How do you measure drilling performance and costs?

After reading many of the comments, I am a bit surprised by the lack of focus on the people who drill the wells. I’ve worked with countless new Rig managers, Toolpushers and Drillers of today, they focus on performance at almost any cost. So many of these men simply aren’t trained as we once were, the gaps in ownership of the entire operation is lost. Drilling a well used to be an art form. Interpreting the data given by the well, that only a skilled Driller could understand, then he took ownership of his decision and the crew moved forward. When the art of drilling is applied, along with additional information (AI) not control, will the industry be revitalized. For Pete’s sake, the drilling foremen of the day are essentially secretaries

Safety is of prime importance in Drilling operations Any unsafe operation will ultimately result in loss of time and skill and manpower So any shortcuts to increase efficiency or save time must have not overriding safety

All of this talk about high speed drilling and making hole faster, yet we forget the real reason we are drilling the hole to start with. The idea is to extract hydrocarbons (unless we are looking at the highly experimental mass geothermal away from traditional hot spots, or even worse, the attempt at shoving CO2 back into the ground). A poorly drilled well will not let any of this happen. Drillers are being incentivized on the wrong metric…making hole faster rather than the amount of hydrocarbon extracted.

No. The goal is to optimise the drilling cost to achieve the well's objectives. A cheap well with the lowest cost that does not achieve the objectives is a wasted well. An expensive well that achieves the objectives is the more valuable well. It is astonishing how so many people today still focus on cost and not value.

Solids Removal Efficiency is described as the mass of drilled solids removed divided by the mass of drilled solids generated. The higher the concentration of drilled solids in the mud system, the higher the probability there will be an NPT event pending and the likelihood drilling costs will be higher. There are digital solutions that can help minimize the drilled solids concentration being carried in the mud (Solids Removal Efficiency) as well as maximize the drilled solids being removed from the well (hole Cleaning Efficiency)

To me total cost per foot, is what should determine or measure drilling performance. Be while drilling, tripping and or circulating.

David Marshall. So right. This description could have been written by a 10 year old from a quick review of literature. This AI is backward - in oh so many ways. I will not contribute to raising its intelligence. It is a rip off.

*Performance Metrics:* 1. *Rate of Penetration (ROP)*: Measures drilling speed in feet per hour. 2. *Drilling Time*: Tracks time spent drilling, including non-drilling activities. 3. *Meters Drilled per Day (MPD)*: Measures daily drilling progress. 4. *Drilling Efficiency*: Calculates the percentage of productive drilling time. 5. *Bit Life*: Measures the lifespan of drill bits. *Cost Metrics:* 1. *Drilling Cost per Foot*: Calculates the cost of drilling per unit depth. 2. *Total Drilling Cost*: Tracks the overall cost of drilling operations. 3. *Cost per Meter*: Measures the cost of drilling per unit depth. 4. *Rig Cost per Day*: Tracks the daily cost of rig operations. 5. Consumables Cost

Use MSE as a trend only. Modified formula for rotary drilling ??????=0.35 ?? (??????/????+(120???? ?? ?????? ?? ????)/(???? ?? ??????)) Caveats for using modified MSE: 1. No consideration for Bit' cutting structure Wear, bit balling, BHA balling, Vibrations, formation change, formation pressure, etc. 2. No consideration for flow rate or hydraulics RPM & TQ are different when a PDM is run 3. ROP & TQ are resultants from WOB & RPM, yet they are in the same side of the equation 4. The drilling performance is a fraction of the MSE with a bit efficacy 30-40% 5. If used as a trend in homogeneous formation with known factors, can indicate need to change drilling parameters using Drill-off tests to optimize parameters and restore regular trend.

