 ft 0. The traditional use of NPT and running casing to bottom as metrics for success has lead the industry to drill many wells resembling the intermediate and last examples shown above. incorporating additional data and knowledge being acquired. considering borehole stability.hole hole cleaning & lost returns. If the well is drilled with a MW of 11. at best. Individual well-specific QRA assessments are then performed ahead of each new well as the drilling campaign progresses. Assumes5-1/2-inch 5-1/2-inch DP. 6.1 XXX ppg. 6. 1. hydraulics. back-reaming and tripping. 6. log evaluations and analysis. particularly in the side of the borehole.5 0. Continuous redesign to the economic limit of performance tends to drive quality to the higher levels shown in the first image.40ppg. An initial hole-quality QRA assessment is performed for all major new drilling projects at the concept selection stage. the hole-section can be completed with significant hidden cost and reduction in overall drilling performance. torque & drag and ECD monitoring. to establish drilling feasibility and to determine the highest performing well design based on available drilling. hole cleaning and lost returns.4 0.3 800 gpm 825 gpm 875 gpm 900 gpm ROP==50 50mm/hr ROP / hr Q == 750 750 gpm Q gpm MW = 12. 6 . 7. we risk initiating uncontrolled failure around the entire borehole circumference as indicated by the 3D borehole image in the bottom left hand corner in Fig.0 ppg @ MW = 12.6 SPE 134580 However. A typical result from a QRA assessment for a hole section is presented in Fig. The borehole is expected to look much like the 3D borehole image in the top left hand corner of Fig. even though there now will be areas of significant breakouts. hole cleaning and lost returns are assessed for a proposed high inclination 97/8-inch hole-section. geotechnical and geological information. 0.0 11. Instantaneous ROP may also be constrained due to reduced cuttings transport efficiency in the enlarged sections of the borehole. Real-time monitoring of wellbore quality is achieved by description of cavings morphology.

flow rate and desired hole quality to maximize the achievable drill rate and footage per day The caliper log from the 8-1/2-inch hole section in well A26.PWD Improved Understanding (calibration / Re-design) Fig.SPP .ECD . The hole-quality methodology and work-flow described above was adapted for the Bass Strait. Australia. a well drilled during an earlier drilling campaign with a MW of 9.) .Elements of the iterative process used to redesign hole quality to the economic limit of performance.SPP .Casing Size .6 ppg Well A21a .SPP Limit . 2010). 8 . Other details of the campaign and .Comparison of caliper logs after utilizing QRA-based designs to balance mud weight.Cuttings / Cavings .Mud Weight .Drill Pipe / BHA Well Design ..Hole Caliper / MW .Pump .Casing Points . Further improvement in the hole-quality of wells subsequent to well A21a was achieved by additions of engineered blocking solids to prevent fluid and pressure penetration into the coal fracture network.4 ppg Fig.Logs (Sonic etc. making the increased MW more effective in stabilizing the coals (Zeilinger. 8. al.LOP .Hole Size .Mud Weight = 9. The improvement in hole-quality as a result of consistently using higher than historic MWs is evident in the caliper logs presented in Fig. 7 .In-Situ Stresses .4 ppg.ROP Rig Equipment .Mud Weight = 11. The caliper log from the 8-1/2-inch hole section in well A21a show some indications of instability but the improvement in hole quality compared with well A26 is evident.Trajectory .6 ppg. The formations penetrated in these two hole-sections contain shales with inter-bedded coal stringers.Pore Pressure . A26 A21a Wellbore Stability Polar Plot Well A26 .SPE 134580 7 Earth Model . show hole enlargements in excess of 12.Rock Strength Well Application (Validation) Model Predictions . Well A21a was drilled during the current drilling campaign (2008) using a MW of 11. et.Flow Rate .Drilling Fluid Well Data .5 inches. drilling campaign that started in 2007.

