●
,..
/’
,’,”
1 OBJECTIVES
, &
A Definition of Petroleum Engineering
Introduction
It is appropriate for the Society of
Pe~oleum Engineers to be examining
objectives for the profession. The
SPEinquiry parallels similar activities
of other engineering societies-of
ECPD, ASEE and EJC-and even of
such groups as the Prekident’s Science
Advisory Committee. This ferment
of appraisal attests to the growing
recognition of the vital role which
engineering plays in our culture. We
are acknowledging that we really do
not understand engineering, but that
we must understand both its direction
and goals before ‘we can mqke use
of it.
Where does one begin? It seems
logical to begiir by defitiing the prob-
lem, The organizers of this panel
discussion asked for a statement that
would defirie petroleum engineering,
but they ceftairdy did not expect a
single sentence,, or short paragraph
that would encompass the full scope
of the subject. Although,, hopefully,
such a short statement can be phr~sed
it is first necessary to begin with a
broad brush to delineate the bmmds
and “limits within which petroleum
engineers practice.
Engineering is a many faceted sub-
ject. These many facets produce some
of the difficulty, because each engi-
neer tends to observe “and analyze
from the background of his own par-
ticular experiences. It is said that
even the natives who live ‘in the sha-
dow of Mount Everest do not recog-
nize its profile when they are moved
to another locale surrounding the
mountain.
will be n-different spectrums, one for.
each dimension; It is legitimate to
. such as ,design, construction, “installa-
Engineering’s Many Dmenaions
Enr?ineerirxr can be thought of as
an en;ity hav~ng n-dimensio~s. There
i *@r*n* a one year’s leave of absence by
Texas A&M, John C, Calhoun .amrentIy1S
serving as mience advisorand special essist-
ant to Secretaryof the Interior StewartUdall
@ Washinetm,D. O.
JULY. 1968
. . .
‘:. -
sperm ~
-
,. MmFrT’
i ‘ PETROLEUM
ENGINEERING
JOHN C. CALHOUN, JR. ”
SPI? PRWt)ENT-ELECT
I TEXAS AitM COLLEGE
COLLEGE STATION, TEX.
The following three articles are slightly revised versions of opening
remarks made at a panel discussion on “Objectives for Petroleum Engi-
neering” durhtg rhe Annual AIME Mteting in DalIns last February.
In the discussion which followed presentation of the formal talks, sev-
eral opinions pointed out the Society’s obligation for the continuing
education of its members-that possibly the Society shotdd do more
at the Local Section level to improve and expand study group sessions.
The need to develop nurnagenrent skills in the engineer was pointed out
and a question was raised as to whether more training along these
lines shoutd be expected of the petroleum engineering graduate. Opin-
ions endorsing John C. CaIhoun’s definition, of p~troieanr engineering
took special note of his recognition of the opportunities of the petroleum
engineer for expanded service into broader fietds of activity.
L. P. WHOIUTON, 1963 SPE President
talk about engineering in terms of view, i.e., as a matter of design. In
any one of these spectrums. The this way the spectrum that ci%cerns
total meaning of engineering, how- the kind of job to be done and the
ever, requires vision that can take in spectrum that concerns the kind of ac-,
rdl n-dimensions at one time. tivity applied to the job may often
What are some of these dimt%sions? seem to be at cross purpuses.
h is impossible to name. them all, Another dimension concerns the
since the spectrum depends upon kinds of tools used, The tools may
where one stands in order to get his be massive, earth-moving types of
view. I can speak’ only of some of machinery capable of handling large
the more familiar dimensions with volume of .materiais in all shapes and
which I have had some contact. forms. The tools may be complex
One dimension concerns the kinds circuits capable of moving electrons
of jobs to be done. Is there a dam to and fro; or perhaps the tools aie
to be built? Is there a radio “to be pipes, compressors, pumps and con-
designed? Is there oil to be moved tainers, by which fluids can be shunt-
from the interior of the earth to its ed, stored, separated and ‘transported.
surface? Are there hydro~arbon mole- One kind of job may demand many
cules to be changed from.. one form kinds of tools, and one kind of tool
to another? can be used on many kinds of jobs.
