SPE 133429

Cost-Per-Foot Reduction by Bit-Run Optimization: A Simulation Study

M. Ebrahimi, SPE, and E. Noveiri, SPE, ACECR-Production Technology Research Institute

Copyright 2010, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Trinidad and Tobago Energy Resources Conference held in Port of Spain, Trinidad, 27–30 June 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
Weight on bit, rotary speed, bit hydraulics and more importantly bit types, are the most important parameters affecting rate of
penetration and consequently the economics of drilling. Pulling a worn bit is necessary to make the drilling operations more
efficient. Cost per foot calculation is a popular criterion used to predict when to pull a bit.
Simulation is a powerful tool to enhance drilling performance and thereby reducing total drilling cost. In this paper, the first 3
thousands feet of a reservoir lithology including four bit runs are simulated so that factors affecting penetration rate are optimized
and the lowest possible well cost is achieved. The effects of using other bit types, weight on bit, rotary speed and bit hydraulics are
simulated in an attempt to determine the optimized parameters, which result in the lowest drilling cost.
Overall, it was found that in bit runs 2, 3 and 4, a lower cost per foot can be achieved using milled tooth bits instead of tungsten
carbide types. Furthermore, it can be concluded that by increasing weight on bit and reducing rotary speed in harder rocks, more
favorable results are obtained while in softer rocks it is vice versa. In addition, by lowering both mud flow rate and nozzle sizes,
hydraulic horse power dissipated at the bit is increased, hence decreasing cost per foot. These optimizations would save about 17%
of the original well cost, which is a considerable amount of money.

Introduction
The usual objective when drilling a well is to drill for the lowest overall cost. At first sight, this may seem like a requirement to
drill as fast as possible, since many of the costs, such as the rig day rate, wages etc., are time dependent. However, some costs are
fixed, for example the cost of the bit, and it may not always be economic to pay a very high cost for a bit that drills somewhat
faster, particularly if the other costs are low.
Many parameters affect the performance of a drilling operation, that if are not adjusted properly, make the operation
uneconomical. Weight on bit (WOB), rotary speed (RPM), bit hydraulics and more importantly the type of the bits used, are the
most important parameters affecting rate of penetration and consequently the economics of drilling. However, all the optimization
in the world will not make a bit last for the entire well. The most common criterion to determine the best time to terminate a bit run
is the cost per foot calculation.
A drilling simulator can calculate the cost per foot for each bit run, re-setting the calculation for each new bit. It can take into
account the time taken to change the bit, and calculate the time taken to trip into and out of hole. The other costs include the bit
cost and the rig day rate (including all the associated overheads).
In this paper, some first three thousands feet of a reservoir lithology including four bit runs and a 13 3/8 in. casing set at 2600
feet is analyzed so that the factors affecting rate of penetration are optimized and the lowest possible well cost is achieved. All bits
used in the original drillings process were of tungsten carbide insert type. In the first step, other drilling bit types are examined to
see if a better drilling performance is observed. Then, the effects of the change in operating conditions (WOB and RPM) are
investigated. At the end, it is attempted to get even better results through bit hydraulics optimization.
As a result, it was found that bit runs number 2, 3 and 4 could yield a lower cost per foot with milled tooth bits because they
have higher rate of penetration and also cost less than half the price of a tungsten carbide bit. In addition, it is shown that altering
the weight on bit is more effective than changing rotary speed. Optimized drilling in harder sections of lithology demands a higher
weight on bit while the same is not true for softer sections. Apart from that, lowering both mud flow rate and nozzle sizes increases
2 SPE 133429

hydraulic horse power dissipated at the bit, hence decreasing cost per foot. Optimization of these 4 factors will save us about 17%
of the original well cost.