Bass Strait. In high angle wells. In low angle wells. so any time spent after reaching total depth conducting hole conditioning. In the early 1990's the operator developed a model to predict the hole cleaning efficiency for various factors. Hole Cleaning Performance Limiter Many factors influence the drill rate at which the cuttings load may become unacceptable. The use of the QRA modeling resulted in a balance of mud weight. 2002). or backreaming in preparation for running casing may become a significant percentage of the total well..e. In the operator's well mix it is rare for the drill rate to be limited in low angle wells. considerable time was spent conditioning the hole after reaching total depth.8% in 2007 to 3. the flow area above it declines and the fluid shear acting on top of the bed increases. reflecting a significant reduction in hidden costs. 1994). 9. At some point the deposition and removal rates equal each other and an "equilibrium bed height" is established (Rasi. in the ROP management workflow redesign of the hole cleaning rate continues until the next step is proven to be uneconomic or the another limiter becomes dominant. surface solids processing. One factor that influences the bed height is the cuttings generation rate.8% in 2009. 9 . As ROP is increased the bed height grows which restricts the flow area and ECD may approach integrity. even at 500-800 ft/hr. As the bed grows in height. the equivalent circulating pressure (ECD) from the cuttings load may approach integrity or packoffs may occur. including hole angle (Rasi. the metric improved from 1. fluid properties. there would be no circulating or reaming time on connections and no hole conditioning during trips or prior to running casing. The measure of the adequacy of hole cleaning has generally been the ability to drill to total depth with reasonable NPT and no stuck pipe. an improvement of 326%. drill string. In previous programs. 7000 10 FDP 6000 9 BMI 8 Hole Quality NPT 7 6 4000 5 3000 4 NPT (%) Feet per Day 5000 3 2000 2 1000 1 0 0 2007 2008 2009 Fig. The factors that control the cuttings transport rate vary with hole angle. The cuttings slip rate can be controlled with rheology. the slippage of cuttings downward as they travel laterally results in the continuous deposition of a layer of material on the bottom. If cleaning is inadequate. As with borehole instability. When the performance management workflow was implemented in 2005 the operator had already implemented many of the practices that allowed challenging wells to be drilled with low NPT and minimal stuck pipe (Elks. When this time is included in the pre and post comparisons. such as the logging while drilling (LWD) data acquisition rate.8 SPE 134580 redesigns arising from the performance management workflow have previously been published (Kilroy. and finally to 0. These included : 1) using maximum rotation and maximum circulation (MRMC) both while drilling and when circulating bottoms up . hole enlargement is the true performance limiter and the redesign effort shift to stability. flow rate. hole and casing architecture that yielded a significant increase in the sustainable drill rate and also a significant reduction in hole quality related NPT. cuttings injection). the transport efficiency is determined by the rate at which the cuttings slip downward in the vertical flow stream. Australia drilling performance summary showing reduced trouble time and increased footage per day NPT related to borehole quality was reduced from 7. Jr.518 ft/day to 6. These cuttings beds begin to develop at around 40° of inclination. However. as measured by the performance management metric increased from 1. The bed may also become more prone to pack off and stick pipe.475 to 2. tripping. an improvement of 55%. This trend is seen in most areas with soft formations where the drill time may be small. W. Over the same time period the ROP.2% in 2008. or ROP. 1994). The results are shown in Fig. Low velocity in enlarged hole remains the primary concern. the economic limit of redesign in hole cleaning has proven to be a much higher and cost effective standard than NPT or stuck pipe.463 ft/day. This would be maintained while extending the ROP to some level at which another limiter becomes dominant (i. 2009). In this situation. Ideally.283 feet per day. usually after making connections when there is no fluid flow.C. It may also create tripping or casing running hazards.

e. or other traditional approaches.The cuttings bed reaches an equilibrium bed height in the gauge hole and the enlarged hole that leaves approximately the same open flow area in each hole section. Cuttings transported easily in gauge hole. which is to say the highest ROP and equilibrium bed height that does not result in packoffs or ECD that exceeds integrity. In some sense. The hole cleaning simulations resulted in several key learnings and observations. Gauge hole was seen to clean quickly and easily (i. Packoff events were seen to occur in. 11. First. very high drill rates were achieved in horizontals that exceeded industry recommendations by a large margin. In similar testing in plexiglas boreholes of uniform diameter the wellbore was easily cleaned with no packoffs. Second. . In one drill team. 10). what determines the dirtiest hole possible? This is a more complex problem than what determines how clean the hole is? As redesign occurred in hole cleaning operations. 3) monitoring torque and drag (T&D) friction factor trends in real time at the rig site while drilling. 