This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
A PROJECT REPORT SUBMITTED TO RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD DRILLING AND COMPLETION DEPARTMENT EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION VERTICAL
BY PARTICIPANT NAME: ARUN KUMAR N
IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF REQUIREMENTS FOR PGDM AT INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT KOZHIKODE
ABSTRACT DRILL BIT SELECTION PROCESS MANAGEMENT & BIT PROCUREMENT STRATEGY Arun Kumar N PGDM, IIM Kozhikode Guide: Ashutosh Rai, GM, D&C Department, Reliance Industries Ltd June 2011, 23 pages
The objective of the project is to analyze the drill bit selection process and the bit procurement strategy and improve them. Drill bit selection very important in deep sea drilling and the cost impact could be 10-15% of the well cost even though the bit itself costs less than 0.5% of the total well cost. Various methods of bit selection were studied and evaluated. The method of bit selection scorecard has been recommended. Various strategies of drill bit procurement were analyzed, including the outright purchase, consignment basis and performance based method. It was found out that performance based contracting strategy is not widely used and hence an indirect method to implement the performance strategy through cost per foot analysis during bit selection has been advised. The use of cost per foot method has been advocated for drill bit selection and benchmarking previously used bits. When drilling in locations having familiar lithology, we can use past data from previously drilled wells to compute cost/foot. When drilling wildcat wells in unfamiliar lithology, a method has been devised whereby one can predict Rate of Penetration from mud log data and use it to estimate the cost per foot. Cost per foot method is a powerful tool because it takes into account both the performance parameters and also the cost details of not only bits but of the whole well, including the drilling rig. Hence cost per foot is a potent tool to have in your armory and one can use it along with the normal calculations to confirm that the selection that has been made is economically sound. All the findings are based on computations done on real life wells and drill bits that has been used/ drilled in the past and those that are going to be used/ drilled in the future. Key Words: Process management, Procurement Strategy, Cost per foot, Drill bit economics, Bit selection scorecard
Mr. Senthil Arumugam and Mr. Many thanks to the HR team at RIL headed by Mr. encouragement and patience throughout my project. Mr. Vigyan Tiwari. Ashutosh Rai. Vivek Verma. I cannot thank them enough for all the support he has provided me for the successful completion of this present work. Finally I would like to thank everyone who has contributed at least a bit to this project. Dhiraj Hindoriya for without their help this project would not have been complete. who is my mentor for his guidance. Darius Ghandhi for making me feel comfortable and guiding me through the initial days. Maurizio Fico. Mitra. Mr. GM. Vivek Agarwal. Utkarsh Shukla for their support and guidance. D&C.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my sincere appreciation and deepest gratitude to Mr. I am immensely grateful to Mr. N. Mr. 3 .K. I would also like to thank Mr. Mr.
REFERENCES 18 7. Bit selection by the engineering team 15 c. Introduction to drill bits 5 b. INTRODUCTION 5 a. Importance of drill bit selection 5 2. Cost per foot benchmarking of past bits 16 b. Case for/against Cost/Foot Method 16 e. KK4C-A1 and KK-DWN-1 wells 17 e. Bit performance prediction 14 e. Introduction to Rocks 7 c. Bit Selection for KK-III-D1-A1 based on ROP data of KKD-1A. RESULTS AND FINDINGS 16 a. Analysis of the existing process 16 d. Procurement process at RIL 15 b. Project Objectives 5 b. Cost per foot and specific energy analysis for KKD-1A. APPENDICES 19 1 2 3 4 4 . CONCLUSION 17 6. Implementing Cost/Foot Method 16 4. Bit Selection 9 d.TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE ABSTRACT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1. Bit contracting strategy 14 3. Cost per foot calculations by ROP prediction using method developed by Chevron Texaco for KK-III-D1-A1 16 c. KK4C-A1 and KKDWN-1 wells 17 d. OBSERVATIONS 15 a. Cost-Benefit analysis of bits for KK-III-D2-E1 well 17 5. PROJECT SCOPE 5 a.
