Offset Well

Analysis
Introduction

The term “offset wells” refers to wells that are geographically the
closest to the proposed well location.
Offset well analysis is one of the most important step in well design.
It is a unique opportunity to review other wells at the start of the
planning process, prior to making critical design decisions.
When performed accurately and presented properly, it provides the
basis for all design work and risk analysis.
Session Objectives
At the end of this training session, you will be able to:
►List the main objectives of offset well analysis

►Identify relevant offset wells

►Perform detailed offset well analysis and present the data in a meaningful format

►Identify wellbore stability concerns in offset wells

►Calculate the learning curve for a group of wells

►Define the technical limit

►Validate the pore and fracture pressures from offset wells data

►Estimate the Bottom Hole Static Temperature (BHST) from log data

►Analyze drill bit performance

Why Analyze Offset Wells ?
Why Analyze Offset Wells ?
The main objectives of the offset well analysis are:
►Identify all problem areas so that they can be addressed in the planning
phase
►Identify all events that might influence well design, equipment selection
and schedule
►Identify all good practices that should be continued
►Provide the necessary information to conduct a risk analysis

►Measure performance for benchmarking

►Identify constraints and areas of opportunity

►Validate assumptions
How can offset data analysis influence
the drilling schedule ?

e.g. weather downtime !!

How to Identify Relevant Offset
Wells
 Selecting Offset Wells – Small Fields
A-2, 1998 Prod Recommendation:
Select all wells
40
44 45
43
57
39
58
46 49 51
50 70
42
48 59

B-1, 1999, P&A

47
69
Reynosa
A-1, 1975, P&A The older wells can yield
56 89
71

209 90

52 60 68
67 91
55
72

information about the original

121
54 66 119 120 148
65
64 169
73 92 118
75
63 76 122 178
74
53 78 93 117
62 147
61 77
87 168
116

pressure, rock formation and

88 179
115 170

C-3 1976, Prod

123 171 172
126 140
79 94 124 146
82 125

C-4, Proposed
81 80 86 173
95 149
180
145
127 175

drilling hazards. The latest

96 114
98
113
97 144
85 141
128 174
84
99 112 140 152
150
83 142
105 139 186
100 111

wells (although not in the

143 167
101 151
129
153 176
102 104
110
137 138 154

C-2, 1976, Prod C-1, 1978, P&A

106 155
109 177

same structure) will yield

156
158
103
108 157

130
107 136 159

131
181
135

important information about

132
133 166
134

Scale (km) 160

184

performance (bits), and

161
162

165
182
163

0 1 2 3 existing drilling hazards.

164
183

Legend Multiple Field Example Map

Existing Wells
Proposed Well
Selecting Offset Wells – Infill Drilling Case 1

Recommendation:
Select the four closest
original wells and the
three closest infill wells

…and increase the

number of wells
depending on the findings
from the first seven wells
Legend

Original Development Wells (say 10 years old)

Recent Infill Wells (say less than one year old)
Proposed Well
Scale (km)

0 2 4 6
Selecting Offset Wells – Infill Drilling Case 2

Recommendation:
Select the four closest
original wells and all the
infill wells

…and increase the

number of wells
depending on the findings
from the eight seven wells
Legend

Original Development Wells (say 10 years old)

Recent Infill Wells (say less than one year old)
Proposed Well
Scale (km)

0 2 4 6
Selecting Offset Wells – Deep Exploration

Recommendation:
Select all the Deep Wells
and the two closest
shallow wells to have
coverage in all areas

Legend
Shallow Wells (less than 2000 m) or
Wells with no Available Data
Deep Wells (more than 4000 m)
Proposed Deep Wells
Scale (km)

0 10 20 30
Selecting Offset Wells – Rank Wildcat
Selecting Offset Wells – Rank Wildcat

Recommendation:
Central-1 Select all wells within 400
Km !
Onshore
Wells
George
Danielle

Navarin
Nancy Basin Wells

Scale (km)

0 100 200 300

Relevant Offset Well - Conclusion

Guidelines for the identification of relevant offset wells:

►Pick wells all around the target location

►Pick the closest wells available

►Old wells contain valuable information (original pressures, drilling hazards, etc)
►Recent wells are better for time analysis, bit selection, existing pore pressure,
etc.
►Wells in close proximity to the new well but in different structures or separated
by faults can still yield valuable information
►Ideally, we are looking for geological similarity combined with geometrical
similarity
Offset Well Selection Exercise

You are the well engineer for an offshore platform and you
have been asked to plan a sidetrack for well C2 (see platform
diagram on the next slide). Assume that all wells are
targeting the same reservoir.

Please identify the minimum offset wells you would select

and indicate why ?
 Offset Well Selection Exercise
A2 (1988) A4-ST (2002)
A3 (1988)
A1 (1988) A4 (1987)
A5 (1987)
A6 (1987)

B3 (1988)
B1 (1988) B2 (1988) B4 (1988) B5 (1987)
B6 (1988)
Proposed C2-ST

C6-ST (2002)
C1 (1989)
C6 (1988)
C5 (1989)
C2 (1989)
C3 (1989) C4 (1989)

C5-ST (2003)
D1 (1989)

D5 (1989) D6 (1989)

D3 (1989) D4 (1989) Scale (km)

D2 (1989)
0 1 2
 Offset Well Selection Exercise - Solution
A2 (1988) A4-ST (2001)
A3 (1988)
A1 (1988) A4 (1987)
A5 (1987)
A6 (1987)

B3 (1988)
B1 (1988) B2 (1988) B4 (1988) B5 (1987)
B6 (1988)
Proposed C2-ST

C6-ST (2001)
C1 (1989)
C6 (1988)
C5 (1989)
C2 (1989)
C3 (1989) C4 (1989)

C5-ST (2001)
D1 (1989)

D5 (1989) D6 (1989)

D3 (1989) D4 (1989) Scale (km)

D2 (1989)
0 1 2 3
What Data Should be Reviewed
What data should be reviewed ?
 Daily operations reports
 Drilling fluids, cementing, casing reports.
 Composite log (mud loggers log)
 Drilling data Log (MD Totco, Pason, 6 pen geolograph, etc.)
 Open hole logs (e.g. Caliper, Gama Ray, Resistivity, Neutron Density, Sonic,
etc.
 Cased hole logs (CBL-VDL, USIT, multi-finger calipers, etc.)
 Structure map showing location of offset wells (surface and subsurface) and
location of proposed wells
 Field map showing location of existing roads and existing pads
 End of Well Reports
 Seismic sections
 Bit Records
 Pore and Frac pressure profiles
 Temperature profiles
 Conversation with people familiar with the area
Where to look for data ?
 Client Files
 Client Information Management System (Database)
 Other Operators
 Regulatory Agencies
 Drilling Contractors
 Service Companies (cement, fluids, bits, etc.)
 Technical Literature (SPE, World Oil, etc)
 Regional Studies
 Specialty Companies like Drilling Records

The quality of the offset analysis is directly related to

the quality of the data !
Offset Well Data Review – Case History
0

An appraisal well was

2000
planned by IPM offshore
West Africa in the mid- 4000
Planned

nineties with no access to 6000

Actual

the seismic data.

(Depth (feet)
8000

10000

Around 9000 ft, problems 12000

started to severely impact 14000

the drilling performance.
16000

18000
0 25 50 75 100 125
Tim e (days)
 Case History - Seismic Cross Section

2000

4000
What do you think were
6000
the problems delaying
8000 performance ?
Depth (ft)

10000

12000
Wellbore deviation due
14000 to formation dip !
16000

18000
0 2 4 6 8 10

Inclination (deg)
The Importance of Data Presentation
 Challenger Case History
How a simple O-ring lead to a Catastrophe

Source: Visual Explanations, Edward R. Tufte, PhD, Graphics Press, Cheshire, Connecticut, 1997 (revised 2002)
 Sequence of Events

Source: Visual Explanations, Edward R. Tufte, PhD, Graphics Press, Cheshire, Connecticut, 1997 (revised 2002)
Example of Poor Data Presentation
(the answer is hidden)

Source: Visual Explanations, Edward R. Tufte, PhD, Graphics Press, Cheshire, Connecticut, 1997 (revised 2002)
 Same Information Re-arranged

Source: Visual Explanations, Edward R. Tufte, PhD, Graphics Press, Cheshire, Connecticut, 1997 (revised 2002)

The message is obvious :

Low temperature has a dramatic effect on O-ring integrity !
 The Importance of Offset Well
Selection and Data Presentation

A Case History
C-32 Case History

After reaching TD of the 8 ½” section the mud weight was

raised from 1.45 gr/cc to 1.52 gr/cc in response to high gas
units. A subsequent short trip resulted in total losses. Several
attempts were made to cure the losses to run 7” casing. The
casing was successfully run to bottom but was cemented with
partial losses. This was followed by a gas influx which
required cement to be bullheaded from surface. Then normal
operation was resumed.