11 . tripping and running casing to provide the rig supervisor an indicator of the worsening hole condition (i. For example. several key observations helped to redefine the assumed limits. research in a full scale flow loop showed hole enlargement to dominate the cuttings transport process (Fig. 2) circulating multiple bottoms up prior to tripping to ensure the cuttings bed was reduced to a safe tripping level. the enlarged sections. Another observation. the organization became more aware that poor management of bit whirl could also create enlargement. The impact was that when hole cleaning was observed to be the limiter the response became to redesign the hole quality as much as the fluid rheology. While these practices have been successful. excess cuttings bed). The behavior was consistent with observations from the field. the objective is not to drill with a clean hole but to succeed with "the dirtiest hole possible".Full scale testing showing the packoff process developing as the top of the drill collars enters the enlarged area and the stored mass is mobilized by the increased velocity around the collars. the IROP (instantaneous ROP) in the horizontal pay was routinely maintained at 1000-1500 ft/hr with no history of packoffs. And third. was that the area above the cuttings bed appeared to be relatively constant in both the gauge and enlarged areas. as a result of redesign to extend vibrational bit limiters. The question becomes. cuttings bed is removed) around the BHA using typical flow rates and drill string rotation speeds Enlarged hole is almost impossible to clean-up even when the BHA is backreamed through the enlarged area.e. the high drill rates achieved in the previously mentioned horizontals were in gauge sandstone wellbores. or around. Dune and Packoff Rapid mobilization of stored mass Fig. they are focused on NPT avoidance and not necessarily the economic limit of redesign for footage per day. depicted in Fig. A2 Equilibrium Bed Height A1 A1 ≅ A2 Fig. 10 . flow rates. 4) real time cuttings return volume monitoring to provide the rig supervisor a measure of hole cleaning efficiency and 5) backreaming multiple cycles at high RPMs (120 – 200) prior to the connection to condition the borehole and reduce the bed height and ECD.SPE 134580 9 prior to tripping out of the hole.

This field trial was in 12-1/4” hole at 66° inclination in a field known to have wellbore instability. The enlarged area will refill immediately when drilling resumes. which occurs at a given bypass area. More significantly. While increased MW and other design changes have been beneficial. Three potential root causes of enlargement are 1) wellbore instability due to stresses or the fluid type utilized. Altogether. Regardless of hole size. reaming and circulating time was almost eliminated in many operations without adverse effect on hole cleaning. Another conclusion was that only one interval of enlarged hole may dominate the hole cleaning performance for the entire hole section. The system may become selflimiting. 10 – 20 ft) during the time it takes to circulate cuttings above the BHA. 2) side cutting from bit whirl while drilling or while reaming. there have also been other changes in operating practices related to hole cleaning. after MW is increased to reduce hole enlargement. including the rathole below the previous casing shoe.200 ft/hr followed by a connection with minimal reaming and shortened circulation times. Mud weights have been increased globally to the point that ECD is now close to integrity in most high angle operations. While drill rates may become limited by the ECD caused by declining flow area. The chart shows instantaneous ROPs of 150 . Fig. hole enlargement is believed to be the dominant factor in hole cleaning efficiency. it may be possible to drill rate very high rates without packoffs if the integrity allows it. the most common issue is stress-induced instability. 12 . A typical connection practice is now to reduce rotary speed (3/4 to 2/3 of the on-bottom RPM) prior to coming off bottom to mitigate bit whirl and ream upward only a minimal distance (i. MRMC was revised to MRMCwow (maximum rotation and maximum circulation without whirl). this occurs when the fluid velocity above the bed reaches the equilibrium rate.e. 12 shows data from a connection during a field trial. which is that the bed will grow until the cuttings deposition rate equals the erosion rate. which has been previously discussed. Fig. As the bed height increases the velocity and erosion rate increase. When modeling hole cleaning the design flow rates and rheologies are now based on worst case hole enlargements The most unique perspective to come out of the research is that it may not be possible to pack off due to high drill rate during steady state conditions. Although higher rotary speeds may aid hole cleaning this may be offset if whirl is allowed that results in enlargement.Time based drilling data showing connection practices with minimal circulation and reaming . The implication is that wiper trips or other hole conditioning operations do not improve hole cleaning if the cleaning problem is dominated by enlargement. Because whirl was seen to cause enlargement. which it usually is. A testing protocol was developed to determine the off-bottom speeds that minimized whirl. which is typically 2-4 minutes. and 3) inadequate filtration control and MW when drilling unconsolidated sands Although there has been redesign and changes in practices to address all three. even when there is little history of NPT. The low whirl speeds have generally been found below 120 RPM and the impact on hole cleaning in those teams that have reduced RPM appears minimal.10 SPE 134580 This is consistent with the equilibrium bed height concept.

