IADC/SPE 128234

The Automated Drilling Pilot on Statfjord C

H.F. Larsen, T.E. Alfsen and R. Kvalsund, Statoil; F.P. Iversen, Drilltronics Rig Systems; M. Welmer, National
Oilwell Varco; Ø. Hult, Trac-ID Systems; and S. Ekrene, Geoservices.

Copyright 2010, IADC/SPE Drilling Conference and Exhibition

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2010 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference and Exhibition held in New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, 2–4 February 2010.

This paper was selected for presentation by an IADC/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 International Association of Drilling Contractors or the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the International Association of Drilling Contractors or 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 International Association of Drilling Contractors or 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 IADC/SPE copyright.

Abstract
In the Automated Drilling Pilot three newly developed technologies aiming to improve the quality of the drilling operation,
have been submitted to an extensive offshore field test in the North Sea. The technologies involved were: (1) Software for
drilling control automation based on real time process modeling, (2) system for drillpipe tracking based on RFID technology
and (3) sensors for continuous measurements of drilling fluid parameters. During this field test the listed technologies were not
only tested simultaneously, but also set up to exchange data in real time, forming one integrated drilling automation system.
In this paper the relevant functionalities of the technologies tested in the pilot are described. The paper also outlines the
preparations for the pilot, including work performed on risk mitigation, onshore testing and training of personnel. In addition,
the actual field performance of the technologies have been measured and evaluated regarding their influence on a number of
important operational areas such as HSE, operational efficiency, work tasks/responsibilities and demands on surrounding
technology. Lastly the capability of these technologies for exchanging data in real-time to form a closely integrated automation
system has been demonstrated and evaluated.
Based on the experiences from the Automated Drilling Pilot, several crucial technology enablers have been identified for
the technologies involved, the most important being related to personnel training/experience building, drilling data
quality/availability and offshore expert support.

Introduction
Increasing the level of automation in the drilling process has for a number of years been highlighted as a way of achieving
faster and more predictive well construction. Important technology areas have been identified [1], and there are at present time
several innovative automation systems available in the market. However, the use of such systems in actual drilling operations
is still very limited.
The purpose of the Automated Drilling Pilot was to submit three newly developed technologies, designed to improve
different parts of the drilling operation through automation, to a common offshore field test. In addition, the pilot aimed to
integrate these technologies through exchange of real time drilling data to form one integrated drilling automation system.
Statfjord C was chosen as site for the field test. The platform is located on the Tampen basin in the Norwegian area of the
North Sea and has been in production since 1979. In January 2008 Statfjord C was also the scene for the first offshore test [2]
of the drilling control automation systems involved in the Automated Drilling Pilot.
The technologies involved in this comprehensive field test have been developed over the last years can be related to three
main components of the drilling process: (1) Drilling process control, (2) drilling fluids and (3) drillpipe tally. The following
paragraphs give a brief overview of the background for each of these systems.

Drilling process control - automation

The drilling control automation system tested in the Automated Drilling Pilot has been developed in Norway over the last
eight years. This technology currently aims to reduce non productive time during drilling operations by imposing operational
safeguards directly on the drilling machinery, automating sub operations in drilling control and indicating expected values of
surface parameters on the drilling workstation to assist detection of abnormal situations. The basic functionalities of this
automation technology was also tested offshore on Statfjord C in January 2008 [3], but in the Automated Drilling Pilot the
automation system would for the first time be active in operation over an extensive time period, contributing to the drilling of
several wells.
2 IADC/SPE 128234

Drillpipe tally - automatic tracking

A system for tracking drillpipes based on RFID technology has been developed as a joint industry R&D project since 2007
with the overall goal of enabling drillpipe life cycle management. A successful test of automatic detection of drillpipe going
in/out of the wellbore was demonstrated offshore in May/June 2008 at the Snorre B drilling rig in the North Sea. The same
system functionality was also chosen to be applied for the Automatic Drilling Pilot, but this time the tracking system was to be
integrated with the drilling control automation software, providing the latter system with an electronic tally description in real
time.

Drilling fluids - continuous measurements

The sensors for measurements of fluid parameters come from a project started in 2005 where several parameters of drilling
fluids were measured on a continuous basis. A selection of parameters including both drilling fluid and cuttings were chosen to
undergo R&D studies, and this culminated in a Yard Test in December 2007 in Sandnes, Norway [3]. The yard test had a flow
loop of oil based drilling fluid and a shaker, but no drilling facilities. Cuttings were added manually to simulate a drilling
operation. Promising results from this test motivated a further refinement of the sensors suitable for installation on a rig, and in
the Automated Drilling Pilot two of the sensors from the project were included: (1) Measurements of mud density and (2)
measurements of mud rheology data. The chosen parameters are of crucial importance for the mathematical process modelling
that forms the basis for the drilling control automation software also to be tested in the pilot, and the measured fluid
parameters were therefore to be transferred to this system in real time during the field test.