Factors Affecting the Rate of Penetration (ROP)

The factors that influence the rate of penetration during a conventional rotary drilling process are numerous. In general these
factors can be classified into six groups:

1. Bit type
2. Formation characteristics
3. Drilling fluid properties
4. Bit operating conditions (weight on bit and rotary speed)
5. Bit tooth wear
6. Bit hydraulics

Bit Type
The bit type selected has a large effect on penetration rate. PDC bit drills the fastest in the soft shale, and also penetrates
rapidly in the soft sand, but it has difficulties in penetrating the harder sand and the limestone. The milled tooth bit does well in the
softer rocks also. In the harder rocks, it does relatively less well. The milled tooth bit does not do quite as well as the PDC bit in
the shale, where it tends to suffer from the accumulation of sticky clay cuttings between the bit teeth, a problem known as bit
balling. The tungsten carbide insert bit has shorter teeth than the milled tooth bit, and it is thus not aggressive enough to drill
rapidly in the softer formations. It also suffers from bit balling in the shale section. However, its great advantage lies not so much
in a high rate of penetration as in its greater abrasion resistance, and therefore longer life, particularly in the harder rocks. The
natural diamond bit has an overall lower rate of penetration than any of the other bits. As with the tungsten carbide bit, its great
advantage lies in its ability to penetrate the very hardest rocks with acceptable wear.
Unfortunately, the selection of the best available bit for the job can be determined only by trial and error. The most valid
criterion for comparing the performance of various bits is the drilling cost per unit interval drilled (Bourgoyne et al., 1986).
The results of the cost analysis sometimes must be tempered with the engineering judgment. Reducing the cost of a bit run will
not necessarily result in lower well cost if the risk of encountering drilling problems such as stuck pipe, hole deviation, hole
washout, etc., is increased greatly (Bourgoyne et al., 1986).

Formation Characteristics
Elastic limit and ultimate strength of the formation are the most important formation properties affecting penetration rate.
Permeability of the formation and mineral composition of the rock can also has major effects on penetration rate (Bourgoyne et al.,
1986). However, these factors are beyond our control and can not be manipulated; therefore no optimization can be made on them.

Drilling Fluid Properties

ROP tend to decrease with increasing fluid density, viscosity and solid content, and tend to increase with increasing filtration
rate (Lyons et al., 1996). These parameters usually depend on the nature of pore and fracture pressures of the formation and hence
no optimization is performed on them.

Bit Operating Conditions

WOB and rotational speed (RPM) of the drill string have a major effect on both the penetration rate and the life of the bit. In
addition, these parameters can be varied easily. Thus, the determination of the best weight and rotary speed for a given bit is one of
the routine problems faced by the drilling engineer.
Generally speaking, no significant penetration rate is obtained until a threshold weight on bit is applied. Penetration rate then
increase rapidly with increasing values of weight on bit. However, at higher values of weight on bit, subsequent increase in it
causes only slight improvements in rate of penetration. In some cases a decrease in rate of penetration is observed at extremely
high values of weight on bit, attributed to less efficient bottomhole cleaning (Bourgoyne et al., 1986).
Penetration rate usually increases linearly with rotary speed at low values of rotary speed. At higher values of rotary speed, the
response of penetration rate to increasing rotary speed diminishes. The poor response of penetration rate at high values of rotary
speed usually is also attributed to less efficient bottomhole cleaning (Bourgoyne et al., 1986).
SPE 133429 3

Bit Tooth Wear

Most bits tend to drill slower as the bit run progresses because of tooth wear. Bit wear is often directly dependent on WOB,
rotary speed and the rock type being drilled. Operating conditions and bit wear are simultaneously optimized through using cost
per foot calculation.

Bit Hydraulics
The efficiency of cleaning the bottom hole does not just depend on the mud flow rate, but also on the degree of local turbulence
at the bottom hole. However, if the power and maximum pressure of the mud pumps are limited, it is intuitively clear that there
must be some optimum combination of flow rate and pressure drop across the nozzles to get the best cleaning effect.
There is still discussion as to which combination of pressure and flow rate produces the best cleaning effect. The most popular
criteria assume that the cleaning effect is maximized either when the hydraulic horsepower dissipated at the bit is a maximum, or
when the change in momentum of the mud as it hits the hole bottom is a maximum. The former is called bit hydraulic horse power
and the latter is often known as the "Jet impact" criterion. The bit hydraulic horsepower is expressed as (Lapeyrouse, 2002):

pq
HHP = (1)
1714
Where HHP is hydraulic horsepower, p is circulating pressure in psi, q is circulating rate in gpm, and 1714 is a conversion factor.
For practical purposes, however, there does not appear to be a great difference between the two criteria, and so the hydraulic
horsepower criterion has been chosen for the simulator as it is more easily comparable with the mud pump horsepower.