Mechanical specific energy (MSE) is a measure of the energy efficiency which is directly related with bit type, formation type, mud type & weight factor with depth, formation pressure etc

MSE began as a "Drill-off" test but this became more problematical with the use of motors or triple-combo RSS tools as their technical usage optimisation tends to dictate drilling parameters. However, there are two MSE formulas that I have used throughout much of my 30-year career as a DD. Integrated with drilling parameters, I found MSE to be vital to ROP with Motors and RSS tools. I then built this into my own Drilling Index, but with zero as the objective function of efficiency - ie., no inefficiency. Optimising combinatorial drilling parameters would actually show caveats such as bit wear. Flow rates, WOB, RPM could all be optimised within the formula. Teamwork with the WSG (offset wells) and mud engineers was an important aspect.

There are numerous DI tables and performance pyramids to asist with the dillability of a formation and I have doubts about their usefulness. The DI is an after-the-fact result as not much can be changed until a bit trip. Todays' bit technology encompasses much more than simply assuming ROP will increase with WOB. This is not always true. Cutter size, shape, rake, density, number, placement are all computer-modelled and these details are often application-specific. With such high-tech bits, applying simple rules can result in catastrophic consequences such as destructive whirl, high string vibration, twist off etc. The DD needs to understand the bit selection aims and limitations. In todays' environment, this entails detailed planning.

Drilling index (DI) is a measure of the drillability of the formation related with the compaction of formation and composition of formation. This is also related with bit type with nozzle, mud type and weight. Formation characteristics is most important here.

From a drilling fluids management perspective, KPI’s (cost/bbl rock drilled) need to include drilling fluid products (base oil, barite, emulsifiers, wetting agents, lime, salt, fluid loss control and LCM). The total amount of each product added can be optimized. Solids control equipment cost/bbl and shaker screen usage. Both of which can be optimized to reduce costs. Waste management includes trucking, disposal & tractors. Waste volume can be minimized by optimizing the solids control equipment. Diesel consumption through the generators is also a great KPI to track. As a mud system cleans up (remove more drilled solids) the less energy it will require to pump the same volume of mud. These are the tangible cost/bbl KPI’s that we track.

Measuring drilling performance and costs involves assessing various factors to enhance efficiency, identify improvement areas, and manage expenses. Key metrics include Rate of Penetration (ROP), Drilling Cost per Foot/Meter, Total Drilling Cost, Downtime, Tripping Time, Bit Life, Wellbore Quality, Safety, Environmental Compliance, Mud Costs, Fuel Consumption, Coring Performance, Drilling Fluid Efficiency, Wellbore Deviation, and Formation Evaluation. Companies use real-time monitoring, data analytics, and advanced tech like simulators and sensors, along with benchmarking, to evaluate operational effectiveness and cost efficiency.

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are specific and measurable goals that also reflect the unexpected operation hazard like loss circulation, well kick and well control issue, stuck pipe, HPHT issue, failure of surface equipment etc

Far too often, we allow ourselves to live in the artificial silos that have been built. Without the proper objective in mind, a highly optimized well can also prove to be a failure. Yes, one objective was met (perhaps new ROP record, no lost time, etc) however, without a good idea of what the rocks are, what formations are being drilled, you can turn a mechanical success into a economic failure. The incentive should all be the same...for the geologist, the driller and the service companies...a successfully producing well.

Tripping, as take-off and landing for a plane, might be a routine procedure but is the drilling activity more prone to events. Avoiding swab or surge, managing over-pull, circulating bridges, cleaning ledges, and even connection time is part of the performance of a well trained crew.

D'après mon expérience ces analyses ne sont pas les mêmes pour un puits de développement et puits d'exploration. Par exemple pour un puits de développement,nous connaissons presque tous kes problèmes qu'on peut rencontrer alors on peut minimiser le temps et les co?ts de forage facilement. Par contre pour les puits d'exploration le programme de forage peut être changer à n'importe quelle moment parce qu'on peut rencontrer des problèmes non prévus et ca peut augmenter le temps et les co?ts de forage et moi personnellement j'ai travaillé sur les deux types.