SPE 134580 11 The following plots show another field trial in which the original hole was drilled using the standard high angle reaming practices that were revised to mitigate whirl during the geologic sidetrack. all subsequent drill wells have been drilled with the same practices. Tripping on elevators has become commonplace and backreaming has not been required to trip out of the hole. 14 .6 10.2 ppg. Surprisingly. Fig.2 10. Fig. routinely requiring extensive backreaming to get out of the hole. was less than that in the original hole by as much as 0. occasionally causing lost returns or stuck pipe.ECD in the original hole versus the sidetrack hole. which was drilled at twice the ROP using the same MW and drilling assembly. Casing was successfully run to bottom on all wells. 14 shows the ECD in the sidetracked hole. On the sidetracked hole. but the result points to the fact that drill rate should not be constrained by assumed hole cleaning limits. Since this sidetrack hole was drilled. WOB was increased to mitigate on-bottom drilling whirl and the connection practices were modified to mitigate off-bottom bit whirl. The specific reasons for the reduced ECD at the higher ROP are not known. Tripping the drill string on elevators had been problematic in this field due to tight spots. EMW Surface MW Original Hole ECD Sidetrack Hole ECD 10. Both holes had similar trajectories with inclinations up to about 85°. packoffs were common while backreaming. the drill string was tripped out of the hole on elevators with minimal problems even after MRMCwow’ing the hole clean at reduced RPMs.Instantaneous ROP in the original hole versus the sidetrack hole. 2250 2450 Measured Depth (m) 2650 2850 3050 3250 3450 3650 3850 4050 Sidetrack Hole Original Hole 4250 0 5 10 15 20 25 Instantaneous ROP (m/hr) 30 35 40 Fig. 13 shows the comparison of instantaneous ROPs which were doubled from 3250m to TD as a result of increased WOB and MSE management.0 00 42 00 41 00 40 00 39 00 38 00 37 00 36 00 35 00 34 00 33 00 32 00 31 00 30 00 29 00 28 00 27 00 26 00 25 00 24 Measured Depth (m) Fig. Backreaming out was not required.8 Original Hole ECD (ppge) 10. . 13 .4 Sidetrack Hole 10. 11. In addition.0 FG @ Shoe.

Torque is only a concern if it actually approaches the mechanical limit of the string or system. Because ECD is a product of the equilibrium bed height. 15 shows an example field trial where the WOB is staged up from about 20k lbs to about 55k lbs in a 78° high angle 12-1/4” hole over about 400 m. The ROP increases from 25 m/hr to about 45 m/hr while MSE becomes more consistent (i. T&D are expected to increase as the equilibrium bed height grows and the "dirtiest hole possible" is achieved. 16 and 17 show data from one operation routinely using the above noted practices. If instantaneous ROP is excessive. 15 . Fig. to eliminate hole cleaning limiters. Fig. typically around 5-7 minutes. In soft rock the PDC bit must be designed with the proper depth of cut control to allow adequate WOB to mitigate whirl and its undesirable effects. reduced bit and downhole tool life. One drill team recently drilled an 80° plus .WOB ramped up during Max IROP testing in 12-1/4” hole. 17 shows the ECD and IROP over the hole section. MSE stays fairly constant but illustrates the relationship of WOB vs. The process also does not utilize predictive software or cuttings transport modeling. Fig. The process focuses on minimizing connection time rather than maximizing instantaneous ROP. less variation in cutting efficiency). WOB increased from about 4k lbs to about 8k lbs while IROP increased from about 200 ft/hr up to almost 300 ft/hr with a sustained rate of about 250 ft/hr. 16 shows the digital drilling data for the 12-1/4” hole section which was drilled at sail angle of about 87°.960 ft. including hole enlargement. A controlled field trial process was developed to ensure the limit is recognized when it is reached and risks are mitigated The Max IROP (maximum instantaneous rate of penetration) test determines the drill rate that can be maintained with no significant circulation or reaming on connections. and poor steering response. including drilling with long gauge (4” plus) bits equipped with depth of cut control. improve borehole quality and overall performance. with no significant circulating time required to further reduce the bed height. connection practices. the WOB almost doubled whereas the MSE dropped significantly and the ROP increased significantly indicating improved efficiency and reduced vibrations.12 SPE 134580 A clear concern is that the hole cleaning limit is found by having a stuck pipe event. Fig. Fig. Drill teams worldwide continue to relentless re-design their bits. etc. while the instantaneous drill rate is increased steadily as each stand is drilled. if it is acceptable prior to the connection it should be acceptable afterward. The limits are established empirically with the in-situ conditions through the testing described above for monitoring ECD. ECD remained fairly steady as the IROP was increased even up to the 300 ft/hr level indicating hole cleaning was not compromised even at the higher drill rates. The maximum instantaneous drill rate is that at which the ECD equals integrity when the stand is down. IROP vs. At about 8. Connection practices are held constant. whirl mitigation practices. and not because it is showing an increasing trend. The Max IROP test differs from some practices in that it does not limit ROP based on observed torque or drag. the result will be unacceptable ECD and longer circulation times to reduce the bed height. BHAs.e. MSE.