Cost per Foot Analysis

There is almost always some uncertainty about the best time to terminate a bit run and begin tripping operations. If the lithology is
somewhat uniform, cost per foot calculation can be used as a criterion. In this case the best time to terminate the bit run is when
the lowest cost per foot is achieved.
However, when the lithology is not uniform, this procedure will not always results in the minimum total well cost. In this case,
an effective criterion for determining optimum bit run is obtained only after enough wells are drilled in the area to define the
lithologic variations. For example it is sometimes desirable to drill an abrasive formation with an already dull bit and then place a
sharp bit in the next shale section. Alternatively, it may be best to terminate a bit run in order to place a hard formation bit in an
extremely hard abrasive section (Bourgoyne et al., 1986).
Costs are usually broke into two categories: (1) Fixed costs and (2) Variable operation costs (Bourgoyne, 1986). The usual
objective when drilling a well is to drill for the lowest overall cost. At first sight, this may seem like a requirement to drill as fast
as possible, since many of the costs, such as the rig day rate, wages, etc., are time dependent. However, some costs are fixed, for
example the cost of the bit, and it may not always be economic to pay a very high cost for a bit that drills somewhat faster,
particularly if the other costs are low.
Unless the bit run is to be terminated for a specific reason, such as logging or casing the well, the cost of each bit run can be
minimized by calculating the cost per foot as the hole gets deeper. This is done by summing the fixed and time-dependent costs
and dividing by the total footage drilled during the bit run (Lyons et al., 1996):

Cost Bit cost + (Drilling time + Trip time) × Rig cost per hour
= (2)
ft Feet drilled this bit run

When we run in hole with the new bit, we have already incurred the cost of the new bit and spent time to run in hole, but have
drilled no distance. Our cost per foot is therefore infinite. However, as soon as we begin drilling, the factor "Feet drilled this bit
run" begins to increase, and so the cost per foot decreases. As we continue drilling, the fixed costs remain constant, but the time
related costs increase, as does the footage drilled. Initially, the fixed costs are greater than the time-related costs, but eventually the
time-related costs begin to dominate the top line of the expression. In the real situation, the bit gradually wears, and so the number
of additional feet drilled per additional hour gets less as time increases. The time-related costs continue to increase steadily,
however, and so eventually the cost per foot reaches a minimum and then begins to rise again. It is at this minimum value that we
have reached the minimum cost per foot for the bit run, and we should therefore replace the bit.
Finally, note that the Cost per Foot calculation can be used even if the bit run has to be terminated for other reasons. In this
case, all that needs to be done is to find the set of conditions that give the minimum cost per foot at the depth where the bit run is to
be terminated.
4 SPE 133429

Drilling Simulator
For this study, a drilling simulator is used that receives: a description of a series of rock layers (lithology), a description of one or
more drill bits, and a set of operating parameters such as weight on bit, bit rotary speed, mud flow rate and other required
information, as input. The simulator then calculates the rate of penetration and the rate of bit wear. From this information, a plot of
drilled depth versus time is obtained.
Two parameters govern the drilling response. These are the "Softness Factor" (S) that determines the initial rate of penetration
and the "Wear Factor" (W) that determines the rate of bit wear. As drilling proceeds, the drilling model is continuously calculating
the state of wear of the bit and its rate of penetration. The wear algorithm starts by calculating a "wear factor". At each time step
the "Life" of the bit is multiplied by the "wear factor" to reduce the life by a certain fraction of its current value as the time
increases.
To obtain the current rate of penetration, the present "Life" is combined with two more factors that represent the interaction of
the particular bit with the rock being drilled, and the underlying rate of penetration. The result is further combined with the factors
that depend on the weight on bit, the rotary speed and the mud density. These operations result in the calculation of rate of
penetration that would be characteristic of a bit for which the cuttings are removed as soon as they are formed (Perfect Cleaning).
At this point the effect of mud flow rate is introduced, and a final rate of penetration is calculated based on the effectiveness of the
mud flow in cleaning the cuttings away from the bottom hole (Cooper et al., 1995).
The simulator has been given a capability to infer rock strength from sonic data following recommendations available in the
literature, if strength data are not available; however, to estimate abrasivity, it is necessary to define a way to estimate this value.
An example of how the abrasivity of the formation is estimated is shown in Equation 3 (Abouzeid and Cooper, 2005).

