SPE 128295

Deepwater Drilling in Both Hard and Abrasive Formations; The Challenges

of Bit Optimisation
Dominic Murphy, Tullow Oil plc, Nick Tetley, Uyen Partin and Denise Livingston, Smith Technologies

Copyright 2010, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE North Africa Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Cairo, Egypt, 14–17 February 2010.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
In mid 2007, two deepwater exploration wells made the first significant oil discovery offshore Ghana, West Africa (Jubilee
Field). Drilling of the first two wells and subsequent appraisal wells indicated hard and abrasive formations, notably in the 12-
1/4” reservoir sections, where up to four bits were needed using a combination of polycrystalline diamond compact (PDC) and
tungsten carbide insert (TCI) bits. Therefore amongst the many project challenges there were significant drilling challenges to
overcome. The primary goal was to drill the 12-1/4” section in one run, with the benefits of substantially reducing drilling time
and costs where full-spread operating rates are in excess of $1MMUSD/day.

To address these challenges, the drilling team adopted a holistic planning approach prior to drilling the first development well.
This used, in conjunction with a detailed analysis of the offset performance, a 4D finite element model that accurately predicts
the performance of bit and bottom hole assembly (BHA). This approach allowed a fundamental understanding of the proposed
system and its behaviour. The goal of drilling the section in one run was achieved far sooner than would have been expected
using “trial and error” methodology, but with high vibration levels. Ongoing optimisation of the dynamic model with the
actual down-hole data justified a BHA change to reduce vibration levels. Subsequently, the changes made to the BHA
successfully reduced vibration levels, more than doubled rate of penetration (ROP) and facilitated good quality log while
drilling (LWD) data.

With the high cost base of deepwater drilling activity, optimisation solutions that can be applied before and during the drilling
process will make significant contributions to the overall project economics. Efforts were therefore applied to making the best
pre-well bit and BHA selection, then analysing and understanding initial results, with an emphasis on maximising any learning
and incorporating recommendations into the subsequent well. On the Jubilee Project, on-going optimisation can now focus on
maximising overall drilling performance.

Introduction
It was clear from the Jubilee exploration and appraisal wells that there were significant opportunities to reduce drilling costs
through improved bit performance. For a fast track development a trial and error approach to bit selection and optimisation
would be costly.

An analysis of formation data revealed that the compressive strengths and nature of the sandstone could be described as hard
rock.1 This was unusual for a deepwater field as there are few references in the literature to hard rock drilling in a deepwater2
field and no readily apparent references to hard sandstone drilling in a deepwater environment.

The pre-development goal was to optimise bit and BHA selection using whatever tools were available to accelerate the
learning curve as much as possible due to the extremely high operating costs.

Jubilee Field Formation Properties & comparison to deepwater drilling worldwide

In hard formations, weight-on-bit (WOB) must be increased to overcome shear strength thresholds.3 This significantly
increases individual cutter loading which can lead to micro-chipping of the diamond table in the nose and central portions of
the bit. As drilling continues, the damaged cutters experience accelerated wear compared to cutters in the shoulder and gauge
areas. Sandstone and siltstone bearing formations comprise most of the abrasive group of formations. The degree of
2 SPE 128295

abrasiveness is generally defined by the various cementing minerals, the angularity and distribution of the individual sediment
grains and depositional environment. Abrasive formations tend to cause higher PDC wear on the shoulder and gauge regions
of the bit. Any bit wear is compounded and accelerated in any application where there is significant bit vibration/whirl.4-8 Due
mostly to this latter consideration, PDC bit performance in large hole sizes (12” or greater) suffers more than in small hole
sections, making further demands on selecting successful PDC designs.

The benefits of running PDC bits are well documented but their use still remains challenging in hard and abrasive formations,
and particularly in larger hole sizes. Significant progress has been made in extremely hard but non abrasive formations such as
limestone through design changes to address bit stability.9-11 However, in abrasive formations such as sandstones, PDC cutter
wear becomes a limiting factor.12 Tackling abrasive formations successfully therefore relies on the actual cutter technology
utilised in addition to bit design considerations. Over the last five years significant progress has been made towards improving
the durability of PDC cutters.13

The Jubilee field is offshore Ghana, West Africa in an area where the water depth is between 1,100 and 1,550m. The typical
stratigraphic sequence is shown in Figure 1. Drilling of the first four wells had indicated hard and abrasive formations
through the reservoir section from the top Upper Mahogany to base Lower Mahogany. Of these four wells, three had drilled in
the Jubilee Field: Mahogany-1, Mahogany-2 and Hyedua-1. Odum-1 targeted another structure 15km east of the field. Log
analysis of the in-field wells allowed us to further quantify the compressive strengths encountered using proprietary rock
mechanic analysis (RMA). This revealed that the average formation strength was in the range of 6,000 to 10,000psi but with
stringers up-to 25,000psi (Figure 1).

These formation properties were unusual for a deepwater drilling setting. Other challenging formations have been documented,
such as extremely hard basalt stringers encountered in deepwater drilling West of Shetland and hard abrasive sandstones were
referenced in a deepwater application West Africa.14 This latter application gives a good comparison as to how these
formations were successfully drilled by a seven-bladed bit with 16mm cutters (PDC 6). In the Jubilee field the same bit design
was run and drilled the overburden successfully on Hyedua 2, yet managed to only drill approx 20m of the reservoir before
being pulled in a very worn condition (Figure 2).

Bit Selection
In a new development the typical procedure for drill bit selection is for the operator to initially approach the drill bit vendors
with a data package for the proposed wells based on offset information. Drill bit vendors will put together a bit proposal based
on this data and local experience; usually there is no way of validating the bit recommendation except by actually running the
bit and gaining a data point. Should the bit performance not meet expectations then either a new bit is trialled on the next well,
if the bit made TD or a new bit(s) is (are) run to get to TD. This method of trial and error leaves the operator exposed to
significant costs as the learning curve is developed.