When the total hidden costs are considered. rather than major NPT. the design objective for treatment of borehole patterns has shifted from elimination of NPT and getting casing on bottom to redesigning to reduce their amplitude to the economic limit of redesign. Fig. 17 . In most cases the pattern results in hidden costs and loss of rig time. bits .SPE 134580 13 high angle 17-1/2” hole section with IROPs up to 150 m/hr (≈500 ft/hr).ECD and ROP plot for 12-1/4” hole section. ROPs are reaching levels that few personnel believed possible in high angle holes. Vibrationally Induced Borehole Pattern Limiters The manner in which vibrationally induced borehole patterns limit footage per day is typically indirect. Fig. significant changes in operational practices. Like stability. 16: Ramp up of WOB and ROP in 12-1/4” hole section.

The 3D images shown below provide a clear diagnostic. Note that downhole weight on bit measured by MWD tools does not reflect this because the MWD load and torque sensors are typically above the first few stabilizers which are taking the load. are a result of the feedback between the contact points in the BHA and hole already drilled.. Stick-slip can often be reduced by decreasing WOB. 2003) When the near bit stabilizer (or other contact point) encounters a small ledge or perturbation in the borehole it is pushed to the side as it drills past this perturbation. the magnitude and existence of a pattern is determined by the rate of side cutting of the bit . Fig. ROP. The extra torque created as the stabilizers engage the patterns can also lead to stick-slip.e. 18 is an example 3D image of a caliper log of a 6 ⅛ inch hole showing a significant one inch amplitude borehole spiral. except the formation strength. All of these are controllable through changes in design or practices. but adds unproductive time and reduces footage per day. they do not provide an indication of the sidecutting occurring at the bit. and methods to mitigate repeating borehole patterns are discussed in this next section. The MSE provides a direct measurement of the . The causes. The increased torque and drag from patterns can lead to back reaming on connections and wiper trips or even underreaming to create additional clearance to run casing. Fig. second stabilizer). or oscillations. This leads to an exponential growth in the pattern until the body of the BHA makes contact with the borehole and limits further increases. but these are not available while drilling and other indirect methods are required to anticipate or detect the presence of patterns. 18 – One inch amplitude spiral pattern with a 4 foot period These repeating borehole patterns. Figure 19 shows the BHA used in the given well superimposed on the pattern. the bit also becomes stable and drills gauge hole. The effect of this load can often be seen the in wear created at the end of the stabilizers as they attempt to drill the humps in pattern. This is dependent on whirl. if the side cutting action of the bit is reduced. there are numerous causes of tight hole and diagnostics are needed to ensure the redesign is appropriate to solve the root cause. If tight hole or loss of weight transfer are seen to reduce footage per day they become the object of redesign the workflow. This does not show up as NPT. RPM and WOB and the lateral aggressiveness of the bit. Patterns also impact performance by reducing weight transfer. The pattern repeats itself.14 SPE 134580 and BHA designs are justified. The feedback relationship between the first stabilizer and bit can be seen in the degree to which the period of the pattern matches the distance between the two . the BHA will flex and the repeating pattern will decay toward zero. While LWD sensors provide valuable data to help protect the BHA from high shock Thus for a given formation and BHA. Whirl is assumed to increase the side cutting action to a degree that dominates all other corrective actions so the detection of whirl is taken to correlate with the likelihood of patterns. formation strength. When the stabilizer reenters smooth hole and become quiet. Mechanical specific energy (MSE) surveillance is the primary tool used by the operator to detect bit whirl. When part of the weight on bit is taken on the stabilizers the DOC and ROP decline. the crew may adopt practices to deal with the symptoms rather than redesign to eliminate the vibrationally induced patterns themselves. but if the bit design or whirl cause this to be excessive the bit will be pushed even further to the side and the system pivots about the next contact point in the BHA (i. et. This lateral force causes the bit to cut sideways at the same time. Fig. The most apparent effect of patterns is tight hole. which is a particularly problem in long reach wells where the torque may become the primary performance limiter. However. 19 – BHA illustrated on top of pattern All steerable bits are capable of sidecutting. but this may increase whirl which in term may cause the amplitude of the pattern to become even greater. Several papers have been written that show that excess side cutting of the bit often leads to borehole patterns. If the root cause of the tight hole is not understood. (Pastusek. performance limitations created. In contrast.

