See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/267630082

Coupled axial-torsional dynamics in rotary drilling with state-dependent

delay: stability and control

Article  in  Nonlinear Dynamics · November 2014

DOI: 10.1007/s11071-014-1567-y

CITATIONS READS

75 1,870

5 authors, including:

Xianbo Liu Nicholas Vlajic

University of Maryland, College Park National Institute of Standards and Technology
19 PUBLICATIONS   485 CITATIONS    33 PUBLICATIONS   500 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Xinhua Long Guang Meng

Shanghai Jiao Tong University Shanghai Jiao Tong University
71 PUBLICATIONS   1,465 CITATIONS    686 PUBLICATIONS   11,626 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

NODYCON 2021, Rome, February 16-19, 2021 www.nodycon.org/2021 View project

microflow View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Xianbo Liu on 01 November 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Nonlinear Dyn (2014) 78:1891–1906
DOI 10.1007/s11071-014-1567-y

ORIGINAL PAPER

Coupled axial-torsional dynamics in rotary drilling

with state-dependent delay: stability and control
Xianbo Liu · Nicholas Vlajic · Xinhua Long ·
Guang Meng · Balakumar Balachandran

Received: 4 February 2013 / Accepted: 30 June 2014 / Published online: 17 July 2014
© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Abstract Nonlinear motions of a rotary drilling
mechanism are considered, and a two degree-of-
freedom model is developed to study the coupled axial-
torsional dynamics of this system. In the model devel-
opment, state-dependent time delay and nonlinearities
that arise due to dry friction and loss of contact are con-
sidered. Stability analysis is carried out by using a semi-
discretization scheme, and the results are presented
in terms of stability volumes in the three-dimensional
parameter space of spin speed, cutting depth, and a
cutting coefficient. These stability volume plots can
serve as a guide for choosing parameters for rotary
drilling operations. A control strategy based on state
and delayed-state feedback is presented with the goal
of enlargening the stability region, and the effective-
X. Liu · X. Long · G. Meng
State Key Laboratory of Mechanical System and Vibration,
School of Mechanical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong
University, Shanghai 200240, China
e-mail:liuxianbo@sjtu.edu.cn
X. Long
e-mail:xhlong@sjtu.edu.cn
G. Meng
e-mail:gmeng@sjtu.edu.cn
N. Vlajic · B. Balachandran (B)
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of
Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA
e-mail:balab@umd.edu
N. Vlajic
e-mail:vlajic@umd.edu
ness of this strategy to suppress stick-slip oscillations
is illustrated.
Keywords Drill string · State-dependent time delay ·
Stability analysis · Semi-discretization method ·
Stick-slip vibrations · Vibration control
1 Introduction
Drill strings are a main component of rotary drilling
systems, which are used to drill deep boreholes for the
exploration of oil and natural gas. As illustrated in Fig.
1, a typical drill string system consists of a drill bit, the
drill collars, and the drill pipes. The drill bit, which is
located at the bottom of the wellbore, is used to break
up rock formations, while the drill collars are used to
apply weight to the drill bit. The combination of the
drill bit and the drill collar illustrated in Fig. 1 is also
referred to as the bottom-hole-assembly (BHA). For a
detailed description on the drill-string system, one can
refer to the books such as the one by Bommer [1]. The
drilling system is prone to destructive vibrations and
expensive drill-bit failures due to the high structural
flexibility and nonlinear bit-rock forces. Field mea-
surements [2,3] show that the rotary speed range of
drill bit extends from zero up to twice that of the spin-
ning speed of the top motor. This self-exited torsional
vibration is also referred to as stick-slip vibration.
In order to further understand the underlying mech-
anisms of stick-slip vibrations in drill strings, models

123
1892
Fig. 1 Representative drill-string system
with one degree of freedom, two degrees of freedom,
and eight degrees of freedom have been proposed [4–
7]. Different friction models have been used by sev-
eral authors to study bit-rock interactions and related
stick-slip effects [4,6,8]. Due to bit-rock cutting, time-
delay effects are also considered to be another cause
of destructive drill-string vibrations. Time-dependent
and state-dependent delay effects have been reported
and studied in manufacturing operations, for exam-
ple, the studies of Long, Balachandran, and Mann [9]
and Insperger, Stépán, and co-workers [10,11]. Simi-
lar to the regenerative effects [12–14] encountered in
metal cutting operations, Richard, Germay and Detour-
nay [15,16] proposed time-delay effects in a nonlinear
model of the drill-string system. They also show that
the time delay is a root cause of self-excited vibra-
tions for both axial and torsional motions and that the
time delay in the drilling process is a state-dependent
quantity. After linearization, they were able to uncouple
the torsional and axial vibrations, and study the system
dynamics and stability using the approximation con-
sisting of two identical third-order differential equa-
tions. In the efforts of Besselink, Wouw and Nijmeijer
[17], a modified model for axial and torsional vibrations
is presented based on the state-dependent time-delay
model presented in earlier work [15]. In the modified
model construction, axial stiffness and axial damping
123
X. Liu et al.
are taken into consideration but torsional damping is
ignored. It is noted that Besselink et al. [17] and Richard
et al. [16] also examined the uncoupled axial and tor-
sional case by exploiting different time scales in the
system. In the current work, torsion damping is taken
into account in the proposed delay system model and a
completely coupled axial-torsional case is considered
by the authors. The stability of this system incorporat-
ing state-dependent delay can be determined.
In order to attenuate undesirable vibrations of a drill
string, different active control methods have been stud-
ied [4,18–25]. Jansen and van den Steen [19] used
a feedback controller to extend the working range
through a vibration-free zone constructed based on a
simple torsion pendulum model. Tucker and Wang [20]
presented a control approach using feedback through
the drive torque input to control torsional slip-stick
oscillations due to nonlinear friction. Karkoub et al.
[25] also studied control of torsional oscillations, and
in their control scheme, genetic algorithms were used.
Recently, de Bruin et al. [24] proposed a state-feedback
controller based on a Popov-like criterion. They intro-
duced a model that included set-valued nonlinearities
and used both simulations and experiments to show
the effectiveness of the scheme for controlling torsional
vibrations. While in these prior studies, there has been a
focus on the control of torsional vibrations and nonlin-
earities that originate from the chosen friction model,
axial vibrations and time delay effects, which are one
of the primary causes of stick-slip vibrations, have not
been considered.
A goal of the current work is to determine the range
of stability for the coupled axial-torsional motions in
the presence of state-dependent delay as well as to
investigate the effectiveness of a feedback controller to
suppress stick-slip vibrations. The remaining sections
of this article have been put together as follows. Build-
ing on earlier efforts [15,17], in Sect. 2, an enhanced
model for the drill string to study both axial and tor-
sional vibrations is proposed. In Sect. 3, nondimen-
sional parameters are introduced and the system is
linearized about a nominal operating point according
to the procedure outlined in references [16,17]. Fol-
lowing that, a stability analysis is carried out using
a semi-discretization method [26,27] and the stability
volume is constructed in a multi-parameter space. In
Sect. 4, control schemes with choices of optimal feed-
back gains are presented and the enlargement of the
stability regions in the controlled system is studied. As
Coupled axial-torsional dynamics in rotary drilling 1893