Another dimension recognizes types This again illustrates the interlocking
of work. Included within this spec- of the dimensional’ viewpoints that
trum are all kinds of construction, all cmcern engineering.
kinds of processes, all kinds of manu- Another familiar dimension to engi-
facturing, the creation of all types of neering concerns the kinds of ideas
machines and the operations of de- and knowledge which are invoked.
vices. This dimension normally is Does the job, the tool, or the function
broken down into broad categories involve chemical ideas? Are the COI!-
cepts primarily mathematical? Is it
tion and ‘testing, operation,, control necessary to h;ve a knowledge .of ge-
and evaluation of performance: O1O”W?In qne particular instance, the ;’
Naturally, those who design for one engineer may use the concept of en-
Kmd of job may also design for some vopy. In., another particular in$t-e
he may use the concept of energy
other job. Consequently, one who de-
sigrp may eventually tldnk of engi- conservation. Persrms with particular
neering entirely from his point” of kinds of knowledge cari apply their
r 7ZS
.- ..-. .. . . . . .. .
...

knowledge to many kinds of jobs, to
many kinds of tools, or to many klrids
of operations. Again interlocking di-
mensions occur.
Other engineering spectrums could
be cited; But only one more will be
mentioned, and it is one that often
leads to deep argument. For whom
is the job done? Is it done irr the lab-
oratory for a research director? Is it
done in the field for the supervisor
of an operating unit? The particular
activity under dkcussion may lie done
for the public welfare, for defense,
for it~dustry. The job at hand may
have an economic goal, a consema-
tion goal,. or perhaps the goal of en-
joyment. A particular kind of activity
may be carried on for different groups
and for’ many different goals. Because
a large part of the effort of the engi-
neer is motivated by economic factors
there are those who choose to view
economics as a limiting dimension of
engineering. I personally do not.
At this point, it should be clear
that this article will not define petro-
leum engineering according to any
specified set of dimensions, It is pos-
sible to list a number of jobs that fall
within the category of the petroleum
engineer. A number of ‘functions for
petroleum engineering could be dis-
cussed, such as design, producing op-
erations, or reservoir control. A ‘num-
ber of particular tools or the types of
ideas and knowledge required could
be portrayed.
Furthermore, those
jobs that lie within the laboratory
could be differentiated from those that
fall within operations. In each of these
cases, however, the scope that one en-
gineer envisions reflects only hk con-
cept of the total dimensions along
which he wishes to make nleasure-
ments. Unless he exhausts all pos-
sible dimensions, he still does not have.
a definition of petroleum engineering:,
He has only partially described it.
Engineering-The Sysierns Concept
Is there no unifying theme for these
various points Qf view? Yes, there is
an available general classification
scheme. Just as the zoologist divides
the total kingdom of animals into or-
ders, families, species and genuses, so
it seems possible to classify the orders
of engineering. There are the usual
pitfalls and, disadvantages inherent to
all generalizations. However, the
scheme is helpful ior achieving an
over-ail perspective to the categories
of engineering. ! Ttie systems of interest to. the en-
The zoologist can. set up a classi-
fication scheme because he recognizes
different organisms. He examines tie
characteristics of each organism and
groups Ijke systems with like systems.
In the general area of man’s activities
dealisw with machines, mocesses, re-
sources and natural for&s, there’ are
. .
. .-
726,. .
. . ... ,,
-, ,
no organic unjts. It is possible, how-
ever, even in the ‘physical world, to
identify certain systems of action with
either natural or man-made bound-
aries. Each system can be thought of
as a total organism, much the same. as
the popular concept of’ the human
body or some other organic unit.
Classification can then proceed accord-
ing to systems.
Webster’s Dellssition of System
Now, it may be easy to recognize
a biological organism as a system, but
how does one recognize a system in
the engineering sense? The following
is one of the primary definitions given
by Webster’s Third New International
Dictionary. “System: A complex unity
formed of many often diverse parts
subject to a common #lan or serving
a common purpose; an aggregation or
assemblage of objects joined in regu-
lar inttxaction, or interdependence; a
set of units combined by nature or
art to form aiz integral, organic or
organized whole; an orderly working
totality; a coherent unification.”
The third segment of this definition
has been italicized to indicate the
manner in which one tail describe an
engineering system, Namely, it is “a
set of units combined by nature or
art to form an integral . , . organized
whole.” Sometimes the systems of
concern to the engineer are set up by
natural. At other times they are set up
by the art of man, and at still other
times the systems are a combination
of nature and art. It is necessary,
moreover, in defhiing engineering sys-
tems to drop the word “organic”. En-
gineering systems may. contain some
organic components, but they can-
not be thought of as being entirely or-
ganic in nature.
Inasmuch as the systeni, by detini-
tikm, is a complex unity formed of di-
verse parts, it is possible within a
particular system to have a complete
spectrum of different kinds of jobs,
a complete spectrum of types of tools
for doing the job or a complete spec-
trum of. basic knowledge which ap-
plies to the performance of the parts
of the system. A recognition of the
system as a unified whole, made up
of interdependent activities, side-steps
the problem of deffnkg engineering in
terms of any one spectrum or dimen-
sion which may represent one’s own
particularized activity
,. within
whole,
gineer are primarily those that’ have
physical boundaries, either, natural ,or
man-made, or which deal with physi-
cal structures and processes. For ex-
ample, in architecture the system con-
cerns the physical entities within
which we live, work”hnd carry on the
total activities of civilization. The sys-
.