the cost of the design changes utilized is small when compared to the economic impact of the hidden costs that can result from vibrationally induced patterns. The BHA is redesigned to reduce the amplitude of its vibrational shape at the given operating parameters. Bit whirl in softer formations may not fracture the cutters. there are three other major factors that can be controlled by design or operational practices.. reducing WOB increased amplitude. The key operational parameter to suppress bit whirl while drilling is to maximize the WOB and DOC (ROP) within the other drilling limits. The bit was changed to a PDC at 1414 feet to drill the rest of the hole section. there are changes that are considered in both design and practices to ensure the patterns exhibit decay rather than gain. (Ernst. . Increasing the rate of penetration per revolution will reduce the number of gauge trimmer passes required to drill a given hole section and thus there will be less total side cutting (Pastusek. Forward BHA whirl can be detected by wear on one side of the BHA and/or stabilizers. Figs. In firmer rocks. 2007) The side load is fixed by the BHA stiffness. The example was a 17 ½ hole section drilled with roller cone and PDC bits. al. For a fixed al. the lateral rate will increase as the rock strength decreases and at higher revolutions per minute there are more cuts per minute to the side for a given section of hole. it must drill a slightly oversized hole. The presence of sidecutting can also be inferred from the fracture and wear patterns left on the bit. the inability to steer may be a primary indicator of whirl and the degree of sidecutting occurring. MSE is actively monitored for signs of whirl and used continuously to determine the WOB and RPM parameters that minimize it. The spiral pattern is fully developed from 800 to 1050 feet and starts to decay from 1050 to 1400 feet as soon as the WOB is increased from 30 kip to 50 kip. all at a constant RPM. 2003). The higher the ROP. It is important to reduce the reliance on LWD vibration data to manage bit whirl. while reverse BHA whirl will often show up as rounded gauge pads and gouge marks. 2005). 20 and 21 show a field example of the effect of increased WOB on the decay in a pattern. Conversely. BHA whirl creates sidecutting by tilting the bit axis. If the evidence suggests vibrational patterns are the root limiter. which may result in the inability of rotary steerable tools to apply adequate side force to steer. Proprietary software is used along with an iterative field trial process to develop the quietest BHA The bit gauge design is also modified to constrain sidecutting to that required to achieve the desire build rates (Pastusek. In most cases. 2009). the smoother the hole will be. In control drilling situations with a fixed maximum rate of penetration. As with all limiters. which increased the lateral load on the trim cutters and their DOC. While LWD vibration data should be monitored to protect the tools from high shocks. While whirl mitigation is important. et. The axial penetration per revolution is increased by increasing the WOB. The pattern restarted as soon as the PDC was put in the hole. When a bit despite very low levels (<1g RMS) of lateral vibration at the LWD tool (Dupriest et. Consequently.. The expectation was established that all bits would be designed with gauge lengths of 4 inches or more (Dupriest et. et.. et. As previously noted. the bit side cutting will increase in softer formations and with higher RPM. Significant sidecutting may be occurring at the bit. al. a variety of factors determine whether the initial perturbation will experience gain or decay. Six and eight inch gauges are now being deployed in most directional and straight BHAs where the required dog leg has been 4°/100 and less. the process of redesign continues iteratively to the economic limit of redesign.SPE 134580 15 rock cutting dysfunction caused by the lateral movement of the bit which creates sidecutting. the MSE is a global measure of the level of vibrational dysfunction and sidecutting occurring at the bit. It grows in magnitude when the WOB is dropped from 25 to 15 kip. This makes it imperative to eliminate or extend as many non-bit ROP barriers as possible to improve borehole quality as has been discussed throughout this paper. however gauge pad rounding and wear on the blades behind and below the cutter tips can often be seen with close inspection. however it disappears once the WOB is raised from 15 kip to 40 kip. All BHAs are intrinsically capable of creating a pattern. The length of the gauge pads and their relief relative to the gauge trimmers are the primary bit design factors influencing the gain that may develop in the pattern. ( ≥1520ksi) the shoulder cutters and gauge trimmers will often show significant fracture events if whirl is occurring instead of smooth wear. 2009). increasing the gauge length reduces the side cutting response of the bit. The rest of the 17 ½ inch section is drilled with higher WOB and near perfect hole to 3632 feet.