a demonstration of the effectiveness of the controller,

elimination of nonlinear stick-slip oscillations in the
coupled axial-torsional system is considered. Finally,
concluding remarks are provided.

2 Modeling of drill-string motions, bit-rock

interactions, and delay effects

In this section, a discrete system or reduced-order

model is developed in an attempt to capture the quali-
tative aspects of the dynamics of the drill-string shown
in Fig. 1. The same assumptions as those used in previ-
ous studies [16,17,28,29] are used here. Specifically,
these assumptions are the following: (i) the wellbore
is vertical and lateral motions of the drill string can be
neglected and (ii) the top end of the string is driven at
a constant axial speed V0 and constant torsion speed
Ω0 . A representative two degree-of-freedom system,
which can capture the axial and torsional vibrations of
the system shown in Fig. 1, is depicted in Fig. 2.
In this model, there is a total of six stiffness, damp-
ing, and inertia elements. These elements are the axial
stiffness K a and torsion stiffness K t that are used to
capture the flexibility of the drill pipes (1,000 m long);
the axial damping Ca and torsion damping Ct due to the
drill mud; and the equivalent translation inertia M and
rotary inertia I of the BHA plus one-third of the drill
pipes. Structural damping is neglected here as in ear-
lier work [17]. To be consistent with previous efforts,
all of the parameter values are adopted from the work of
Germay et al. [30] and these values are listed in Table 1.
With these assumptions, the equation of motion of
the two degree-of-freedom model for drill string can be
written as
M z̈(t) + Ca ż(t) + K a (z(t) − V0 t) = Ws − W (t)
I ϕ̈(t) + Ct ϕ̇(t) + K t (ϕ(t) − Ω0 t) = −T (t) (1)
Here, an overdot denotes the derivative with respect to
time t. The quantity Ws is the submerged weight of the
drill string and, neglecting buoyancy effect from the
drill mud, this quantity is equal to the sum of weight
of both the drill pipe and drill collar. The variable
W (t) is the weight-on-bit and T (t) is the torque-on-
bit. According to Detournay and Defourny’s work [31],
both the force and torque on the bit are determined by
the bit-rock interactions. They can be decomposed into
cutting and friction components as follows:
Fig. 2 Discrete system used to capture axial and torsional
dynamics of drill-string system
W (t) = Wc (t) + W f (t)
T (t) = Tc (t) + T f (t) (2)
The subscript c denotes the cutting component, while
the subscript f denotes the friction component. The
cutting component is proportional to the instantaneous
cutting depth of rock and the friction component is
assumed to obey Coulomb friction [31]. Considering
bit bounce and loss of contact between the drill bit and
rocks, there are many cases of cutting. Following ear-
lier efforts [15–17,29,30,32], the forces and torque on
bit can be written as
Wc (t) = aζ R(d(t))H (ϕ̇(t))
1
Tc (t) = a 2 R(d(t))H (ϕ̇(t))
2
W f (t) = σ al H (d(t))H (ż(t))
1
T f (t) = μγ a 2 σ l sgn(ϕ̇)H (d(t))H (ż(t)) (3)
2
The parameter  is the intrinsic specific energy,
which mainly depends on the rock strength. Here, to
cover a broad range of strata from sand to rocks, this
parameter is allowed to vary in the range 0 of 110 MPa
rather than be limited to one constant value (e.g., 60
MPa in [30]). The parameters a, ζ , σ , l, μ, and γ are
specific to the design of the drill bit and bit-rock interac-

123
1894 X. Liu et al.

Table 1 Different
Quantities Symbol Value Units
parameters and quanitities
[30] Discrete mass M 3.4e4 kg
Discrete rotary inertia I 116 kg m2
Axial stiffness Ka 7.0e5 N/m
Torsion stiffness Kt 938 Nm/rad
Axial damping Ca 1.56e4 N s/m
Torsion damping Ct 32.9 N s m/rad
Intrinsic specific energy of rock  0–110 MPa
Contact strength σ 60 MPa
Radius of drill bit a 108 mm
Wearflat length of drill bit l 1.2 mm
Cutter face inclination ζ 0.6 –
Frictional coefficient for rock-bit interaction μ 0.6 –
Geometry parameter of drill bit γ 1 –
Number of blades on drill bit n 4 –
Ratio of axial to torsion natural frequencies η 1.6 –
Axial damping ratio ξ 0–0.05 –
Torsion damping ratio κ 0–0.05 –
Dimensionless cutting coefficient ψ 0–26.0 –
Dimensionless angular driving speed ω0 0–25.0 –
Dimensionless nominal depth of cut δ0 0–25.0 –

H (·) and sgn(·) are the Ramp function, Heaviside func-

tion and Sign function, respectively. They are defined
as follows:

y, y ≥ 0
R(y) = (4)
0, y < 0

1, y ≥ 0
H (y) = (5)
0, y < 0
⎧
⎨ 1, y>0
sgn(y) = 0, y=0 (6)
⎩
−1, y < 0
To calculate the sum of instantaneous cutting depth
d(t) in Eq. (3), a model for bit-rock interaction will be
used along the lines of reference [15]. As shown in
Fig. 3, the rocks are cut by a drag bit with n identical
symmetrically distributed blades.
Fig. 3 Bit-rock interactions: Two successive blades of drill bit
The instantaneous depth of cut for each blade dn (t)
and rocks to be cut
can be written as

tion. The parameter values, which are listed in Table 1, dn (t) = z(t) − z(t − τ ) (7)
are consistent with those used in previous studies [30–
32]. The variable d is the sum of instantaneous cutting where the state-dependent delay τ (ϕ(t)) represents the
depth of each drill-bit blade. The scalar functions R(·), elapsed time for the drill bit to rotate over an angle of