,s h“”
terns of aeronautical engineering are
those that deal with Mcraft or other
devices that have the capability of
free or controlled flight above the sur-
face of the earth. The systems of in-
dustrial engineering are the arrange-
ments of structures, processes and
people with the capability of trans-
forming raw material into manufac-
tured products.
In each of these systems mentioned
“there are human factors included.
Thus, the systems of engineering can-
not be defined to completely encom-
pass only physical entities and physi-
cal boundarie~.
Systems Interact
The view of engineering from the
systems concept does not eliminate all
problems of definition, because many
systems will interact i Often several
subsystems may be thou~ht of as a
part of some larger system, For ex-
ample, systems of locomotion, such
as automobiles and engines, are gener-
ally of primary concern to the me-
chanical engineer, Systems of physical
structure such as highways and rail-
roads, on the other hand, are gen-
erally systems of concern to the civil
engineer. Both of these subsystems,
PIUSmany others, combine to make a
m,uch larger system which we call
transportation, This leads to the real-
ization that ‘perhaps there needs to be
so,meone called a transportation engi-
neer whose area of expertise is the
total transportation system rather than
any single subsystem that is a part of
transportation.
TIM Petroleum Engineering System
The particular system of concern
to the petroleum engineer is usually
made up of one or~a series of individ-.,
ual underground reservoirs, into which
has been introduced one or more
man-made arrangements of wells, the
total generally being coupled on the
surface of the earth with arrange-
ments through which fluids may be
processed either as they emerge from
the earth or prior to their injection
into the earth. This system fits the
definition of an orderly working total-
ity. It is unified for the purpose of
recovering fluids from, processing
fluids through, or storing fluids with- .,
-in the crust of the earth, Within this
system one can recognize three pri-
mary subsystems, the subsystem which
the
concerns the creation and operation of
‘the wells, that which concerns the.
surface processing of the fluids, -and ,
that w@ch concerns the fluids and
“their behavior within the rock strata.
Function of the Essgfrieei ‘-. .-
The systems viewpoint of engineer-
ing brings the function of the engineer
,.
JO URXAL OF ,P”ETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY ‘.
 . . .. . . . .
*
into focus. The engineer is the indL
vidual responsible for a complete an-
alysis of the system and for a syn-
thesis that will enable the system to
continue a healthful existence or to
evolve into a more useful and more
efficient system, In this sense, the role
of the engineer is pmdlel to that of
the physician whose system ‘of con-’
cem is the human body and to whom
one looks for a diagnosis of what
may be wrong or what can go wrong,
and for a prescription of what ought,
to be done to maintain a healthy body
or to cure its ilk.
The systems concept of engineering
also leads to new ideas concerning the
knowledge necessary for engineering.
Once viewed from the idea of systems
analysis and synthesis, engineering can
no longer be too concerned as to
whether the basic knowledge is phys-
ics, chemistry, or something else.’ In-
deed, the engineer must take the point
of view that the knowledge he needs
is that knowledge which concerns the
understanding and total well being
of the system which is his to control.
Most importantly, the engineer needs
knowledge of the system itself. He
needs to know what its component
parts may be, what unity exists within
the system, what its total purpose is,
and what methods are available for
measuring the system and analyzing
its behavior. This ldnd of viewpoint
may lead the engineer to a realization
that his real problem is to understand
biology because the system with which
he deals has a unity in biological proc-
esses more than in anyddng else. In
particular, with petroleum engineering
the systems point of view leads to the
conclusion that the unity of the sys-
tem is to be found in the nature of
the geological environment within
which $e system exists.
This viewpoint of systems engineer-
ing also leads to new concepts con-
cerning education for the engineer.
As one thinks in terms of systems,
the emphasis no longer becomes the
“how-to-do” of specific jobs or the
behavior of specific tools. Rather, the
emphasis becomes basic knowledge
pertaining to the ,generaI nature of
systems, the methods of analysis (in-
cluding the creation of models) that
will portray the behavior of the sys-
tem, the methods of synthesis that will
allow the creative engipeer to put new
systems together and, over-all, a wide
inquiry into the general behavior of
systems and the sciences underlying
them.