Incident Classification: Catastrophic

Time Lost: 82 hours
Loss Cost Estimate: 104 KUSD
Case History : C-32 Planning
C-11 Legend:
C-29

C-50 Existing Wells

C-51
C-52 C-1
C-32
Future Wells
C-31

C-35
C-39 P&A Wells
C-6 C-30
C-21

C-17 C-27 C-33

C-28
C-3
C-46 C-42
C-38
C-37
C-36
C-8 C-4
C-43
C-44
C-32 - Initial Offset Wells Selection
C-11 Legend:
C-29

C-50 Existing Wells

C-51
C-52 C-1
C-32
Future Wells
C-31

C-35
C-39 P&A Wells
C-6 C-30
C-21

C-17 C-27 C-33

C-28
C-3
C-46 C-42
C-38
C-37
C-36
C-8 C-4
C-43
C-44
C-33 – Most Recent Offset
C-11 Legend:
C-29

C-50 Existing Wells

C-51
C-52 C-1
C-32
Future Wells
C-31

C-35
C-39 P&A Wells
C-6 C-30
C-21
C-33 was drilled just before
C-17 C-27 C-33
C-32 with the same rig and
C-28
C-3 crew working directly for the
C-46 Operator
C-38
C-37
C-36 C-42
C-8 C-4
C-43
C-44
Why were two nearby wells ignored ?

C-11 Legend:
C-29

C-50 Existing Wells

C-51
C-52 C-1
C-32
Future Wells
C-31

C-35
C-39 P&A Wells
C-6 C-30
C-21
C-33
Fault at
C-17 C-27
C-28 Reservoir
C-3
Level
C-46 C-42
C-38
C-37
C-36
C-8 C-4
C-43
C-44
How the Data was
Presented
C-21

-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
SUMMARY

5
B ent o nit e M ud 12 1/4" Hole Section:
( 1.12 - 1.2 2 ) g r / cc Drill to 450 m.
12 1/4'' Hole
9 5/8" , 36 lbs/ft, J-55, BTC
15m @450 m
@ 447
8 1/2" Hole Section:
796 m - suspended operations because the cuttings pit w as full
25 1213 m - koomey pump failure
Invert OB M 1450m - 448 m - logs
( 1.19 - 1.50 ) g r/ cc
35 8 1/2" Hole
7" , 23 lbs/ft, N-80,BTC @1455 m M D 6 1/8" Hole Section:
@ 1440m M D
2350 m - trip to 1440 m, Noted that the w ell w as flow ing (possibly from
45 sw abbing). Flared gas at surface.
Inver t OB M - conditioned mud from 1.74 to 1.77 gr/cc
( 1.59 - 1.9 6 ) g r / cc - increased mud density to 1.93 during w ell control
55 8rd
3 1/2" , N80, 9.3 lbs/ft,
@2,460.6 m M D 6 1/8" Hole
@2,476m M D

65
C-27

-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Summary
B ent o nit e M ud
( 1.0 6 - 1.2 1) g r/ cc
5 12 1/4" Hole Section: Drill to 300 m. Ran and cemented 9 5/8".
9 5/8" Casing , 36 lbs/ft, J-55, BTC 12 1/4'' Hole At 300 m recorded high drag.
@ 299.69 m @ 300 m
15 8 1/2" Hole Section: Drill to 1450 m. At 1081m, recorded densities: In = 1.36 gr/cc,
Out = 1.29 gr/cc. Wireline logs w ere run from 1450m to 800m.
Invert OB M
25
( 1.2 0 - 1.3 9 ) g r/ cc
6 1/8" Hole Section: Drill to 1760. At 1605 m, encountered total losses. Tried to
7" Casing , 23 lbs/ft, N-80, BTC
cure w ith LCM. At the end, spotted tw o cement plugs from 1562-1606m. At 1671m
35
@ 1449 m encountered partial losses. At 1685 m took a gas influx. A 1760 m, ran 5" liner.
8 1/2" Hole
@1450 m

45 4 1/8" Hole Section: Drilled to 2046 m. Encountered losses w hile drilling at 2046
Invert OB M mts. While running tubing, it w as ejected from the w ell. Bullheaded the kick. Had
( 1.51 - 1.6 8 ) g r/ cc
difficulties to circulate. Had to perforate the tubing to be able to cement.
55 6 1/8" Hole @
5" Casing , N 80, 5 lbs/ft, HD SLX
1760 m

65
C-30

-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Summary
B ent o nit e M ud
( 1.10 - 1.255) g r/ cc 12 1/4" Hole Section: Drilled to 450 m. Ran and cemented 9 5/8".
9 5/8" Casing, 36 lbs/ft, J-55, BTC 12 1/4'' Hole Section
@ 447.11 m @ 450 M 8 1/2" Hole Section: Drilled to 1505 m. Observed gas cut mud at 1219m. Density In
15
= 1.32, Out = 1.21 gr/cc. SCR at 70 SPM, 211 GPM. Increased MW to 1.33 gr/cc. At
1286 m, observed gas cut mud. In = 1.35, Out = 1.24 gr/cc. Increased MW to 1.35
Invert OB M
25 gr/cc. At 1300m, In = 1.35, Out = 1.24 gr/cc. Increased MW to = 1.36 gr/cc. At
( 1.2 5 - 1.4 1) g r/ cc
1333m, In = 1.36, Out = 1.24 gr/cc. Increased MW to = 1.37gr/cc. At 1380, In = 1.37,
Out = 1.28 gr/cc. Increased MW to = 1.38.
35
7" Casing , 23 lbs/ft, N-80, BTC
8 1/2" Hole Section
@ 1503.23 m M V @1505 m M D 6 1/8" Hole Section: Encountered losses at 1760m and 1769m. At 1769 m,
45 observed gas cut mud. MW Out = 1.46 g/cc. Increased MW to: In = 1.65g/cc w ith Out
Invert OB M
= 1.63 g/cc. Spotted cement plug. Drilled plug from 1645 to 1771 m. Observed gas
( 1.51 - 1.6 8 ) g r/ cc
cut mud at 1971m. In = 1.63, Out = 1.53 gr/cc. Increased MW to = 1.64gr/cc.
55 6.4 lbs/ft, M -VAM
2 7/8" Tubing , N80, 6 1/8" Hole Section At 2017m, degasser failed. A 2025 m, encountered losses: 6 m3. At 2255 m,
shoe @ 2384.60 m M D @ 2,402 m
observed gas cut mud, In = 1.66, Out = 1.58 gr/cc. Increased MW to = 1.67gr/cc w ith
65 LCM.
Same Information on a
Stick Chart
 Stick Chart of Original Wells
C-21 C-27 C-30
(Dec 2000) (Feb 2001) (Feb 2001)
0m
9-5/8” C-21
9-5/8” 300 m 9-5/8” C-27
447 m 447 m C-30
500 m

7” 7” 7”
1000 m
1219 Raised
MW fm 1.32
to 1.37)
1440 m 1450 m
1500 m 1503 m
JM-1 1605 (Total)
JM-5 5” 1760-1769
1685
1760 m Raised MW to 1.65
JM-11 2-7/8”
2-7/8” & set cement plug
2000 m 3-1/2” 1971
JI-3 2046 m 2046
2025 (6 m3)
JI-7 2350 Tubing was 2225 Raised
ejected from well 2384 m
2461 m Raised MW fm MW to 1.67
2500 m while cementing
1.74 to 1.77)
1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2

Mud Weight (gr/cc)

Legend Note:
Influx All wells were drilled with oil base mud from the start of
Lost Circulation the 8-1/2” hole section to TD
Gas Cut Mud
Stick Chart of all Wells
C-21 C-27 C-30 C-1 C-29 C-33
(Dec 2000) (Feb 2001) (Feb 2001) (Aug 1967) (May 2001) (Dec 2002)
0m
Had to Drag while Drag of 3 to
9-5/8” 9-5/8” POOH 6 tons while
9-5/8” 9-5/8” 10-3/4” perform a
300 m clean out trip 9-5/8” drilling
447 m after logging
500 m 447 m 405 m 457 m
Lost 97 m3
during well
control ops
7” 7” 7” and 54 m3
900 m 7” 7” while,
1000 m Partial Losses
1219 Raised while cementing
MW fm 1.32 cementing 7” casing
to 1.37) 9-5/8” 1568 (50 m3) casing (24 m3) 1400
1440 m 1388 m
1450 m 1392 m
1500 m 1503 m
JM-1 1605 (Total) 1648 m 1583 (110 m3)
JM-5 5” 1760-1769
1685 Raised MW to
JM-11 1760 m
2-7/8” 1.65 & set
3-1/2” 1902
3-1/2” 2-7/8” 1971
cement plug
Shut-in and
2000 m
JI-3 2046 m 2046 2025 (6 m3)
circulated
(260 m3) through
JI-7 2350 Tubing was 2225 Raised MW mud-gas
ejected from well 2384 m to 1.67 5”
2365 m X3 separator
2461 m
Raised MW 2350 m
2500 m fm 1.74 to while cementing
1.77)

Legend
Influx Notes: 2940 m (Partial)
Lost Circulation - C-1 was drilled entirely with water base mud
- All other wells were drilled with oil base mud from the start of
Gas Cut Mud the 8-1/2” hole section to TD
Mud Weights Presented Separately

C-21
C-27
C-30
C-01
C-29
C-33

1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2 2.1

Mud Weight (gr/cc)