123
Coupled axial-torsional dynamics in rotary drilling 1895

2π/n. From the geometry, τ (ϕ(t)) can be determined Eq. (3) will be linearized about the steady-state solution
by solving the following equation and the resulting equations of motion can be written as
M z̈ + Ca ż + K a (z − V0 t) = Ws − aζ d(t) − σ al
2π
ϕ(t) − ϕ(t − τ ) = (8) 1 1
n I ϕ̈ +Ct ϕ̇ + K t (ϕ −Ω0 t) = − a 2 d(t)− μγ a 2 σ l
2 2
Under the assumption that the cutting depth of each (13)
blade is the same, the sum of instantaneous cutting To reduce the number of parameters in the equations
depth d(t) for n blades used in Eq. (3) can be writ- above, the governing equations will be cast in dimen-
ten as follows sionless form along the lines of Richard et al. [16] and
Besselink et. al [17]. The following nondimensional
d(t) = ndn (t) (9) variables are introduced:

Kt a 2
tˆ = t, x= (z − V0 t − z 0 ) ,
3 Solutions and stability analysis I 2K t
θ = ϕ − Ω0 t − ϕ0 (14)
3.1 Steady-state solution and linearization of the two Here, tˆ, x, and θ are the new variables with respect
degree-of-freedom model to t, z and ϕ, respectively. On substituting Eq. (14)
into Eq. (13), the resulting dimensionless equations of
There exists a steady-state response for the equations motion are given by
of motion given by Eq. (1), which physically represents
x  (tˆ) + 2ξ ηx  (tˆ) + η2 x(tˆ) = −ψδ(tˆ)
stable drilling without vibrations; this is described as
θ  (tˆ) + 2κθ  (tˆ) + θ (tˆ) = −δ(tˆ) (15)
z s = V0 t + z 0 , ż s = V0
The prime operation denotes a derivative with respect
ϕs = Ω0 t + ϕ0 , ϕ̇s = Ω0 (10) to the dimensionless time tˆ. The dimensionless para-
The subscript s is indicative of the steady-state meters in Eq. (15) are defined as

nature of the solution. The constants z 0 and ϕ0 rep- ωna Ka I Ca
resent the constant deformation of the axial and torsion η= = ,ξ= √
ωnt Kt M 2 Ka M
springs, respectively. The quantities Ω0 and V0 repre- (16)
aζ I Ct
sent the spinning speed of drill string and the nominal ψ= , κ= √
penetration rate of the drill bit, respectively. As in turn- Kt M 2 Kt I
ing, milling, or drilling in metal cutting processes, the The ratio of axial natural frequency to torsional
nat-
quantity d0 is referred to as the nominal depth of cut, ural frequency η is approximately equal to GE = 1.6.
and it can be determined through kinematic relations The quantity ψ is dependent upon the rock strength and
as drill-bit geometry. Analogous with turning or milling
in metal cutting processes, ψ is referred to as the cut-
2π
ds = d0 = V0 (11) ting coefficient. The parameters ξ and κ are the damp-
Ω0 ing ratios associated with axial and torsional motions,
On substituting Eqs. (2)–(4), (10), and (11) into Eq. respectively. The values for these parameters are listed
(1), the z 0 and ϕ0 components are obtained for the in Table 1. Iin Eq. (15), the dimensionless perturbation
steady-state solution. These components are given by of cutting depth δ can be written as
 
1 V0
z0 = − 2π aζ + Ca V0 + σ al − Ws a 2
Ka Ω0 δ(tˆ) = (d − d0 ) = n[x(tˆ) − x(tˆ − τ̂ ) + (τ̂ − τ̂0 )v0 ]
  2K t
1 2 V0 1
ϕ0 = − π a + Ct Ω0 + μγ a σ l2
(12) (17)
Kt Ω0 2
Since the magnitudes of ż, ϕ̇, and d are greater than The dimensionless quantities τ̂0 , τ̂ (tˆ), and v0 are,
zero for a small perturbation to the steady-state solu- respectively, the steady-state time delay (a constant
tion (ż s , ϕ̇s , ds ), the forces and torques on the drill bit quantity), state-dependent time delay (a non-constant

123
1896 X. Liu et al.

quantity), and axial penetration rate (a constant quan- same form as those obtained in earlier work [10,11] on
tity), and they are given by turning dynamics, wherein the two coupled equations
 have the same natural frequency (i.e., η ≡ 1). Com-
2π I
τ̂0 = , ω0 = Ω0 paring the current study with a previous one [17], it is
nω0 Kt
  (18) noted that here torsion damping is taken into account
Kt 2π a 2 I and the stability of the coupled axial-torsion system is
τ̂ = (τ − ) , v0 = V0
I nΩ0 2K t K t analyzed unlike the previous study.
where ω0 is the dimensionless angular driving speed.
Furthermore, τ̂ is the nondimensional perturbed form
3.2 Use of semi-discretization method for
of the state-dependent delay τ . Upon substituting Eqs.
determining stability
(14) and (18) into Eq. (8), the result is
The semi-discretization method, which is well known
θ (tˆ) − θ (tˆ − τ̂ ) + (τ̂ − τ̂0 )ω0 = 0 (19)
in computational fluid mechanics, was first presented
by Insperger and Stépán [26,27] for time-delay sys-
After substituting Eqs. (17) and (19) into Eq. (15)
tems. This semi-numerical method can be used to study
and eliminating (τ̂ − τ̂0 ), the authors obtain
the stability of solutions of DDEs with parametric exci-
x  (tˆ) + 2ξ ηx  (tˆ) + η2 x(tˆ) = −ψn[x(tˆ) − x(tˆ − τ̂ (tˆ))] tation terms. It has been widely used for making sta-
− ψnδ0 [θ (tˆ) − θ (tˆ − τ̂ (tˆ))] bility predications in milling processes. Due to the rel-
θ  (tˆ) + 2κθ  (tˆ) + θ (tˆ) = −n[x(tˆ) − x(tˆ − τ̂ (tˆ))] atively small number of parameters, the stability of the
two degree-of-freedom system (22) can be solved ana-
+ nδ0 [θ (tˆ) − θ (tˆ − τ̂ (tˆ))] (20)
lytically along the lines of prior work [11]. However,
where the dimensionless nominal depth of cut δ0 is here, the semi-discretization method will be used to
defined as determine the system stability since determining the
analytic form proposed in reference [11] is not feasible
v0 a 2 V0 a 2 after the feedback control scheme is implemented in
δ0 = = = d0 (21)
ω0 2K t Ω0 4π K t later sections of this paper. For a general overview of
the semi-discretization method, the reader is referred
The dimensionless equations of motion Eq. (20) are to the book by Insperger and Stépán [33].
coupled by the forces on bit through the state-dependent To use semi-discretization method, Eq. (22) needs
delay which originates from the term (τ̂ − τ̂0 )v0 in Eq. to be written in matrix form as
(17). Equation (20) is nonlinear and can not be analyt-
ically solved since τ̂ is the solution of Eq. (19). Based Ẋ = A1 X (tˆ) + A2 X (tˆ − τ̂0 ) (23)
on the works of Insperger et al. [11] and Besselink et where the state variables are assembled into a vector
al. [17], the state-dependent delay in Eq. (20) can be as
linearized by neglecting the perturbation component of ⎛ ⎞
x(tˆ)
time delay; that is, τ̂ (tˆ) ≡ τ̂0 . The resulting linearized ⎜ ẋ(tˆ) ⎟
equations of motion are of the form X (tˆ) = ⎜ ⎟
⎝ θ (tˆ) ⎠ (24)
 