The Automated Drilling Pilot technologies

This section describes in more detail the technologies involved in the Automated Drilling Pilot on Statfjord C.

Drilling control automation system

The system for drilling control automation aims
to reduce the possibility of causing damage to the
well or the drilling equipment while operating the
draw-works, the top-drive and the mud pumps during
drilling operations. This is done by offering three
main drilling control functionalities: (1) Automatic
procedures, (2) envelope protection and (3) enhanced
process monitoring. The system’s ability to provide
these functionalities relies on accurate mathematical
modelling of the ongoing drilling process. These
mathematical models can only be applied on a basis
of an accurate numerical description of the physical
entities involved in the drilling process. The
complete input data set required can be divided into
two main categories: (1) Real time sensor data and
(2) system configuration data. The real time sensor
data are measurements from available rig sensors that Figure 1: Drilling control system with automation functionality
can be fed directly into the drilling control
automation software during operation. The remaining configuration data set consists of a number of physical entities not
measured by any rig sensors, but that still need to be provided upon use of the system. This configuration data set describes
among others things: Rig equipment (ex. pump, draw works), surface architecture (ex. riser), subsurface architecture (ex.
casing, open hole), drill string, well trajectory and formation geology.
When the system receives sensor data and is configured with all the required input parameters, it provides a number of
functionalities aiming to improve drilling control. The following section describes these functionalities in more detail.

Envelope protection
Drill-string axial velocity limitation
The axial movement of the drill-string in the well generates swab and surge pressures which can exceed the pressure
window of the formations in the open hole. A large acceleration, deceleration or velocity can cause pressures which can be
detrimental to the formation and may lead to well control situations. The system for drilling control automation calculates
maximal acceleration, velocity and deceleration for upward and downward movement as a function of gel time and flow rate.
In addition, a maximum string velocity can be entered into the system based on the detailed operational procedure. The draw-
works machine controller will at any time during operation apply the smallest of three possible limits: (1) Machine limitation,
(2) detailed operation procedure limitation or (3) swab/surge limitations as calculated by the automation software.
IADC/SPE 128234 3

Limitation of flow-rate
With higher flow-rate, the pressure in the annulus can increase to levels above the fracturing gradient of the formations in
the open hole section, with the possible consequence of a loss circulation situation. To avoid such an incident, the system
calculates the maximum flow-rate which guarantees that the down-hole pressure along the complete open hole section will be
below the fracture pressure of the formations. The maximum flow-rate is thereafter converted into a maximum pump rate and
applied directly to the mud pump controller. The mud pump controller also receives an absolute maximum flow-rate as
described in the detailed operation procedure. The smaller of the two values is applied to the mud pump to limit the commands
given by the driller.

Automatic procedures
Pump start-up
The acceleration of the pump rate can generate additional down hole pressures which can damage the formations in the
open hole section and therefore initiate formation fracturing and, as a consequence, mud losses. Controlling the change of rate
of the mud pumps is of paramount importance to avoid damaging the formations while starting the mud pumps. In addition,
before accelerating the mud pumps, it is necessary to initiate the circulation by breaking the gel. Furthermore, after a
connection is made, there is always a column of air at the top of the drill-string (the liquid level is equilibrated at the mud
return outlet). Therefore, before breaking the circulation, it is necessary to fill the pipes. To optimize the pump start-up
procedure, an assisting procedure has been implemented in the drilling control automation system. This semi-automatic
sequence consists of three main phases: (1) Fill pipe with a relatively high flow-rate, (2) break circulation with the pump rate
reduced to gel breaking flow-rate and (3) pump acceleration where the mud pumps are accelerated in steps to the desired flow-
rate.
If an MWD is present in the bottom hole assembly, the system accounts for the high acceleration required for activation of
the MWD. Usually the detailed operation procedure specifies the pump start-up procedure; In particular, the number of steps
that should be used for different flow ranges. The driller may configure the pump start-up automation in line with these
specifications.

Friction test
After drilling a stand, the driller often performs a friction test to record the free-rotating weight, free-rotating torque, pick-
up weight and slack-off weight. These measurements are used to detect unexpected changes in hook load and surface torque,
as such changes may indicate pack-off or hole collapse. Good control of pipe velocity is required to achieve high quality
friction tests, and in order to achieve comparable measurements, it is also important to always use the same procedure. The
system automates such friction tests, performing automatic pick-up, rotation off bottom and slack-off. The driller may specify
the friction test by configuring the test parameters. For added safety, the axial velocity is always constrained by the automation
system’s tripping safe guards. The system records the hook load and surface torque during the friction test and subsequently
displays the mean steady state values for each test sequence. During the test, continuous monitoring of the hook load, surface
torque and pump pressure (when circulating) is used to detect unexpected behaviour. If any of these values are out of bounds,
the procedure is automatically aborted.