Other Examples of Stick
Charts
Example Stick Chart - Casing Seats
 Example Stick Chart – Deep Salt Drilling
Planned
Well L1 SGM1 C1 S102 CA 1 B1 T1 LX1
1988 1983 1964 1963 1963 1970 1968 1988 1981
0m

1000 m

2000 m

3000 m

4000 m

? Top of Salt
?
5000 m Base of Salt
Legend
Influx
6000 m Lost Circulation
Stuck Pipe
Reaming
Stick Charts - Comments

►The objective is to enhance the effectiveness of the data presentation and

re-enforce the message
►A stick chart can include all data but sometimes it is better to be focused on
a specific issue (e.g., casing seats, lost circulation, drag, etc.)
►For a stick chart to be most effective, the formation depths must also be
plotted for each well so that events can be identified as a function of the
geology rather than a function of depth
RiskTrack and No Drilling Surprise
NDS - Example Time vs Depth Plot
3D Visualization of Offset Data

Display of all available data in geologic context

Illustration of different scales of data
Best way to present results to client
Identification of Wellbore
Stability Concerns from
Offset Well Data
Wellbore Stability

Offset well analysis can yield valuable information regarding

the risk of wellbore instability
Things to look for include:
 Stuck pipe events
 Caliper logs
 Reaming (depth, intensity)
 Drag during trips (depth, magnitude)
 Presence of fill on bottom after tripping
 Notes regarding cuttings coming over the shaker
 Drilling fluid properties
Wellbore Stability – Caliper Logs

Caliper logs indicate the magnitude and sometimes the

geometry of hole enlargement. There are various types of
caliper logs:
 single arm
 two arm single axis
 two arm dual axis
 four arm dual axis
 six arm triple axis
 LWD Calipers
Multiple axis calipers can provide information on the nature of
the instability (chemical versus stress induced)
Example – One Axis Caliper in 6-1/8” Hole

This example is from

an oil base mud
application which
typically yields “gun
barrel” holes.
Example – One Axis Caliper in 9-7/8” Hole

Note the
presence of mud
cake on the
borehole wall
Example 6 arm Caliper in 12-1/4” Hole
Axis 1 Axis 2 Axis 3
Sand
Shale

Gamma Ray 3”
Wellbore ovality is a good example of stress induced instability.
Note that it is also obvious in the sand.
6 arm Caliper Borehole Presentation

This example is from a 6-1/4” hole

Example of LWD Caliper

Ultrasonic shows clear spiralling in the

first run

Pendulum
Spiralling stopped by introduction of a
BHA
Near bit stabilizer

Near bit
stab.
Stick Chart Exercise

Prepare a stick chart for the well you have been assigned (through a
random draw)
As a minimum, your stick chart should show:
- well name and date drilled
- hole and casing depths
- hole and casing sizes
- mud system used including density range
- all drilling hazards including wellbore stability concerns

Those who have time can plot the mud density vs depth.
Offset Wells Time
Analysis
Offset Wells Time Analysis

The main objectives of offset wells time analysis are:

–Prepare a time estimate for the well to be drilled
–Identify areas of opportunity (Non Productive Time)
–Identify areas that require special attention (flat times, hard
formations, etc.)
 Time Analysis – Example 1
35.0
30.0
Non Productive Time
Total time (days)

25.0 Productive Time

20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
NPT Distribution
A B C D Tight Hole Plugged flowline Cementing
2% 1% Equipment Failure
Wells Bit Failure
5% 1%

Rig Repair
Note: NPT on a well is defined as the 7%

total time taken to perform those Plugged Casing

activities that do not progress well due to LCM

13% Lost Circulation
Well Control 57%
operations towards the desired 14%

objective, expressed as a percentage of

Four Wells Weighted Average NPT = 19.6%
the total operating time
Time Analysis – Example 2

45.0
40.0 Logging
35.0
Well Completion
Time (Days)

30.0
Cementing
25.0
20.0 Other
15.0 Unplanned BHA & Bit Trips
10.0 Rig Dow ntime
5.0 Location Subsidence
0.0
Productive Time
RS32 RS33 RS34 RS35 RS 36 S779 S780

Wells in Chronological Order

Time Analysis – Definitions Example

Hole Section Start Stop

Drill Surface Hole
Run Surface Casing
Drill Intermediate Hole
Run Intermediate Section
Drill Production Hole
Core (optional)
Drill Production Hole
Run Production Casing
Spud When the bit reaches TD
End of previous section When starting to drill next hole
section (after LOT)
End of previous section When the bit reaches TD
End of previous section When starting to drill next hole
section (after LOT)
End of previous section When the bit reaches core
point
End of previous section When starting to drill new hole
after reaming the cored hole
End of previous section When the bit reaches TD
End of previous section Rig Release (assume the
drilling rig does not do the
completion)

What is important is to be consistent !

Time Analysis – Example 3

Well A Well B Well C Well D

Drill 11” Hole 2.31 0.24 0.23 0.25
Run 8-5/8” Casing 2.56 1.29 1.04 0.85
Drill 7-7/8” Hole 18.27 6.91 5.73 9.25
Run 4-1/2” Casing 8.44 5.27 1.18 1.31

This data can be normalized for the depth of each hole section to provide
performance data to estimate the next well. The drilling data can easily be
converted to “feet per day” while the flat times will be broken down in a fixed
component (rigging up to run casing and BOP testing is takes the same time
regardless of the hole depth) and a ft/day component.
Example 3 Data - Time Versus Depth Curves
0

2000 Well A
Well B
This is the data from
4000 Well C
the previous slide
Well D presented in a
Depth (ft)

6000
graphical method.
8000

10000

12000

14000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time (days)
Time Analysis Presentation Example
Productive Well Times

500

1000

1500
Removing NPT
highlights was is Kiwa 1
Measured Depth (m)

achievable. This is also

2000
Maui 5
Maui 6
2500 referred to as “CleanMaui 7
3000
Time”
3500

4000

4500
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00
Days
T vs D Presentation - Case History
0

1000

2000
Initial Presentation in
the End of Well Report
3000

4000

5000

400
6000
0 100 200 300 400 500

T i m e ( d a y s)
T vs D Presentation - Case History
0

Revised Presentation
1000

2000
Highlights Areas on
(Depth (m)

3000 which to Focus

4000

5000

6000
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Time (days)
Detailed Time Analysis Example
Section
30" Hole / 24" Conductor

Well A-10 A-9 A-11 A-6 A-3 A-5 A-2 A-7 A-8

Depth (casing) 201.00 200.00 193.00 192.00 191.00 192.00 191.00 191.00 199.00

Operation (hrs)
Conductor Running
R/U to run 18-5/8" 2.00 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 0.50 1.00
P/U and check shoe joint 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 3.00
Run conductor 5.00 6.00 7.50 7.00 5.50 7.00 8.50 10.50 14.50
Total Conductor Running 8.00 9.00 11.00 9.00 9.00 8.00 13.00 11.00 15.50
Conductor Cementing
R/U to run cementing string 2.00 2.50 2.50 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Run Cementing string & stab into float shoe 1.00 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 0.50 2.00
Cement conductor 7.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 2.50 1.50 1.00 1.50
POOH cementing string 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.50 1.00
R/D cementing equipment 6.00 6.00 8.50 2.00 1.00 0.50 4.00 0.50
Total Conductor Cementing 11.50 14.50 12.50 12.50 6.00 6.00 3.50 9.00 3.00
Install Diverter
Cut Conductor 2.00 2.00
Install 18-5/8" VG Loc 2.00
N/U Diverter 2.00 11.00 13.00 11.50 14.00 10.50 9.50 11.00 6.00
Pressure test Diverter & Conductor 2.50 0.50 0.50 1.00 1.50 0.50 2.50 2.00
Total Install diverter 8.50 11.00 13.50 12.00 15.00 14.00 10.00 13.50 8.00
Woodside Drilling Performance 1968-1992

170

30

3500

Ref: SPE 35077 – Step Change Improvement and High Rate Learning are Delivered by Targeting
Technical Limits on Sub-Sea Wells, DF Bond, PW Scott, PE Page and TM Windham
Technical Limit Definition

(20-40%) (10-15%)
Actual
Technical Limit + Waste + NPT
Time =

The Technical Limit is what could be achieved in a flawless

operation using the best possible people, planning and technology
Technical Limit – Principal Assumptions
No activity is rushed, safety is not compromised
All people are competent and perfectly informed as to their tasks (time for pre-
job briefing can be included in the activity duration)
All tools, materials and people are available precisely when needed.
All tools (including the rig) are fit for purpose and no tools fail.
All maintenance is done off the critical path.
The casing program is the minimum needed for well integrity.
Each section of hole is drilled with 1 assembly and 1 bit.
ROP is the composite best in the field or region (including 10 min connection
time / stand)
Hole condition is perfect and does not require wiper trips or clean out trips.