In the automotive and aerospace industries, the use of finite element analysis (FEA) to achieve virtual prototyping (VP) has
become widely accepted as part of the development process. VP significantly shortens the development cycle thus reducing
new product time-to-market. More importantly for the oil and gas drilling industry, VP allows the running of “what-if”
scenarios in a virtual environment rather than the traditional trial and error method of bit/BHA development.15-17

This approach has been applied to bit design, but in this case it is based on laboratory results derived from tests of PDC cutters
or inserts on rock samples at confining pressures. The laboratory data quantifies actual cutter forces and cuttings generated in
scientific terms of magnitude and orientation as a function of the rock failure mechanism and rock removal rates. From this
the application of the system was widened to incorporate analysis of the behaviour of BHAs directed towards optimising either
the BHA or bit selection or both. Due to the difficulties encountered in drilling hard rock and how bit runs can be very quickly
terminated due to vibrational issues, a significant amount of the optimisation effort is directed towards ensuring dynamic
stability for the bit and BHA system. In this case the modelling program provides an expert bit selection tool because it can
accurately predict how several different bit designs will perform in particular formation types, with a specific drive type, under
various operating parameters and with a specific BHA configuration. It gives the operator/service company’s engineering team
the opportunity to virtually drill the same interval multiple times with different bits and then choose the most appropriate bit
and BHA combination for the application.

Pre Drilling Study

It was due to the considerations outlined above and the limitations of the conventional methods of bit selection that led to the
decision to undertake a full analysis of the 12-1/4” sections drilled as part of the exploration and appraisal campaigns. The
objectives of the study were to:

1. Simulate the bit and BHAs run.

2. Calibrate the model to accurately predict actual field data.
3. Make bit and BHA recommendations for the first wells in the campaign.
SPE 128295 3

Four runs were chosen based on their bit dull grade and data availability (Figures 3 and 4):
• Hyedua-1 (H-1) well, eight-bladed PDC1 bit, 13mm cutters, BHA1-rotary, drilled 140m;
• Odum-1 (O-1) well, six-bladed PDC2 bit, 16mm cutters, BHA2-rotary, drilled 732m;
• Mahogany-1 (M-1) well, six-bladed PDC2 bit, 16mm cutters, BHA3-motor with 0.78 degree bent angle, drilled
1,457m;
• Mahogany-1 (M-1) well, eight-bladed PDC3 bit, 16mm cutters, BHA4-straight motor, drilled 21m.

Two main conclusions reached from the scenarios investigated were that the bit-BHA-parameters combinations used were
causing the high level of vibrations and stick slip. Amongst all options the straight motor BHA had the worst performance in
terms of vibrations. This was confirmed by the field data with one of the shortest runs that drilled only 21m. A range of
possible WOB and revolutions per minute (RPM) run in the field were simulated in order to identify a safe window of
operating parameters. The bit-BHA drilling system with the widest safe operating window was on Hyedua-1 with the eight-
bladed bit with a rotary BHA1 (Figure 5).

For the first well in the development phase, Hyedua-2, a bit-BHA and parameters optimisation was conducted. The bit
selection consisted of maintaining the packed BHA5 constant, changing only the bit and applying a range of WOBs (from
10klb to 30klb) and RPMs (100 to 210) in order to investigate the window of safe parameters. The bits investigated were
(Figure 4):
• Six-bladed PDC2 bit with 16mm cutters; and
• Nine-bladed PDC4 bit with 13mm cutters.

From the bit selection part, it was concluded that (Figures 5 and 6):
• The packed BHA5 performed better than motor and pendulum BHAs previously investigated from offset wells
(Odum-1, Hyedua-1 and Mahogany-1); and
• The nine-bladed PDC4 bit with 13mm cutters shows a wider safe range of operational parameters than the offset bit
which was a six-bladed PDC bit (with back up blades) dressed with 16mm cutters.

During the study, a wellbore planned trajectory was changed to around 14° inclination, a short tangent then a drop back to
vertical (Figure 7). This new plan was incorporated in the BHA-parameters comparison study, which consisted in keeping the
nine-bladed PDC bit constant and changing the BHA into three major BHA comparisons:
• Packed BHA comparison;
• Packed versus rotary steerable system (RSS) BHA comparison;
• Effect of roller reamer in RSS BHA comparison.

For the Packed BHA comparison 1, the following BHAs were investigated (Figure 3):
• Packed BHA5, with three 12-3/16” stabilizers;
• Packed BHA6, with three 12-3/16” stabilizers, same as BHA5 and adding a pony non-magnetic drill collar (NMDC)
below the upper stabilizer; and
• Roller reamer BHA7 with two 12-1/4” roller reamers (close to the bit and upper in the drillstring) and a 12-1/8” inline
stabilizer (in the middle) directly above the ARC tool.

For the Rotary Steerable System (RSS) vs. Packed BHA comparison 2, the following BHAs were investigated (Figure 3):
• RSS BHA8 with 12-1/4” roller reamer on top of MWD-LWD spaced by a pony NMDC; and
• Packed BHA6, with three 12-3/16” stabilizers, with a pony NMDC below the upper stabilizer.

For the Effect of Roller Reamer in RSS BHA comparison 3, the following BHAs were investigated (Figure 3):
• RSS BHA8 with 12-1/4” roller reamer on top of MWD-LWD spaced by a pony NMDC; and
• RSS BHA9 with 12-1/8” stabilizer on top of MWD-LWD spaced by a pony NMDC.

From the BHA-parameters study, it was concluded that (Figures 8, 9 and 10).
• Packed BHAs 5 & 6 and RSS BHA show the lowest overall vibration signature with a wider safe operational
window.
• Among the packed assemblies, BHA6 option showed some improvements due to drill collar and stabilizer ODs sizes.
• The roller reamer didn’t appear to offer any benefit for this application in terms of vibration reduction.

From these studies, the less aggressive nine-bladed PDC bit with 13mm cutters was selected for the next well Hyedua-2.
4 SPE 128295

First well results

The first well drilled in the new campaign was Hyedua-2 in which the reservoir interval was cored. Therefore a minimum of
two bits were required to drill the section, one to drill to core point , the other to drill below the cored interval and to TD.

