DI-97 – Flat Time Reduction – Approach, Methodology and Tools
Bob Radtke of Technology International
Date Submitted: 17 October 2000
Title: Flat Time Reduction – approach, methodology and tools
Submitted by: SINTEF Petroleum Research N-7465 Trondheim, Norway + 47 73 59 11 00
Principal Investigator(s): Inge Carlsen, firstname.lastname@example.org Hans Peter Jenssen, email@example.com
Business Impact: Saved time and money by improved performance in planning, assessments and operations with respect to focusing the relevant issues of flat time and its impact in a more systematic and commonly established manner in due time during the various phases of deepwater developments (planning and operations), involving technology, methods and tools, and human resources. An improved guideline basis and tool/tools, linking the technical and non-technical aspects in deepwater drilling for the operators should be providing this.
Technical Objectives: Establish a common approach with methodology, tools and data to identify the critical flat time issues involved and to develop the needed improvements actions with respect to technology, procedures, tools and risk assessments for reducing flat time in operations – focusing on drilling and completion. A pre –study with participation from all interested companies should be run in order to define the framework, the terms and the parameters with respect to flat time, the methodology and tool approach, and the detailed work plan before the main JIP is started.
Methodology: Review meetings with the operators, work on a mapping status approach, experiences and establishing a ‘guide’ map on how and what to focus on in the main project – see attached example on a summary table outline below. Item Subjects and areas of focus : Technology Process Flat Time and incidents Reliability Rig, surface equipment, DP, mooring etc Riser, connections BOP, well control, wellhead, seabed structure Drillstring and casing BHA, drilling Systems /MWD Formation induced problems Human factors, resources (organisation) Note : The various items’ groups shown here may be different at the end of the pre-study.
Deliverables: From the pre-study, the common basis for defining terms, parameters, critical items and their importance, methodology and tools (with tool requirements/specifications) and work plan/activities should come out in a final project report for the pre-study phase. The deliverables from the main JIP should then include the review/analysis of collected experience data, methodology and process descriptions, software tools and tool linking means/modules based on what is already available in the market, in addition to identified new tools under development. It is recognized that while a common systematic approach and basis may be established, there will always exist a need to adopting to the companies’ various application requirements and operational focus, also with respect to the region specific diversities. This should also be reflected in the project plan and work.
Comments: Time schedule (tentative): The pre-study should preferably be launched by January 2001, and should be planned for 3 to 4 months running. In this phase it will be a strong need for detailed communication and discussions with the participants – while the main JIP should run for approximately 10 to 12 months, depending on the final defined objectives and work scope. Background / references / sources: · DEA/ERCH Flat Time Reduction forum Houston/Woodlands, September 1999 · IADC/SPE conference in New Orleans, February 2000 · SINTEF Deepwater Technology and Flat Time assessments study / Agip March 2000 · Discussions with operating companies in Houston February, May and September 2000