Ref: SPE 35077 – Step Change Improvement and High Rate Learning are Delivered by Targeting
Technical Limits on Sub-Sea Wells, DF Bond, PW Scott, PE Page and TM Windham
Technical Limit Methodology
1. List drilling data by activity and duration
2. Pull out NPT and waste (bit trips, wiper trips, rig maintenance, etc.)
3. Group reported activities by normal well construction sequence I.e. Set
Casing, wellhead/BOP, drill shoe track/LOT, etc (use of consistent
definitions essential)
4. Tabulate instantaneous ROP from mud log
5. Determine TL average ROP for section
90’/ Inst ROP (min/ft) + 10 min/stand = Pseudo ROP inc. connections
6. Tabulate each well by sequence
7. Take best times for each to determine best time composite well
8. Create TL well with best flat from above but use TL section ROP for generic
hole sections
 Example Technical Limit Spreadsheet
Section
30" Hole / 24" Conductor

Well A-10 A-9 A-11 A-6 A-3 A-5 A-2 A-7 A-8 AVG MIN MAX

Depth (casing) 201.00 200.00 193.00 192.00 191.00 192.00 191.00 191.00 199.00 194.44 191.00 201.00

Operation (hrs)
Conductor Running
R/U to run 18-5/8" 2.00 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 0.50 1.00 1.33 0.50 2.00
P/U and check shoe joint 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.67 1.00 3.00
Run conductor 5.00 6.00 7.50 7.00 5.50 7.00 8.50 10.50 14.50 7.94 5.00 14.50
Total Conductor Running 8.00 9.00 11.00 9.00 9.00 8.00 13.00 11.00 15.50 10.94 6.50 19.50
Conductor Cementing
R/U to run cementing string 2.00 2.50 2.50 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.39 0.50 2.50
Run Cementing string & stab into float shoe 1.00 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 0.50 2.00 1.36 0.50 2.00
Cement conductor 7.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 1.50 2.50 1.50 1.00 1.50 2.22 1.00 7.50
POOH cementing string 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 0.50 2.00
R/D cementing equipment 6.00 6.00 8.50 2.00 1.00 0.50 4.00 0.50 3.56 0.50 8.50
Total Conductor Cementing 11.50 14.50 12.50 12.50 6.00 6.00 3.50 9.00 3.00 9.53 3.00 22.50
Install Diverter
Cut Conductor 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
Install 18-5/8" VG Loc 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
N/U Diverter 2.00 11.00 13.00 11.50 14.00 10.50 9.50 11.00 6.00 9.83 2.00 14.00
Pressure test Diverter & Conductor 2.50 0.50 0.50 1.00 1.50 0.50 2.50 2.00 1.38 0.50 2.50
Total Install diverter 8.50 11.00 13.50 12.00 15.00 14.00 10.00 13.50 8.00 15.21 6.50 20.50

Breaking down the well in small increments is essential to estimate the technical limit.
For example, the best time for Total Conductor Running was on well A-10 and A-5 (8.0
hrs) while the composite best time for this activity is 6.5 hours.
Technical Limit - Estimate Success to be…

Technology Fortune
15% 5%

People
80%

Ref: Technical Limit Workshop, Brunei Shell Petroleum, Nov 4 and 5, 1998
Technical Limit Reference Page
The Learning Curve
The Learning Curve

The concept of the learning curve was first developed by the airline
manufacturing industry. Although no particular incentives were in
place, it was observed that the time required to build aircrafts was
getting smaller as a time progressed (and the number of aircrafts
built increased).

Similarly for drilling operations, each drilling campaign displays a

learning curve with the first wells taking longer to drill than the
last.
The Learning Curve

t  c1 * e n c 2
 c3(1 )*
Where:

t is the time required to drill the nth well

n is the well number in the drilling sequence

c1 is a constant reflecting how much longer the initial well takes to

drill than the idealized final well

c2 is a constant reflecting the speed with which the drilling organisation

reaches the minimum drilling time for an area

c3 is a constant reflecting the ideal minimum drilling time for an area

Ref: SPE 15362 - The Drilling Performance Curve: A Yardstick for Judging Drilling Performance, JF
Brett and KK Millheim
Learning Curve

t  c1 * e n c 2(1 )*
 c3
30
25
T im e ( d a y s )

20 c1
15
10 ?
5 c3
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Wells in Chronological Order
 Value of C2 Industry Average: C2 = 0.34 (“C” Performers)
Good Projects: 0.5<C2<1.0 (“B” Performers)
Excellent Projects: C2>1.0 (“A” Performers)
Ref: SPE 15362 - The Drilling Performance Curve: A Yardstick for Judging Drilling Performance

C2 = 0.34 C2 = 0.50
30 30
25 25
160 days 148 days
Time (days)

Time (days)
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Wells in Chronological Order Wells in Chronological Order

C2 = 1.00 C2 = 1.50
30 30
25 25
134 days 129 days
Time (days)

Time (days)
20 20
15 15 You can drill 3 more wells !
10 10
5 5
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Wells in Chronological Order Wells in Chronological Order
Calculation of C1, C2 & C 3 Using Excel Solver®

The method proposed by Brett and Millheim to calculate the various coefficients is
a non linear minimization technique. It calculates the value of the three C’s for the
best possible fit with the existing data
It can easily be
performed by building a
simple Excel spreadsheet
and using the Solver
option.
If Excel Solver® is not
located in the “Tools”
menu of your Excel
version, you can add it by
using “Add-Ins” from the
“Tools” menu
 Calculation of C2 Using Excel Solver®

C1 5.03 Actual time of Well No 1 minus C3

C2 0.90 Guess (intially try 0.45) Initial Values
C3 8.045 Average of last two wells
Cells
Actual Time Estimated Square of (Actual- Calculated by
Well Order (days) Time (days) Estimated Time) Solver® from
1 12.96 12.99 0.0007 initial values
2 10.13 10.01 0.0153
3 8.67 8.79 0.0151
4 8.25 8.30 0.0024
5 8.13 8.10 0.0010
6 7.96 8.02 0.0032 Target Cell
This is calculated using the Sum 0.0377
learning curve formula
Least Square Error 0.0793 =Square Root(Sum/Number of Wells)

Ref: Benton – Vinccler Project: A Drilling Performance Approach, Julio Guzman GFE Project
Exercise to Calculate the Learning Curve
Actual Time
1. Calculate the Learning Curve
Well Order (days)
1 33.1
Coefficients for the group of well
2 20.9 shown on the left.
3 19.0
4 19.0
5 15.5 2. How well is this project
6 17.6 performing from a learning curve
7 16.4 standpoint ?
8 14.0
9 15.6
10 16.1
11 11.9
12 12.6
Learning Curve Exercise
C1 20.9
C2 0.45
C3 12.3

Actual Time Estimated Square of (Actual- This is what your

Well Order (days) Time (days) Estimated Time)
1 33.1 33.10 0.0000 sheet should look
2 20.9 25.54 21.5718 like before using
3 19.0 20.73 2.9825
4 19.0 17.66 1.8086 Solver
5 15.5 15.70 0.0386
6 17.6 14.45 9.9378
7 16.4 13.65 7.5557
8 14.0 13.14 0.7336
9 15.6 12.82 7.7301
10 16.1 12.61 12.1574
11 11.9 12.48 0.3383
12 12.6 12.40 0.0409
Sum 64.8953

Least Square Error 2.3254978

Learning Curve - Solution

C1 17.5
C2 0.74 Given a C2 of 0.74, this is
C3 14.9
considered a “Good” project
Actual Time Estimated Square of (Actual-
from a learning curve
Well Order (days) Time (days) Estimated Time) Standpoint
1 33.1 32.34 0.5827
2 20.9 23.20 5.2990
3 19.0 18.84 0.0256 35.0
4 19.0 16.76 5.0302 30.0 Actual
5 15.5 15.76 0.0690 25.0

Time (days)
6 17.6 15.29 5.3468 Calculated
20.0
7 16.4 15.06 1.7932
8 14.0 14.95 0.9075
15.0
9 15.6 14.90 0.4887 10.0
10 16.1 14.88 1.4977 5.0
11 11.9 14.86 8.7878 0.0
12 12.6 14.86 5.1021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Sum 34.9302
Wells in Chronological Order
Least Square Error 1.7061217
Estimation of Bottom Hole
Static Temperature
Bottom Hole Static Temperature (BHST)

The BHST for each hole section is used to estimate the geothermal
gradient of the formation (temperature increase as a function of
depth)
This information is critical to design the thickening time of cement
slurries and to test it in accordance with the test schedules of the API
RP 10B
In high temperature application, the data is also used to check the
stability of drilling/completion fluids and to determine the
temperature requirements of downhole equipment.
The best source to get the BHST is the production records
BHST in Exploration Drilling

In exploration drilling, offset wells with production history are

seldom available
It is also often the case at the start of a development drilling
campaign
In these instances, an alternative method of estimating the
BHST is necessary
BHST Estimation using the Horner Plot

The idea of using a Horner plot for the estimation of BHST was first
introduced by Timko & Fertl in 1972.
This was based on the analogy with conventional pressure build-up
method.
The Horner plot method is not fully accurate but given its simplicity,
it has received wide acceptance by well engineers.

