meize otc16290 slides spe distinguished lecturer series

Distinguished Lecturer Series, 2005 - 2006

1

SPE DISTINGUISHED LECTURER SERIESis funded principally

through a grant of the

SPE FOUNDATIONThe Society gratefully acknowledges

those companies that support the programby allowing their professionals

to participate as Lecturers.

And special thanks to The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical,and Petroleum Engineers (AIME) for their contribution to the program.


2

“Lessons Learned from Integrated Analysis of GOM Drilling

Performance ”

Presented by Robert A. Meize, WWDWO Drilling Manager

Anadarko Petroleum Corporation


3

Presentation Summary

• Company Overview• Drilling Data Analysis Implications• Conventional Drilling Data Analysis• “New-and-improved” Analysis• Actual Results• Conclusions


4

TEXAS

LOUISIANA10

00m

2004 GOM Rig Count – Max 7; Min 2

GC 518 (K2 North)

GC 562 (K2)

GC 608 (Marco Polo)

GC 652 (Genghis Khan)

EGOM


5

WesternWestern

Eastern Gulf CoastEastern Gulf Coast

MidMid--ContinentContinent

Central TexasCentral Texas

Western CanadaWestern Canada

MacKenzieMacKenzie DeltaDelta

North SlopeNorth Slope

Onshore

2004 Onshore Rig Count; Max. 62, Min. 42


6

Georgia Black SeaGeorgia Black Sea

Faroe IslandsFaroe Islands

Nova ScotiaNova Scotia

W. AfricaW. Africa

International

IndonesiaIndonesia

N. AfricaN. Africa

Middle EastMiddle East


7

Study Objectives

• Stimulate industry discussion• Present summary data to management and

industry peers• Benefits of state-of-the-art drilling analysis

– efficiency– knowledge retention and transfer– problem identification


8

Drilling Analysis ….

• On par with other disciplines?

• What resources committed to collecting and storing data?

• How much analysis needed for improvement?


9

Drilling Challenges and Opportunities

• Wellbore Designs for Different Areas• Project Management – All Disciplines• Implementation• Technology Development & Transfer• Lowering Cost / ft


10

Motivation and Justification

• Industry spends $MM’s collecting/storing data

• 35% + corporate capex spent on drilling • Individual well costs often determine

economics• Cost/benefit of drilling studies • Trained personnel necessary for

maximum benefit. • Drilling Data Mgmt ≤ $1MM/yr


11

Percentages of Total and Non-Trouble Drilling Costs SPUD Through Evaluation

APC 1999 – 2004

73%620 MM

27%232 MM

Non-Trouble Cost

Trouble


12

1999 - 2004 APCDrilling Trouble Cost

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Cemen

ting

Well C

ontrol

Loss C

irc.

Tool Fail

ureTight H

oleRig R

epair BOP

Other

Trouble Type

Cos

t ($

MM

)


13

Trouble Time Percent

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Year

Perc

ent o

f Tim

e

Trouble Time Non-Trouble Time


14

Trouble Time Analysis Lessons Learned

• Drilled too far, took kick• Weak formation or close tolerance to

frac gradient• Lost circulation• Tight hole/packing-off• Casing/cementing problems


15

Lessons Learned Number One

“Enemy of Good is Perfect”

• Don’t “push” casing points• Casing point selection & pore

pressure interpretation is critical• Add 1 or 2 contingency strings• Once wellbore starts losing mud, set

pipe.


16

AnadarkoWells Max Depth

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Year

Dep

th (f

t)


17

CONTINUOUS DRILLING

IMPROVEMENT …

BEST COMPOSITE COST-BCC BEST COMPOSITE TIME-BCT (Combined best cost & time from existing wells in a field)


18

GOM Wells 3&45.0Circ.& Cmt. Casing GOM Wells 1,3,616.5Run 13-3/8" Casing GOM Well 56Trip out of HoleGOM Well 40.5Rig ServiceGOM Wells 1&20Short Trip GOM Well 27.5Circ/Condition Mud GOM Well 343Drilling Ahead GOM Wells 5&61Leak off TestGOM Well 42.5

Drill out Shoe/Cement

GOM Wells 2&55.5Make Up BHA & TIH

FROM WELL(S)BestHrs.