x (tˆ) + 2ξ ηx (tˆ) + η x(tˆ) = −ψn[x(tˆ) − x(tˆ − τ̂0 )]
2
θ̇(tˆ)
− ψnδ0 [θ (tˆ) − θ (tˆ − τ̂0 )] and the coefficient matrices A1 and A2 are given by
θ  (tˆ) + 2κθ  (tˆ) + θ (tˆ) = −n[x(tˆ) − x(tˆ − τ̂0 )] ⎛ ⎞
0 1 0 0
+ nδ0 [θ (tˆ) − θ (tˆ − τ̂0 )] (22) ⎜ −η2 − nψ −2ξ η nψδ0 0 ⎟
A1 = ⎜⎝
⎟ (25)
Equations (22) represent a linear system of delay- 0 0 0 1 ⎠
differential equations (DDEs) with a constant delay τ̂0 . −n 0 −1 + nδ0 −2κ
⎛ ⎞
In this system, the axial and torsional dynamics are cou- 0 0 0 0
pled by an additional term [θ (tˆ) − θ (tˆ − τ̂0 )], which is ⎜ nψ 0 − nψδ0 0 ⎟
A2 = ⎜⎝ 0 0
⎟ (26)
dependent on the state-dependent delay. The equations 0 0⎠
of system dynamics shown here (i.e. Eq. 22) have the n 0 −nδ0 0

123
Coupled axial-torsional dynamics in rotary drilling 1897

In order to discretize the delay, the time interval divi-

sion [tˆi , tˆi+1 ] of length Δ tˆ is constructed in the follow-
ing manner
τ̂0
Δ tˆ = (27)
m + 0.5
where m is a integer. Then, a discrete map can be
defined as
yi+1 = Dyi (28)
where the subscript i corresponds to the time tˆ = i Δ tˆ.
The vector yi has dimension 2m +4 and its components
are structured as
yi = (xi , ẋi , ϕi , ϕ̇i , xi−1 , ϕi−1 , . . .
(29)
. . . , ϕi−m+1 , xi−m , ϕi−m )T

wherein the superscript (·)T has been used to denote

the transpose operation. The coefficient matrix D is a
(2m + 4) dimensional square matrix, which is given by
⎛ ⎞
0 ··· 0
⎜ 0 ··· 0 ⎟
⎜ P R ⎟
⎜ 0 ··· 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 ··· 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 0 0 0 0 ··· 0 0 0 ⎟
D=⎜ ⎟ (30)
⎜ 0 0 1 0 0 ··· 0 0 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 0 0 0 1 ··· 0 0 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ⎟ Fig. 4 Root locus for matrix D on complex plane for ξ = κ =
⎝ . . . . . . . . . ⎠ 0.02, ψ = 14.0, and m = 4 : a driving speed ω0 is increased
0 0 0 0 0 ··· 1 0 0 from 3.0 to 24.0 with δ0 = 1.0 and b depth of cut δ0 is increased
from 0.0 to 14.5 with ω0 = 6.0

Here, the P and R matrices are 4×4 and 4×2 matrices,

respectively. They can be determined as
P = e A1 Δ tˆ, R = (P − I )A−1
1 A2
where the quantity e A1Δ tˆ is the matrix exponential of
A1Δ tˆ. The superscript -1 is used to denote a matrix
inversion operation, and the matrix I is the identity
matrix.
The stability of solutions of the discrete map (28)
depends on the coefficient matrix D. The system is
stable if all of the eigenvalues of D are located within
the unit circle on the complex plane [34]. Alternatively,
the system is stable if the spectral radius of matrix D is
less than one and this stability condition can be written
as
2m+4
ρ(D) = max ( |λi | ) < 1
i=1
In Eq. (32), ρ(·) is a scalar value, matrix function
that yields the spectral radius of a matrix and λi are
(31) the eigenvalues of the matrix D. While increasing the
driving speed ω0 from 3.0 to 24.0 (corresponding to
Ω0 ≈ 60 − 480 rpm), a pair of eigenvalues will move
from the outside of the unit circle to the inside of the
unit circle and the system will become stable, as graphi-
cally depicted in Fig. 4a. However, when increasing the
nominal depth of cut δ0 , a pair of eigenvalues moves
outside the unit circle and the stable drilling motion
becomes unstable as shown in Fig. 4b.
3.3 Parametric studies in stability
The driving speed ω0 and nominal cutting depth δ0 are
two of the most important parameters that can readily
(32) be controlled in practical application, while the cutting

123
1898 X. Liu et al.