The near miss concept was applied broadly and became the primary metric for identifying borehole limiters and the need for redesign or changes in practices. 21 – Pattern eliminated to section TD Conclusions In 2008 a global performance management workflow built on "limiter redesign" thinking was modified to emphasize the redesign of borehole related performance limiters. and the expectation for redesign was shifted from NPT reduction to elimination of near misses. the practices that have eliminated low-level near miss events have intrinsically eliminated the higher level NPT costs and increase the certainty of success. Significant additional gains were seen beyond those that were achieved earlier from MSE surveillance and the redesign of bit dysfunction. . 20 – Effect of WOB on pattern amplitude Fig. particularly in narrow margin wells.16 SPE 134580 3D Caliper Images B H A 2 R o l l e r c o n e t o 1 4 1 4 B H A 3 P D C t o B H A 3 3 6 3 2 P D C t o 3 6 3 2 Fig. Near-miss recognition and response practices where developed to increase the focus on borehole limiters. In addition to achieving gains in footage per day.

Performance by Risk Management". . .Utilization of cuttings characterization and robust near miss recognition and response practices to adjust MW in real time. These are largely related to one of three areas. .. and mitigation of vibrationally induced borehole patterns. "Improving Drilling Efficiency Through the Real Time Application of PERFORM. . vendor.SPE 134580 17 The redesign effort has resulted in some practices that are not routine in the industry.M. Each change in practices has arisen from a deeper understanding of "how things really work" and we are thankful to our business partners for their willingness to share their unique knowledge. .. and contractor personnel who have worked to development new practices to extend borehole-related performance limiters. . . .Discontinued use of torque and drag trends to establish hole cleaning limits.. UAE. SPE 35077 presented at IADC/SPE Drilling Conference. rather than to a level that only eliminates NPT and allows casing to be run to bottom.Develop and utilize Quantitative Risk Analysis (QRA) assessments to balance priorities when determining stability MW.Redesign to drill the "dirtiest hole possible". . Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank the numerous operator.Extend gauge lengths to a minimum of 6" to reduce the amplitude of vibrationally induced patterns. . Nomenclature Mud Weight Non-Aqueous Fluid Engineered Particle NAF Managed Pressure Drilling Fast Drill Process Mechanical Specific Energy Non-Productive Time Bottom Hole Assembly Weight on Bit Rounds Per Minute Rate of Penetrations Instantaneous ROP Quantitative Risk Assessment Logging While Drilling Equivalent Circulating Pressure Maximum Rotation and Maximum Circulation MRMC without Whirl Torque and Drag Depth of Cut Gallons Per Minute Pounds Per Barrel Feet Per Hour Measurement While Drilling MW NAF EP NAF MPD FDP MSE NPT BHA WOB RPM ROP IROP QRA LWD ECD MRMC MRMCwow T&D DOC GPM PPG FPH MWD References Aldred W.W.Utilization of engineered particle fluids in conjunction with higher MW to stabilize fractured shales and coals. Windham T.The primary mitigation for vibrational patterns is to reduce whirl through redesign and the real time use of MSE to adjust parameters. "Step Change Improvement and High Rate Learning are Delivered by Targeting Technical Limits on Subsea Wells". Scot P.F. We would particularly like to thank the many industry experts who have shared their expertise and enthusiasm for their chosen fields of study...Use of MW which results in ECD close to integrity. Key related practices for increasing footage per day are: . management of instability. rather than NPT. Page P.D.Use of "Max IROP" test protocol to determine the drill rate corresponding to the dirtiest hole possible. . which are cuttings transport. New Orleans. SPE 57574 presented at Middle East Drilling Technology Conference.Use of near miss events surveillance to drive redesign. .E. The advances described have been implemented and refined by 23 drill teams over the last four years and each has contributed in significant ways. Abu Dhabi. and the converse is also true. 8-10 November 1999 Bond D. .Creation of the expectation that borehole quality will be redesigned to the economic limit of performance.Develop and utilize operational practices to mitigate differential pressure sticking potential to allow use of higher MW for stability.The higher the ROP the lower the amplitude of vibrational patterns.