Auto reciprocation
Often after drilling one stand, the last single or the whole stand is reamed to improve the hole conditions. This procedure is
also automated by the drilling control automation software. The configurable auto-reciprocating sequence consists of: (1)
Prepare back-reaming: the rotational velocity is changed to pre-set value, maintaining the current flow-rate, (2) back-reaming:
the string is moved upward with the pre-set axial velocity, (3) adjust to reaming conditions: the angular velocity is adjusted to
pre-set value and the flow-rate is reduced by pre-set value (4) reaming: the string is moved downward back to its original
position at the pre-set speed. As for the friction tests, the applied axial velocities are restricted by the system tripping safe
guard limits. The system also monitors the surface parameters to detect any potential pack-off or hole collapse. If the measured
values exceed the prognosis, the procedure is automatically aborted.

Expected pick-up and slack-off weight

As mentioned above, the driller normally records pick-up and slack-off weights when moving the drill string in order to
detect an over pull or reduced set-down weight. This procedure does not aid in discovering abnormally changing down hole
conditions such as a gradual increase of friction due to cuttings bed or formation collapse. The system can assist the driller in
detecting slowly changing down-hole conditions by calculating the expected hook load at any time of the drilling process. By
indicating the expected pick-up and slack-off weight on the drilling workstation screens, the Driller can observe whether the
actual hook load is getting closer to or exceeding the expected values based on the calibrated reference friction.

Expected surface torque

Similarly, the system calculates expected surface torques based on the calibrated mechanical and hydraulic models. The
expected surface torque is displayed on the drilling workstation screens beside the measured surface torque. The Driller can
4 IADC/SPE 128234

therefore discover if the observed surface torque is evolving consistently with the wellbore geometry. Using this information
he may, if necessary, take remedial actions to help improve down-hole conditions.

Expected pump pressure

The calibrated hydraulic model of the drilling control automation system is used to display expected pump pressure on the
drilling workstation on the same gauge showing the measured pump pressure. This information is especially valuable when
starting the pump since it shows what pump pressure should be expected at the different stage of the pump acceleration. Any
large deviation from the calculations is an indication that the down hole conditions have changed since the last pump startup.
Based on this information, the Driller can decide to wait before continuing to the next stage, or interrupt the procedure.

Drillpipe tracking system

Drillpipes are subject to high loads and heavy wear under
harsh conditions. As analysis show, significant costs are related
to drillpipe failures in drilling operations. Accordingly, there is a
big cost saving potential through proactive maintenance,
optimized operations and improved logistics. Radio-frequency
identification (RFID) is the use of an object (typically referred to
as an RFID tag) applied to or incorporated into a product,
animal, or person for the purpose of identification and tracking
using radio waves.
A drilling operations tracking system based on RFID
technology has been developed to provide automatic tracking
and quality control of drillpipes through the whole value chain.
The goal of the product is to reduce costs and improve quality in
drilling operations, the supply chain and in life cycle
management of drillpipes. The complete system provides the
following features: Figure 2: Drilling tubular life cycle management.
o Automatic pipe tally
o Logging of accumulated time and rotations in well
o Tubular fatigue estimation and overload detection
o Inspection advisory and alerts
o Onshore logistics and mobile solutions
o Interface to drilling control systems and enterprise logistics and maintenance solutions

For the Automated Drilling Pilot the

scope was to identify drillpipes entering
and leaving the well bore and automatically
generate an electronic tally that was to be
sent to the drilling control automation
system. Such downhole application of the
tracking system is challenging due to
restrictions on RFID tag sizes and
mounting techniques, high temperature,
pressure, shock and vibrations as well as
exposure to aggressive gases and fluids.
Furthermore, optimal reading of
tubular-IDs at high velocity must be
achieved through fluids, in steel
environment and with electromagnetic
interference. Comprehensive studies, Figure 3: RFID tag for downhole tubulars (left) and well centre RFID reader antenna
laboratory experiments and industrial (right).
testing onshore and offshore have been
performed to develop a reliable tracking technology meeting these requirements.
The RFID tag is designed to withstand down-hole conditions, is ATEX Zone 1 certified, and currently rated to 180°C /
350°F at 1 050 bars / 15 000 PSI. By mounting the tag in the pin tool joint API slot of the drillpipes, optimal reading condition
and tag protection is obtained and tubular mechanical integrity is maintained. This RFID technology has proven excellent
reliability through 10 years of usage in down-hole applications.
IADC/SPE 128234 5

The RFID equipped drillpipe joints are identified when entering/leaving the wellbore by a well centre reader system at
velocity up to 2 m/s. The reading performance is not affected by steel, mud, temperature or other challenges in the well centre
environment.
Data from the reader system is then sent to a rig tracking server for generation of an electronic tally. A tubular tally
software module provides a real-time automatic tally based on well centre RFID readings combined with real time
measurements of block position and hook load from the rig sensors. Algorithms detect drill string movement and direction and
ensure a correct tally even if drill string joints without a tag should appear or if any RFID reading should fail.
In 2008 the system was tested on the Snorre B drilling rig in the North Sea with a 100 % reading reliability, but for the
Automated Drilling Pilot the produced tally was in addition made available for the drilling control automation system through
the use of a standardized WITS-ML interface.