Fig. 5 Stability volume for

drilling operations in
ω0 − ψ − δ0 parameter
space for ξ = κ =
0.02, ω0 = 0.5 − 24.0, and
ψ = 0.1 − 26.0. The
surface shade corresponds
to the nominal depth of
stable cutting

Fig. 6 Cross-sections of
stability volume of Fig. 5 for
different cutting coefficients
ψ and ξ = κ = 0.02

coefficient ψ varies as the drill bit reaches different
strata, such as sand or rock. For further parametric stud-
ies, a stability volume is obtained numerically using the
linearized model in the three-dimensional ω0 − ψ − δ0
space and the obtained result is shown in Fig. 5. To clar-
ify, the region of stability in the volume refers to points
where the solution limtˆ→∞ ||X (tˆ)|| = 0. For the lin-
ear system, points outside the volume correspond to an
unbounded solution; that is, limtˆ→∞ ||X (tˆ)|| = ∞. It
is noted that under certain circumstances the unstable
points in the linear system may correspond to long-time
responses in the form of periodic and quasi-periodic
motions of the nonlinear system, as shown in earlier
studies [15–17]. The shaded volume, which takes the
shape of an irregular triangular prism, is the stability
volume. This region has different characteristics from
the stability chart of Insperger et al. [11]. Parameter
values corresponding to a point inside the volume will
lead to stable drilling (i.e., Eqs. (10)–(12)), while para-
meter values corresponding to a point outside the vol-
ume will lead to unstable drilling and something that
should be avoided in practice. As illustrated in Fig. 5,
with an increase in the cutting coefficient ψ from 0.1
to 26.0, the stable nominal depth of cut increases. It
is also noted that there is no stable region, when ω0 is
smaller than a critical value.
Cross-sections of the stability volume of Fig. 5 for
different values of the cutting coefficient ψ are shown
in Fig. 6, where the shaded areas correspond to stable
regions. As ψ is increased, the left boundary moves
toward the right while the top boundary moves up and
the total area of the stable region is enlarged. How-
ever, as ψ is increased, the minimum threshold value
of the drive speed ω0 needed to ensure stability is also

123
Coupled axial-torsional dynamics in rotary drilling
Fig. 7 Cross-sections of
stability volume of Fig. 5
for different nominal depths
of cut δ0 and ξ = κ = 0.02
Fig. 8 a Points A,B,C,D, and E in the cross-section of stabil-
ity volume at ψ = 14.0. Time histories of simulations for these
points: b point A, ω0 = 10.0 and δ0 = 1.33, c point B, ω0 = 10
increased. This threshold value is determined by the left
boundary. Cross-sections of Fig. 5 for different nomi-
nal cutting depth δ0 are shown in Fig. 7. As the nom-
inal cutting depth δ0 is increased, the bottom bound-
ary moves up and the stable area of drilling is reduced.
The stability of the points A,B,C,D, and E marked with
an asterisk in ω0 − δ0 plane for ψ = 14.0 in Fig. 8a
has been numerically ascertained. Here, point A is on
the stability boundary and it corresponds to periodic
motion as shown in Fig. 8b. Point B, which is at the
same driving speed ω0 but at a smaller cutting depth
δ0 , is located in the stable region and it leads to sta-
1899
and δ0 = 1.0, d point C, ω0 = 10.0 and δ0 = 1.75, e point D,
ω0 = 5.1 and δ0 = 1.75, and f point E, ω0 = 5.1 and δ0 = 0.25
ble drilling process as illustrated in Fig. 8c. Point C,
which is directly above Point A, is outside the stability
region and it corresponds to unstable drilling as shown
in Fig. 8d. Point D, which is very close to the left
boundary inside the stable region, is associated with
stable drilling as shown in Fig. 8e. However, for point
E, which is at the same driving speed as point D but in
a different stability region, the associated response is
unstable as shown in Fig. 8f.
The damping experienced by the drilling system Eq.
(1) is mainly derived from drill mud and it plays an
important role in determining the stability of the drilling
123
1900
Fig. 9 Stability boundaries
for different damping ratios
and ψ = 14.0
process. As illustrated in Fig. 9, with an increase in
the damping ratio, the top boundary travels upwards
and the stable region is enlarged. In the instance that
the damping ratio lim ξ = lim κ → 0, then there
exists no region where the amplitude of oscillations
decay to zero; rather, the system will exhibit periodic
or quasi-periodic motions such as that found in earlier
work [15–17]. It can be inferred that viscous or struc-
tural damping can play an important role in suppressing
vibrations due to the state-dependent delay effect (i.e.,
variable delay effect). Since the left boundary does not
shift with respect to the damping ratio, the effects of
drill-mud damping on stabilizing regenerative effects
(i.e., constant delay effect) are minimal. It is noted that
increasing either κ or ξ independently does not greatly
increase the area of stability.
In the ψ − δo plane, any points that cross the left
boundary are unstable due to the regenerative effect
(i.e., constant delay effect), while points that cross the
top boundary are unstable due to the state-dependent
delay effect (i.e., variable delay effect). Furthermore,
the numerical studies reveal that any motion initi-
ated from an unstable point close to the left boundary
diverges faster than the motion initiated from an unsta-
ble point close to the top boundary. When the corre-
sponding eigenvalues are examined, it is found that for
a crossing of the left boundary there is an associated
large positive, real-part eigenvalue compared to that
for a crossing of the top boundary. Due to this observa-
tion, it is expected that motions initiated from near the
left boundary would be difficult to control compared to
those initiated from near the top boundary.
123
X. Liu et al.
4 Controller design and application
4.1 Controller and stability analysis for the linearized
model of drilling system
Time-delay effects have been widely studied in net-
worked control systems, speed control of combustion
engines, and stability of metal cutting systems [14].
From the linear mapping (28), it is learned that the
drilling operation becomes more stable with decreas-
ing spectral radius ρ(D). In the works of Elbeyli
and Sun [35], an optimal method is proposed to
determine the feedback gains for a PD (proportional-
derivative) control system. Following their approach,
a control approach is developed for the drilling string
system governed by system (22) based on the semi-
discretization method.
An application of motor torque control at the top of
the drill string is the most common approach used in
practice. The system with the controller can be written
as
x  (tˆ) + 2ξ ηx  (tˆ) + η2 x(tˆ) = −ψn[x(tˆ) − x(tˆ − τ̂0 )]
− ψnδ0 [θ (tˆ) − θ (tˆ − τ̂0 )]
θ  (tˆ) + 2κθ  (tˆ) + θ (tˆ) = −n[x(tˆ) − x(tˆ − τ̂0 )]
+ nδ0 [θ (tˆ) − θ (tˆ − τ̂0 )] + u(tˆ, tˆ − τ̂0 ) (33)
where u(tˆ, tˆ − τ̂0 ) is the feedback of the state variables
that also includes delayed states. With this feedback
approach, the matrix form of Eq. (33) can be written as
Ẋ (tˆ) = A1 X (tˆ) + A2 X (tˆ − τ̂0 ) + Bu(tˆ, tˆ − τ̂0 ) (34)
Coupled axial-torsional dynamics in rotary drilling
Fig. 10 Block diagram for the time-delay system with control.
The elements in the dashed rectangle represent the uncontrolled
or original time-delay system governed by system (22) or (23)
where B is the input matrix and is given by
 T
B= 0001
The block diagram for the controlled system is illus-
trated in Fig. 10. The elements within the red-dashed
rectangle correspond to the original system and the
matrixes A1 , A2 , and vector X are given in Eqs. (23) to
(26). For a typical drill string, the torque on top can be
monitored and a measure of the torsion vibrations can
be obtained indirectly from the torque or directly from
a down-hole measurement [3]. Therefore, the output
measurement Y of the system can be written as
Y (tˆ) = C X (tˆ)
In Eq. (36), C is the observability matrix and has
two possible forms as follows:
 