Ref: SPE 5036 Static Formation Temperature From Well Logs – Am Empirical Method. WL Dowdle & WM
Cobb. JPT November 1975
Typical Log Header

Maximum Recorded Temperatures 128 degF 128 128

Circulation Stopped Time 21-Dec-2002 21:00
Logger on Bottom Time 23-Dec-2002 1:30

What will happen to the

temperature if a second
logging run is performed
without circulating the
well ?
BHST Estimation using the Horner Plot

t Circulation time after

reaching TD (hrs)
BHST
Time since end of
t
(Linear Scale)

circulation (hrs)

+ Temp from Log 2

Note that when:

t , t  t 1
+ Temp from Log 1
t

1 t  t 10
t
(Logarithmic Scale)
Horner Plot Example

Tool 1 Tool 2

126 degF 128 degF

21 Dec 2002 21:00 21 Dec 2002 21:00
23 Dec 2002 01:30 24 Dec 2002 16:00

Assume the well was circulated for three hours from the time TD was
reached to the start of the trip out to log
Horner Plot Example
Circulation Time t (hrs) 3
Circulation Stopped 12/21/2002 21:00

Logging Run Number Log On Bottom delta t (hours) (t+ delta t )/delta t Temp
1 12/23/2002 1:30 28.5 1.1053 126
2 12/24/2002 4:00 55 1.0545 128

Estimated BHST = 130 degF

128.5 130.5
130
128 129.5

Temperature (deg F)
Temperature (deg F)

y = -42.577Ln(x) + 130.26
127.5 129
Applying a logarithmic 128.5
127 trend line to the graph and 128
forecasting backward to x = 127.5
126.5 1 (using Excel).
127
126 126.5
126
125.5 125.5
1 10 1.0000 10.0000
(t+detla t)/delta t (t+delta t)/delta t
BHST Exercise

Upon reaching TD, a deep well offshore Venezuela was circulated

for 5 hours before pulling out of the hole to log. The circulated
was stopped on 16 Oct 2001 at 07:30. Three different logging
tools were run in the well and the maximum temperature
recorded is as follows:
Tool No Reached TD Max Temp Recorded (defF)
1 17 Oct 2001 at 04:45 401
2 17 Oct 2001 at 12:16 406
3 17 Oct 2001 at 21:36 409

Estimate the BHST using the Horner plot method.

BHST Exercise - Solution
Circulation Time t (hrs) 5
Circulation Stopped 10/16/2001 7:30

Logging Run Number Log On Bottom delta t (hours) (t+ delta t)/delta t Temp
1 10/17/2001 4:45 21.25 1.2353 401
2 10/17/2001 12:16 28.77 1.1738 406
3 10/17/2001 21:36 38.10 1.1312 409

Plotting the data : Applying the trendline:

410 425
409
408 420
Temperature (degF)

Temperature (degF)
407 y = -91.341Ln(x) + 420.4
406 415
405
Estimated BHST = 420 degF
404 410
403
402 405
401
400 400
1.0000 10.0000 1.0000 10.0000
(t+detla t)/delta t (t+detla t)/delta t

Offset Well Analysis

 Pore Pressure & Fracture
Gradient
(Validation Using Offset Well Data)
Pore Pressure & Fracture Gradient

The estimation of the pore pressure and fracture gradient is the

responsibility of the subsurface team (geologist, geophysicist and
reservoir engineer). They provide this information to the Well
Engineer as part of the Well Proposal.

The Well Engineer is however responsible for performing a quality

assurance check against the data which can be found in offset well
records and to challenge the subsurface team if discrepancies are
discovered.
Pore Pressure & Fracture Gradient
Offset records generally contain information to help validate the
predictions prepared by the subsurface team.

For pore pressure:

 RFT (Repeat Formation Tester) Pressures
 DST (Drill Stem Tests) Pressures
 Kicks
For fracture pressure:
 LOT (Leak Off Tests)
 FIT (Formation Integrity Test)*
 Stimulation fracture data
 Cement height data
 Lost circulation information

* This provides an indication that the frac pressure is at least that high
Pore and Frac Pressure from Offset WellsHochstetter Offset Pore & Frac Pressures

Pore & Frac Pressure (ppg)

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
0

Maui 5 - 7 Te Whatu 2

500

An example
Witiora 1
Kiwa 1

Te Whatu 2
1000

RFT Data Maui 4 from a

group of
1500
Kiwa 1
TVD rkb (m)

Witiora 1

offshore
2000
Maui 5
Maui 6
Maui 7

wells
2500
Well Test Data
Maui 1 - 3

Kiwa 1
3000
Te Whatu 2

Witiora 1
3500

4000
Formation Strength Data - Example
0
Kauhauroa-1

Kauhauroa-2

1000 Kauhauroa-3
FIT

Kauhauroa-4

2000 Kauhauroa-5

Kauhauroa-3 Lost
Depth (ft MD rkb)

Circulation MW
Kauhauroa-4 Lost
3000 Circulation MW

4000
FIT

Formation Integrity
5000 Tests (FIT) are clearly
Identified FIT

6000
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
EMW (ppg)
Drill Bit Performance
Analysis
Drill Bit Performance Analysis

0
Drill bit performance analysis
1000
is an important component of
2000
offset well analysis.
(Depth (m)

Indeed, the overall drilling

3000

4000
performance depends largely
5000 on the performance of the
6000 drilling bits.
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Time (days)
Drill Bit Performance

The main factors that impact bit performance are:

• Bit type versus formation being drilled
• Drilling parameters (WOB, rpm, nozzles/flowrates)
• Rotating hours
• Drill string vibrations (BHA, hole geometry, etc.)
• Drilling Fluids
• Presence of junk in the hole

A close analysis of the offset well bit records can yield valuable
information for improving the performance on subsequent wells.
 Typical Bit Record

Rig Name: OE Well Name: H-1 Operator: Conf. Report Date: 6-March-2000

Bit Run Bit Manuf. Bit IADC Serial Nozzles TFA Footage Depth Hours Avg. Avg. Avg. Circ. SPM Cutters Bea Gau Oth. Rsn.
No. No. Size Type Code Number (1/32 in) in2 (m) Out On Bit ROP WOB RPM Press. FLOW I O D L ring ge
(in.) (m) (hr.) ( m/hr ) (Klbs) (psi) gpm
1 1 26 Reed EMS 11 KCC 115 Y96189 2 x 20 ; 1 x 22 2.356 93 310 6.0 15.5 2 80 750 1000 0 0 NO A E I NO TD

1 2 26 Reed EMS 11 KCC 115 Y96189 2 x 20 ; 1 x 22 2.356 2 312 0.5 4.0 6 80 750 1000 0 0 NO A E I NO TD

2 1 17 1/2 Reed EMS 13 GLKC 135 X54592 1 x 16 ; 3 x 20 1.117 1088 1400 29.5 36.9 12 130 2400 900 1 1 NO A E I NO TD

3 1 12 1/4 Hycalog DS 69 HFGNV 22809 4 x 14 ; 2 x 16 0.994 1460 2860 56.5 25.8 12 160 2600 850 1 1 WT G X I PN TD

4 1 8 1/2 Hycalog DS 56 DGJ M432 18757 3 x 12 ; 1 x15 0.504 4 2864 4.5 0.9 20 110 1900 450 0 0 BU A X I NO PR

5 1 8 1/2 Reed EHP 51 ALKDH 517 KN2702 2 x 14 ; 1 x 16 0.497 326 3190 53.5 6.1 25 100 2050 450 3 3 WT A E I NO HR

4 2 8 1/2 Hycalog DS 56 DGJ M432 18757 1 x 14 ; 2 x 16 0.543 2 3192 3.5 0.6 20 130 2300 450 0 0 BU A X I NO PR

6 1 8 1/2 Hycalog EHP 51 ALKDH 517 KT2772 3 x 14 0.451 106 3298 9.0 11.8 20 100 2400 450 1 1 NO A E I NO TD
IADC Bit Dull Grading Code

The International Association of Drilling Contractors has

developed a standard methodology for describing used bits. This
information is essential for detailed bit performance analysis.

The methodology is composed of an 8 character code that

describes bit wear and the reason why the bit was pulled.

Cutting Structure B G Remarks

INNER OUTERR DULL LOCA- BRNG/ GAUGE OTHER REASON
ROWS OWS CHAR TION SEALS 1/16” CHAR PULLED
IADC Bit Dull Grading Code
Cutting Structure B G Remarks
INNER OUTERR DULL LOCA- BRNG/ GAUGE OTHER REASON
ROWS OWS CHAR TION SEALS 1/16” CHAR PULLED

The cutting structure is graded from 0 to 8 depending on the proportion of

cutting structure lost (0 = Intact, 8 = 100% worn).
Fixed Cutter Bits Roller Cone Bits

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Inner Cutting
Structure (All Inner Cone 1
Rows)

Outer Cutting
Structure (Gauge
Row Only)
Cone 2
Cone 3

Ref : Reed Hycalog PDC & Roller Cone Product Technology Reference Information
IADC Bit Dull Grading Code
Cutting Structure B G Remarks
INNER OUTERR DULL LOCA- BRNG/ GAUGE OTHER REASON
ROWS OWS CHAR TION SEALS 1/16” CHAR PULLED