Run results validated many of the assumptions in the model. Firstly the initial PDC, a seven-bladed design with 16mm cutters
drilled the overburden very successfully, but once it penetrated the top reservoir it wore very quickly confirming the
abrasiveness of the formations (Figure 2). The bit was dull graded 2-8-RO-G-X-I-LT-CP. Below the cored interval the nine-
bladed PDC4 bit drilled 57m and was pulled out of hole graded 1-2-WT-S-X-I-CT-PR (Figure 11). Although the short run
length was disappointing, further analysis indicated the bit was very stable and had simply worn out, again demonstrating the
abrasiveness of the formation. It became clear that to successfully drill this application engineers had to address both bit
design and cutter technology.

Post well analysis

At this time significant progress had been made in cutter technology and this had become available for field testing.18 The new
cutter technology was incorporated into a heavy-set PDC design to address the shortcomings of the previous bit. At this
juncture it is illustrative to highlight the benefits of VP in this application. The bit selected (PDC5) was an eight-bladed design
with 16mm cutters and eight back up blades (Figure 4). This design looked exactly the same as the bit run on Mahogany-1
(PDC3) that had drilled 21m and had dull condition 1-8-RO-S-X-I-WT-PR. Within the VP environment PDC5 proved to be
very stable. By contrast PDC3 within the same VP environment generated very high levels of both stick slip vibration and
lateral accelerations. Differences in these results can be attributed to subtle design differences that are not immediately
apparent to visual inspection.

Cutter Development
The challenging 12-1/4” hole section contains hard/abrasive sand intervals. The bits fitted with premium PDC cutters dulled
very quickly due to wear which was identified as being due to abrasion rather than impact. Thus the current cutter technology
was the limiting factor for efficient drilling in Jubilee field. A new cutter technology (NCT) had reached the stage of field
testing at the same time and this application was identified as a good candidate due to the abrasive wear being experienced,
and that the application had been subjected to FEA modelling to ensure that recommendations were in place to avoid excessive
bit and BHA vibrations. This meant that as far as possible cutters were being subjected to thermal wear with only limited
mechanical/impact wear from high vibration levels.

Laboratory tests had already indicated this type of cutter has significant abrasion and thermal fatigue resistance compared to
conventional PDC cutters while not compromising impact resistance. Laboratory testing on hard and abrasive granite suggests
the new cutter technology has three/four times the wear life of a conventional premium cutter (Figure 12). This had been
supported by a limited number of test runs, but at the time these cutters had not been tested in a high cost/profile environment.

During the time it took to analyse the results of Hyedua-2 and develop the improved bit design and cutter technology, three
additional development wells were drilled. Varying bit designs were run during this time adjusting parameters in an attempt to
control the excessive wear and both torsional and lateral vibration. In addition to controlling stick slip and lateral vibration
there was an obvious need to redistribute the loads being applied to the shoulder of the bit (as evidenced from dull bit
examination). The inclusion of back up cutters to increase diamond volume at the shoulder became an obvious design
requirement. Additionally in an attempt to further reduce the energy being generated at the shoulder and reduce cutter wear as
much as possible it was decided to run the bit at low RPM

The bit complete with experimental cutters was ready for well J-02 which spudded April 2009. To limit abrasive wear the bit
was run at normal parameters to the top reservoir, but through the reservoir the RPM was reduced to 60 RPM. The
combination of bit and parameter selection was successful and the entire 12-1/4” section was drilled with one bit run.
Although successful the ROP through the reservoir was very low; i.e. one success factor had been met. A result of the rigid
adherence to parameters to limit abrasive wear was extremely high stick slip, and towards the end of the run high lateral
vibration, both of which had a negative impact on the LWD tools. The reduction of stick slip and lateral vibrations as well as
improvement in ROP was the goal of the next stage of the FEA modelling.

Application of FEA modelling on J-02

Focusing on the most recent offset well, J-02, the objective of the study was to identify any potentially damaging drill-string
dynamics, particularly stick-slip and lateral vibration and make recommendations for improvement.

The methodology of the analysis was as follows:

1. Identify conditions of stick slip and whirl of identified well;
2. Replicate drilling conditions through simulations of offset well to understand drilling dynamics;
3. Run dynamic simulations for different BHAs;
SPE 128295 5

4. Run dynamic simulations for different WOB and RPM combinations to identify conditions that induce whirl and stick
slip;
5. Make final recommendations of drilling system.

1. Identify conditions of stick slip and whirl of identified well.

When transitioning from 3,000psi shales to sandstones that average 15,000psi with peaks of 30,000psi, a change from 160 to
60 RPM was initiated as an attempt to decrease the severity of damage to the bit cutting structure due to high lateral vibrations
when rotating at a higher RPM through hard sandstones. However, by lowering the RPMs, stick slip levels increased (Figure
13) proving the challenge of determining how to decouple stick slip and whirl.

Towards the end of the run, the inherent complication of transitional drilling identified another contributing factor to stick slip
(Figure 14). Transitioning from a harder sandstone to a softer claystone creates an environment for the bit to suddenly rotate
faster while the stabilizers and other BHA components are still in the harder formation.

2. Replicate drilling conditions through simulations of offset well to understand drilling dynamics.

To ensure the final recommendations were valid, a calibration of the simulation model was completed to ensure the field
conditions matched the simulated conditions. The model also confirmed a coupled effect with whirl and stick slip at different
RPMs (Figure 15). Reducing the RPM from 160 to 60 when entering the harder sandstone was necessary to minimise the
cutter damage due to excessive lateral vibration; however, the decrease in rotational energy created more torsional oscillation
(stick slip).