  0010
Case 1: C = 0 0 1 0 , Case 2: C =
0001
(37)
Here, the authors study two control cases of the sys-
tem. For the Case 1 system, there is physically one mea-
surement, namely, the θ measurement, and for the Case
2 system, the measurements include both θ and θ̇ . Feed-
back control is carried out for both of these observer
cases. The feedback control law is constructed as
u = K 1 Y (tˆ) + K 2 Y (tˆ − τ̂0 )
where K 1 and K 2 are the feedback gains for the
states and the delayed states, respectively. They are
defined as
 
K1 = p K 1 = ( p1 p2 )
Case 1: , Case 2:
K2 = q K 2 = (q1 q2 )
1901
The control law Eq. (38) includes feedback of both
the current output and the delayed output. The effects
of this delayed feedback approach is investigated later.
On substituting Eqs. (36)–(39) into Eq. (34), the matrix
form of the system takes the form
Ẋ = (A1 + B K 1 C) X (tˆ) + (A2 + B K 2 C) X (tˆ − τ̂0 )
(40)
As carried out with Eq. (23), the stability of solu-
tions of the system with control Eq. (40) can be deter-
mined by using the semi-discretization method follow-
ing Eqs. (23)–(32). The feedback gains K 1 and K 2 are
unknowns that will be determined through an optimiza-
tion procedure. The stability of the system (40) depends
on the spectral radius of matrix D which is a function
(35)
of K 1 and K 2 in the controlled system. This condition
for stability can be written as
ρ(D(K 1 , K 2 )) < 1 (41)
The system is more stable with decreasing ρ(D
(K 1 , K 2 )), and the feedback gains K 1 and K 2 are found
through the following optimization procedure:

minimize: ρ(D(K 1 , K 2 ))
(42)
subject to: K 1 , K 2 ∈ [Bnd1 , Bnd2 ]
(36)
The terms Bnd1 and Bnd2 are the bounds that are
determined by the actuator or amplifier limitations and
constraints. Here, the following boundaries are used to
limit the feedback gains for the optimization method
Case 1: p, q ∈ [−10, 10] ,

p1 , q1 ∈ [−10, 10]
Case 2: (43)
p2 , q2 ∈ [−5, 5]
As shown in Fig. 11, by using the same parameters as
those used to carry out the simulations for the unstable
motion shown in Fig. 8d, a curved surface is obtained
by sweeping through the feedback gains. For Case 1,
the corresponding equations from Eqs. (37) and (39) are
(38) used, and the minimum value on the surface is found
to be min[ρ(D(K 1 , K 2 ))] = ρ(D(−5.17, 5.06)) =
0.979 < 1. From this figure, one can also conclude
that the unstable drilling in Fig. 8d can be stablized
by applying the feedback control proposed above, for
which the optimal feedback gains for the considered
(39) drilling parameters are found to be K 1 = −5.17 and
123
1902 X. Liu et al.

Fig. 11 Surface of the

spectral radius versus
feedback gains
ρ(D(K 1 , K 2 )) for Case 1:
K 1 = p, K 2 = q,
ξ = κ = 0.02, ψ = 14.0,
ω0 = 10, and δ0 = 1.75.
Here, the shading on the
surface corresponds to the
value of spectral radius ρ

Fig. 12 Stability
boundaries for different
control cases and
uncontrolled cases for
ξ = κ = 0.02 and ψ = 14.0

K 2 = 5.06. For Case 2, there are four feedback gains
that need to be optimized and the variable space is no
longer a surface but a four-dimensional hyper-plane.
The MATLAB Optimization Toolbox is used to carry
out multivariate optimization.
Further analysis is carried out to study the stabil-
ity of drilling operations for the two different control
cases and the results are shown Fig. 12. To obtain these
results, the authors used the Matlab Optimization Tool-
box to solve the control design problem given by Eq.
(42). For Case 1 with K 2 ≡ 0, which corresponds
to only feedback of the current torsion position with-
out the delay term in Eq. (38), the stability region is
enlarged by 8.2 times compared to the original stabil-
ity area without control (ω0 from 0 to 25). Addition-
ally, the controller moves the top boundary upward to
δ0 = 8.7 but has no effect on the left boundary, which
is difficult to control since that boundary is governed
by the regenerative effect as mentioned in Sect. 3.2. By
using Case 1 with two feedback gains for both torsion
position and the delayed torsion position, the stability
region is enlarged by the movement of both the top
boundary and left boundary and the stability area is
17.6 times that for the original system. Here, the left
boundary is changed because of the delay feedback.
For Case 2 with four feedback gains corresponding to
θ (tˆ), θ̇ (tˆ), θ (tˆ − τ̂0 ), and θ̇(tˆ − τ̂0 ), the top boundary
is pushed upward since the feedback of θ̇ is equivalent
to the addition of torsion damping.
Time histories for the response associated with point
F (ω0 = 10, δ0 = 12) in Fig. 12 are provided in Fig.
13 for three different control schemes. All of the dif-
ferent simulations have been started at the same initial
condition, which is the equilibrium position (x(tˆ) =
0 and θ (tˆ) = 0, for tˆ ≤ 0) with unit initial axial speed
and unit angular speed (i.e., x  (0) = 1, θ  (0) = 1). As
shown in Fig. 13a, the response of the system without
control (u ≡ 0) is unstable and quickly blows up. With