EXAMPLE BCT ACTIVITIES

17" HOLE SECTION


19

Deepwater Well Times,18-23 days with the BCT (pink curve ~15 days)

0

2,500

5,000

7,500

10,000

12,500

15,0000 5 10 15 20

Time (day)

Mea

sure

d D

epth

(ft)

Best no TroubleInput Data

Time vs Depth


20

Deepwater Drilling Costs with BCC -Uppermost (Pink) Curve

(12,000,000)

(10,000,000)

(8,000,000)

(6,000,000)

(4,000,000)

(2,000,000)

0

PHASE SEQUENCE

CU

MM

ULA

TIVE

WEL

L C

OST

PreSpud Conductor 26" Phase 17.5" Phase 12.25" Post-TD


21

The Drilling Learning Curve

Well Sequence Number

Tim

e

1 2 3 4

Learning Potential

(C1)

Learning Rate (C2)

Operational Limit (C3)


22

Learning Curve Analysis

tn = C3 + C1*exp [(1-n)C2]; ……… (Eq.1)tn is time to drill the nth well; C1, C2, C3are defined in the literature as the learning potential, learning rate & operational limit.

BCT (~15 days) < C3 (~20 days); C2 from 0.4 to 0.8 shows “good performance” and C2 > 0.8 indicates excellent performance;

Note: C2=0.7 results in 50% C1 in 2nd well.


23

Lessons Learned Number Two

“Measure twice, cut once”

• Review all available data• Seek best performance in all phases

of operations• Repeat things that work well


24

Cajun Express


25

Deepwater Drilling Economics -Improved C1 Level $5.96MM

0 .0

5 .0

1 0 .0

1 5 .0

2 0 .0

2 5 .0

3 0 .0

3 5 .0

4 0 .0

W e ll # 1 W e ll # 2 W e ll # 3 W e ll # 4 W e ll # 5 W e ll # 6

Day

s (N

orm

. foo

tage

= 7

957.

3 ft)

DrillingCas ingB O PTroubleR ig P osE valuat ionP os t D rill

3 4 .49

2 4 .6 12 4 .99

2 8 .77

2 1 .852 5 .43


26

Lessons & Solutions from ~4000 ft WD to Ultra-deepwater, 9000 ft WD

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

W ell#1

W ell#2

W ell#3

W ell#4

W ell#5

W ell#6

W ell#7

W ell#8

W ell#9

Day

s (N

orm

. foo

tage

= 8

541.

5 ft)

DrillingCasingBOPTroubleRig PosEvaluationPost Drill

37.02

30.89

35.17

31.49

26.42 26.8223.45

27.328.36

Wells 1-6; Deepwater; 4,000' ft WD Ultra deepwater; 9,000' ft WD


27

Millennium


28

ULTRA-DEEPWATER LEARNING;Curves Separated by Drlg. Operation

14.2

11.83 10.45

7.01

5.6 4.77

4.79

0.79

2.16

6.58 5.75

7.96

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Atwater Valley349 #1

Lloyd Ridge360 #1

Lloyd Ridge 50#1

Day

s (N

orm

. foo

tage

= 9

902.

5 ft)

DrillingCasingEvaluationTrouble


29

Subsalt S. Timbalier; AFE estimate forWell #3 based on previous performance

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

South

Timbalier

308 #1

South

Timbalier

308 #2S

T1

South

Timbalier

308 #3

South

Timbalier

308 #3(P

lanned)

South

Timbalier

308 #4

5 da

ys (N

orm

foot

abe

= 90

18.4

ft)

Drilling

Casing

Evaluation

Trouble

Rig Pos

BOP

Post-Drill

164.95

121.04

70.76

102.43

60.26


30

S. Timbalier Learning Analysis; C2 = 0.8 Excellent Learning

0

30

60

90

120

150

180

South

Timbalier

308 #1

South

Timbalier

308 #2S

T1

South

Timbalier

308 #3

South

Timbalier

308 #4

Day

s (N

orm

foot

abe

= 18

590.

1 ft)

Drilling

Casing

Evaluation

Trouble

Rig Pos

BOP

Post-Drill

163.89

119.75

70.74

62.77


31

Top Five Time & Money Savers

1. Marker beads on surface casing cementing

2. BOP test against 20” & 13-5/8”casing

3. Bit run retrievable wear bushing4. Use cement stinger on 9-5/8”

production to set TA plugs5. Utilize same rig & crew on

consecutive wells


32

Algeria

East Texas Gulf of Mexico

Leveraging Technology / Transfer Leveraging Technology / Transfer Alaska


33

Traditional Analysis


34

The Future


35

Summary and Conclusions• There are computer-assisted tools available

for drilling data analysis• Proper utilization can set new benchmarks

for drilling performance• Facilitate lessons learned, problem

identification and areas for improvement• Requires technical skills to interpret and

utilize the data• Senior management support is essential.


36

SPE DISTINGUISHED LECTURER SERIESis funded principally

through a grant of the

SPE FOUNDATIONThe Society gratefully acknowledges

those companies that support the programby allowing their professionals

to participate as Lecturers.

And special thanks to The American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical,and Petroleum Engineers (AIME) for their contribution to the program.

meize otc16290 slides spe distinguished lecturer series

Documents