Abrasivity = Constant × Quartz Content × Rock Strengh (3)

Case Study

Lithology
For current study, the first 3465 feet of a reservoir lithology including four bit runs and a 13 3/8 in. casing set at 2600 feet are
analyzed so that the factors affecting the rate of penetration are optimized and the lowest possible well cost is achieved. Table 1
shows the lithology of the reservoir where each layer is characterized by its depth, thickness, fracture gradient (FG), softness (S),
abrasivity (W), three logging values of gamma ray activity (GA), resistivity (Res), porosity (Por), fluid type, and pore fluid
pressure gradient (PPG).

Table 1: Lithology of the section being studied

Depth Thickness Rock Type FG S W GA RES POR Fluid Type PPG
0-90 90 Soft sand 9.70 150 2 25 6.00 35 -- 8.50
90-290 200 Shale 9.40 110 4 125 4.00 35 -- 8.55
290-300 10 Hard sand 9.35 15 25 25 10.00 8 Water 8.61
300-330 30 Lime stone 9.33 50 12 20 6.00 12 Water 8.61
330-410 80 Soft sand 9.32 120 2 25 6.00 35 -- 8.62
410-610 200 Shale 9.31 90 1 85 6.00 40 Water 8.63
610-625 15 Hard sand 9.31 10 41 30 4.00 18 Water 8.63
625-1325 700 Lime stone 9.20 60 15 20 6.00 12 Water 8.70
1325-1335 10 Hard sand 9.20 10 30 30 4.00 18 Water 8.70
1335-2035 700 Soft sand 9.90 70 3 35 4.00 22 Water 8.90
2035-2085 50 Hard sand 9.95 20 8 45 12.00 8 Water 8.90
2085-2335 250 Shale 10.50 100 1 90 2.00 35 -- 9.10
2335-2635 300 Shale 11.00 99 1 110 1.00 25 -- 9.30
2635-2705 70 Soft sand 11.10 75 3 30 80.00 12 Gas 9.35
2705-2765 60 Soft sand 11.15 50 1 25 150.00 22 Oil 9.36
2765-2965 200 Soft sand 11.30 50 1 30 3.00 12 Water 9.38
2965-3465 500 Lime stone 12.30 20 2 18 5.00 8 Water 9.40

Bit Run Optimization Methodology

All the bits used in the original bit runs were of tungsten carbide insert type. The first 2600 ft of the lithology was drilled using
a 17 1/2 in. bit and mud density of 9 ppg. At the depth of 2600 feet, a 13 3/8 in. casing was set, mud density was increased to 10.2
ppg, and 12 1/2 in. bit was used. Table 2 shows the 4 bit runs coupled with their resultant cost per foot and overall well cost. As it
can be seen, drilling this section takes 163 hours and imposes a cost of approximately 325000 dollars.
SPE 133429 5

Table 2: Original Bit runs and their associated costs

Bit Bit Depth Depth Time Mud Nozzles Mud Rotary Overall Well
Bit WOB Saving
Run Size In Out Taken Weight Size Flowrate Speed Cost / Cost
Type (lbs) ($)
# In. (ft) (ft) (hr: min) (ppg) (32nds) (gpm) (RPM) Foot ($)
1 T.C 17 1/2 0 1325 38:12 9 15 760-750 100 38000 57 75699 --
2 T.C 17 1/2 1325 2600 70:17 9 15 750-730 85 40000 55 143805 --
-- Casing 13 3/8 in. set at 2600 ft 107:16 -- -- -- -- -- 94 243828 --
3 T.C 12 1/4 2600 2965 118:30 10.2 15 675 80 40000 87 257919 --
4 T.C 12 1/4 2965 3465 163:12 10.2 15 675 120 47000 94 325532 --

In the first step, it was attempted to obtain a better cost per foot results with other bit types, keeping operating parameters the
same as the original bit runs. To avoid complexity, only 4 main bits types with predefined properties were analyzed. Table 3
shows the ROP and Wear Factor for the studied bits.