A typical drill bit cost is < 0. PROJECT SCOPE a. Here. Scenario two is same number of bits and higher ROP. The impact of drill bit maybe 10 – 15% of well cost. Focus is to reduce drilling time and cost. A fresh approach is expected. Here there is savings in Drilling time and the equivalent saving in rig cost is 3-6 times bit cost. The average spread cost of rig operations in deep water is USD 1mm/ day. there is savings in Tripping time and equivalent saving in rig cost is 15-20 times bit cost. Two scenarios were considered. Introduction to drill bits The various types of bits are elucidated in exhibit I below.5% of deep water well cost. Drill Bits Roller Cone bits Milled Tooth Bits Fixed Cutter Bits Natural Diamond Bits Insert Bits PDC Bits TSP Bits Exhibit I – The various types of bits Impreg bits Comparison of Roller Cone vs Fixed Cutter Bits is given in exhibit II below 5 . Importance of drill bit selection The cost of a deep water well is 60 – 70 mn USD. Scenario one is lesser number of bits and same ROP. The industry aspires for highest ROP & least number of bits 2. The Cost benefit analysis of bits done for KK-III-D2-E1aptly illustrates the importance of bit selection. Analysis of various contracting strategies in bit procurement is to be made b.1. INTRODUCTION a. Project Objectives The objective is to prepare a basic bit selection procedure for various types of rocks.
gouging and scraping being secondary Two or more cones containing cutting element Cones free to rotate independently Exhibit II – Comparison of Roller Cone and Fixed Cutter Bits Milled tooth bits These are manufactured by milling the teeth out of a steel cone. Natural Diamond Bits These are the first fixed cutter bits in the industry. Those designed for softer formations are long and have a chisel shaped end and bits use compressive failure with scraping and gouging. Advancements in other diamond tools are making this bit obsolete. PDC cutters life far exceed that of other hard materials. Hard facing on one side makes one side wear more than the other and the tooth remains relatively sharp. Those designed for soft formations are usually faced with a wear resistant material (usually tungsten carbide) on one side of the tooth. Those designed for harder formations are short and have a hemispherical end (button bits) and the cutting action is more of compressive failure. The scarce cutter exposure does not allow high penetration rates. They are designed for hard rock drilling where other tools suffer from very early cutter wear. Cutter can be shaped to resist to high exposure allowing higher ROP than roller bits. Case hardened steel should wear by chipping and will keep the teeth sharp.Fixed Cutter Bits Fixed cutter blades integral to bit body Rotate as a unit with drill string Gouging and scraping are the only actions at bottom Crushing is undesirable Since formation breakage is by shear alone. 6 . Those designed for hard formations are usually case hardened by special processing and heat treating the cutter during manufacturing. for appropriate formation. known as shear bits Fixed cutter blades integral to bit body Rolling Cutter Bits Two or more cones containing cutting element Cones free to rotate independently Rotate about the axis of the cone as bit is rotated in the bottom of the hole Chipping and crushing are the primary bit action. The cutting structure is aggressive and cuts rock by combining compressive failure. This is backed up by tungsten carbide (compact) for mechanical resistance. plus gouging and scraping the rock at the bottom. PDC cutter embodies a layer of sintered diamond powder (polycrystalline diamond) for wear resistance. They have a Shaped Tungsten Carbide matrix body on which natural diamonds are set. PDC Bits These are the most widely known fixed cutter bits. Cutting action becomes predominantly compressive failure of the rock TCI Bits These are manufactured by pressing a tungsten carbide cylinder into accurately machined holes in a cone.
manufactured with sharp. Such formations are away from PDC reach because of heat exceeding PDC thermal stability. They are most effective in unconsolidated or poorly consolidated sediments (sands and silts). They have no particular drawbacks except low ROP. They are less effective in hard and cemented formations (abrasive sandstones. high pressure process. Introduction to Rocks Rock Types The various types of rocks generally encountered during drilling are given below in Exhibit III. Clay SLIGHTLY ABRASIVE 7 Soft Shale SOFT Chalk Soft Limestone Gypsum Volcanic Tuff Hard Limestone Dolomitic Limestone Schist Serpentine . They have rounded crown profile drilling head. They are good for horizontal drilling. porous carbonates and evaporites). dolomite). They have higher resistance to thermal degradation than natural diamond. chert. They can also be used in moderately strong formations (silty clays. They are also good when high RPM drilling (turbine or PDM) is expected. gritsize diamonds sintered directly into the bit matrix in a high temperature. where standard bits cannot drill. They extend field of application also into moderately abrasive formations with high compressive strength. Thermally stable polycrystalline diamond is an artificial material produced by diamond grits. They can be appropriately shaped (self sharpening mode). b. TSP cutters are baked into the matrix enabling them to effective shear hard rock formations while withstanding high temperature (12000 due to friction) These bits have the same advantages of PDC. soft shales.PDC bits are good when long times on bottom are required. especially abrasive sections Impregnated Bits These are specialty tools for application in ultra abrasive formations. TSP Bits They have a Shaped matrix body on which thermally stable diamonds are arranged. The cutting structure is very hard abrasive matrix with thousands of cutters with no macroscopic exposure. The mechanism of drilling is more of abrasion than pure shear.