In the 12-1/4” section of a previous offset well J-04, the RPM was held close to 160 RPM and the calliper measured a
maximum hole of 15-3/4” (Figure 16). Initial investigation attributed the over gauge hole to bore hole instability. When the
FEA simulation was completed it showed that the drilling parameters utilised, creating high lateral vibration and whirl, could
also have been responsible for the over gauge hole. The simulation indicated an over gauge hole of approximately 14-1/4”
diameter (Figure 16).

For the 12-1/4” section of J-02 well, the well profile consisted of a tangent section of 38° inclination with TD at 4,160m. The
appropriate formation files were selected from the library of rock files based on laboratory testing. A sandstone with 20,000 to
30,000 psi UCS and shale with 2,000 to 5,000 psi UCS were selected and confirmed as representative of the actual formations
due to calibration of ROP (Figure 17) and torque. The same bit used in the identified well was simulated: eight-bladed
directional PDC5 bit with 16mm cutters and back up cutters (Figure 4).

3. Run dynamic simulations for different BHAs.

Alternative BHAs were recommended for further investigation through simulations. Two BHAs were investigated, including
the BHA that was run on the identified well (Figure 3).

BHA10 = BHA run on identified offset well

BHA11 = Add motor assistance to rotary steerable system

WOB and RPM were fixed at 30 klbs and 60, respectively for BHA10. BHA11 includes a motor assisted rotary steerable
system so WOB = 30 klbs, surface RPM= 30, and motor RPM = 65.

BHA11 proved to lower lateral vibrations and stick slip (Figure 18) without comprising ROP. It should be noted that lateral
vibrations and stick slip cannot be eliminated, but only minimized since the interbedded formations contribute heavily to the
overall vibrations.

4. Run dynamic simulations for different WOB and RPM combinations to identify conditions that induce lateral vibration
and stick slip.

In order to determine which BHA had a wider range of safe operating parameters, different WOB and RPMs were simulated
for both BHAs. The bit lateral vibration and RPM are outputs from the simulation and these values were normalised and
graphed to determine a value that represent areas of high lateral vibrations and stick slip. The results identify WOB and RPM
combinations that should be avoided (marked by red or yellow) due to stick slip and lateral vibration (Figure 19). Simulations
showed downhole lateral vibrations in excess of 50g’ at the bit and rotary steerable at non-optimal RPM’s (Figure 20).

This mapping shows that BHA11 has a safer range (blue-green) of drilling parameters yielding lower overall vibrations.
6 SPE 128295

Having a clear drilling parameter mapping allows the field personnel to clearly understand WOB and RPMs that should be
avoided.

5. Make final recommendations of drilling system

After matching field measured drilling conditions through simulations and investigating different BHA configurations, an
appropriate range of WOBs and RPMs were recommended by identifying the areas of whirl and stick slip. The final
recommendation included the rotary steerable eight-bladed, 16mm PDC5 bit with the motor assisted push-the-bit rotary
steerable system.

Applied Recommendations to J-05

With the support from the operator organisation that embraced the new technology the recommendations for bit (PDC5),
BHA12, and drilling parameters were applied to the next similar well in the field, J-05. For the 12-1/4” section of J-05, the
well profile consisted of a tangent section of 49° inclination with TD at 4,192m (Figure 7).

The combination of FEA modelling and applying the bit performance strategy contributed to a performance improvement from
8.9 m/hr to 21.2 m/hr resulting in overall savings of approximately $3 million dollars.

The bit was pulled in good condition (Figure 21) and no tools, including the rotary steerable or MWD/LWD tools, failed or
needed repairs. Overall the vibration levels were lower on J-05 than J-02 (Figure 22); however, stick slip and lateral vibrations
were still apparent. Ongoing optimisation is anticipated for this challenging field.

Conclusions
Using the FEA modelling technology in combination with new cutter technology, engineers selected an eight-bladed 12-1/4”
bit with back up blades and NCT16mm cutters with the goal of drilling the interval in one run. The bit was run in a highly
abrasive formation on a rotary steerable BHA on well J-02 and well J-05 with outstanding results. On well J-02 the bit drilled
the entire 12-1/4” hole section from shoe to TD for the first time in field history. On well J-05, the total footage and
penetration rate performance of the eight-bladed PDC bit increased significantly, more than doubling the ROP and facilitating
capturing good LWD data avoiding the time needed for post well logging.

Compared to the three-well offset average (six bit runs), the new style PDC bit drilled 165% more meters (1702 m) with a
ROP (21.18 m/hr) increase of 122% in addition to completing the hole section in one run (Figure 23). As an added benefit, the
bit was pulled in good condition with a dull grade of 1-2-WT-A-XXX-IN-DL-TD. Subsequent runs have confirmed the initial
success.

On-going work in the field is focused on addressing issues with stick slip in the overburden and using actual core samples to
further refine the FEA modelling used for drilling the reservoir.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank management at Tullow Oil plc and Smith Technologies for permission to publish the well data
and drilling performance figures. Also, special thanks to Craig Fleming, Smith Technologies for his technical writing and
editorial contributions.

Reference Papers
1. Somerton, W.H., Esfandiari, F., Singhal, A.: “Further Studies of the Relation of Physical Properties of Rock to Rock
Drillability SPE paper 2390 published by the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineers
1969.
2. Close, F., Conroy, D., Grieg, A., Morin, A., Flint, G., Seale, R.: “Successful Drilling of Basalt in a West of Shetland
Deepwater Discovery” SPE paper 96575 presented at Offshore Europe, Aberdeen, Scotland, U.K., 6-9 September
2005.
3. Mensa-Wilmot, G., Fear, M.: “The Effects of Formation Hardness, Abrasiveness, Heterogeneity and Hole Size on
PDC Bit Performance” SPE/IADC paper 67698 presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, The
Netherlands, 27 February – 1 March 2001.
4. Brett, J.F., Warren, T.W., Behr, S.M.,: “Bit Whirl – A New Theory of PDC Bit Failure” SPE paper 19571 presented
at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 8-11 October 1989.
5. Langeveld, C.: “PDC Bit Dynamics” IADC/SPE paper 23867 presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New
Orleans 18-21 February 1992.
6. Warren, T.W., Brett, J.F., Sinor, L.A.: “Development of a Whirl-Resistant Bit” SPE paper 19572 presented at the
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 8-11 October 1989.
7. Weaver, G.E., Clayton, R.I.: “A New PDC Cutting Structure Improves Bit Stabilization and Extends Application into
Harder Rock Types” SPE/IADC paper 25734 presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, The
Netherlands, 23-25 February 1993.
SPE 128295 7