Table 3: ROP and Wear Factor of different bit types

Bit \ Rock Shale Lime Stone Soft Sand Hard Sand Chert
ROP Factor 20 14 17 17 5
PDC
Wear Factor 20 210 200 400 250
Milled ROP Factor 11 13 20 12 6
Tooth Wear Factor 280 220 550 350 300
Tungsten ROP Factor 8 12 15 12 6
Carbide Wear Factor 25 70 100 90 50
ROP Factor 3 4 4 7 5
Diamond
Wear Factor 5 2 100 55 60

The total wear factor is the result of combining this wear factor and wear parameter entered in the lithology, and then further
combining with two parameters that represent effects of weight on bit and rotary speed on the rate of wear of the bit (Cooper et al.,
1995).
Having determined the best bit types to be used, different sets of operating parameters (WOB, rotary speed and bit hydraulics)
were simulated to see if a better cost and time saving can be yield. The procedure consists of a step-by-step approach, simulating
different scenarios in sequence.
Since there are many shale layers in the lithology, the well has been drilled using an oil based mud. The Mud pump is limited
to provide 900 Horse power (HP). This value has been taken into account in the simulation.

Results and Discussion

The first step consists of comparing other bits cost per foot results to find a more economic case. Results are shown in table 4
where, regarding bit types, only the first bit run was recognized optimized. Runs number 2, 3 and 4 could yield a lower cost per
foot using milled tooth bits because they have higher rate of penetration and also cost less than half the price of a tungsten carbide
bit.

Table 4: Optimization of bit types

Bit Bit Depth Depth Time Mud Nozzles Mud Rotary Overall Well
Bit WOB Saving
Run Size In Out Taken Weight Size Flowrate Speed Cost / Cost
Type (lbs) ($)
# In. (ft) (ft) (hr: min) (ppg) (32nds) (gpm) (RPM) Foot ($)
1 T.C 17 1/2 0 1325 38:12 9 15 760-750 100 38000 57 75699 0
2 M.T 17 1/2 1325 2600 69:35 9 15 750-730 85 40000 48 143805 17881
-- Casing 13 3/8 in. set at 2600 ft 106:34 -- -- -- -- -- 87 243828 17881
3 M.T 12 1/4 2600 2965 117:49 10.2 15 675 80 40000 81 257919 18110
4 M.T 12 1/4 2965 3465 158:35 10.2 15 675 120 47000 85 325532 30427

Since Tungsten carbide bits have more bit wear tolerance, they may seem more efficient to be used for drilling harder rocks.
However, the distance to be drilled in the fourth section (hard lime stone) is not that long to justify higher cost of the bit.
In the second step, an attempt was made to improve drilling performance through optimizing weight on bit and rotary speed.
The results of optimizations are summarized in table 5.
6 SPE 133429

Table 5: Optimization of WOB and rotary speed

Bit Bit Depth Depth Time Mud Nozzles Mud Rotary Overall Well
Bit WOB Saving
Run Size In Out Taken Weight Size Flowrate Speed Cost / Cost
Type (lbs) ($)
# In. (ft) (ft) (hr: min) (ppg) (32nds) (gpm) (RPM) Foot ($)
1 T.C 17 1/2 0 1325 36:05 9 15 760-750 100 42000 55 73056 2643
2 M.T 17 1/2 1325 2600 64:18 9 15 750-730 120 42000 46 119328 24477
-- Casing 13 3/8 in. set at 2600 ft 102:44 -- -- -- -- -- 84 219351 24477
3 M.T 12 1/4 2600 2965 111:05 10.2 15 675 130 45000 78 231642 26277
4 M.T 12 1/4 2965 3465 146:38 10.2 15 675 100 62000 81 280084 45448

Overall, sections 1 and 2 (bit runs 1 and 2) have rocks of different strength and abrasiveness; therefore, they can be interpreted
as rocks with moderate strength and abrasiveness. In such formations, a moderate rotary speed with moderate WOB should
maximize the drill rate and reduce bit wear. Bit run 3 drills a section of shale and soft sandstone. It can be inferred that in soft
rocks, increasing the rotary speed and relatively low WOB can improve the penetration rate. Note that the weight on bit of 45000
pounds for 12 ¼ in. bit is considered lower than 42000 pounds for 17 ½ in. bit. In harder formations such as section 4, increased
WOB is more important than increased rotary speed. Moderately high WOB with low rotary speed yields the most optimum drill
rates.
At the end, bit hydraulics is optimized. The data are shown in Table 6. The nozzle sizes 8/32 to 12/32 of the third and the
fourth bit runs did not actually change calculated cost per foot and therefore the biggest size is reported here.