123
Coupled axial-torsional dynamics in rotary drilling
Fig. 13 Time histories of position response x(tˆ) (bold line) and
control effort u(tˆ) (dashed line) for application of different con-
trol strategies to the response at point F(10,12) in Fig. 12: a with-
out control, b with control, Case 1 with K 2 ≡ 0 ( p = −1.55),
Case 1 and K 2 ≡ 0 (without delayed feedback), the
response still diverges, but at a much slower rate, as
seen in Fig. 13b. The stable responses shown in Fig.
13c and Fig. 13d for location F are for Cases 1 and
2, respectively. With Case 1, the maximum amplitude
of position response x(tˆ) is 36 and the maximum con-
trol effort u(tˆ) is 4.75. By comparison, with Case 2, the
maximum amplitude of position response is 2.6 and the
maximum control effort is 5.12. These results indicate
that Case 2 is more effective than Case 1, since the con-
trol effort is almost the same but the settling time and
the amplitude of position response are much smaller.
4.2 Application to the nonlinear drilling system
The stability analysis presented in Sect. 3 and the
control strategies discussed in Sect. 4.1 were carried
out in the context of the linearized system given by
Eq. (22). Here, the authors demonstrate the useful-
ness of the control scheme for the nonlinear system
1903
c with control, Case 1 ( p = −1.981, q = 0.426), and d with
control, Case 2 ( p1 = −5.03, q1 = −1.67, p2 = −4.91, q2 =
−0.31)
given by Eq. (1). For parameter values of ω0 = 10
and δ0 = 2.5, the response obtained from the lin-
earized model grows unboundedly, while the response
obtained from the nonlinear model approaches a peri-
odic motion, as observed from Fig. 14a. The responses
obtained from the linear and nonlinear models have
nearly identical time histories until approximately tˆ =
70, when the system nonlinearities start to have an
influence on the response. Through further computa-
tions, it has been found that the system response has
a maximum Lyapunov exponent equal to zero, which
confirms the system response to be a periodic motion.
An expanded section of Fig. 14a between 150 and 200
nondimensional units of time is provided in Fig. 14b.
The presence of stick-slip vibrations is evident in the
response. These nonlinear vibrations can accelerate the
wear of drill bit and even cause failures of the drill
string.
To eliminate the nonlinear vibrations, the control
strategy outlined in Sect. 4.1 is applied to the non-
123
1904 X. Liu et al.

Fig. 14 Simulation of
nonlinear oscillation of drill
string for ξ = κ = 0.02,
ψ = 14.0, ω0 = 10 and
δ0 = 2.5: a comparison
between responses obtained
from the nonlinear model
Eq. (1) and the linearized
model Eq. (22) for the same
parameters and b stick-slip
phenomenon in torsion
response

Fig. 15 Simulation of
nonlinear system with
control for Case 1 with p =
−3.82, q = 3.61, ξ = κ =
0.02, ψ = 14.0, ω0 = 10,
and δ0 = 2.5): a time
response and b phase
portrait projection

linear model given by Eq. (1). As shown in Fig. 15,
both the time response and the phase portrait projec-
tion show the system state variables converge to zero
quickly after the control is activated. Extensive numer-
ical simulations in the ω0 − δ0 parametric plane con-
firm that the nonlinear system can be controlled if
the linearized system is stable for the same control
scheme.
5 Concluding remarks
In this paper, the authors have developed a reduced-
order drill string model with two degrees of freedom,
to consider axial and torsional motions of a typical drag
bit drilling system. By comparison with earlier stud-
ies [15–17], in this enhanced model, the authors take
into account torsion stiffness and torsion damping. In