8. Clegg, J.M.: “An Analysis of the Field Performance of Anti-Whirl PDC Bits” SPE/IADC paper 23868 presented at
the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, 18-21 February 1992.
9. Mensa-Wilmot, G., Booth, M., Mottram, A,: “New PDC Bit Technology and Improved Operational Practices Saves
$1M in Central North Sea Drilling Program” IADC/SPE paper 59108 presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling
Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, 23-25 February 2000.
10. Mensa-Wilmot, G., Penrose, B.: “Advanced Cutting Structure Improves PDC Bit Performance in Hard and Abrasive
Drilling Environments” SPE paper 81167 presented at the Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering
Conference, Port-of-Spain, Trinidad, West Indies, 27-30 April 2003.
11. Mensa-Wilmot, G., Douglas, C., Schell, E.: “New PDC Bit Technology, Improved Drillability Analysis, and
Operational Practices Improve Drilling Performance in Hard and Highly Heterogeneous Applications” SPE paper
91423 presented at the SPE Eastern Regional Meeting, Charleston, West Virginia, 15-17 September 2004.
12. Glowka, D.A., Stone, C.M.: “Effects of Thermal and Mechanical Loading on PDC Bit Life” SPE paper 13257, pp
201-214, SPE Drilling Engineering, June 1986.
13. Schell, E.J., Phillippi, D., Fabian, R.T.: “New, Stable PDC Technology Significantly Reduces Hard Rock Cost Per
Foot” SPE-IADC paper 79797 presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 19-21
February 2003.
14. Guerrero, C.A., Kull, B.J.: “Development of an SeROP Predictor Tool for Real-Time Bit Optimization” SPE/IADC
paper 105201 presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 20-22 February 2007.
15. Gillick, S., Hamilton, R., Singh, A., Van der Pouw, A.: “Rock Mechanics Lab Testing and Computerized Simulation
of Bit Dynamics Improves Drilling Performance in Horizontal Chalk Reservoirs” IADC/SPE paper 87101 presented
at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Dallas, Texas, 2-4 March 2004.
16. Aslaksen, H., Annand, M., Duncan, R., Fjaere, A., Paez, L., Tran, U.: “Integrated FEA Modeling Offers System
Approach to Drillstring Optimization” IADC/SPE paper 99018 presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference,
Miami, Florida, 21-23 February 2006.
17. Frenzel, M.P.: “Dynamic Simulations Provide Development Drilling Improvements” OTC paper 19066 presented at
the 2007 Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 30 April – 3 May.
18. Baker, R., Shen, Y., Zhang, J., Robertson, S.: “New Cutter Technology Redefining PDC Durability Standards for
Directional Control: North Texas/Barnett Shale” IADC/SPE paper 128486 presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling
Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, 2-4 February 2010.
8 SPE 128295

Hyedua-1 Odum-1 Mahogany-1 Mahogany-2 J-2

UCMPS UCMPS UCMPS
0 30k
UCMPS UCMPS
0 (psi) 30k 0 (psi) 30k (psi)
2100 0 (psi) 30k 0 (psi) 30k
2500
3300 2150 3100
2200 3500
2550 …

3350 2250 2600

MSX616 3600
MSi616 dull: 5-5
2300 dull: 1-8 2650
Rotary
Rotary 3650
3400 2350 3550 MSi616 2700 bha4
bha3 dull: 3-8
2400
Motor 2750 3700
0.78BH
3450 2450
MSi616
bha3 2800
dull: 1-2
3750
2500
Motor 3600
0.78BH 2850
3500 2550
bha2
3800
ATJG8 2900 MDSi816
2600 dull: 2-3

2950 MSi616 3850 RSS

3550 2650 MDi813 dull: 1-1
dull: 1-8 3650 5.8 m/hr
Rotary Rotary
2700 3000 3900
bha5
3600 2750 3050
GX09
MSi816 3950
2800 (1-8)
Mtr 3100
Rotary 3700
3650 2850
bha6
4000
3150
2900 GF10HBV
bha5 3200 4050
3700 2950 XR+C 8½”ARC
3750 3250
3000 4100
3750 Mi813 3300 GF20BOD
dull: 1-8 3050 VCPS
GF30BDV GF20BDV
4150
Rotary 3350
bha3
3100 bha6
GF30BOD
3800 3800 4200
3150 3400 VCPS

3200

Figure 1 – Log interpretation of sonic and gamma ray to determine lithology and compressive rock strength.

Figure 2 – Worn seven-bladed PDC POOH after drilling approximately 20m of the reservoir.
SPE 128295 9

BHA 1 - ROTARY BHA 2 - ROTARY BHA 3 w/ MOTOR BHA 4 w/ MOTOR Packed Packed
(Hyedua-
(Hyedua-1) (Odum-
(Odum-1) (Mahogany-
(Mahogany-1) (Mahogany-
(Mahogany-1) BHA5 BHA6
6-5/8" DP 5-1/2” DP 6-5/8" DP 6-5/8" DP 5-1/2" DP 5-1/2" DP
Cross-Over - Cross-Over Cross-Over
9jts 5-1/2" HWDP 9jts 5-1/2" HWDP
8jts x 6-5/8" HWDP 15ts x 5-1/2” HWDP 8jts x 6-5/8" HWDP 8jts x 6-5/8" HWDP
Cross-Over Cross-Over
Cross-Over Cross-Over Cross-Over Cross-Over
2 x 8" DC 2 x 8" DC
1 x 7.94" DC 2 x 8-1/4” DC 1 x 8-1/4" DC 1 x 8-1/4" DC
8" Jar 8" Jar
Jar Jar Jar Jar