Table 6: Optimization of bit hydraulics

Bit Bit Depth Depth Time Mud Nozzles Mud Rotary Overall Well
Bit WOB Saving
Run Size In Out Taken Weight Size Flowrate Speed Cost / Cost
Type (lbs) ($)
# In. (ft) (ft) (hr: min) (ppg) (32nds) (gpm) (RPM) Foot ($)
1 T.C 17 1/2 0 1325 34:27 9 10 456 100 42000 54 71017 4682
2 M.T 17 1/2 1325 2600 62:23 9 10 456 120 42000 45 116935 26870
-- Casing 13 3/8 in. set at 2600 ft 100:01 -- -- -- -- -- 84 216958 26870
3 M.T 12 1/4 2600 2965 107:42 10.2 12 535 130 45000 76 225340 32579
4 M.T 12 1/4 2965 3465 141:24 10.2 12 533 100 62000 78 270270 55262

Figures 1 and 2 show the overall well cost and savings made due to optimizations for the studied bit runs. Figure 3 compares
original and optimized drilling performance in terms of time taken. Having made these optimizations, 55262 $ of the total well
cost is saved which is approximately 17% of the original well cost.

Figure 1: Overall well cost for original bit run and different optimized bit runs
SPE 133429 7

Figure 2: The amount of money saved due to different bit run optimizations

st
Figure 3: Comparison of the original and optimized drilling performance for the 1 three thousand feet of a reservoir lithology

Conclusions
Simulation is a powerful tool to enhance drilling performance and thereby reducing total drilling cost. In this paper, a simulator
was used to fulfill this task using a mechanistic algorithm. Overall, in this study milled tooth bits are preferred to other bits,
because it can yield greater ROP with an acceptable wear. The drilling parameters analysis showed that WOB and ROP are critical
in drilling optimization. In soft sections of the lithology, increasing the rotary speed can improve the penetration rate with little
effect on bit cutter wear. In such lithology relatively low WOB is recommended. In medium strength sections increased rotary
speed will not have the same result as in soft formations. Moderate rotary speed with moderate WOB should maximize the drill
rate and reduce bit wear. In harder portions, increased WOB is more important than increased rotary speed. Moderately high WOB
with minimum rotary speed yields the most optimum drill rates. Due to mud pump limitations in providing high pressures, mud
flow rate and nozzle sizes should be adjusted in a manner that the overall cutting removal is the nearest possible case to perfect
cleaning process. In this study, by reducing both nozzle sizes and mud flow rate, the horse power dissipated at the bit is increased,
8 SPE 133429

hence reducing cost per foot of drilled interval. As it is noted, by using this simulator, 17% of the original well cost is saved, which
is a considerable amount of money.

References
1. Abouzeid, A.A. and Cooper G.A. 2001. The Use of a Drilling Simulator to Optimize a Well Drilling Plan, presented at the Geothermal
Resources Council Annual Meeting, San Antonio, Texas, 26-29 August.
2. Bourgoyne, A.T., Chenevert, M.E., and Millhein, K.K. 1986. Applied Drilling Engineering. Textbook Series, SPE, Richardson, Texas 2:
190–223.
3. Cooper, G.A., Cooper, A.G. and Bihn, G. 1995. An Interactive Simulator for Teaching and Research, paper SPE 30213 presented at the
Petroleum Computer Conference, Houston, 11-14 June.
4. Norton J. Lapeyrouse. 2002. Formulas and Calculations for Drilling, Production and Workover. Second Edition, Gulf professional
publishing
5. Lyons, E. 1996. Standard Handbook of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering, Volume 1, Gulf professional publishing company.
6. Payzone. http://www.maxsimul.com/.