Hard & Mica Schist SOFT OR MEDIUM MIXED Sand Loose Sandstone Shale Marl Shale Med-Hard Limestone Salt Frozen Soil & Ice Siliceous Limestone Dolomite Marble Peridotite Andesite Pegmatite Hematite Magnetite MEDIUM HARD NON ABRASIVE HARD ULTRA HARD 8 Metamorph Schist Gneiss Granite Basalt VERY HARD Gabbro Rhyolite Diorite Soft Sandstone Sandy Shale Claystone Sandy Limestone Soft Schist Med-Hard Sanstone Siltstone Alluvial Deposits Calcitic Limestone Med-Hard Limestone Hard Shale Exhibit III – Rock Types MEDIUM HARD ABRASIVE Conglomerate Taconite Abrasive Sandstone Pyritic Formations Banded Hematite .
The fifth method is ROP models based on WOB. UCS is Unconfined Compressive Strength. especially bottom of a deep well. It is the most important rock mechanical parameter in drilling analysis. The fourth is Rock Strength from ROP models. Sonic Logs. When bearing wear rate is much less than tooth wear rate we can go for Shorter tooth size or More economical design or Less bit weight. c. PDC drag bits should be avoided in formations which have tendency to stick to cutters. Various methods of Rock Strength Calculations are given in the next section. It varies from rock to rock. Second method is Rock Strength from Logs. Bit Selection Scorecard. Small amount of tooth breakages are to be tolerated than selecting shorter tooth size. Gamma Ray Logs. Small hole size demands design simplicity. It is a more realistic representation of approximate rock strength. The general rules are as follows that IADC Classification charts can be used to provide approximate listing of bit type applicable in a given formation hardness. When enough weight cannot be applied economically to milled tooth bit to cause self sharpening tooth wear. Mud weight etc. Drilling Specific Energy. RPM. Here. PDC drag bits perform best in uniform sections of carbonates and evaporates that are not broken up with hard shale stringers or other brittle rock types. Bit with longest tooth size possible be used. Bit Dullness.Rock Strength It is required to predict drilling time and bit wear. Here correlations between rock strength and sonic travel time are used. we can go for Longer tooth size or Better bearing design or More bit weight. Neutron Logs can be used. Diamond drag bits perform best in non brittle formations having a plastic form of failure. longer tooth size to be used. Third method is Rock Strength from cuttings. Finding Rock Strength Rock strength can be found in many ways. When rate of tooth wear is much less than bearing wear rate. The Final Criteria for Bit Selection are Cost per Interval Drilled. Bit Selection Approximate bit selection can be done based on preliminary rules and final selection can be based on a number of final criteria. Preliminary methods are using Common tendencies shown by past experience and using Formation Hardness in IADC Charts. IADC Classification Charts The rocks are classified based on Compressive strength 0 – 5000 psi 9 . It is done on cylindrical rock samples in tri-axial lab cell. CCS is Confined Compressive Strength. Three cone rolling cutter bits are most versatile and are a good initial choice for shallow portion of the well. High cost of tripping favors long bit life. The two most important measures are UCS and CCS. When using a roller cone bit. First method is Rock Mechanical Laboratory Testing. Here critical transition force on few mm-sized rock samples is computed.