Fixed Cutter Bits Roller Cone Bits

BF - Bond Failure *BC - Broken Cone LN - Lost Nozzle
BT - Broken Cutters BF - Bond Failure LT - Lost Teeth/Cutters
BU - Balled Up BT - Broken Teeth/Cutters OC - Off-Center Wear
CT - Chipped Cutters BU - Balled Up Bit PB - Pinched Bit
ER - Erosion *CC - Cracked Cone PN - Plugged Nozzle/Flow Passage
HC - Heat Checking *CD - Cone Dragged RG - Rounded Gauge
JD - Junk Damage CI - Cone Interference RO - Ring Out
LN - Lost Nozzle CR - Cored SD - Shirttail Damage
LT - Lost Cutter CT - Chipped Teeth/Cutters SS - Self Sharpening Wear
NR - Not Rerunable ER - Erosion TR - Tracking
PN - Plugged Nozzle FC - Flat Crested Wear WO - Washed Out Bit
RG - Rounded Gauge HC - Heat Checking WT - Worn Teeth/Cutters
RO - Ring Out JD - Junk Damage NO - No Dull Characteristic
RR - Rerunable *LC - Lost Cone
SS - Self Sharpening Wear * Show Cone under Location 4
TR - Tracking
WO - Washed Out Bit Note that this is for the Primary dull characteristics.
WT - Worn Cutters
NO - No Dull Characteristics
Ref : Reed Hycalog PDC & Roller Cone Product Technology Reference Information
Fixed Cutter – Main Wear Characteristics

POST OR STUD
CUTTERS

NO WEAR WORN BROKEN LOST BOND EROSION

(NO) CUTTER CUTTER CUTTER FAILURE (ER)
(WT) (BT) (LT) (BF)

CYLINDER
CUTTERS NO WEAR WORN BROKEN LOST BOND
(NO) CUTTER CUTTER CUTTER FAILURE
(WT) (BT) (LT) (BF)

Courtesy of
Dull Characteristics – Some Examples

Fixed Cutter Bits

BF - Bond Failure
BT - Broken Cutters
BU - Balled Up
CT - Chipped Cutters
ER - Erosion
HC - Heat Checking
JD - Junk Damage
LN - Lost Nozzle
LT - Lost Cutter
NR - Not Rerunable
PN - Plugged Nozzle
RG - Rounded Gauge
RO - Ring Out
RR - Rerunable
SS - Self Sharpening Wear
TR - Tracking
WO - Washed Out Bit
WT - Worn Cutters
NO - No Dull Characteristics
BU - Balled Up
Ref : Reed Hycalog PDC & Roller Cone Product Technology Reference Information
 Dull Characteristics – Some Examples

Roller Cone Bits

*BC - Broken Cone
BF - Bond Failure
BT - Broken Teeth/Cutters
BU - Balled Up Bit
*CC - Cracked Cone
*CD - Cone Dragged
CI - Cone Interference
CR - Cored
CT - Chipped Teeth/Cutters
ER - Erosion
FC - Flat Crested Wear
HC - Heat Checking
JD - Junk Damage
*LC - Lost Cone
Ref : IADC Drilling Manual – Eleventh Edition
LN - Lost Nozzle
LT - Lost Teeth/Cutters
OC - Off-Center Wear
PB - Pinched Bit
PN - Plugged Nozzle/Flow Passage
RG - Rounded Gauge
RO - Ring Out
SD - Shirttail Damage
SS - Self Sharpening Wear
TR - Tracking
WO - Washed Out Bit
WT - Worn Teeth/Cutters
NO - No Dull Characteristic
BU – Balled Up Bit
* Show Cone under Location 4
(primary)
CD – Cone Dragged
(secondary)
Dull Characteristics – Some Examples

Fixed Cutter Bits

BF - Bond Failure
BT - Broken Cutters
BU - Balled Up
CT - Chipped Cutters
ER - Erosion
HC - Heat Checking
JD - Junk Damage
LN - Lost Nozzle
LT - Lost Cutter
NR - Not Rerunable
PN - Plugged Nozzle
RG - Rounded Gauge
RO - Ring Out
RR - Rerunable
SS - Self Sharpening Wear
TR - Tracking
WO - Washed Out Bit
WT - Worn Cutters
NO - No Dull Characteristics CT – Chipped Cutter
Ref : Reed Hycalog PDC & Roller Cone Product Technology Reference Information
Dull Characteristics – Some Examples

Fixed Cutter Bits

BF - Bond Failure
BT - Broken Cutters
BU - Balled Up
CT - Chipped Cutters
ER - Erosion
HC - Heat Checking
JD - Junk Damage
LN - Lost Nozzle
LT - Lost Cutter
NR - Not Rerunable
PN - Plugged Nozzle
RG - Rounded Gauge
RO - Ring Out
RR - Rerunable
SS - Self Sharpening Wear
TR - Tracking LT – Lost Cutter
WO - Washed Out Bit
WT - Worn Cutters
NO - No Dull Characteristics

Ref : Reed Hycalog PDC & Roller Cone Product Technology Reference Information
Dull Characteristics – Some Examples

Roller Cone Bits

*BC - Broken Cone
BF - Bond Failure
BT - Broken Teeth/Cutters
BU - Balled Up Bit
*CC - Cracked Cone
*CD - Cone Dragged
CI - Cone Interference
CR - Cored
CT - Chipped Teeth/Cutters
ER - Erosion
FC - Flat Crested Wear
HC - Heat Checking
JD - Junk Damage
*LC - Lost Cone
LN - Lost Nozzle
LT - Lost Teeth/Cutters
OC - Off-Center Wear
PB - Pinched Bit
PN - Plugged Nozzle/Flow Passage
RG - Rounded Gauge
RO - Ring Out
SD - Shirttail Damage
SS - Self Sharpening Wear
TR - Tracking
WO - Washed Out Bit
WT - Worn Teeth/Cutters
NO - No Dull Characteristic
* Show Cone under Location 4
BT – Broken Teeth/Cutters

Ref : IADC Drilling Manual – Eleventh Edition

Dull Characteristics – Some Examples

Fixed Cutter Bits

BF - Bond Failure
BT - Broken Cutters
BU - Balled Up
CT - Chipped Cutters
ER - Erosion
HC - Heat Checking
JD - Junk Damage
LN - Lost Nozzle
LT - Lost Cutter
NR - Not Rerunable
PN - Plugged Nozzle
RG - Rounded Gauge
RO - Ring Out
RR - Rerunable
SS - Self Sharpening Wear
TR - Tracking
WO - Washed Out Bit
WT - Worn Cutters RO – Ring Out
NO - No Dull Characteristics

Ref : Reed Hycalog PDC & Roller Cone Product Technology Reference Information
Dull Characteristics – Some Examples

Roller Cone Bits

*BC - Broken Cone
BF - Bond Failure
BT - Broken Teeth/Cutters
BU - Balled Up Bit
*CC - Cracked Cone
*CD - Cone Dragged
CI - Cone Interference
CR - Cored
CT - Chipped Teeth/Cutters
ER - Erosion
FC - Flat Crested Wear
HC - Heat Checking
JD - Junk Damage
*LC - Lost Cone
LN - Lost Nozzle
LT - Lost Teeth/Cutters
OC - Off-Center Wear
PB - Pinched Bit
PN - Plugged Nozzle/Flow Passage
RG - Rounded Gauge
RO - Ring Out
SD - Shirttail Damage
SS - Self Sharpening Wear
TR - Tracking
WO - Washed Out Bit
WT - Worn Teeth/Cutters
NO - No Dull Characteristic
JD – Junk Damage
* Show Cone under Location 4

Ref : IADC Drilling Manual – Eleventh Edition

Dull Characteristics – Some Examples

Fixed Cutter Bits

BF - Bond Failure
BT - Broken Cutters
BU - Balled Up
CT - Chipped Cutters
ER - Erosion
HC - Heat Checking
JD - Junk Damage
LN - Lost Nozzle
LT - Lost Cutter
NR - Not Rerunable
PN - Plugged Nozzle
RG - Rounded Gauge
RO - Ring Out
RR - Rerunable
SS - Self Sharpening Wear
TR - Tracking
WO - Washed Out Bit WT – Worn Cutters
WT - Worn Cutters
NO - No Dull Characteristics

Ref : Reed Hycalog PDC & Roller Cone Product Technology Reference Information
Dull Characteristics – Some Examples

Roller Cone Bits

*BC - Broken Cone
BF - Bond Failure
BT - Broken Teeth/Cutters
BU - Balled Up Bit
*CC - Cracked Cone
*CD - Cone Dragged
CI - Cone Interference
CR - Cored
CT - Chipped Teeth/Cutters
ER - Erosion
FC - Flat Crested Wear
HC - Heat Checking
JD - Junk Damage
*LC - Lost Cone
LN - Lost Nozzle
LT - Lost Teeth/Cutters
OC - Off-Center Wear
PB - Pinched Bit
PN - Plugged Nozzle/Flow Passage
RG - Rounded Gauge
RO - Ring Out
SD - Shirttail Damage
SS - Self Sharpening Wear
TR - Tracking
WO - Washed Out Bit
WT - Worn Teeth/Cutters
NO - No Dull Characteristic
* Show Cone under Location 4
SD - Shirttail Damage