7 x 8-1/4" DC 3 x 8-1/4" DC 5 x 8-1/4" DC 5 x 8-1/4" DC 5 x 8" DC 5 x 8" DC

- - 8" worn to 7.88" NMDC 8" worn to 7.88" NMDC 8" NMDC 8" NMDC

11-7/8" Stab 12-1/4” FG Stab 11-7/16" Stab 11-7/16" Stab 12-3/16” Stab 12-3/16” Stab
7.88” NMDC 7.75” DC MWD/LWD MWD/LWD
- 8" NM Ponny DC
12-1/4” FG Stab 12-3/16” NM Stab MWD/LWD MWD/LWD
MWD/LWD MWD/LWD
MWD/LWD MWD/LWD 12-1/4" FG Stab 12-1/4" FG Stab
12-3/16" FG Stab 12-3/16” Stab
MWD/LWD MWD/LWD Motor w/ 12-1/8" Stab & Straight Motor
0.78 bent housing w/ 12-1/8" Stab 8” DC MWD/LWD
Bit Sub Bit Sub
Bit Sub Bit Sub
12-1/4” PDC Bit 12-1/4” PDC Bit 12-3/16" FG Stab 12-3/16” Stab
12-1/4” PDC Bit 12-1/4” PDC Bit
12-1/4” PDC Bit 12-1/4” PDC Bit

BHA7 with RSS BHA8 with RSS BHA9 without BHA12

BHA10 BHA11
Roller Reamer Roller Reamer Roller Reamer (Jubilee-
(Jubilee-5)

5-1/2" DP 21.9ppf 10% Wear 5-1/2" DP 21.9ppf 10% Wear 5-1/2" DP 21.9ppf 10% Wear 2 x 8” Collar 2 x 8” Collar 2 x 8” Collar

9jts 5-1/2" HWDP 9jts 5-1/2" HWDP 9jts 5-1/2" HWDP Jar Jar Jar

Cross-Over Cross-Over Cross-Over 9 x 8” Collar 9 x 8” Collar 9 x 8” Collar

8-1/4" DC 8-1/4" DC 8-1/4" DC 12- 1/4” Roller Reamer

12-1/4” 12- 1/4” Roller Reamer
12-1/4” -

8" Jar 8" Jar 8" Jar 2 x 8" NMDC 2 x 8" NMDC -

7 x 8-1/4" DC 7 x 8-1/4" DC 7 x 8-1/4" DC MWD/LWD MWD/LWD -

8" NMDC 8" NMDC 8" NMDC 12-1/8” Stabilizer 12-1/8” Stabilizer 12-1/8” Stabilizer

12- 1/4” Roller Reamer

12-1/4” 12- 1/4” Roller Reamer
12-1/4” 12-1/8” Stab MWD/LWD MWD/LWD 4 x MWD/LWD

8" NM Ponny DC 8" NM Ponny DC 8" NM Ponny DC 12-1/8” Stabilizer 12-1/8” Stabilizer 12-1/8” Stabilizer

MWD/LWD MWD/LWD MWD/LWD MWD/LWD MWD/LWD Cross-Over

12-1/8" Inline Stab MWD/LWD MWD/LWD - Motor Motor

MWD/LWD RSS 12-1/8" Stab RSS 12-1/8" Stab Flex Collar Flex Collar Downhole Filter Sub

12- 1/4” Roller Reamer

12-1/4” Push the Bit RSS Push the Bit RSS 12-1/8” Stabilizer 12-1/8” Stabilizer 12-1/8” Stabilizer

12-1/4” PDC Bit 12-1/4” PDC Bit 12-1/4” PDC Bit Push the Bit RSS Push the Bit RSS Push the Bit RSS

12-1/4” PDC Bit 12-1/4” PDC Bit 12-1/4” PDC Bit

Figure 3 – BHAs investigated.

PDC 1 PDC 2 PDC 3 PDC 4 PDC 5

(Hyedua-
(Hyedua-1) (Odum-
(Odum-1 & Mahogany-
Mahogany-1) (Mahogany-
(Mahogany-1) (Hyedua-
(Hyedua-2) (Jubilee-
(Jubilee-2)
Eight Bladed-
Bladed-13mm Six Bladed-
Bladed-16mm Eight Bladed-
Bladed-16mm Nine Bladed-
Bladed-13mm Eight Bladed-
Bladed-16mm

Figure 4 – Bits investigated.

10 SPE 128295

Hyedua-
Hyedua-1: 8-
8-bladed 13mm & BHA1 - Rotary
(actual parameters: 3-
3-20wob & 60-60-100rpm) Odum-
Odum-1: 6-
6-bladed 16mm & BHA2 Rotary
Hyedua-1: Mi813 & BHA3 (actual
Bit Lateral Vibration (g) Odum1: MSi616 & BHA3parameters: 5-
5-15wob & 60-
60-210rpm)
Odum1: MSi616 & BHA3
Bit Lateral Vibration (g) Delta Bit RPM
Bit Lateral Vibration (g)
Bit Lateral Vibration (g) Delta Bit RPM (Stick-Slip)
130

200 200

120

180 180

110

160

SRPM
160

SRPM
100
SRPM

140
140
90

120
80 120

Likely window
of actual
100
70 parameters 100
10 15 20 25 30
10 15 20 25 30
WOB (klb)
WOB (klb)
60
1 20
10 15 20 25 30
2 30
WOB (klb) Likely window
3 of actual parameters 40
4 50
5 60
1 6 70
2 7 80
3 M-1: 6-
6-bladed 16mm & BHA3 with 0.78°
0.78° Bent Motor 90
100
Mahogany1 - MSi616 & BHA3
Bit Lateral (actual
Vibration parameters:
5-
5-30wob & 173-
173-276rpm)
4 Mahogany1 - MSi616 & BHA3
5 Delta Bit RPM
6
7 Bit Lateral Vibration (g) Delta Bit RPM (Stick-Slip)
100 100