Ground Description is “Medium hard and abrasive rocks such as sandstones with streaks of quartz. Ground description is “Very soft. sandstones. crystalline dolomites. hard limestone or chert. 225 to 315 and 227 to 317. quarzite streaks. well-compacted rocks such as hard silica limestones. Bit Description is “A Steel Tooth Bit for Medium Formations”. 625 to 735 and 627 to 737. dolomites. hard limestone or chert. 415 to 435 and417 to 437. Ground Description is “Hard abrasive rocks such as sandstones with quartz binder. hard quartz shales. Ground Description is “Medium-hard and abrasive rocks such as sandstones with streaks of quartz. This is the most commonly used method for bit selection around the world. magma and metamorphic rocks” 9000 – 12000 psi Bit IADC Code Recommendation is 411 to 431. pyrite ores. salts. dolomites. clays. magnetite ores. quartzite shales. gypsum and hard coals” 3000 – 6000 psi Bit IADC Code Recommendations are 221 to 311. petryfied. hematite ores. hematite ores. well-compacted abrasive rock such as sandstones with quartz binder. Bits are compared using the standard drilling cost equation 10 . un-stratified. Bit Description is “A Steel Tooth Bit for Hard Formations”. marl limestone. Ground Description is “Long intervals of very soft poorly compacted shales. 115 to 215 and 117 to 217. 515 to 615 and 517 to 617. 315 to 335 and 317 to 337. chromium ores. Ground Description is “Hard. Bit Description is “A steel tooth bit for soft formations”. phosphorite ores. Bit Description is “A TCI / Button Bit for Hard Formations”. and granites” Cost per interval drilled Cost per Interval Drilled Cost per interval drilled can be used for determining cost per interval during bit run and economic comparisons of bit runs or drilling techniques. Bit Description is “A TCI / Button Bit for Medium Formations”. hematite ores. magma and metamorphic coarse grained rocks” 14500 psi and above Bit IADC Code Recommendation is 621 to 731. hard. Bit Description is “A TCI / Button Bit for Soft Formations”. and hard shales” 6000 – 9000 psi Bit IADC Code Recommendations are 311 to 331. hard sandstones.Bit IADC Code Recommendations are 111 to 112. salts and limestones” 12000 – 14500 psi Bit IADC Code Recommendation are 511 to 611. poorly compacted rocks such as poorly compacted clays and sandstones.
This property gives accurate method of bit selection. a soft formation bit will produce an entirely different value of SE from that produced by hard formation bit. Because SE is the amount of energy needed to penetrate rock. RPM. drill type. methods of cutting removal.C B (T t ) R F C = cost per interval (INR/m) B = bit cost (INR) T = trip time (h) t = rotating time (h) R = rig cost per hour (INR/h) F = length of section drilled (ft) Drilling Specific Energy Specific energy method is a simple and practical method for the selection of bits. SE is a direct measure of bit performance in a particular formation and provides an indication of bit-rock interaction. SE may be defined as the energy required to remove a unit volume of rock. For a formation of given rock strength. it is a very significant measure of drilling efficiency and indicator of bit condition. Bit Dullness 11 . It is less sensitive to changes in weight and rotary speed and hence a practical tool for bit selection. depth of drill hole. WOB. ROP and rock strength. Drilling specific energy has been derived by considering the mechanical energy expended at the bit. Moore in 1974 showed that SE for rotary drilling can be calculated by SE 20 WN t DF SE = Drilling specific energy (MJ/m3) W = Weight on bit (kg) N = Rotating speed (rpm) D = The hole diameter (mm) F = Footage (ft) Research has shown that SE depends on design and geometry of bit. The bit that gives lowest value of SE in a given section is the better one.
Steerability. Various decision criteria can be Bit price. A systematic approach on how to select a bit based on quantitative measure is a simple scorecard. For bit selection. Degree of dullness can be used as a guide for selecting a particular bit. This has been elucidated in Exhibit V. increasing drilling cost. Bits that wear too quickly are less efficient and have to be pulled out of the hole more frequently. The most commonly used scheme for dull bit is the one developed by IADC Bit Selection Scorecard Selecting bit when thee are multiple bit vendors giving their proposal is a challenge for the operator. Measure the performance. A critical evaluation of the pulled bit provides vital clues for bit selection for the next run. Grading bearing wear and Grading gauge wear. 12 . Dull bit grading can involves Grading tooth wear.Define the objective.Dull bit condition indicates difficulty faced by the tool on bottom. Bit wear characteristics. ROP. Section Cost per foot. Select the bit. Balanced Scorecard is used to overcome the limitations of doing only financial tracking when evaluating company strategy. The scorecard template is given in exhibit IV Exhibit IV: Sample Scorecard Bit Selection Methodology There are various aspects to Bit Selection. Re-usage of bits etc. a simple scorecard can be used with three activities .
Exhibit VI: Software based bit selection. 13 . software is used in bit selection. This is elucidated in Exhibit VI.Exhibit V: Bit Selection Methodology Software based Bit Selection Usually.