Continuous measurements of drilling fluid parameters

For the Automated Drilling Pilot on Stafjord C two sensors for continuous measurement of drilling fluid parameters were
tested. Based on the relevance for the drilling control automation system sensors were utilized for measuring drilling fluid
density and viscosity in the mud inflow during the test.
The resulting mud measurement system to be used in the pilot consists of two independent sensors. Shear stress
encountered during a full range of shear rates and gels are measured automatically using a rotational in line viscometer with
Couette geometry. Control commands have been developed to give the combination of shear rates and measurement cycle
wanted. The equivalents of 3, 6, 100, 200, 300 and 600 rpm of a conventional R1B1 manual Couette rheometer as per API RP
13 B-2, 4th edition [4] were measured in the Statfjord field test, as well as gel measurements. Density is measured using a
Coriolis flow meter, capable of handling pressures up to 20 bars. For both sensors fluids are sampled in a by-pass loop
including a sampling probe dipping into the suction pit with a pumping skid upstream of the instrument skid. Due to the ease
of installation of the suction probe, various sampling points can be selected. In addition automatic washing sequences can be
set at preferred intervals, and the instruments are automatically operated on commands from an interface which in turn
communicates with the data acquisition system. Both the sensor interface and the acquisition system can easily be placed in
other locations than the actual sensor modules. No input data from other rig sensors are needed for these sensors to operate, but
input of general drilling parameters are beneficial for quality control of the data. Data delivered from this system as used in the
Automated Drilling Pilot were shear stresses at a given reference temperature, gel measurements and density, all made
available through a WITS-ML interface.

Technology integration
During the field test the three individual automation systems were to be integrated through real time exchange of drilling
data. The main motivation for this integration was to provide the drilling control automation software with high quality data
from the two other systems involved in the test: (1) Tally data from the pipe tracking system and (2) mud property data from
the mud sensors.
The data integration was achieved by utilizing the WITS-ML data protocol version 1.3.1.1. WITS-ML objects included
were well, wellbore, tubular, log and real-time. The tracking system and the mud measurement system were prepared with
WITS-ML interfaces, and a dedicated WITS-ML server was set up to function as a data hub between the systems, facilitating
the real time data exchange. The drillpipe tracking system could then populate a tally on the WITS-ML server, making this
available for the drilling control automation system. Similarly the mud measurement system would write mud property data to
the WITS-ML server for use in the drilling automation system. In addition both the tracking system and the mud measurement
system would be able to receive a number of surface drilling parameters through the WITS-ML server for use in their
respective processing software.

Preparations
Since the Automated Drilling Pilot included simultaneous field testing of three individual technologies developed by separate
vendors and in addition aimed to integrate these systems through real time data exchange, it was a rather complex and
challenging project to execute. In addition the field test would involve a number of Statfjord onshore and offshore personnel
related to both installation work and the actual drilling operation, in particular the main users of the new technology would be
personnel from the drilling contractors.
A pilot project organization was established in the Statfjord onshore operator organization in Q3 2008 with a dedicated
project leader from the operator reporting to the Statfjord drilling and well manager. The technology vendors were then
organized with one common project coordinator, and this project team worked very closely with the Statfjord personnel, in
particular through the Statfjord C drilling plan manager and drilling superintendent. This section describes a few of the most
important tasks that were performed prior to the Statfjord C field test.

Onshore testing
A virtual rig environment in Norway was utilized for pre-pilot testing of the technology. This testing proved very useful, if
not mandatory. In particular the drilling control automation system was tested, and these tests revealed major problems in the
real-time capabilities of the system related to the software architecture design. The testing allowed for the system to be
6 IADC/SPE 128234

modified and re-tested in the virtual rig environment before offshore installation. The same work would not have been possible
to perform offshore.
Since the solution for real time data communication between the three individual technologies was set up especially for the
field test, it needed to be thoroughly tested prior to field implementation. The different system software were therefore
installed in the virtual rig environment as they would be on Statfjord C. Simulation of system behaviour in this virtual
environment allowed realistic testing of the real time data exchange solution. The tests session was important both for
revealing system bugs before the offshore implementation, thus saving valuable rig time, but also as a tool for qualifying this
particular part of the automated drilling system for offshore implementation and use.

Training
The virtual rig was also used for training of the offshore personnel that would
be involved as technology users in the field test. All drillers and assistant drillers
attended training sessions that focused on use of the drilling control automation
functionalities in operation. These sessions gave the users a clearer picture of
what the system really did, and they got familiar with the modification in the
drilling control user interface introduced by the automation system. The drillers
could also provide feedback on the system functionalities and user interface, and
several of these user suggestions were in fact implemented in the drilling control
automation system before the actual field test.
In addition to these driller’s training sessions, the drilling engineers attended
a course with focus on the configuration data set needed to run the drilling
control automation system.