.. Amsterdam.K. SPE 24559 presented at 67th SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition.F. "The Drilling Performance Curve: A Yardstick for Judging Drilling Performance". "Implementation of ROP Management Process in Qatar North Field".. S...E. S. L. USA.. F. "Wellbore Stability in Fractured Rock".A. pg 1379-1388 Pastusek P. 21-23 November 2005 Dupriest F. M. Kadaster A. The Netherlands. U.Washington D.C. 5 – 8 October 2003 Ottesen. 9-11 March. Elks.E. “A Fundamental Model for Prediction of Hole Curvature and Build Rates with Steerable Bottomhole Assemblies”. 1999.A. paper SPE/IADC 105594..C. U. 2005. Texas. Dallas.. R.E..18 SPE 134580 USA. SPE 27464 presented at IADC/SPE Drilling Conference. Millheim K. paper SPE 125246 presented at the SPE ATCE. Dupriest.E.. Dupriest F. Zheng.. 24-27 September 2006 Dupriest F. R.E.. T. Qatar. Koederitz W. paper IADC/SPE 128712 presented at the IADC/SPE drilling conference. 2-4 February. presented at the 2005 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Dallas.. Louisiana. Tenny. Anderson. USA. V. “Directional and Stability Characteristics of Anti-Whirl Bits With Non-Axisymmetric Loading”. Amsterdam.W. Ottesen.: Utilizing engineered particle drilling fluid to overcome coal drilling challenges. Sinor. Louisiana. Kline.H. USA. Witt J. R. SPE 105521 presented at SPE/IADC Drilling Conference. presented at the SPE ATCE. presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Denver..E. W. presented at the IPTC conference. SPE 102210 presented at SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. 2010.W. New Orleans..F.G. McCann.. Brackin V.. USA. "Comprehensive Drill Rate Management Process to Maximize Rate of Penetration". High Angle Wellbores". E. The Netherlands.C......E..H... SPE 92194 presented at SPE/IADC Drilling Conference.. Masonheimer. M. 12-15 March 1996 Brett J. "Borehole Stability Assessment Using Quantitative Risk Analysis".. Pastusek P. "Design Methodology and Operational Practices Eliminate Differential Sticking". F. S.A. S. Dupriest. March 11. Cooley. The Netherlands. Doha.E. D.. 2007 . Ottesen.C.L. Albaugh E. 15-18 February 1994 Remmert S.E...M. "Drilling Optimization".. published in the Journal of Petroleum Technology. "Hole Cleaning in Large. USA. W..S. "Maxmizing Drill Rates with Real-Time Surveillance of Mechanical Specific Energy". 2010. New Orleans. R. The Netherlands. Brackin V. Townsend C.L. paper SPE/IADC 119625 presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference and Exhibition held in Amsterdam. Gupta. 21-23 November. “Extended-reach Drilling Develops Sacate field. Lutes P. Turton. F. November 1970. P. Louisiana. S.E. M. Colorado.E. Qatar.. K.. S. 2-4 February 2010.: Practices implemented to achieve record performance in narrow margin drilling in the Bass Strait extended reach.. SPE 95546... Doha. Ottesen. SPE 15362 presented at 61st SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. San Antonio.. Ernst S. F. Lummus J. October 4-7. Sowers. 20-22 February. “A Model for Borehole Oscillations” SPE 84448. Pastusek. 2010.. paper SPE 24614.E. Oil & Gas Journal. S. 9 – 12 October 2005. New Orleans.. IPTC 10706 presented at International Petroleum Technology Conference.A..Beyond the Learning Curve". Chandler. Lutes P. 1992. Louisiana. IADC/SPE 128728 presented at SPE/IADC Drilling Conference. offshore California”. 5-8 October 1986 Dupriest F. Rasi. P. “Maintaining Steerability While Extending Gauge Length to Manage Whirl”. C. The Netherlands. "A Total Quality Management Tool For Drilling in the 1990s".. 4-7 October.... Remmert S. 2-4 February. paper IADC/SPE 128129 presented at the IADC/SPE drilling conference. W..D.USA..K. 20–22 February 2007.W. Jr.. "Physics-Based Well Design . 4-7 October 1992 Kilroy. Amsterdam.. USA. Pastusek.. 23-25 February 2005 Dupriest. March 17–19 2009. R. Witt J.M. “Effects of RPM and ROP on PDC Bit Steerability”. Elks Jr.. New Orleans.. New Orleans.S.Zeilinger. Dupriest. pg 45-55. presented at the 2007 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference in Amsterdam. "Maximizing ROP with Real Time Analysis of Digital Data and MSE". Washington DC. Keller. 2002. SPE/IADC 52864 presented at SPE/IADC Drilling Conference. USA.