90 90
- Low Vibrations

80 80
- Moderate Vibrations

- Considerable Vibrations
SRPM
SRPM

70 70 - Above Threshold

60 60

50 50

40 40
10 15 20 25 30 10 15 20 25 30

WOB (klb) WOB (klb)

40
1 60
Likely window
2
of actual parameters 80
3 100
4 120
5 140
6
7
M-1: 8-
8-bladed 16mm & BHA4 with straight motor
Mahogany1 - MS816 & BHA4 Mahogany1 - MSi816 & BHA4
Bit Lateral(actual
Vibration parameters: ~30wob & 240rpm)
8
Delta Bit RPM

Bit Lateral Vibration (g) Delta Bit RPM (Stick-Slip)

80 80

70 70

60 60
SRPM
SRPM

50
50

40
40

30
30
10 15 20 25 30
10 15 20 25 30
WOB (klb)
WOB (klb)

80
5.0
90
5.5
100
6.0
Likely window of actual parameters
6.5
110
120
7.0
130
7.5
140

Figure 5 – Vibration operational windows for offset wells from the preliminary study. Note: 185 motor RPM kept constant.
8.0

SRPM = surface RPM.

SPE 128295 11

PDC2 PDC4
6-bladed
Tullow 16mm
Oil - 12 1/4" Section 9-Tullow
bladedOil - 12 1/4" Section
13mm
Packed BHA - Mi913 - Bit Lateral
Packed BHA - MSi616 - Bit Lateral
Bit Lateral Vibration (g) Bit Lateral Vibration (g)

200
200

180
180

160

SRPM
160
SRPM

140
140

120
120

100
100
10 15 20
10 15Tullow Oil - 12
20 1/4" Section25 30 Tullow Oil - 12 1/4" Section 25 30

Packed BHA -WOB

MSi616 (klb)- Delta Bit RPM
Packed BHA - WOB
Mi913 - Delta Bit RPM
(klb)

Delta Bit RPM (Stick-Slip) Delta Bit RPM (Stick-Slip)

1 1
2 2
3 3
200 4 200
4
5 5
6
7

180 180

160 160
SRPM
SRPM

140 140

120 120

100 100
10 15 20 25 30 10 15 20 25 30

WOB (klb) WOB (klb)

Figure 6 – Operational window for bit selection to avoid lateral vibrations and stick slip above thresholds.
40 20
60 40
80 60
100 80
120 100
140 120
140
12 SPE 128295

J-5
H-2 J-2

Figure 7 – Proposed well plans for Hyedua-2, Jubilee-2 and Jubilee-5 wells.

BHA7 with Packed Packed

SLB Packed BHA Reamer
Roller BHA6 BHA5
Smith Pack2
w/ Roller Reamer Mi913 @ 3600m - new well Packed Smith BHA
Mi913 @ 3600m - new well profile Bit Ay Mi913 - New well
Bit Lateral Vibration (g) Bit Lateral Vibration (g) Bit Lateral Vibration (g)

200 200 200

180 180 180

160 160
SRPM
SRPM

160
SRPM

140 140
140

120 120
120

100 100
100 10 15 20 25 30 10 15 20 25 30
10 SLB
15 Packed with20 Roller Reamer25 30
Smith
WOB Packed
(klb) 2 WOB
Smith (klb) BHA1
Packed
Mi913 @ WOB
3600m - new well
(klb) Mi913 @ 3600m - new well
Delta Bit RPM Mi913 @ 3600m - new well
Delta Bit RPM Delta Bit RPM
1
1 Delta Bit RPM (Stick-Slip) 1 Delta Bit RPM (Stick-Slip) 2 Delta Bit RPM (Stick-Slip)
2 2 3
3 4
3
4 5
4
200 5 6
5 200
6 200
6 7
7
7

180 180 180

160 160 160

SRPM

SRPM
SRPM

140 140 140

120
120 120

100
100 100
10 15 20 25 30
10 15 20 25 30 10 15 20 25 30
WOB (klb)
WOB (klb) WOB (klb)

20
40
Figure 8 – BHA comparison 1 - bit lateral vibration and stick slip operational window.
20
20
40
60
60 40 80
80 60 100
100 80 120
120 100 140
140 120
140
SPE 128295 13

SLBRSS BHA8
PD with Roller w/
Reamer Packed
Smith Pack2
Mi913 @ 3600m - new well Mi913 @ 3600m - new well
RollerBitReamer
Ay BHA6
Bit Ay

Bit Lateral Vibration (g) Bit Lateral Vibration (g)

200 200

180 180

160 160

SRPM
SRPM

140 140

120 120

100
100
SLB PD with Roller Reamer 10 15 20 25 30
10 15
Mi913 @ 3600m20
- new well 25 30 Smith Packed 2
Delta Bit(klb)
RPM Mi913 @WOB
3600m(klb)- new well
WOB
Delta Bit RPM
Delta Bit RPM (Stick-Slip) Delta Bit RPM (Stick-Slip)
1
0.2 2
200 0.4 3
200
0.6 4
0.8 5
1.0 6
7
180 180

160 160
SRPM

SRPM

140 140

120 120

100
100
10 15 20 25 30
10 15 20 25 30
WOB (klb)
WOB (klb)

Figure 9 – BHA comparison 2 - bit lateral vibration and stick slip operational window.
20
20
40
40 60
60 80
80 100
100 120
120 140
140

RSS
SLB BHA8
PD with Rollerwith
Reamer RSS BHA9
SLB without
PD without Roller Reamer
Mi913 @ 3600m - new well Mi913 @ 3600m - new wel
RollerBitReamer
Ay Roller Reamer
Bit Ay

Bit Lateral Vibration (g) Bit Lateral Vibration (g)

200 200

180 180

160 160
SRPM
SRPM

140 140

120 120

100
100 SLB PD with Roller Reamer 10 SLB
15 PD without20Roller Reamer25 30
10 15 20
Mi913 @ 3600m - new well25 30
Mi913 @ 3600m - new well
Delta WOBBit(klb)
WOBBit RPM
(klb) Delta RPM