123
Coupled axial-torsional dynamics in rotary drilling
addition, they treat a nonlinear system with dry friction,
loss of contact, and state-dependent time delay.
Studies conducted with these models help the
authors gain important insights into the stability of
motions and the role played by different parameters and
the delay effects. Stability analyses has been presented
for the linearized model using the semi-discretization
method in the parameter space spanned by the drive
speed ω0 , the cutting coefficient ψ, and the nominal
depth of cut δ0 . The stability volume is an irregular tri-
angular prism and motions initiated at any point inside
this stability volume lead to stable drilling responses.
Through the studies, it is found that the left boundary
of the stability diagram is influenced by the regenera-
tive effects (i.e., constant delay effects), while the top
boundary is influenced by the effect due to the state-
dependent delay (i.e., the effect due to variation of the
delay). An examination of the sensitivity of the sta-
bility boundaries with respect to different parameters
indicates that damping of the drilling system will only
affects the top boundary in the stability chart but has
virtually no effect on the left boundary. This points
to the difficulty in extending the stable region to low
driving speeds.
Control strategies are also presented in this paper
by using optimal feedback gains [35] and an approach
that makes use of semi-discretization. Feedback that
is proportional to the states and the delayed states are
also introduced. With this feedback control, it is shown
that the stability region for the controlled system with-
out delayed feedback is enlarged by only shifting the
previously mentioned top boundary, while the stability
region is enlarged by shifting of both the top bound-
ary and the left boundary in the controlled system with
delayed feedback. By applying optimal feedback gains,
the stability region is shown to greatly enlarged. To
show the effectiveness of the control strategy for a non-
linear drilling model, numerical studies are carried out
for a system which exhibits nonlinear stick-slip vibra-
tions in the uncontrolled case. The simulations show
that the stability characteristics of the nonlinear system
are consistent with those observed for the linearized
system and that the proposed control strategy is feasi-
ble for the nonlinear system.
Although the stability analysis and control strategy
presented in this study were pursued in the context of a
two degree-of-freedom model, their effectiveness can
be demonstrated through studies with higher degree-
of-freedom systems such as those obtained through
1905
finite-element modeling. Future work under consider-
ation includes examination of similar control strate-
gies with higher degree-of-freedom systems obtained
through finite-element constructions and experimental
validation.
Acknowledgments The authors from Shanghai Jiao Tong Uni-
versity gratefully acknowledge the support received through 973
Grant No. 2011CB706803 and No. 2014CB04660.
References
1. Bommer, P.: A Primer of Oilwell Drilling. The University
of Texas at Austin, Austin (2008)
2. Dufeyte, M.-P., Henneuse, H., Elf, A.: Detection and mon-
itoring of the slip-stick motion: field experiments. In:
SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, pp. 429–438, 11–14 March
1991
3. Pavone, D. R., Desplans, J. P.: Application of high sampling
rate downhole measurements for analysis and cure of stick-
slip in drilling, pp. 335–345. Number SPE 28324. (1994)
4. Navarro-Lopez, E. M., Suarez, R.: Practical approach to
modelling and controlling stick-slip oscillations in oilwell
drillstrings. In: Control Applications, 2004. Proceedings of
the 2004 IEEE International Conference on, vol. 2, pp. 1454–
1460, Sept 2004
5. Brett, J.F.: The genesis of bit-induced torsional drillstring
vibrations. SPE Drill. Eng. 7(3), 168–174 (1992)
6. Mihajlović, N., van Veggel, A.A., van de Wouw, N., Nijmei-
jer, H.: Analysis of friction-induced limit cycling in an exper-
imental drill-string system. ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Con-
trol 126(4), 709–720 (2004)
7. Liu, X., Vlajic, N., Long, X., Meng, G., Balachandran, B.:
Nonlinear motions of a flexible rotor with a drill bit: stick-
slip and delay effects. Nonlinear Dyn. 72(1–2), 61–77 (2013)
8. Liao, C.-M., Balachandran, B., Karkoub, M., Abdel-Magid,
Y.L.: Drill-string dynamics: reduced-order models and
experimental studies. ASME J. Vib. Acoust. 133(4), 041008
(2011)
9. Long, X.H., Balachandran, B., Mann, B.: Dynamics of
milling processes with variable time delays. Nonlinear Dyn.
47, 49–63 (2007)
10. Insperger, T., Stépán, G., Hartung, F., Turi, J.: State
dependent regenerative delay in milling processes. ASME
IDETC/CIE 2005, (DETC2005-85282), 2005 (2005)
11. Insperger, T., Stépán, G., Turi, J.: State-dependent delay in
regenerative turning processes. Nonlinear Dyn. 47, 275–283
(2007)
12. Stépán, G.: Modelling nonlinear regenerative effects in
metal cutting. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A Math.
Phys. Eng. Sci. 359(1781), 739–757 (2001)
13. Balachandran, B.: Nonlinear dynamics of milling processes.
Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci.
359(1781), 793–819 (2001)
14. Balachandran, B., Kalmar-Nagy, T., Gilsinn, D.E.: Delay
Differential Equations: Recent Advances and New Direc-
tions. Springer, New York (2009)
123
1906
15. Richard, T., Germay, C., Detournay, E.: Self-excited stick-
slip oscillations of drill bits. Comptes Rendus Mcanique
332(8), 619–626 (2004)
16. Richard, T., Germay, C., Detournay, E.: A simplified model
to explore the root cause of stickslip vibrations in drilling
systems with drag bits. J. Sound Vib. 305(3), 432–456 (2007)
17. Besselink, B., van de Wouw, N., Nijmeijer, H.: A semi-
analytical study of stick-slip oscillations in drilling systems.
ASME J. Comput. Nonlinear Dyn. 6(2), 021006 (2011)
18. Aldred, W. D., Sheppard, M. C.: Anadrill. Drillstring vibra-
tions: A new generation mechanism and control strategies.
In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, pp.
353–453, 4–7 Oct 1992
19. Jansen, J.D., van den Steen, L.: Active damping of self-
excited torsional vibrations in oil well drillstrings. J. Sound
Vib. 179(4), 647–668 (1995)
20. Tucker, W.R., Wang, C.: An integrated model for drill-string
dynamics. J. Sound Vib. 224(1), 123–165 (1999)
21. Kreuzer, E., Struck, H.: Active damping of spatio-temporal
dynamics of drill-strings. In: IUTAM Symposium on
Chaotic Dynamics and Control of Systems and Processes
in Mechanics 122, 407–417 (2005)
22. Yigit, A.S., Christoforou, A.P.: Stick-slip and bit-bounce
interaction in oil-well drillstrings. ASME J. Energy Resour.
Technol. 128(4), 268–274 (2006)
23. Khulief, Y.A., Al-Sulaiman, F.A., Bashmal, S.: Vibration
analysis of drillstrings with self-excited stickslip oscilla-
tions. J. Sound Vib. 299(3), 540–558 (2007)
24. de Bruin, J.C.A., Doris, A., van de Wouw, N., Heemels,
W.P.M.H., Nijmeijer, H.: Control of mechanical motion sys-
tems with non-collocation of actuation and friction: a popov
criterion approach for input-to-state stability and set-valued
nonlinearities. Automatica 45(2), 405–415 (2009)
25. Karkoub, M., Abdel-Magid, Y.L., Balachandran, B.: Drill-
string torsional vibration suppression using ga optimized
controllers. J. Can. Pet. Technol. 48(12), 1–7 (2009)
123
View publication stats
X. Liu et al.
26. Insperger, T., Stépán, G.: Semi-discretization method for
delayed systems. Int. J. Numer. Method. Eng. 55(5), 503–
518 (2002)
27. Insperger, T., Stépán, G.: Updated semi-discretization
method for periodic delay-differential equations with dis-
crete delay. Int. J. Numer. Method. Eng. 61(1), 117–141
(2004)
28. Liu, X., Vlajic, N., Long, X., Meng, G., Balachandran, B.:
Multiple regenerative effects in cutting process and nonlin-
ear oscillations. Int. J. Dyn. Control 2(1), 86–101 (2014)
29. Germay, C., van de Wouw, N., Nijmeijer, H., Sepulchre,
R.: Nonlinear drillstring dynamics analysis. SIAM J. Appl.
Dyn. Syst. 8(2), 527–553 (2009)
30. Germay, C., Denol, V., Detournay, E.: Multiple mode analy-
sis of the self-excited vibrations of rotary drilling systems.
J. Sound Vib. 325(12), 362–381 (2009)
31. Detournay, E., Defourny, P.: A phenomenological model for
the drilling action of drag bits. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci.
Geomech. Abstr. 29(1), 13–23 (1992)
32. Detournay, E., Richard, T., Shepherd, M.: Drilling response
of drag bits: theory and experiment. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min.
Sci. 45(8), 1347–1360 (2008)
33. Insperger, T., Stépán, G.: Semi-Discretization for Time-
Delay Systems: Stability and Engineering Applications, vol.
178. Springer, New York (2011)
34. Nayfeh, A.H., Balachandran, B.: Applied Nonlinear
Dynamics: Analytical, Computational, and Experimental
Methods. WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH, Weinheim (1995)
35. Elbeyli, O., Sun, J.Q.: On the semi-discretization method for
feedback control design of linear systems with time delay.
J. Sound Vib. 273(12), 429–440 (2004)