Ref : IADC Drilling Manual – Eleventh Edition

Dull Characteristics – Some Examples

Roller Cone Bits

*BC - Broken Cone LN - Lost Nozzle
BF - Bond Failure LT - Lost Teeth/Cutters
BT - Broken Teeth/Cutters OC - Off-Center Wear
BU - Balled Up Bit PB - Pinched Bit
*CC - Cracked Cone PN - Plugged Nozzle/Flow Passage
*CD - Cone Dragged RG - Rounded Gauge
CI - Cone Interference RO - Ring Out
CR - Cored SD - Shirttail Damage
CT - Chipped Teeth/Cutters SS - Self Sharpening Wear
ER - Erosion TR - Tracking
FC - Flat Crested Wear WO - Washed Out Bit
HC - Heat Checking WT - Worn Teeth/Cutters
JD - Junk Damage NO - No Dull Characteristic
*LC - Lost Cone
* Show Cone under Location 4

TR - Tracking
Dull Characteristics – Some Examples

Roller Cone Bits

*BC - Broken Cone
BF - Bond Failure
BT - Broken Teeth/Cutters
BU - Balled Up Bit
*CC - Cracked Cone
*CD - Cone Dragged
CI - Cone Interference
CR - Cored
CT - Chipped Teeth/Cutters
ER - Erosion
FC - Flat Crested Wear
HC - Heat Checking
JD - Junk Damage
*LC - Lost Cone
LN - Lost Nozzle
LT - Lost Teeth/Cutters
OC - Off-Center Wear
PB - Pinched Bit
PN - Plugged Nozzle/Flow Passage
RG - Rounded Gauge
RO - Ring Out
SD - Shirttail Damage
SS - Self Sharpening Wear
TR - Tracking
WO - Washed Out Bit
WT - Worn Teeth/Cutters
NO - No Dull Characteristic
SS – Self Sharpening Wear
* Show Cone under Location 4

Ref : IADC Drilling Manual – Eleventh Edition

Dull Characteristics – Some Examples

Roller Cone Bits

*BC - Broken Cone
BF - Bond Failure
BT - Broken Teeth/Cutters
BU - Balled Up Bit
*CC - Cracked Cone
*CD - Cone Dragged
CI - Cone Interference
CR - Cored
CT - Chipped Teeth/Cutters
ER - Erosion
FC - Flat Crested Wear
HC - Heat Checking
JD - Junk Damage
*LC - Lost Cone
LN - Lost Nozzle
LT - Lost Teeth/Cutters
OC - Off-Center Wear
PB - Pinched Bit
PN - Plugged Nozzle/Flow Passage
RG - Rounded Gauge
RO - Ring Out
SD - Shirttail Damage
SS - Self Sharpening Wear
TR - Tracking
WO - Washed Out Bit
WT - Worn Teeth/Cutters
NO - No Dull Characteristic
ER – Erosion
* Show Cone under Location 4

Ref : IADC Drilling Manual – Eleventh Edition

IADC Bit Dull Grading Code
Cutting Structure B G Remarks
INNER OUTERR DULL LOCA- BRNG/ GAUGE OTHER REASON
ROWS OWS CHAR TION SEALS 1/16” CHAR PULLED

Fixed Cutter Bits Roller Cone Bits

N - Nose Row
M - Middle Row
Cone 1, 2 or 3
G - Gauge Row
A - All Rows

C - Cone
N - Nose
T - Taper
S - Shoulder
G - Gauge

Ref : Reed Hycalog PDC & Roller Cone Product Technology Reference Information
IADC Bit Dull Grading Code
Cutting Structure B G Remarks
INNER OUTERR DULL LOCA- BRNG/ GAUGE OTHER REASON
ROWS OWS CHAR TION SEALS 1/16” CHAR PULLED

Fixed Cutter Bits Roller Cone Bits

This box is for roller cone bits. Non Sealed Bearings
Fixed cutter bits will always A linear scale estimating
be designated by "X". bearing life used. (0 -No life
used, 8 - All life used, i.e., no
bearing life remaining.)

Sealed Bearings
E - Seals Effective
F - Seals Failed
N - Not Able to Grade

Ref : Reed Hycalog PDC & Roller Cone Product Technology Reference Information
IADC Bit Dull Grading Code
Cutting Structure B G Remarks
INNER OUTERR DULL LOCA- BRNG/ GAUGE OTHER REASON
ROWS OWS CHAR TION SEALS 1/16” CHAR PULLED

For all Bits

The letter “I” is used to designate bits that are in gauge.

If the bit is under gauge, the amount is recorded to the nearest 1/16” of an
inch. For example, if the bit is 1/8” under gauge, this is reported as 2/16
or often only as 2.

Ref : Reed Hycalog PDC & Roller Cone Product Technology Reference Information
IADC Bit Dull Grading Code
Cutting Structure B G Remarks
INNER OUTERR DULL LOCA- BRNG/ GAUGE OTHER REASON
ROWS OWS CHAR TION SEALS 1/16” CHAR PULLED

This is for the Secondary dull char. and it uses the same codes as for the Primary dull char.
Fixed Cutter Bits Roller Cone Bits
BF - Bond Failure *BC - Broken Cone LN - Lost Nozzle
BT - Broken Cutters BF - Bond Failure LT - Lost Teeth/Cutters
BU - Balled Up BT - Broken Teeth/Cutters OC - Off-Center Wear
CT - Chipped Cutters BU - Balled Up Bit PB - Pinched Bit
ER - Erosion *CC - Cracked Cone PN - Plugged Nozzle/Flow Passage
HC - Heat Checking *CD - Cone Dragged RG - Rounded Gauge
JD - Junk Damage CI - Cone Interference RO - Ring Out
LN - Lost Nozzle CR - Cored SD - Shirttail Damage
LT - Lost Cutter CT - Chipped Teeth/Cutters SS - Self Sharpening Wear
NR - Not Rerunable ER - Erosion TR - Tracking
PN - Plugged Nozzle FC - Flat Crested Wear WO - Washed Out Bit
RG - Rounded Gauge HC - Heat Checking WT - Worn Teeth/Cutters
RO - Ring Out JD - Junk Damage NO - No Dull Characteristic
RR - Rerunable *LC - Lost Cone
SS - Self Sharpening Wear * Show Cone under Location 4
TR - Tracking
WO - Washed Out Bit
WT - Worn Cutters
NO - No Dull Characteristics
Ref : Reed Hycalog PDC & Roller Cone Product Technology Reference Information
IADC Bit Dull Grading Code
Cutting Structure B G Remarks
INNER OUTERR DULL LOCA- BRNG/ GAUGE OTHER REASON
ROWS OWS CHAR TION SEALS 1/16” CHAR PULLED

For All Bits

BHA - Change Bottom Hole Assembly HP - Hole Problems
DMF - Down hole Motor Failure HR - Hours
DSF - Drill String Failure PP - Pump Pressure
DST - Drill Stem Test PR - Penetration Rate
DTF - Down hole Tool Failure TD - Total Depth/Casing Point
RIG - Rig Repair TQ - Torque
CM - Condition Mud TW - Twist Off
CP - Core Point WC - Weather Conditions
DP - Drill Plug WO - Washout -DrillString
FM - Formation Change

Ref : Reed Hycalog PDC & Roller Cone Product Technology Reference Information
Key to Dull Bit Grading: Grade a Lot of Dulls !

Photo courtesy of
 11” Bits Bit Performance Analysis Example
7-7/8” Bits

0 ft
A May 2002 B Jun 2002 C Aug 2002 D Sep 2002
GT-C1 (117)
6x13, 20, 120-150 195.8 201.0
1000 ft 1-1-WT-G-X-I-NO-TD 213.3
1173 1156
GT-C1 (117) 1175 GT-C1 (117)
GT-C1 (117) 6x13, 20, 120-150
2000 ft 3x16, 1x13, 45, 160-175
3x16, 1x13, 40, 60-120
1-1-WT-G-X-I-NO-TD 1-1-WT-G-X-I-NO-TD
1-1-WT-A-1-I-NO-TD
3000 ft
Ft Union
3565 66.7 ft/hr

4000 ft
HC 606 (PDC)
6x14, 10-28, 40-60
HC 606 (PDC) 1-2-CT-S-O-I-WT-BHA
5000 ft 6x13, 5-25, 45-115
1-1-CT-T-X-I-RO-PR

6000 ft Lance Pay

DPO 463 (PDC)
FM2655 (PDC) 6x14, 35, 75 Fox Hill
7000 ft 8-8-CR-S-X-I-CT-TD
6x12, 25, 50-70
89.7
2-2-CT-M-X-I-BT-FM 7815 Lewis
8000 ft
H-M09 (437)
55.7 2x14, 1x16, 25-35, 160-185
8797
Fi28RPS (517) 2-4-BT-G-E-I-WT-HR
9000 ft
2x12, 1x16, 30, 55
20.7 9434 20.5 9491 68.5 Almond
9977 4-8-BT-G-E-I-FC-FM
H-M09 (437)
20.4 2x14, 1x16, 38, 170
66.1 9831 23.1 HX20 (517)
10,000 FM2645 (PDC)
ft
10100 9906 11.5 8-8-CR-N-N-8-WT-TQ 9918 3x16, 35, 30-45
3x13, 3x15, 20, 50-60 2-2-WT-A-E-I-NO-TD
2-2-FC-A-X-I-WT-FM EPS 123 (537)
11,000
13.4 2x12, 1x14, 35, 150
ft 11162 Fi28RPS (517) Bit Name (IADC) 3-3-WT-A-E-2-NO-TD
12.3 3x13, 30-35, 60-65 Nozzles, WOB, RPM
11703 1-1-WT-G-XI-NO-TD IADC Dull Grading
Drilling Bit Economics - Cost per Foot