Delta Bit RPM (Stick-Slip) Delta Bit RPM (Stick-Slip)

0.2
0.2 0.4
0.4 0.6
200 200
0.6 0.8
0.8 1.0
1.0

180 180

160 160
SRPM
SRPM

140 140

120 120

100
100
10 15 20 25 30
10 15 20 25 30
WOB (klb)
WOB (klb)

20
20 40

Figure 10 – BHA comparison 3 - bit lateral vibration and stick slip operational window.
40 60
60 80
80 100
100 120
120 140
140
14 SPE 128295

Figure 11 – A nine-bladed PDC 4 bit drilled 57m on Hyedua-2 well and was pulled out of hole graded 1-2-WT-S-X-I-CT-PR.

ONYX - Wet VTL Test

25
SMITH BITS
Premium
Premium
20 SMITH
NCT BITS
ONYX
Wearflat Area (mm^2)

15

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Rock Volume Index

Figure 12 - Vertical turret lathe (VTL) tests were conducted to compare the wear resistance of the premium cutters to the new
cutter technology (NCT). In the test, the cutter is used to cut a piece of granite under the exact same conditions and
parameters. The wear flat size is recorded after cutting a certain volume of rock.
SPE 128295 15

160 RPM in shale

Yields lower Stick_RT, but
higher VIBLAT_RT

60 RPM in sandstone
Yields higher Stick_RT, but
lower VIBLAT_RT

Figure 13 – Log data showing higher lateral vibration and lower stick slip at 160 RPM and lower lateral vibration and higher
stick slip at 60 RPM.

Transition from
Hard formation (sandstone) to
softer formation (shale)

Figure 14 – Log data showing higher stick slip when transitioning from sandstone to claystone.
16 SPE 128295

Stick Slip

Revs/min

Bit Lateral Vibration

G

- 160 RPM - 60 RPM

Figure 15 – Simulated data showing the comparison between higher and lower RPM and the effect on stick slip and whirl
(lateral vibration).

RPM Correlation with Hole Size

12 1/4" Section of Jubilee-4
160 RPM

16.25 30012 ¼”
As RPM is reduced, the hole size approaches

15.75
250

15.25

200
14.75
Caliper (in)

Hole Diameter ~ 14.25”

RPM

14.25 150

60 RPM
13.75
100

13.25

50
12.75

12.25 0
4200 4300 4400 4500 4600
MD (m)

Hole Size RPM

Figure 16 – Calliper measurement compared to RPM for offset well Jubilee-4 (left). FEA simulated bottom hole pattern where
160 RPM contributes to over gauge hole; whereas, 60 RPM creates a closer to gauge hole (right).
SPE 128295 17

ROP Comparison - Actual vs Simulated

WOB = 20-30 klbs

60

50
Average Instantanous ROP (m/hr)

40

33.3 33.3 P75-P25

32.2 32.0
30 P10-P90
P50
18% Difference Average
18% Difference Min-Max
20

<1% Difference 23% Difference

10
Exact Match 14% Difference
7.9 7.4
6.5 6.0
3.9 3.6 3.1
3.0
0
Actual Simulated Actual Simulated Actual Simulated
Claystone Claystone Sand Sand Transition from Sand Transition from Sand
to Claystone to Claystone

160 RPM 60 RPM

Figure 17 – Log data and FEA was used to compare actual vs simulated ROP values, respectively. The average values
(yellow) and median values (white) of the actual and simulated were similar based on the formations and parameters run.

Stick Slip
Revs/min

Bit Lateral Vibration

G

BHA10
- BHA 1 -BHA11
BHA 2

Figure 18 – BHA11 experienced less lateral vibration and stick slip than BHA10.
18 SPE 128295

BHA10 BHA11

Figure 19 – Parameter Sensitivity. Areas in red and yellow should be avoided due to whirl and stick slip. Areas in blue show
low whirl and stick slip. Areas in green are transitioning from low to medium levels of low whirl and stick slip.

Figure 20 - Plot of lateral vibrations at different string and motor RPM combinations. Y axis = distance from bit. X axis =
lateral vibrations in G’s. Red lines from drillstring are contact force vectors (magnitude and direction of contact forces).
SPE 128295 19

Figure 21 – Dulls from J-05 documenting the good bit condition.

Figure 22 - J-02 (left) shows higher stick slip overall than J-05 (right). Whirl and stick slip are still apparent.
20 SPE 128295

Well Number Spud Date Size Type Out Drill Hrs ROP Inc BHA Bit Grade
(m) (m) (m/hr) I O C L #1 #2 #3 G O R
HYEDUA 2 25-Oct-08 12.25 PDC 6 3393 996 56 17.8 14 BHA 8 2 8 RO S X X X I LT CP
HYEDUA 2 25-Oct-08 Cored Section Vertical
HYEDUA 2 25-Oct-08 12.25 PDC 4 3565 57 18.5 3.1 Vertical Rotary 1 2 WT S X X X I NO PR
HYEDUA 2 25-Oct-08 12.25 TCI IADC 527 3663 98 48.5 2.0 Vertical Rotary 5 4 BT A E E E 2 WT TD
JUBILEE 2 11-Apr-09 12.25 PDC 5 4215 1135 126.6 9.0 38 BHA 8 3 4 WT A X X X I CT TD
JUBILEE 5 22-Jul-09 12.25 PDC 5 4192 1702 80.5 21.1 49 BHA 12 1 2 WT S X X X I NO TD
JUBILEE 11 8-Aug-09 12.25 PDC 5 4213 1481 90.5 16.4 40 BHA 12 2 3 WT S X X X I NO TD
JUBILEE 12 31-Aug-09 12.25 PDC 5 4292 1349 71.1 19.0 44 BHA 12 3 8 WT S X X X 2 RO TD

Figure 23 – Run details on key wells.