Risk mitigation
The technologies involved in the Automated Drilling Pilot would have a
direct impact on the drilling control, and it was mandatory to put a lot of effort on
risk evaluation and mitigation before the field test. Prior to the Automated
Drilling Pilot all three technologies had been classified to have a satisfactory
technology readiness level for offshore piloting. In fact, of the three systems
involved in the Automated Drilling Pilot, only the sensors for continuous fluid
measurements had not been tested offshore before the Statfjord field test. In
addition the solution for integrating the technologies through real time data
exchange was implemented especially for the pilot and therefore qualified for Figure 4: Virtual rig. Safeguard limits
indicated on driller’s screen as red arrows.
offshore testing through realistic test sessions in the virtual rig environment.
An extensive hazard identification study (HAZID) was also performed prior
to the field test with a wide range of participants covering system, rig and drilling operational expertise. The purpose of this
study was to increase understanding of the effects the new technologies could have on the rig operations and in particular
pinpoint risk factors related to both installation and operational use. Also a main operational safety barrier was established
regarding the use of the new automation technologies. The drillers should at all times be able to disable all impact from the
new technologies on the ongoing operation, instantly resuming standard operational control. The execution of this safety
barrier was then given special attention in the drillers’ virtual training sessions.
Finally, all identified risk factors related to the use of the new technologies were incorporated in the detailed drilling
procedures for the well sections where the systems were to be used, enabling mitigation of these risk elements through the
standard risk handling procedures performed prior to each relevant well operation.

Installation
The pilot installation work started towards the end of 2008, and installation of the complete integrated automation system,
including all three technologies and the integrating communication solution was successfully installed on Statfjord C in less
than two months with only minor disturbances of the continuous ongoing Statfjord C operations. This section briefly describes
how the individual technologies and the data integration system were installed on Statfjord C for the field test.

Drilling control automation

The Drilling Control system on Statfjord C is fully computerized, thus the installation of the additional functionality for the
pilot was a matter of uploading some additional software modules that were tied into the existing control system. The changes
were applied to four main components in the Rigs control system:
o Operator HMI, addition of new control functions at the drillers control station in order to turn on/off new control
functions and updates to the graphical displays to show the status and configuration of the new functions
o Additional functions to the draw works machine controller
o Additional functions to the mud pump machine controller
o Additional functions to the top drive machine controller
IADC/SPE 128234 7

The installation was done in a modular way, to minimize the impact of the ongoing rig operation. As the rig had redundant
drillers operating stations, software updates on one station could be done while rig operations were performed from the other.
The added control system functionality could also be enabled function by function, which also resulted in less need for
interruption of the ongoing rig activities.

Automatic drillpipe tracking

For the pipe tracking system an essential part of
the installation was performed onshore where 307
joints of 5” drillpipe were equipped with RFID tags
during pipe inspection at the drillpipe base in
Norway. Due to high wear level of these drillpipe
joints, the tag mounting was challenging. A
substantial part of the drillpipe was worn out to a
degree were the API slot no longer was there to form
the mechanical protection of the tags by standard
mounting. This called for a redesign of the mounting
procedures where the tags were mounted somewhat
deeper into the pipe joints than in the original
design.
In addition to the RFID tags, the main hardware
components for the pipe tracking system is an RFID
antenna, a reader box, a serial to Ethernet adapter Figure 5: Pipe tracking system initial hardware configuration
and a computer. The antenna was to be located on
top of the diverter below the rotary table and was hoisted in place without any problems. A cable connecting the antenna to the
reader box was pulled over the rig floor and secured. The system software was then installed on the computer placed in an
office in the drilling module. By use of remote desk functionality the vendor had access to this computer from onshore during
the test period. Figure 5 illustrates the initial hardware setup for the tracking system for the pilot test.

Continuous measurements of drilling fluid parameters

For the mud sensor system this was the first
offshore installation. The system was installed in the Safe zone Pit room ATEX zone 1
drilling module with the sensor instrument modules Mud logging room
Valve actuator for pressure
in the pit-room. Installations in pit room consisted of Acquisition concentrator regulation for density
computer
four main parts: Analog to Pressure sensor for
pressurized line for density Mud by
o density module network switch
Digital
conversion
pass
pump
o viscosity module Coriolis density
o pump/hoses Power temperature
ESD density
o control panel supply
flow rate

The modules were placed on top of the pits and JB Temperature sensor ESD
Mud laboratory
the drilling fluids were pumped from active system
Rheometer
through a hose to the two sensors in serial. This hose ESD
Power rheometer Motor
needed to be moved manually if a change in active supply Interface box control
Sensor Hydraulics box
pit occurred during operation. An interface box was electronics control Rheometer skid
placed in the office part of the mud lab, while the
data acquisition system was placed in the office part
of the drilling module Figure 6: Continuous drilling fluid parameters measurement layout

System integration
The tracking system and the mud measurement system were installed on Statfjord C with a WITS-ML interface. In
addition a dedicated WITS-ML server was set up on Statfjord C to function as a data hub for the real time communication
between these systems and the drilling control automation system.
The on site commissioning of the new technologies was performed in February 2009, and the installations were deemed
ready for operation for the drilling of the 12 1/4” section of the well C15B that took place from the Statfjord C platform in
March 2009.