Cb  Cr (tb  tc  tt )
Cf 
Where: D
Cf Cost per foot ($/ft)
Cb Cost of the bit ($)
Cr Operation spread rate ($/day)
tb Time rotating (hrs)
tc Time for connections(hrs)
tt Round trip time (hrs)
D Footage drilled

Ref: SPE Applied Drilling Engineering, 1986 Edition

 Offset Bit Analysis,
Bit Grading and Cost per Foot

A Case History
 Offset Well Bit Record
Dull
Inner Outer Dull Loca- Bear Gage Other Reason
Hole Dia. BIT IADC Depth In Depth Out Interval Hrs ROP Rows Rows Char tion Seals 1/16" Char Pulled

12-1/4 ATM 11 437 4364 7021 2657 60.5 43.9 1 1 NO A 1 1 NO TD

8-1/2 ATM 18 447 7021 9039 2018 45.5 44.4 3 3 ER A E 1 BT HR
8-1/2 ATM 11C 447 9039 10335 1296 31.5 41.1 2 2 ER A E I BT LOG
8-1/2 ATM 22 517 10335 10827 492 16.5 29.8 1 1 ER A E I ER LOG

Only one recent offset was available.

The bit record is incomplete (missing the top part of the hole and the
operating parameters).

Do you notice anything wrong with these dull codes ?

Answer:
1. The Primary & Secondary Characteristics should never be the same.
2. It is only possible to us “NO” is the cutting structure is graded 0-0.
 Offset Well Bit Record
Dull
Inner Outer Dull Loca- Bear Gage Other Reason
Hole Dia. BIT IADC Depth In Depth Out Interval Hrs ROP Rows Rows Char tion Seals 1/16" Char Pulled

12-1/4 ATM 11 437 4364 7021 2657 60.5 43.9 1 1 NO A 1 1 NO TD

8-1/2 ATM 18 447 7021 9039 2018 45.5 44.4 3 3 ER A E 1 BT HR
8-1/2 ATM 11C 447 9039 10335 1296 31.5 41.1 2 2 ER A E I BT LOG
8-1/2 ATM 22 517 10335 10827 492 16.5 29.8 1 1 ER A E I ER LOG

Take a close look at the IADC code, ROP and dull code. What can you
assume ?
This is PDC country !
Bit Program of the Well Drilled by IPM
12-1/4” Interval
Bit Dia. Interval (m) Bit Type IADC Nozzle Flowrate Mud Weight Predicted HIS
(inches) Code (1/32") (gpm) (sg) SPP (psi) (HHP/in2)

12-1/4" 1636 to 2266 DS66H M432 6 x 11 700 1.10 - 1.20 2500/2750 4.8

Alternative EHP43H 437 3 x 14 650 1.10 - 1.20 2800/3000 5.9

2266 to 3026 DS66H M432 6 x 11 700 1.15 - 1.20 2750/3050 4.8

Alternative EHP51H 517 2 x 15, 1 X 14 650 1.15 - 1.20 2700/2950 4.9

Note that a DS66H was programmed to drill the complete 12-1/4” interval. The
alternate bit differed depending on section depth (it is essential to have an alternate
plan when trying PDC’s for the first time in an area).
Bit Record of the Well Drilled by IPM

When the DS66H was pulled, it was still drilling at 50 ft per hour !
What can be said about the dull grading ? 3-4-WT-S-X-1-CT-TQ
3-4-WT-S-X-1-CT-TQ
Answer:
This bit was actually pulled to surface after a wiper trip. Torque is indeed
a very unlikely reason for pulling a PDC bit which shows uniform wear.
Given that this bit was still drilling at 50 ft/hr and that only approx. 450 ft
were left to drill, the right decision should have been to rerun it.
Bit Record of the Well Drilled by IPM

Given that there was only about 450 ft left to drill, an inexperienced WSS
decided to run the cheapest bit on the rig (a milled tooth bit IADC code
113). The bit drilled to TD of 9842 ft at an average ROP of 11.8 ft/hr.
What can be said about the dull grading ? 7-7-WT-A-F-2-CD-PR
7-7-WT-A-F-2-CD-PR

Answer:
We were lucky to make it to TD ! The cutting structure was gone,
the bearings had failed, the bit was 1/8” under gauge and it
showed indication of cone drag. Pulling on rate of penetration is
wrong given that the well had reached TD.
Bit Economics – Compare Alternatives
Operation Spreadrate 63,500 $/day
Interval to drill 450 ft
Trip time 11 hours
HP13G EHP51H DS66H
Bit Price ($) 5,280 12,900 free*
Expected Average ROP (ft/hr) 20 15 10 40 30 20 45 40 35
Time to Drill (hours) 22.5 30.0 45.0 11.3 15.0 22.5 10.0 11.3 12.9
Cost per Foot 209 253 341 159 182 226 123 131 140
* In this type of incremental interval economics, we can assume that the bit cost has been absorbed by the
previous run. Note that the original cost of the DS66H was $46,000.
All prices are in 1995 dollars.

Notes:
The sensitivity analysis shows that that DS66H ROP could decrease significantly and still be
more economical that the roller cone bits

Assuming the DS66H would have continued drilling at an average of 45 ft/hr, this poor bit
selection resulted in losses of:
$5,280 + 63,500$/day/24hrs/day x (37.0-9.7)hrs = $77,511
Rock Strength Analysis (RSA)

Rock Strength Analysis

Copyright @1993,94,95,96
Lithology Key
Sandstone/Sand Conglomerate
Company: SHELL Shale Claystone
Well Name: 51 LKU-D10 Limestone Siltstone
Field: EDIT-TEXT: LOCATION Argillaceous Limestone Chert
Silty Limestone Tuff
Location: Units: Meters
Dolomite Basalt/Volcanic
Date: 4/7/96 Scale: 1"/50 units
Salt Anhydrite
Gamma Sonic Sonic Angle of Compressive Strength (Kpsi) Hyc4
API Units micro-sec/ft Porosity Friction (In-Situ Confined Compressive Strength)
0 40 80 120 240 140 40 0 100 10 60 10 20 30 40 Comments
2750

2800

2850

2900

Computing in situ rock strength from well logs

 Continuous strength profile
 Requires sonic, GR and mud log data
 Used for bit selection, planning, and operation
Reed Hycalog - Lab Testing Rock
Time Analysis Exercise – if time permits…

Using the spreadsheet of the daily drilling report activities for Well
SB-1, prepare the following:
- a list of all Non Productive Time (Day, Description, Duration)
- a pie chart showing the NPT distribution
- indicate what is the proportion of NPT as a percentage of total
well time

If you finish early, you may also wish to plot the time versus depth
curves (total time and clean time).
SB-1 List of NPT Events
Day Description Time (hrs)
1 Repair Bell Nipple 1
1 Replace Damaged Saver Sub 2
1 Change Anadrill Sensor on Drawworks 0.5
2 Repair Mud Mixing Pump 1
3 Clean Excessive Cement Returns 7.5
4 Repair Leaking Coflexip Hose 2
5 Correct Rig Subsidence Problem 164.5
15 Problem Breaking Out Drill Pipe 0.5
16 Monitor Mud Losses 0.5
16 Change Leaking Pop Valve 0.5
17 Repai Drawworks 20.5
18 Stuck Pipe 3
19 Repair Dead Line Anchor Weight Sensor 1
19 Stuck Pipe 1.5
20 Stuck Pipe 8.5
21 Stuck Casing 5
23 Repair Air Compressor 3.75
25 Re-do Control Line Hnager Connection 3
Total 226.25
SB-1 NPT Breakdown

2% 1%
3% 0%
6%
Rig Subsidence
14% Rig Equipment
Stuck Pipe
Excessive Cement Returns
Stuck Casing
Hanger Control Line Connection
Other
74%

Total NPT = 37.0 % of Total Well Time

SB-1 Time vs Depth

0
Measured Depth (m)

500 Actual Time

Clean Time
1000

1500

2000

2500
16.1 25.
0 10 20 5 30
Time (days)
Drill Bit Exercise

Prepare a graphical analysis of the bit performance for the bit

records you have been given.
As a minimum, your graphical analysis should show
- well names and date drilled (draw wells in chronological
order)
- bit sizes
- bit name and IADC code
- bit rate of penetration and depth pulled
- bit operating parameters (nozzles, WOB, rpm)
- full IADC dull grading for each bit
- formation tops
Review of Objectives
At the end of this training session, you will be able to:
►List the main objectives of offset well analysis

►Identify relevant offset wells

►Perform detailed offset well analysis and present the data in a
meaningful format
►Identify wellbore stability concerns in offset wells
►Calculate the learning curve for a group of wells

►Define the technical limit

►Validate the pore and fracture pressures from offset wells data
►Estimate the Bottom Hole Static Temperature (BHST) from log
data
►Analyze drill bit performance