Mud-Motor Characterization

Mud-Motor Characterization

Joint-Industry Project Proposal

September 1st, 2016

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

Previous Joint-Industry Projects

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

Conoco Consortium SPE Paper 22735

Objectives

Improved Motor Quality Assurance

Consistent Performance

Longer Motor, MWD & Bit Life

Realistic Models for Automation

Higher Performing Motor Designs

End-of-Run Motor-Grading

Motor Specification Guidelines

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

Rubber Meets the Rock

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

Quasi-Steady State

~ Power-Section Wear

~ Lithology Changes

Dynamics

~ Micro-Stalling

~ Transmission Wear

0 0

rev

/ ga

l

Time

New

Worn

Differential Pressure (psi)

Torq

ue

(ft-

lbf)

Bending Force

Instrumented Dynamometer

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

Output Flow Rate, Pressure & Temperature

Input Flow Rate, Pressure & Temperature

Rotation Speed & Torque

Rotor Dynamics & Temperature BHA Dynamics Bit Dynamics

Stator Temperatures & Pressure

Damped Constraint

Rigid Support

Primary Work-Scope

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

a. 6 ¾” * Conventional Dynamic Performance vs. Fit

b. 6 ¾” Conventional Rotor vs. Wear Rate

c. 6 ¾” Conventional Transmission Dysfunctions

d. 6 ¾” Conventional Downhole Technique

e. 6 ¾” Even-Wall Dynamic Performance vs. Fit

f. 6 ¾” Even-Wall Rotor vs. Wear Rate

g. 6 ¾” Even-Wall Downhole Technique

* 6 ¾” are 7:8 motors with 5.0 and 3.3 Stages

d. Downhole Technique

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

Pre-Drill X-mission Inspection + Rotor & Stator Mapping

Pre-Drill Instrumented Dynamometer Performance Test

Pre-Drill Downhole Performance Matrix Test

Drill Using Lessons Learned & Occasional Matrix Tests

Pre-Trip Downhole Performance Matrix Test

Post-Drill Instrumented Dynamometer Performance Test

Post-Drill X-mission Inspection + Rotor & Stator Mapping

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Secondary Priorities

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

h. 6 ¾” Fit, Polymer & Profile

i. Conventional 6 ¾” Work per Stage vs. Dogleg

j. Even-Wall 6 ¾” Work per Stage vs. Dogleg

k. Conventional 8” * Dynamic Performance vs. Fit

l. Conventional 8” Wear Rate

m. Conventional 8” Downhole Technique

n. Conventional 6 ¾” Shelf-Life & Re-Run Criteria

* 8” is a 7:8 motor with 4.0 Stages

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

h. Fit, Polymer & Profile

Measure Snug Rotor & Stator Profiles * before Testing

Perform Conventional Soft Dynamic Performance Tests

Perform Even-Wall Soft Dynamic Performance Tests

Measure Stator & Rotor Profiles after Testing

Repeat with a Looser Rotor-Stator Fit

Measure Stator & Rotor Profiles after Testing

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6. * Nominally the same motors from different manufacturers

i. Work per Stage vs. Dogleg

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

Measure Snug Rotor & Stator Profiles before Testing

Insert Pressure & Temperature Probes into Stator

Insert Temperature & Vibration Probes into Rotor

Measure Dynamic Performance while Applying Bending

Measure Rotor & Stator Profiles after Testing

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Possible Investigations

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

o. 5” * Even-Wall Performance vs. Fit

p. 5” Even-Wall Wear Rate

q. 5” Even-Wall Downhole Technique

r. 5” Work per Stage vs. Pitch & Dogleg

s. 6 ¾” Conventional 4:5 / 7.0 Performance vs. Fit

t. 6 ¾” Conventional 4:5 / 7.0 Wear Rate

u. 6 ¾” Conventional 4:5 / 7.0 Downhole Technique

* 5” are 7:8 motors with 5.0 Stages

Summary of the Science

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

Measure Fit, Wear & Roughness using Downhole Sensors

Optimize Downhole Performance from Lessons Learned

Assess the Effects of Polymers, Profiles & Shelf Life

Measure the Effect of Doglegs on Motor Stages

Improve our Understanding of Data Uncertainties

Develop More Realistic Models for Drilling Automation

Project Timeline

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

I. Initial Proposal (7/16 - 8/16)

II. Refine Scope-of-Work (9/16)

III. Participants’ Review (10/16)

$ Subscription (1/17)

V. Acquisition of Data (2/17 - 6/17)

VI. Data Distribution (7/17)

VII. Publish Generic SPE Report (9/17)

$$

Participants ( ~ US$ 80k)

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

Oil Companies

Science Committee

Motors

Dynamometer & Sensor Rental

Witnessing Tests

Motor Manufacturers (in-kind)

Science Committee

Motors

Service Companies (in-kind)

Sensors & Motors

3rd Parties (in-kind) & Universities

Data Analyses & Models

Deliverables

© 2016 Leader Drilling International

Qualified Dynamometer Data

Recommended Dynamometer Procedures

Quantified Motor Performance

Procedures to Extend Motor, MWD & Bit Life

More Realistic Motor Models

Data Quality Audits & Data Analyses

SPE Paper Documenting the Project