Aspect Outright Purchase Consignment Performance Ease of contracting Simple Little effort Massive effort Operator risk More Less Least Performance Good only if right decisions are made Good Best Inventory requirement High Bits in consignment serve as inventory None Chance of inventory build up Yes Temporary. In Outright Purchase bits are purchased from vendor before use. at higher cost by ordering more bits Safest method under uncertainty Has to be contractually managed 14 .d. the vendor quotes for a particular cost per foot. In Performance Basis it is based on the information available. CCS. Bit contracting strategy There are three ways in which bits are normally contracted – Outright purchase. These can be used as inputs for cost per foot calculations. ROP etc. Vendors who quote the lowest for the same technical parameters are chosen. We pay as and when we use them. These are given in Appendix A. Some parameters are UCS. e. Bit performance prediction There are number of methods to predict bit performance. A comparison of the contracting strategies is given in Exhibit VII below. Consignment basis and Performance basis.We pay only by the foot basis. Vendor will take back unused bits No Taking care of Uncertainty Yes. The lowest cost per foot vendor is chosen . Those bits that are left unused are taken back by the vendor. This is usually the option for specialty bits and for bits to be used in unfamiliar lithology. In Consignment Basis the vendor supplies a number of bits that may be used for the next few months.
Then send logs along with other requirements to vendor. The vendor does advanced calculations and suggests the bits. Other Logs and Lithology data from G&G Team. Procurement process at RIL The procurement process at RIL is as per exhibit VIII below. OBSERVATIONS a. Bit selection by the engineering team The method is two fold. For new lithologies first obtain Sonic Logs. Exhibit VIII: Procurement process at RIL The engineering team is responsible for analysis of technical part of the bid b.These are cross checked against 15 .Information required High Medium Very High When to choose When significant information is available When partial information is available When perfect information is available or information cannot be shared Scope for error Highest Less None Exhibit VII: Comparison of Bit Contracting Strategies 3.
e. As Case against. Cost per foot benchmarking of past bits There is wide variation in similar bit types in similar lithologies. We can use our past data to develop these relations d. It takes into consideration a number of factors including rig cost and operating parameters. ROP is predicted and then used for cost per foot calculations. Cost per foot calculations by ROP prediction using method developed by Chevron Texaco for KK-III-D1-A1 Making appropriate assumptions. Using this data. we can predict CCS and then ROP based on methods developed by ChevronTexaco. Implementing Cost/Foot Method For familiar lithology for most part. a. RESULTS AND FINDINGS The following studies were conducted. For familiar lithologies it is based on experience and past data. The ultimate objective of business is to create profits. the inputs required for this calculation are sometimes difficult eg: ROP for a wildcat well.requirements. bits are chosen. we can accurately calculate the Cost per foot sections of a well. The findings are mentioned briefly below. it is the Widely used method in the world. we can still go ahead with outright purchase/consignment basis and indirectly implement the performance basis by selecting bits based on Cost/foot. In case of imperfect or sensitive information. 16 . Technical recommendations sent to Procurement team c. the calculation becomes complex. This can be used for performance comparison and calculating cost per foot. Various bits from various vendors are technically analyzed. When we aim for accurate values. Case for/against Cost/Foot Method As case for. we know which is the best bit and what performance it achieved in the past. This needs perfect information. We can develop equations along the lines of ChevronTexaco to predict ROP. Analysis of the existing process Performance basis (Cost/foot) as a contracting strategy is rarely used. This has to be a continuous process b. What better way to select bits than use economics of drill bit selection. For used bits we can benchmark their performance using Cost Per Foot analysis 4. we can calculate Cost per Foot to sufficient accuracy. The requirement is sent to the vendor and vendor quotes for the same. For wildcat wells from UCS. Using this. These need to be analyzed and justified. It is a bird’s eye view type of overall measure. This method if refined has immense potential for application and cost and time saving in unfamiliar lithology wells. It requires sharing information with vendor.
These are analyzed and bits have been recommended to KK-III-D1-A1 under the maximum ROP criterion for similar lithology and similar types of cross sections. The existing method of bit selection is providing satisfactory results and no modifications are envisaged. 5. Cost-Benefit analysis of bits for KK-III-D2-E1 well This calculation elucidates the effect of a better bit and the savings it produces in terms of reduced tripping or drilling time and the equivalent rig cost. What needs to be understood is that Cost per foot method of bit selection is an important tool because it considers a number of factors and it takes care of the cost aspect .c. e. Cost per foot and specific energy analysis for KKD-1A. KK4C-A1 and KK-DWN-1 wells Cost per foot and specific energy analysis is made for the above offset wells. CONCLUSION Bit selection is a very important decision and has significant impact on well cost. Using Cost per Foot method in addition to the existing ones in benchmarking already used bits and for selecting new ones will help us confirm that we are taking the economically best decision. 17 . KK4CA1 and KK-DWN-1 wells The three offset wells geology logs are first summarized under various heads. Bit Selection for KK-III-D1-A1 based on ROP data of KKD-1A. These have already been discussed in the importance of bit section section (1b). These are compared and we see a similarity in values in CPF and SE analysis indicating both can be used for benchmarking. d.