Field test performance

The field test on Statfjord C lasted from March 2009 till the end of May 2009. In this period the wells C15B, C32B and C28C
were drilled from the platform with the aid of the installed automation systems, making the technologies active contributors to
the drilling of a total of five well sections. All three systems involved in the Automated Drilling Pilot were used throughout the
8 IADC/SPE 128234

entire test period without causing any serious HSE incidents. During the field test the performance of the systems were also
observed and logged. This section presents the evaluation of the field performance of the three individual technologies and the
implemented solution for real time data integration, based on the experiences from the Statfjord C field test.

Drilling control automation

During the Statfjord C field test the system functionality for tripping velocity control, pump start-up, friction tests and
automatic reciprocating were tested intensively. The system worked properly in almost every situation. Still, the overall up-
time for the drilling control automation software was only about 70% throughout the test period. The single most important
reason for this relatively low number was the dependency the system proved have on offshore support from experts from the
system vendor. In fact, subtracting the time where the system was inoperable due to lack of adequate vendor experts on duty,
the system up-time was estimated to about 90 %.
The system’s high demands on offshore expert support are mainly related to four main factors: (1) Insufficient sensory
equipment on the rig, (2) the quality of existing rig sensors, (3) the high dependency on fully manual (non computer-aided)
operations regarding the configuration data set and (4) issues in the standard drilling control system. These four challenges
made it necessary to have two experts available 24/7 on the rig during active use of the drilling control automation system.
Although this underlines the automation systems current need for expert support, the field test also indicated that some of the
functionalities in the drilling control automation system could, with minor effort, be used with much less, or even without,
experts support available on the rig. The remainder of the functionalities would require more extensive work on the
experienced challenges for this to be achieved.
The actual impact this system has on the drilling operation performance is very challenging to quantify. There was no
downtime caused by the use of the system during the test, and the system did not slow down the operations or cause any
damage to the well. The velocity limits calculated by the tripping velocity control software were above the velocities used by
the drilling crew, while the use of fixed connection position may have speeded up the connection slightly, since the block
always stopped at the same predefined height. The time taken by the automation software to start the pumps is similar to the
one used by a driller when starting manually. In some cases, and for those drillers who felt comfortable using the system, the
connection time was reduced since they started filling the pipes with the system before the top-drive was completely
connected. It is also worth noticing that every single MWD survey was of good quality when the pumps were started using the
automation software, and that the repeatability in the automated friction tests provided better data quality for friction
monitoring during the operation. It should also be noted that there were no serious well incidents on Statfjord C during the
entire test period, and it is fully possible that this could be related to the automation systems protective effects, decreasing the
possibility of performing well damaging drilling control.

Automatic drillpipe tracking

The system for tracking drillpipe had an average up-time very close to a hundred percent during the Statfjord C field test,
and the use of this system did not introduce any new work tasks offshore.
During the test period no failures of RFID tags were detected. The reading performance was at its best close to a 100%.
However, on average the reading performance proved to be below satisfactory level. This was caused by: (1) IT network
problems on Statfjord C, (2) changes in the rotary tool configuration (slips change) that required re-tuning of the RFID antenna
and (3) the non-standard physical mounting of the tags in the specific drillpipe joints for this test.
The network issues were resolved by moving the system reader box to the driller’s cabin, but the need for re-tuning of the
antenna unfortunately caused parts of the field test to be performed with none optimal tuning throughout the test. To resolve
the tuning problem a new prototype RFID antenna with automatic tuning was tested towards the end of the test, but this early
prototype was not able to enhance the reading performance in this short time span.
The single most important cause for the observed reading unreliability was established to be related to the physical
mounting of the RFID tags that specifically had to be implemented in the drillpipe joints used in this test. As described in a
previous section, it was decided, based on the high wear level of the drillpipe, to mount the RFID tags somewhat deeper in the
pipe joints in order to ensure mechanical protection. This adjustment reduced the ability of the well centre antenna to detect the
tags in the passing joints. However, by automatic detection of missed readings and introducing dummy elements in the tally
description, the pipe tracking system still managed to produce a real time tally description that was close to a hundred percent
correct.
In a life cycle management perspective the detection of joints entering and leaving the well bore are important to record the
usage history for each individual tubular for inspection advisory. On the other hand, the tracking system also showed the
potential for contribution positive to the drilling operation through providing a high quality description of the active tally based
on minimal manual labour, an effect that also would have a positive impact on the quality of the bit depth estimate. To utilize
the full potential of this functionality the tagging should however include more tally elements than was the case for this field
test, ideally the complete tally should be tagged, in particular including all BHA elements. Furthermore, the placement of the
antenna in the well centre introduces a time lag in the automatic tally description relative to the physical tally actually hanging
from the hook. Additional identification points should be introduced earlier in the process (E.g. at the iron roughneck) in order
to enable the electronic description to be available as soon as the pipe joints are placed in the hook. Resolving these two
factors would enable the tracking system not only to be useful in a life cycle management perspective, but also by reducing
IADC/SPE 128234 9

manual labour related to the tally description while at the same time having the potential to improve the quality of the tally
description and consequently also the quality of the estimated bit depth.