The systems point of vi~w “really’
allows one to visualize where engi-
neering is headed. When the medical
profession adopted the viewpoint that
an individual was a total organism
needing periodic examinations and a
prescription of controls for the con-
tinuation of health, its position moved
JULY. 1 96a
.: =.. .. . ..
. . <,.
from curative medicine to preventive
medicine. Siilarly, as engineering
changea its viewpoint from the spec-
trum of jobs or the spectrum of tools
to a visualization of systems, it is also
moving from a position of curative
engineering to one of preventive sys-
tems maintenance and control.
Building New Systems
.’As the engineer analyzes and con-
trols systems provided by nature or
created by the ,art of man, he con-
tinually becomes aware of the possi-
,bilitiei for building new systems. The
engineer takes component parts of
existing systems and puts them to-
gether to form new systems. By this
means,, the engineer has populated the
earth with a great many species of
new machines and new processes. This
is as vital and fundamental an activity
to our culture as though the physi-
cians of the world would populate the
globe with new kinds of anirrials.
Thus, the systems point of view ulti-
mately leads one to the concept that
engineering is a force that creates
social change, rather than a force
which produces physical change.
With ‘this long preamble, then, engi-
neering can be defined as the activity
of man by which the physical systems
“of nature are controlled or by which
physical systems combining nature
and art are created and controlled.
Petroleum Engineering Defined
From Systems Concept
Therefore, petroleum engineering is
that part of engineering which is con-
cerned with the control of that system
made up of the fluid containing rocks
of the earth, the flow of fluids within of social change. It has given our
these rocks, the wells through which’
the” fluids are conducted to and from
the surface of the earth, and the sur-
face processes coupled thereto.
Having made thk definition, let me
emphasize again that within the sys-
tem there will be many specific jobs
for which it is far more desirable to
ctdl upccn the services of a man whose
formal education is in something other
than petrtileum engineering. In my
terminology, this does not make the,
other engineer a petroleum engh’Ieer
any more than it imakes an engineer
a physician because the physician calls a systems point of view, not a. job or.
upon the engineer for assistance with
an , instr~ment for ~analyzing body
behavior,
In the parlance of the old time
salesman, “you’ve got 40 know the , edge bf a system rather than with an.
territory;’ the key matter by which one assemblage of techriiques.
judges whether ,or not a certain indi-
vidual deservea to carry the name of
the profession can be answered only ,. SS1OGRAI’HICAL SKETj2H OF JOHN C.
by asking, “Does -he know the sys-
tem?”. Every professional is an expert
on something. Otherwise he is not a
. .:
.,
,. . ...?
?,
,., . . ..
professional. Those individuals who
understand the total. system or one
of the subsystems defied above as
the realm of the petroleum engineer
come within this definition of petro-
leum engineering.
More important than the current
interpretation of the definition, how-
ever, is the view it gives for the ‘future.
The systems point of view produces
well deftned objectives for ~etroleum
engineers directed toward a concern
for fundamental knowledge about the
earth. It yields a fundamental objec-
tive for the petroleum engineer to
concern himself with all types of
fluids within the rocks of the earth and
all possible applications of this system
for the uses of man. Whhin the rocks
of the earth, it is possible to create
systems of fluid fnovement and con-
trol for the disposal of waste fluids
from the surface of the earth. It is
possible to create such systems also
for storage of fluids within the con-
fines of the. earth, and for recovery
of minerals other than oil and gas. It
is conceivable that such systems may
have value as underground reactor
beds or underground purifyisig sys-
tems. The systems viewpoint ‘allows
creative imagination to outline objec-
tives which may be unknown at the
present,
Engineering-A Force for
Social Change
The following is repeated because
it is the most important statement in
this article, Engineering i.s a /orce that
cregtes social chisnge, rather than a
force which produces phy.~ical>changc., .—_
Petroleum engineering can be proud
of its record to date as an instrument
culture a large share of its energy
stimulus. It is one of America’s best
demonstrations that engineering and
conservation go hand in hand. It is
uniquely a product of Anlerican effort
and it represents one of the more
highly. exported of American tech-
nologies to other lands. ,,
We need to sustain our record by
a broadened vision. For this reason
we need to think of engineering from
a social point of view, as well as a
physical point of view; we need to
think of petroleum engineering from
resource po”int of view; and we need
to think of the Society. of Petroleum
Engineera from the point of view -of
a profession- concerned with knov/l-
EDITOR’S NqE: A PICTURE , AND
CALHOUIW, JR. WERE PUBLISHED IN
THE MAY; 1963 ISSUE OF JOURNALOF
PETROLEUMTI?CHNOLOOY. “’,
... .
- ?27
. .
,.-”
c .!
‘.
:.> ,
,,