2009 g. Forum2 paper. SPE Latin American and Caribbean petroleum engineering conference. april 2007 f. Nygaard. vol 8. Application of rock strength in drilling evaluation. AADE national technical conference and exhibition. Bloack 1. The international association of drilling contractors website has a calculator that provides bit suggestions for various rock strengths (http://www. World petroleum Congress b. New confined compressive strength calculation impreoves bit selection and bit performance. Rudarsko geolosko naftni zbornik. 1999 j. Kaiser. Unique bit performance predictor using specific energy coefficients as a function of confined compressive strength impacts drilling performance. Nygaard. Intenational journal of petroleum science and technology. REFERENCES a. 1-22 c. SPE rocky mountain oil amd gas technology symposium.org) 18 . 2005 h. how to select PDC bit for optimal drilling performance.6. al. Caicedo et al. et. Caicedo. Devereux. Need for better knowledge of in-situ unconfined compressive strength of rock (UCS) to impreove rock drillability prediction. no 1 (2007). Zagrab 1996 e. Drill bits for horizontal wells. Macini. Unique ROP predictor using bit specific coefficient of sliding friction and mechanical efficiency as a function of confined compressive strength impacts drilling performance i. Calhoun. vol 1. Kelessedis. A survey of drilling cost and complexity estimation models. Pennwell books.iadc. pp. April 2007 d. Drilling technology in non technical language. 3rd amireg international conference.
0642 V p 117 . APPENDICES a.5 to 0.533 UCS 0.7 UCS data can be used to predict drilling time as per Teale’s model (1969) 8 * RPM *D * ROP WOB Abit UCS WOB eff Abit Work on UCS Prediction D’ Andrea et al (1965) & McCann et al (1990) – Rc ~ 0.8 UCS a.783(Vp )0. stiffness and hence to rock strength Velocity also depends on rock mineralogy.99 Andrews et al (2007) 19 .7.Vpb Entwise et al (2005) – Rc2 ~ 0. grain size etc Hence no simple correlations exist Various works on prediction of UCS from Sonic data have a regression coefficient from 0.882 McNally (1987) – Rc ~ 0.6 UCS 143000 e 0.9 UCS 0.035 Vp Oyler et al (2008) – Rc2 ~ 0. Bit Performance Prediction UCS Prediction Using Sonic Data – velocity if elastic waves in rock depends on rock density.
and closer to CCS A globally applicable solution and methodology has been developed by ChevronTexaco UCS for bit selection and performance is erroneous for porous/permeable rock drilled with mud The widely practiced and accepted rock mechanics method for CCS calculation uses the following Rock UCS Confining stress Pore pressure Rock internal angle of friction CCS Calculation CCS Calculation Method 2 20 .A _ UCS CCS K1 (tc 40 ) K 2 UCS is the standard usually used by drill bit specialists for rock strength Apparent strength of rock to the bit is different from UCS.
ROP Prediction ROP for all bit types predicted by applying Specific energy theory Mechanical efficiency as function of rock strength Influence of bit type and torque represented by Coefficient of sliding friction Mechanical efficiency Relationships established for the following on the basis of rock strength Sliding coefficient of friction Mechanical efficiency Weight on bit RPM Use of CCS better describes rock strength to the bit Implemented at EPTC (Chevron Texaco) SEROP – Specific Energy ROP Model 21 .
N could be defined for each bit as a function of apparent rock strength to the bit (EPTC’s conclusion) For a PDC bit with > 7 blades µ = 0. EFFM. ROP 13 .319 Similar relations to be made for other bits Correction factors to µ and EFFM for Drilling environment and Cutter Size also exist Optimum WOB & RPM There are three models for ROP estimation Maurer dD 4 dV dt d b 2 dt Galle and Woods dD WOB k K r p dt a Bourgoyne and Young 8 dD Exp ( a1 a j x j ) dt j 2 Optimize B&Y equation wrt the following for Optimum WOB and RPM Maximizing ROP Minimizing Cost per foot 22 .33 * * N CCS 1 DB [ ] EFFM *WOB AB µ.Rearranging Teale’s Specific Energy equation.00095*CCS + 11.9402 * EXP (-8E-06*CCS) Nom EFFM = 0. WOB.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.