Continuous measurements of drilling fluid parameters

The two sensors for continuous measurements of parameters had not been tested offshore prior to the Automated Drilling
Pilot, and the field test revealed some weaknesses in the installation design. In particular the hose system for transferring mud
from the active pit to the sensor modules was not satisfactory; in particular due to the fact that the hoses needed to be moved
manually when change of active pit occurred. Initially the sensors were also set up to receive mud in serial from the pit, but
this compromised the quality of the density measurements and the solution was to switch the order of flow. There were also
observed leakage from the viscosity sensor during the field test, and although this leakage was diminished to a few drops per
hour towards the end of the test period, it was not completely removed but still kept under control and steady. During the yard
test or laboratory tests, no leakage was observed, which may indicate that the drilling fluid on Statfjord C was more aggressive
for the sealing. Finally, there were some initial instability in the system processing software, but these issues were eliminated
during the course of the field test.
The overall performance of the actual sensors was mainly good. The density sensor had an overall up-time of about 90 %,
while the viscosity sensor where somewhat lower, mainly due to the leakage problems. The results from the density
measurements indicated good accuracy. The discrepancy from manual measurements was below 0.02 sg at all times. The
results from the viscosity measurements were also promising, but some weaknesses in the temperature correction techniques
were revealed. Still, the fluid measurements were mainly good, and the data was successfully transferred to the drilling control
automation system throughout the field test, enchanting the performance of this system.
The new sensors also introduced some new work task on the rig related to system calibration and cleaning. During the field
test these tasks were performed by personnel from the system vendor, introducing one extra personnel on the rig 24/7 during
active use.

System integration
The data integration between the three individual technologies was successfully achieved in the virtual rig environment
prior to the field test. These onshore test sessions, and moreover the ability to implement a common data interface for three
separate technologies in a very short time frame, clearly demonstrated that the WITS-ML protocol can be a powerful tool for
integrating technologies from different vendors. However, some system specific WITS-ML implementation was required for
storing and communicating the drilling fluid data, so continued work on development of the protocol is required. It should also
be noted that WITS-ML was not used for, and is not applicable for, machine control.
Based on the risk evaluations prior to the field test a step-wise approach was chosen for system data integration between
the new systems in the actual field test. Data produced by the two automation systems for pipe tracking and fluid
measurements were at all times delivered to the WITS-ML server, but the drilling control automation system did not make use
of these data before proven reliable in operation.
The new sensors for measuring fluid properties immediately showed considerably better performance than existing mud
sensors on Statfjord C. Based on this performance the mud data provided by the new sensor system was taken into use by the
drilling control automation system already from the first well section, and data from the new mud sensors continued to feed the
drilling automation system with mud data throughout the entire field test period making the sensor system a substantial
contributor to the performance of the drilling control automation system in the entire field test.
Because of the specific challenges related to the reading performance in the Automated Drilling Pilot described in a
previous section, a full integration between the drillpipe tracking system and the drilling control automation system was not
achieved during the field test. However, the full integration in the onshore simulation environment indicates clearly that this
can be achieved in future offshore drilling automation systems.

User feedback
Due to the system set-up on Statfjord C the users were mainly exposed to the new automation systems through the use of
the drilling control automation software (drillers, assistant drillers). None of the drillers had any operational experience with
the system prior to the field test, only experience from the training sessions in the virtual rig environment. In the beginning of
the field test the drillers expressed some scepticism towards the new system. As the field test progressed and the drillers gained
trust in the automation system, there was a striking shift towards a very positive attitude. In their overall feedback from the
field test the drillers underline that the system had the ability to make every driller perform consistently through the use of
automation/limitation functionalities. They also emphasised that the system improved their work situation by simplifying
several of their regular work task, which again enabled higher focus on other responsibilities.

Conclusions
The Automated Drilling Pilot on Statfjord C has clearly indicated that existing drilling automation technologies have a great
potential for improving drilling performance.
10 IADC/SPE 128234

Drilling control Automation

For the drilling control automation software the system proved to be mature with respect to both functionality and built in
safety measures, and the functionalities tested in the Statfjord C field test were appreciated by the drillers. Still, more effort
should be put on quantifying the effect the system actually has on drilling performance in order to motivate a wider
deployment in the business.
Other main technology enablers for this particular system are related to the system’s dependency on input data of adequate
quality. This dependency leads to two important challenges. Firstly, there is a need for upgrading the sensory equipment and
data infrastructure on the drilling rig in order to meet the specific demands the system has on real time sensor data. Secondly,
there is a need for changes in the drilling organisation in order to ensure adequate data quality on the complete input data set
used by the drilling control automation system. The drilling organisation needs to implement new roles and responsibilities
both to ensure adequate quality on real time measurements and in order to provide and control the configuration data set that
must be entered manually into the drilling control automation system before it can be applied. Efficient application of the
drilling control automation system tested on Statfjord C can only be achieved when these necessary changes are in place,
enabling the system to be used with no or minimal offshore expert support from the system vendor.

Drillpipe tracking system

The pipe tracking system proved to be easy to install, and it required no extra offshore support. The basic challenge regarding
this technology in the Automated Drilling Pilot proved to be the reading reliability of the system. The major cause for this
unreliability was the drillpipe wear level requiring sub optimal RFID tag mounting. Activities have therefore been initiated to
enhance robustness of the system reading performance related to following issues:
o Improved procedures for tag mounting
o Ensure proper drillpipe quality
o Optimized new reader device

With these corrections in place a 100% RFID reading stability should be expected, making the tracking system a good
candidate for valuable contribution to complete life cycle pipe management.
In the future an additional identification point, e.g. on the iron roughneck, could resolve issues related to the time lag of the
automatic tally description, and combining this feature with tagging of more elements in the drill string, including the bottom
hole assembly, would also enable the tracking system to be a valuable contributor to the drilling process through enhancing the
quality of the tally description, and consequently also the bit depth estimate. The system would then also reduce the need for
comprehensive and error prone manual work tasks related to producing a good tally description at rig site.

Continuous measurements of drilling fluid parameters

For the fluid sensors there were some challenges related to the installation design. A good solution needs to be found for
transferring mud to the sensors, in particular the process of changing active pit needs to be automated. In addition the leakage
problem needs to be handled and the issues regarding better filtering techniques for the viscosity measurements needs to be
solved. Otherwise the new sensors showed promising results, and they made a very valuable contribution to the Automated
Drilling Pilot by continuously providing good quality mud data for the drilling control automation system.
During the field test the fluid sensors were cleaned and calibrated by vendor personnel, but it would be a clear advantage
for the usability of this system if these minor tasks could be performed by existing rig personnel, not necessarily from the
sensor vendor.

Nomenclature
API – American Petroleum Institute
ATEX - Atmosphériques Explosives (French)
HSE – Health, safety and environment
HMI – Human-Machine Interface
MWD – Measurement While Drilling
PSI - Pounds per Square Inch
RFID – Radio Frequency Identification
RPM – Revolutions Per Minute
R&D – Research and Development
S.G. – Specific Gravity
Q1 – First Quarter
Q3 – Third Quarter
WITS-ML – Wellsite Information Transfer Standard Mark-up Language
IADC/SPE 128234 11

Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to IRIS, NOV, Drilltronics Rig Systems, Trac-ID Systems and Geoservices for permission to
publish this paper. They would also like to acknowledge the Statfjord partners; Statoil, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips
Scandinavia, ConocoPhillips UK, Shell, Centrica and Enterprise for their willingness to carry out the Automated Drilling
Pilot on Statfjord C.

References
[1] Strøm, S., Balov, M.K., Kjørholt, H., Gaasø, R., Vefring, E., Rommetveit, R. 2008 Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas,
U.S.A. The Future Drilling Scenario. 08OTC- 19409

[2] Iversen, F.P., Cayeux, E., Dvergsnes, E.W, Ervik, R., and Byrkjeland, M., International Institute of Stavanger (IRIS) ; Welmer, M.,
NOV; Torsvoll, A., Balov, M.K., Haugstad, E., StatoilHydro; and Merlo, A., Offshore Fields Test of a New Integrated System for Real-
Time Optimisation of the Drilling Process. ENI. IADC/SPE 112744

[3] A. Saasen, SPE, T.H. Omland, SPE, Statoil ASA; S. Ekrene, J. Breviere, SPE, E. Villard, SPE, Geoservices SA; N. Kaageson-Loe, SPE,
A. Tehrani, SPE, J. Cameron, M. Freeman, SPE, F. Growcock, SPE, A. Patrick, T. Stock, SPE, MI-Swaco; T. Jørgensen, F. Reinholt,
N. Scholz, AnaTec AS; H.E.F. Amundsen, A. Steele, EPX AS; G. Meeten, Schlumberger Cambridge Research, 2008 IADC/SPE
Drilling Conference, Orlando, Florida, U.S.A, Automatic Measurement of Drilling Fluid and Drill Cuttings Properties, IADC/SPE
112687

[4] American Petroleum Institute, Recommended Practice Standard Procedure for Field Testing Oil-Based Drilling Fluids, API RP 13B-2,
forth edition, March 2005